Started watching from the first video. I’ve been in the engine design/build business and designing port configurations relatively unknown for many years. Finally somebody that speaks my language. Thanks sir. Great channel.
Thanks! You're a great guy for sharing! Here's my novel, don't read it if you don't want to. You confirmed what I have observed with OEM heads on big block mopars. My buddy hogged so much metal out of a set of 516's they wouldn't hold a head gasket! Huge port windows, big valves, "big" flow, single plane intake 11.5:1 440 charger. car slowed down and was a turd, pushing the gas driving it around town was like stepping on a rotten melon! I was building my dad a replica of the 413 Dodge long ram he ran in a 1957 Chevy and a 1964 sport fury 4spd. There can be a huge difference in cams with what happens between the opening and closing on the same duration! He called Crane in 1968 and told them he was running long rams (32 inch runners) They said "here try this, it's experimental tell us how it does" boy howdy! Split a 727 bellhousing hitting third at 7500 after it flashed there when the ram and SONIC tuning came in. I have ran them on 5 engines. That cam went in many engines including a six pack, and a 383 8 bbl. It started slowing down by about 2 tenths so we pulled it. It had wiped 3 lobes down to .050 to .100 lobe lift. It was a 232/.455 on a 109, 302 deg advertised hyd. On paper. We put in a new mopar 234/.484 and SLOWED down 2 more tenths than the 13 lobe cam!We eventually called crane back and they gave us a 244/254 .524-.552 on a 108. Went 4 tenths faster than the 302 ever did. 7.75 cc'd cr stock 906 heads 446ci 6bbl 4680 lb race weight 4 door c body. 87 octane, 2800 stall, 4.10 gears. 107 mph, 13.41 in 1995. He bought an Erson 302 adv 230/.450 on a 108 they said duplicated the Crane 302 in 1970. We tried it Ha Ha, yea right! So, we kept the wiped out crane 302 and I sent it to Crower and they duplicated it for me (the only cam company that would) it uses a special big base circle blank. The old guy at Crower said "theres some weird majic going on in those lobe profiles, I'm keeping the blank for that one I want to know how it runs!" The lobes are "big, round, and close together in the middle" thats how dad described a good mopar cam by looking down it. He didn't like the look of the "modern " lobes on the mopar .234 he was right! He took the 324-.552 out of the box looked down it and smiled and said "now that's a cam!" He was right! (He was a dang good R&D engineer that hand and eyeball ground some welded up cams for single cylinder alchohol pulling tractors took second at the state finals, driveline failed) He said the 1959 imperial 413 that froze and broke ran way better than the 1965 413 he replaced it with. Everything's the same but the head casting numbers. Same valves, same port windows, closed chambers, same compression same flow within 4% on my home grown flow bench. BUT the 1959 "509" heads were listed as performance engines only in factory applications, same valves etc as 1959 pedestrian engines. Why?? The difference became apparent when I ran my fingers in the ports way smoother, less pinch at the valve bowl, and especially, when I took the valves out and put a light in the port and looked down from the manifold side. WAY more light visible and straighter shot on the 1958 509s compared to the 1965 516s those 509 and early 324 4 bolt VC heads have the best looking ports and casting of any standard port mopar head I have ever seen they were also factory gasket matched and had better unshrouded 81cc max wedge style chambers. They had 10% better low lift flow (.200) stock seats, especially before .050 lift. I went to a 30deg seat and did what the old guys said that makes a huge difference, unshroud the valves, and a good multi-angle valve job. Picked up another 30% before .200 lost 10% at .500. No problem, my cam is .455. Most mopar heads are done by .500 anyways. Then I took them to a great porting shop to have the larger 2.14/ 1.81 valves installed this was to pull the valves back out of their recesses and sit them basically on top. He looked at me and said "oh, mopar, I gotta do alot of grinding to make them work. I handed them to him. He poked around, scratched his head, looked again and said there's nothing have to do to them but a little guide work and a small bowl blend those suckers are sweet. What are they off of? I said 1959 Chrysler 300s he said "it figures, even in the mid 60's they were convoluting the ports on many engines to improve emissions, they knew laws were coming, many late '50s heads on many engines are great and get tossed. On these siamesed port engines when choosing factory heads for street/strip, ignore max flow numbers, just LOOK down the ports and see how much valve you can see then build low lift flow". Then I notched the cylinders for the valves with a jig and cutter I made, installed the heads, rolled the motor over and matched the chambers to the cylinders and notches slightly radiusing and mirrior polishing all sharp corners to prevent hot spots. (most mopar chambers are 413 size and overhang anything bigger.) I never took a grinder to the ports, just a bowl cleanup. It has his original 1965 pistons, rods and crank! Sadly he passed away from cancer before he could hear it run. Waiting to see how it runs. Waddya think?
John Kaase made a huge point about reversion in large cube engines and using old mild steel dyno headers. He figured out why his customers were killing their new engines and finding rust oxide throughout them.
