-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2.216VTurbo
At the time the conventional wisdom and theory on turbo motors was leave intake side of the head alone, force boost thru it and concentrate on making exhaust side flow (hey wait, that's still the theory 30 years later lol)
Did you then, and do you now, Actually believe this to be correct?
I have heard many "theories" over the years, none quite as stone age as this though. Most thought that while porting they wanted to keep port velocities high, so ported, but not Over ported.
You're saying leave the intake side untouched or just cleaned up with stock vales and all?
IF this is what you have done, I think we just found your slow spool issue ;)
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
My old dirt gold van was running 9.0's at 77 back in the day.. really ticked off some people at the local track. I know the feeling.
I wonder how that cat intake valve tolerated the exhaust heat of the turbo..
I think we have learned that in general turbos like larger intake and exhaust now.
You see a turbo on a v8 making 700HP.. and a turbo on a 2.5 making 250HP.. the first thing i looked at was intake port size.
Growing up around 5.0's I watched people in the beginning using stock heads. and stock cams. Swearing by them. 8-12 PSI making 450HP.
Then i watched people go from stock 130CC intake runner heads to aftermarket heads with 160-180CC runners.
They power went into the 600 HP range at the same boost levels... Then watched them actually swap cams around and gain 50-60HP as well.
The voodoo and hysteria did not prove to work.. the bias and repeated "un-knowlege" was keeping people slow.
I sorta see the same thing here.. everyone says stock heads and stock cams. turn up the boost.
they make 210-270HP.. Then you see people with larger ported heads and bigger cams pushing into the 300-500HP range..
Really tells you that their is alot of power to be made making more air flow through the engine. then stacking boost on top of more air.
I personally would be very interested in some intake runner sizes and CC's. yes flow matters.. but the best flowing microscopic runner is only going to flow the same air or less as a medicore runner with twice the volume. You can be efficient with a bucket of water putting out a campfire... or inefficient with a 55gal drum of water.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
Hog them babies out. She ain't done till a tennis ball fits through them ports.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
For those trying to learn from this thread, "hogging out" is NOT a good solution. For the experienced, I think we can all agree that different set-ups require different levels of modification. A person wanting a good street driving 300hp car does not need, and will not benefit from a full race ported huge runner volume head. Port velocity STILL matters!
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
-
1 Attachment(s)
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shadow
Did you then, and do you now, Actually believe this to be correct?
I have heard many "theories" over the years, none quite as stone age as this though. Most thought that while porting they wanted to keep port velocities high, so ported, but not Over ported.
You're saying leave the intake side untouched or just cleaned up with stock vales and all?
IF this is what you have done, I think we just found your slow spool issue ;)
Lol, the theory I subscribe to isn't hamper the Intake side flow and only concentrate on exhaust flow but rather, optimise both buuut make the exhaust outflow the Intake. IMO thats one of the basic tennants of a healthy turbo motor. Sure, there are a thousand other factors but that one is basic.
Just to review, this isn't an all out big HP build on this car bit mostly pull the head, do some upgrades and Get a very healthy 2.2 running again-on a deadline! Ijad znother late day ay eotk so difnt get the head apart yet but im prdtty fure i hsve 3 hours tomorrow to get the head ready to drop off at the machine shop Friday.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
OK ,
original post called for a SC "road race" build with TU manifold and GT series turbo
Cool .. had my attention from the start .. have similar " " project
first question is GT .. what ??.. size ?
.. and I hope you have a dash camera for this ..
as for porting the TU manifold .. beyond making it "look good" to the eye and finishing out the entrance to the turbo , discussion of "porting" it is kinda moot
..IT IS after the TU manifold .. and in person it is KINDA fat
the posted numbers would back that up
"porting" the individual port runner entrances is moot beyond "this matches MY head"
- and all will differ to a degree
as for the manifold , I haven't checked the individual entrances to compare actual as cast sizes
BUT
the step design seems notable in the main log section of the casting
saying it's a definite, measureable change in shape and size
as for the individual runner sections , they look like repeats of the same casting section to me with the only differences being the as cast thickness' and bolt provisions being slightly different
the first improvement of the TU manifold has to be it's out and away design as opposed to the factory out , down and away design thus eliminating one entire right angle from each port runner
it's this change that makes the step design of the main log now worth while ..(I'd think)
you could well make an effort to hog out each runner a little larger as you move towards the turbo .. but the runners become so much shorter it's PROBABLY more an expression of ocd than anything
my own ocd says MAYBE my hobby sized sand blaster MIGHT just help smooth out some of the main log section that I might not be able to grind on ... maybe
- and probably only on the back wall of the casting .. which might be good (the right spot)
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
A sandblaster definitely will not smooth any casting flash in a TU header, there's way to high of nickel content in the manifold....it's extremely hard.
