Cylinder head flow - What is crucial in a stocker?

[Eric Merryfield]

Originally Posted by B Parker

Stan I just sold my business. I'm helping with the transition but I'm only working about 20 hrs. a week. Down from 10hrs a day 7days a week. I had 19 employees. What a weight off my shoulders. I'm 66 and feel I should've done it 2 years ago. Don't wait too late. Get out while we have our health. BP

Congrads Barry, since you are going to be commitment free, we look forward to seeing you at a lot of events this year putting a spanking on racers from near and far with that bad *** camaro!

Eric

[B Parker]

Originally Posted by B Parker

Stan I wouldn't argue anything about machine work with you, but I disagree on the HP needed. Maybe in a lightweight car. But in my 40 plus years of running stockers I'd say more like 15 to 18HP. The point I was going to make if someone can pick up .7 with an intake and heads you must have some pretty bad heads to begin with. Just a few years ago it was 8hp difference with an intake on a small block stocker. If someone is getting much more than that I would love to see it in tec at Indy.
Using the 15 hp number to go .7 you would need to pick up 105hp. That would be 97 hp from head minus the intake. I think I use one of the best out there but if you have someone that can get me 100 hp from a set of heads please let me know. BP

Sorry for any confusion. I originally put .07 but like someone said earlier in a post it's 7 tenths you pick up with heads and an intake. I do still stand by my statement if you pick up anywhere near 7 tenths from a good set of heads and intake you better stop going to the lawn mower shop for your machine work. BP Thanks Bill for catching it. Trying to do to many things at the same time.

[B Parker]

Originally Posted by Eric Merryfield

Congrads Barry, since you are going to be commitment free, we look forward to seeing you at a lot of events this year putting a spanking on racers from near and far with that bad *** camaro!

Eric

Thanks Eric never thought I would sell it during Covid. Sold it for a little less than it was worth but glad to have it gone.
Most of my years racing I always had to leave late and take phone calls all day while away. Most of the time a friend or two would meet me at my house 6 at night to finish getting my car ready than to load everything and get on the road for midnight. Drive half of the night and hope someone saved me a spot. Get in in the morning and unload the car to rush to make the first time shot. It will be nice to be able to enjoy the races this year. BP

[Dave Gantz]

Originally Posted by Bill Diehl

Air is different than water, or is it? anybody that messed with overpowered outboard boats knows that primer is faster than smooth and shiny on the pad and the lower unit, 4,5 or 6 mph and how you go from stuck in the upper 90's to breaking triple digits......that "theory" that has been proven also applies to cylinder head ports...but what do I know? the "experts say, size matters more", not flow

Been a while, Bill.

[HP HUNTER]

Originally Posted by Chipper Chapman

I realize that most stock eliminator engines don’t have what we would call “high” amounts of valve lift. But my question is, considering the amount of dwell at maximum lifts due to our day long durations, where is improving the flow and velocity more crucial? Is it low lift, .100-.300 or what we’ll call higher lift of .350 and up? Typical engines we would not consider maximum max lift flow numbers for much more than bragging rights, and would consider the low and mid lift to be more important as the valve passes through that area twice, which yes it still does, albeit extremely fast. Obviously improving it everywhere is the best case, but often what improves low lift can hurt the high lift and vice versa. So what is the more critical area of improvement in these situations?

I will answer your question: My stocker combination also had .398 lift @ the valve. I dyno tested my engine as it came out of the car 474 HP @ 5400 RPM. I re rung the short block and turned my attention to the heads and intake. I focused on the .200 .300 .400 lift flow and made a nice gain. The engine went back on the dyno, I now had had 513 HP @ 5700-6000. In the real world that HP increase picked my car up exactly 3.2 MPH.
A BBC oval port head with either .398 or .460 lift @ the valve will require either welding the intake seat or Intake valve seats to do what your trying to do, as cast the bowl is too big for a 2.070 valve, which destroys low lift flow.



Example

[Mark Yacavone]

Originally Posted by HP HUNTER

I will answer your question: My stocker combination also had .398 lift @ the valve. I dyno tested my engine as it came out of the car 474 HP @ 5400 RPM. I re rung the short block and turned my attention to the heads and intake. I focused on the .200 .300 .400 lift flow and made a nice gain. The engine went back on the dyno, I now had had 513 HP @ 5700-6000. In the real world that HP increase picked my car up exactly 3.2 MPH.
A BBC oval port head with either .398 or .460 lift @ the valve will require either welding the intake seat or Intake valve seats to do what your trying to do, as cast the bowl is too big for a 2.070 valve, which destroys low lift flow.



Example

There ya' go..Talk about sharing..Wow!

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

There ya' go..Talk about sharing..Wow!

Hey Yac, what do you think it's gonna take to make THAT^^^ look "stock"?

[Larry Hill]

Looks like a good start for Super Stock.

[HP HUNTER]

Originally Posted by Larry Hill

Looks like a good start for Super Stock.

Well then you can say the welding is for Super Stock and the seats are for Stock.........theres more than one way to get there.

[Glenn Briglio]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

Hey Yac, what do you think it's gonna take to make THAT^^^ look "stock"?

Special medicine..........