Who has the fastest /6 here

-
I was close,my CRS doesn't always hide its ugly head !!It was still a badd *** slant !!I wonder if he ever did develop the head he was talking about doing ??

The aluminum head topic comes up at least twice a year but no one is willing to give up the $20K to get the project started. Go to .org and search aluminum head.

With performance from the stock heads like Ryans and other boosted cars. I see no real point in investing the money in something like that. Couple of guys went out and paid $3500+ for the high buck cranks. They turned out as heavy or heavier than the the stock units. One team spent lots of bucks on lighten their cranks and the fastest run they ever made....was with a stock steel crank after they broke the last light one they had....it was also the fastest 60' they ever had. ;)
 
The aluminum head topic comes up at least twice a year but no one is willing to give up the $20K to get the project started. Go to .org and search aluminum head.

With performance from the stock heads like Ryans and other boosted cars. I see no real point in investing the money in something like that. Couple of guys went out and paid $3500+ for the high buck cranks. They turned out as heavy or heavier than the the stock units. One team spent lots of bucks on lighten their cranks and the fastest run they ever made....was with a stock steel crank after they broke the last light one they had....it was also the fastest 60' they ever had. ;)

makes sense though... honda have a horrible time off the line with light flywheels cuz it drags them down... slants are no different with the power output to weight @ a given rpm range...

and the reason guys want to do it is because not everybody like boost... there is something to be said for a NA motor hangin with a boost motor...
 
and the reason guys want to do it is because not everybody like boost... there is something to be said for a NA motor hangin with a boost motor...


wwhhhooooohhww cowboy...NA cars only hang with power adders if their car is anorexic and unstreetable. I take it you haven't riddin in a big boosted A-body? Once you go boost...you never go back. They dig the whole way to the top. Later
Ryan
 
wwhhhooooohhww cowboy...NA cars only hang with power adders if their car is anorexic and unstreetable. I take it you haven't riddin in a big boosted A-body? Once you go boost...you never go back. They dig the whole way to the top. Later
Ryan

your right... i never have... but have you ever ridden in a SS Hemi Dart?

i know its not a slant but the same principle applies... i know i can make more power with boost, or No2 but i like to challenge myself with building a good combo NA.

has nothing to do with if it makes the most power...
 
No Hemi Dart but own a couple Vipers...sorta the same and they do lay down alittle on top. High HP NA is cool but twins on the Viper or Hemi Dart would be unreal.

Having fun with it is all that matters!!!!!

Later
Ryan
 
No Hemi Dart but own a couple Vipers...sorta the same and they do lay down alittle on top. High HP NA is cool but twins on the Viper or Hemi Dart would be unreal.

Having fun with it is all that matters!!!!!

Later
Ryan

well the Mr. Norms 4 speed car we built didn't lay down lol... it was running 10.0's...

but agreed! fun is fun!
 
your right... i never have... but have you ever ridden in a SS Hemi Dart?

i know its not a slant but the same principle applies... i know i can make more power with boost, or No2 but i like to challenge myself with building a good combo NA.

has nothing to do with if it makes the most power...

That's an admirable trait, but the problem is, you have chosen one of the worst possible engines to try to do that with. The narrow (small) bore center spacing of a /6 hamstrings all efforts to try to put decent size valves in the motor, and the fact that the ports were designed for a 170 (and, they were) doesn't help any. The only engine I can think of that is a poorer choice for trying to go fast, normally aspirated, is a 144/170/200/250 Ford 6, with the integrally-cast, intake manifold.

The "big" Ford 6 (240/300) has much larger valves, and can be fitted with Cleveland, welded-up, V8 cylinder heads (which have humongous valves,) if you don't like the stock head, and the 250/292 Chevy 6 is also another engine (which also has a 4" bore) and can accept large valves. It also can be fitted with the V8 cylinder heads, if you don't like the 6 head.

The /6 can, with forced induction, run toe-to-toe, with either of these brand X engines, because of it's unusually strong infrastructure which allows LARGE amounts of boost to be used without damage to the reciprocating assembly, with 500+ HP fairly easily attainable, as evidenced by Ryan's and Tom Wolfe's cars on FABO.

But, because of the lack of a really good breathing head (and, I'm not sure that's ever going to be possible, due to the close bore center spacing of the /6 block,) trying to build a normally aspirated /6 that has specific output numbers approaching 2 HP per cubic inch, or even 1.5, is like trying to run a marathon with your mouth sealed with a piece of duct tape.

Mark's car still amazes me... It's a rocket, for what it is!!! Love to watch it run...
 
That's an admirable trait, but the problem is, you have chosen one of the worst possible engines to try to do that with. The narrow (small) bore center spacing of a /6 hamstrings all efforts to try to put decent size valves in the motor, and the fact that the ports were designed for a 170 (and, they were) doesn't help any. The only engine I can think of that is a poorer choice for trying to go fast, normally aspirated, is a 144/170/200/250 Ford 6, with the integrally-cast, intake manifold.

well im on the last legs of figuring out the bore size issue.

then doing a head with 1.94/1.5 valves... and some fun ports...
 
You'd need a pretty good one to outrun your 127MPH Slant 6...:prayer:

well the norms car goes 10.0's @ 126-130 and the landy car last night with an auto did 10.23's @ 136... the converter is to loose and had no traction, its a 9.90 car...

i dont have finished pics of the landy car @ the moment...
 

