NC Engine Builder
Grumpy Old Man
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2008
- Messages
- 7,245
- Reaction score
- 12,247
It will be a solid roller for sure, and specs will be based around the flow capability of the heads being tested
Cylinder head dyno shoot out
- Thread starter NC Engine Builder
- Start date
-
Hey, on the Facebook page called Sun test equipment there is a guy in Georgia selling a Sun distributor machine.
I think he’ll let it go cheap. And it’s close to you.
Just sayin…
NC Engine Builder
Grumpy Old Man
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2008
- Messages
- 7,245
- Reaction score
- 12,247
And yet ANOTHER thread derailed by BS. Nice
Stay the course man dam the torpedoes!
mygasser
Well-Known Member
My bad. I'm deletin it.
vntned
Well-Known Member
I’ve got two sets of wild iron heads that I’d love to see the potential of, and I’m right here in NC!
One set of heads are some super ported “W1” NASCAR heads. The other set of heads are “810” W2 race heads that were fully race ported by Diamond Elkins back in the day.
Both of these heads have been ported to the same size as Indy 360- square port heads.
One set of heads are some super ported “W1” NASCAR heads. The other set of heads are “810” W2 race heads that were fully race ported by Diamond Elkins back in the day.
Both of these heads have been ported to the same size as Indy 360- square port heads.
NC Engine Builder
Grumpy Old Man
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2008
- Messages
- 7,245
- Reaction score
- 12,247
As interesting as that may be, the point of this test is to see what kind of power output is available from heads that can currently be purchased aftermarket. Those wouldn't be applicable for this situation.
lol everyone wants to get their **** dyno tested when someone else is paying the bills.
PRH
Well-Known Member
Honesty, I’m looking forward to seeing how the TF’s do.
Sounds like the short block combo will be stout enough to allow the heads to show what they can do.
I’ve heard them referred to as “flow bench show poodles” before…….let’s find out!
Sounds like the short block combo will be stout enough to allow the heads to show what they can do.
I’ve heard them referred to as “flow bench show poodles” before…….let’s find out!
I believe the trick flow 190s will be a top contender for a head with stock pushrod location. Camshaft in my opinion should be in the 600 lift range.IMO and if you're going to all that trouble maybe compare an air gap RPM to a Victor and put that to rest.
Last edited:
PRH
Well-Known Member
I’m wondering if any thoughts have been given yet to the “run order”?
Will it be random, or based on the expected power levels, or??
I’d expect all the Ede copy castings to be able to use the same pushrods?
Whereas the TF’s have longer valves, so I’d assume they’d take longer pushrods.
I’m sure all of that will be established/sorted out during the pre-testing mock-ups.
Will it be random, or based on the expected power levels, or??
I’d expect all the Ede copy castings to be able to use the same pushrods?
Whereas the TF’s have longer valves, so I’d assume they’d take longer pushrods.
I’m sure all of that will be established/sorted out during the pre-testing mock-ups.
Earlie A
Well-Known Member
The TF vs the Shockers will be a good comparison. Similar port volumes and CSAs. I expect the TF to have the upper hand in that one, but both will be running out of air well before 6,000rpm. The Bloomers should make power a good bit longer.
As far as manifolds, I would love to see all kinds of comparisons. Air Gap, TF, Indy, Victors. It's the time and money thing again. If the rpm gets pushed to 6,500 and beyond the Air Gap would be toast against the single planes. We're trying to push the heads to the limit, so single plane it is.
I would like to see out of the box manifolds compared, but most of them are cast with 340/360 cid in mind and will choke a 400+ inch motor. That's why the Victor 340 and Super Victor are ported. The two Victors were chosen because of price, availability and the fact that they are both pretty good manifolds.
Earlie A
Well-Known Member
Hoping one geometry correction kit (for the import castings) and two sets of pushrods (one each for TF and imports) will be enough.
@NC Engine Builder can speak about the dyno day stuff.
PRH
Well-Known Member
I’d expect the heads to allow for power peaks to occur solidly above 6000.
Gotta be about 20 years ago now…….419ci, just under 12:1, easy on parts .630 lift roller, Victor 340, 1-7/8x3.5 hedman headers, ported RPM’s flowing 280:
544tq@4900
587hp@6400
Smaller headers may limit the peak rpm.
Gotta be about 20 years ago now…….419ci, just under 12:1, easy on parts .630 lift roller, Victor 340, 1-7/8x3.5 hedman headers, ported RPM’s flowing 280:
544tq@4900
587hp@6400
Smaller headers may limit the peak rpm.
PRH
Well-Known Member
If that trend holds true for this test, it doesn’t bode well for big numbers.
PRH
Well-Known Member
I dug out a sheet a customer sent me.
408 w-flat tops, TF heads with some rework, Wilson ported SV intake, PRH cam, 1.6 HS, E85 Book carb, 1.75-1.875x3.5 dyno headers:
408 w-flat tops, TF heads with some rework, Wilson ported SV intake, PRH cam, 1.6 HS, E85 Book carb, 1.75-1.875x3.5 dyno headers:
Earlie A
Well-Known Member
Wonder about the extent of the 'rework'. Even then it's done around 6000.
Here's a question for you. The TF head 'wing' has a big affect on anti-swirl and I would imagine helps with wet flow. How would that impact a dyno run? What are the things to look for? Torque increase at lower rpm?
Here's a question for you. The TF head 'wing' has a big affect on anti-swirl and I would imagine helps with wet flow. How would that impact a dyno run? What are the things to look for? Torque increase at lower rpm?
Last edited:
PRH
Well-Known Member
Those heads had the entire port “touched”, and the swirl vane removed, but that didn’t improve the flow any.
(I didn’t do the rework of the heads, but I did do the final valve job & assembly.)
How that impacts the dyno results….. there would only be one way to know for sure……..and that didn’t happen.
I consider that power curve very solid thru 6500.
The cam was .430 lobe lift, 264/268-108
(I didn’t do the rework of the heads, but I did do the final valve job & assembly.)
How that impacts the dyno results….. there would only be one way to know for sure……..and that didn’t happen.
I consider that power curve very solid thru 6500.
The cam was .430 lobe lift, 264/268-108
Last edited:
Ironmike
Well-Known Member
Trick Flows will run out of real power at 6K ish RPM. Take my word for it. They still pulled to my prior shift point(6400), but did NOT pull hard. Sold them on here like real quick. As flowed, they are kinda weak in the mid lift range and NEVER broke 300CFM. This was my pair. Weingardner will tell ya the same thing.
I've said before, that is MY engine in MY car. Have heard some really good dyno numbers with them but I suspect "friendly" dynos.
Your results may vary. Believe me, I'm not hating........but they are NOT out of the box magic. I lost a **** ton of money to find this out, so I'm not exactly proud of the knowledge I gained.
Mic drop
I've said before, that is MY engine in MY car. Have heard some really good dyno numbers with them but I suspect "friendly" dynos.
Your results may vary. Believe me, I'm not hating........but they are NOT out of the box magic. I lost a **** ton of money to find this out, so I'm not exactly proud of the knowledge I gained.
Mic drop
NC Engine Builder
Grumpy Old Man
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2008
- Messages
- 7,245
- Reaction score
- 12,247
I have said many times, there is more to HP than cfm. They can be related, but flow isn't the end-all be-all. I think the trick flow is a good example of that. And I also happen to know what the bloomers flow, and I'm not gonna say what the numbers are, but they appear to make power beyond what the flowbench would indicate.
-
Similar threads