AJ- You're theory of exhaust out flowing the intake for a healthy turbo motor I would have to disagree with. This is one area that Shadow and I have always agreed on, and his build pretty much proved it IMO. Him and I have always been the largest advocates of the stock exhaust manifolds capabilities. Any good turbo cam has more duration/lift on the intake side for a reason, it's been proven more effective to increase flow on intake side more than exhaust. So if you could explain why you believe exhaust should outflow the intake, I'd like to hear why you believe this.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
Quote:
Originally Posted by
thedon809
Hog them babies out. She ain't done till a tennis ball fits through them ports.
:lol: (I got it! ;))
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2.216VTurbo
Lol, the theory I subscribe to isn't hamper the Intake side flow and only concentrate on exhaust flow but rather, optimise both buuut make the exhaust outflow the Intake. IMO thats one of the basic tennants of a healthy turbo motor. Sure, there are a thousand other factors but that one is basic.
So you didn't mean to say this then, "At the time the conventional wisdom and theory on turbo motors was leave intake side of the head alone, force boost thru it and concentrate on making exhaust side flow (hey wait, that's still the theory 30 years later lol)"? Because what you described here Would be Exactly what you are now say you "don't subscribe to"?
Not trying to push your buttons AJ, just making sure there isn't a "red flag" situation here that is crippling your efforts across the board. I think I get what your trying to say though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2.216VTurbo
Just to review, this isn't an all out big HP build on this car bit mostly pull the head, do some upgrades and Get a very healthy 2.2 running again-on a deadline! Ijad znother late day ay eotk so difnt get the head apart yet but im prdtty fure i hsve 3 hours tomorrow to get the head ready to drop off at the machine shop Friday.
And to be perfectly clear, the build objective IS relevant. As stated, Not an all out Big HP build, so there is no need for the largest valves you can fit and port volume that will support .550 lift cam. Just surprised me when you posted "leave the intake side alone" as in, don't touch it.
Figured you were a little more experienced than that, just wanted to be sure.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
I would be very curious to see what a 2 valve per cylinder head looks like where the exhaust outflows the intake. Show me one and I'll show you a seriously hampered intake side of head (lol). Then to come up with a camshaft that would work good with that. I know of zero grinds for 8V 2.2's that would be a good fit. Most good flowing 4 valve per cylinder stock heads are no better than 85% E/I (by design). My last BV head avg. out to be exactly 80% exhaust to intake FLOW ratio. Ranging from 75.1 to 83.5 where cam sees most of its action. Cylinder head had great CFM #'s on both intake & exhaust.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DodgeZ
I've seen videos where old school 426 hemis pick up 60 HP for a header change. Does that video just show that the headers weren't the problem in that system, or is there a greater point that I'm missing? We know that a ported exhaust manifold really helps spool and power. Presumably the TU piece helps too as long as you can get good flow to the inlet of the turbo in your application, as there are known clearance issues with some combinations. This much you know, unfortunately.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
Quote:
Originally Posted by
cordes
I've seen videos where old school 426 hemis pick up 60 HP for a header change. Does that video just show that the headers weren't the problem in that system, or is there a greater point that I'm missing? We know that a ported exhaust manifold really helps spool and power. Presumably the TU piece helps too as long as you can get good flow to the inlet of the turbo in your application, as there are known clearance issues with some combinations. This much you know, unfortunately.
I post a 13 minute long video, you reply in 9 minutes asking questions... Watch the whole video, jack --- ;)
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DodgeZ
I post a 13 minute long video, you reply in 9 minutes asking questions... Watch the whole video, jack --- ;)
As a fan of that program, I've seen it before.
ETA: If you cut out the pitch for the various products it's darn near a 9 minute video anyway.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
Quote:
Originally Posted by
cordes
I've seen videos where old school 426 hemis pick up 60 HP for a header change.
My 5.9 Magnum Duster picked up 72 horsepower going from 318 exhaust manifolds to Dougs headers.
Just swapping in headers with no other changes, the car jumped from 14.1 to 13.49 and with carb tuning and opening the dumps walked it down to 13.0.
318 manifolds really suck when you are putting out 400 hp.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
I think SRT Shorty's are worth quite a bit on a 5.7 hemi.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
Quote:
Originally Posted by
thedon809
I think SRT Shorty's are worth quite a bit on a 5.7 hemi.
I have no personal experience with it, but I've read they're good for a solid 20hp.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
Quote:
Originally Posted by
thedon809
I think SRT Shorty's are worth quite a bit on a 5.7 hemi.
It all depends on what your baseline is. 318 manifolds embrace the suck, lots to be had there going to headers.. The factory SRT are almost a shorty header so you gain less going to a true header..
Long tubes tend to make the most ponies.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
What about going long tubes on a 5.7? SRT's are 6.1 and 6.4's and the port shape is different than the 5.7.
-
Re: 4 hours of poring today, TU Header
Warning Possible thread Jack alert!
AFAIK long tubes are the best option on the 5.7's. Been years since I looked into it, but I believe they gave the best gains in HP/ TQ And fuel economy.