Attachments

  • 101_4245.JPG
    127.1 KB · Views: 173
  • 101_4246.JPG
    130.7 KB · Views: 181
  • DSCN1384.jpg
    87.8 KB · Views: 170
  • DSCN1387.jpg
    105.1 KB · Views: 175
what's the real comp on these Hemis

follow the compression....
 
what's the real comp on these Hemis

follow the compression....

only 12.5... the norms made 711hp @ 6500 and the landy motor made 772 @ 6800...

my slant race motor will be 15:1 on 118 lol... go for gold!
 
That's an admirable trait, but the problem is, you have chosen one of the worst possible engines to try to do that with. The narrow (small) bore center spacing of a /6 hamstrings all efforts to try to put decent size valves in the motor, and the fact that the ports were designed for a 170 (and, they were) doesn't help any. The only engine I can think of that is a poorer choice for trying to go fast, normally aspirated, is a 144/170/200/250 Ford 6, with the integrally-cast, intake manifold.

By whose calculations? I'd like to see documentation to back that up. I don't doubt the slant head needs help, but with the right person behind a grinder and on the flow bench.......again, I'd like to see the data. I know someone who is approaching 200 CFM now at around .500 lift with a slant head with just conventional porting. That's flowin for a slant.

The "big" Ford 6 (240/300) has much larger valves, and can be fitted with Cleveland, welded-up, V8 cylinder heads (which have humongous valves,) if you don't like the stock head, and the 250/292 Chevy 6 is also another engine (which also has a 4" bore) and can accept large valves. It also can be fitted with the V8 cylinder heads, if you don't like the 6 head.

The phord valves can be fitted to the slant too.....but IMO they aren't needed. I think they are too much. Those 1.70/1.44 or the stock 318 valves are probably good for most anything. Remember the bore size here. It ain't real big.

The /6 can, with forced induction, run toe-to-toe, with either of these brand X engines, because of it's unusually strong infrastructure which allows LARGE amounts of boost to be used without damage to the reciprocating assembly, with 500+ HP fairly easily attainable, as evidenced by Ryan's and Tom Wolfe's cars on FABO.

Ed's not buildin a forced induction engine. So the point is kinda moot what a forced induction engine will do. That's comparin apples and oranges.

But, because of the lack of a really good breathing head (and, I'm not sure that's ever going to be possible, due to the close bore center spacing of the /6 block,) trying to build a normally aspirated /6 that has specific output numbers approaching 2 HP per cubic inch, or even 1.5, is like trying to run a marathon with your mouth sealed with a piece of duct tape.

Mark's car still amazes me... It's a rocket, for what it is!!! Love to watch it run...

Not sure I agree that a "good breathing head" cannot be accomplished using the confines of a stock head. I don't think enough people in the know have really tried yet. Sorta like the "real turbo" I keep waiting on someone to put on a slant. Ain't happened yet. Don't take any of this to mean I don't like forced induction. I do. It's great. But that's not what everybody's into.

I meant to say that's not what everybody's into that Ed is referring to.
 
Not sure I agree that a "good breathing head" cannot be accomplished using the confines of a stock head. I don't think enough people in the know have really tried yet. Sorta like the "real turbo" I keep waiting on someone to put on a slant. Ain't happened yet. Don't take any of this to mean I don't like forced induction. I do. It's great. But that's not what everybody's into.

why is it red lol
 
why is it red lol

Well, I don't know what you would consider a "good breathing" head, but one such example would be the 302 Z-28 1969 Brand X stock head that was installed on that motor by the factory. It fed 39 cubic inches per cylinder (the same cylinder displacement as a 225 slant 6 has,) and because of the 4" bore, had room for 2.02" intake valves and 1.6" exhaust, STOCK. Ported versions of that head reportedly exceed 300 cfm flow rates for the intake (don't know the numbers for the exhaust,) and the numbers I have seen for a ported /6 head with the larger (1.75") intake valves, usually don't exceed 200 cfm, by much.

You can see the problem.

As I said before, the flow limitations are due to the small valves dictated by the bore size of the slant 6, and, I don't know how it would be possible to get around that, given that the bore center spacing is a part of the block.

If you know a way around that problem (other than forced induction,) I'd surely like to hear it.

Thanks for any info...
 
Hey Stroker...please explain what a race turbo setup it supposed to be. Curious minds want to know. Later
Ryan
 
Hey Stroker...please explain what a race turbo setup it supposed to be. Curious minds want to know. Later
Ryan

I have before and no one has said anything about having a slant with one. Ball bearing supported shafts, instead of bushings. Ultra light impellers for quick spool up. Just look at any diesel performance site. Those are the type turbos I am talking about. Properly sized, of course.
 
You would better off trying to duplicate the head the dragmasters used.....furnace brazing tubes straight into the intake valve and eliminating the bend(and restriction) of the stock head. EFI makes this easy to run. Dad had a lot of heads flowed on the same bench and 210cfm at .500 was about the best number. One head flowed 230+ but the low numbers were worse than a stock head. The chart should still be on ss.org somewhere. Every head we ever flowed stalled/flattened above .550 except for the 230 mentioned above.

Waste of time making an aluminum head for a slant in my opinion. Money is better spent on a boosted set-up, stroking or extreme diet.
BUT its your $$$ spend it however makes you happy and have fun.
 
-
Back
Top