I had a guy bring me the parts to assemble a 496 stroker BBC for street driving in a truck, with a couple of passes at the track just to see what it would do. He had chosen the biggest cc ports he could find thinking it would make big power. You’re right, it was a turd! Keep the information coming
Thank you for going over reversion, I thought it was from the overlap period and bad exhaust scavenging at low rpm. Now I have a new way of looking at the event
We ended up with Bob from AllPro for our Bonneville gig, 280cc raised runner deal, 53cc chambers with 2.18/ 1.6, we made 840 on the chassis dyno, pretty happy with 394” old Chevy SBC
I think the industry is now trying to sell products regardless of their intended use. I see guys in town with these fancy intakes, heads and they talk they have a big cam. They want that 'cam chop' which in my opinion does nothing but put undue pressure on your valves and all they can do is sit in parking lots and rev the engine. It's becoming more of an appearance and sound exercise than anything else. The idea of building an engine for its intended use is becoming a thing in the past. I don't care about parking lots attendance or revving an engine just to sound like an idiot. I want my car to perform on the track, whether it's a 1/4 mile, road course or time attacks and such. I'm a endurance racing guy and if no one sees me or hears me, I don't care...they'll see me on the podium at the end however. Keep the videos coming.
🎯 "All for show and none for go" gets one in trouble no matter how much they know. (Show and go can easily make for big uh-oh even when you know no-no…)
Mr. Brian Love listening to you explain how things work. The numbers sometimes get me but - does help understanding things. GREAT JOB 👍 LOVE the sound of a HEALTHY SB CHEVY, the smell of TURBO BLUE! 😁!!!
Totally agreed, head told be years ago (most flow through smallest hole will work best) and has worked well for me for many years and engines, (I don't do full out pro-mod or pro-stock stuff). Good show, thanks again 👍👍👍
I picked the trickflow 240 for my 470 cubic inch Mopar. Heads are pretty small for the cubic inch. I run a stock block so i don't want to spin it too the moon. Makes good enough power for the et i want to run.
thank you for saying this, i got laughed at when i picked my little XR280 ON A 108 STRAIGHT UP with AFR comp port 195s on my 350 easily walked past the 500 mark and kept climbing even with a dual plane and 750. bigger isn't always better
I really enjoying learning from you. It’s nice just hearing talk and learning some times when you’re cruising down the road. You got on cams and it m made me think, Eric wiengarter is calling out all cam guru’s and grinders it and trying to have a ls cam shoot out yet thing, be better so many that comment on his channel I think, lol. You should check it out.
How about a video on combustion chambers,I've ported hundreds of heads,probally ruined half or more learning,I've always known there is power to be found in combustion chambers but I've never really found it
350cfm at 260cc didnt sound plum terrible, for us non-nascar guys 350 at 300 would have made the point better, lol. The amount of reversion in an engine blows my mind, ive seen the smallest piece of shrapnel passed around to every cylinder and on a turbo engine.
@@jaythorne5208 Chapman is really good Morgan is good Kaase is good, there are some unknowns that don't want to be named that work for a couple of cup teams that are very good, Clements cylinder head is very good, and we're pretty good too.
@salterracingengines good stuff! Some porters are saying the cross sectional area above the short side turn pretty much dictates what the head will flow...given the throat and the rest of the port is sized correct. What's your thoughts on that?
@@roberthollinshead2325 there's a lot of Truth in that. But there's also a lot of space between the entrance of the port in the beginning of the short-term, you also have radius corners to deal with you can have floors that are too low, it's very complicated at times. But just making a gaping hole is not the answer.
I am building a N/A Ls3 with a BTR Stage 2 V2 221/24× .619/.617 street engine for my swap. Stock rebuild with a cam. What you're saying pretty much since the stock 821 heads are are probably big enough. If I port them, it would be way too much. It would probably slow my velocity down, right? It may kill my bottom end? I'm not building a all out race engine, so just stock would be best then? It's going in a 03'Crown Vic Police Interceptor and she weighs 4200 lbs. I don't want to port them if I don't need to. I am not spinning her to the moon. Prob a little above stock. Everyone on RUclips is screaming PORT,PORT,PORT!!!! HMMMMMM I don't think it's right for every emgine. If I was spinning it to 8k RPMs it might help correct? But for stock, it would be a waste? Ish anyways lol. Thank you for the video brother. Great information.
@@GrandPitoVic sounds like a fun build and for that all I would do is make sure everything is clean in the runner you metal impeding or disturbing air flow. That head doesn't need much to be great but get a high flowing valve with a good valve job. That will make a big improvement without messing up the port.
@@SalterRacingEngines Great!!!! Thank you brother!!!! There is so many people yelling the same stuff on RUclips. And it's funny that alot of it us wrong lol. Not all. I really appreciate the info brother. Thank you.
@@joe-hp4nk to some degree yes but like I said to somebody else the valve size in relationship to the port side is critical your corners are critical your short-term is critical the valve job itself is extremely critical. So there's actually a whole lot going on there.
Hello great video I have a 78 sbc all stock except the highest lift cam available for stock drive all street want low to mid power any suggestions would be appreciated
AFR cyl heads MCSA minimum cross sectional area [pushrod pinch ] Most inline valve heads suffer inefficient ports . Ford Windsor ,, Chev SB + others Ford W 200cc = 2.160 sq/in mcsa and chevy 220cc =2.180 application 400cuin chevy sb 220cc 2.180 at redline of 6500 works Other stock and mildy modified Big Blocks have around this mcsa Proven Afr head 227cc N/A 400cuin peak hp 640 at 6800--7000rpm 12.5 to 1 cr 260+ SRoller
im building a 6" rod 406 and will be using 195 as cast enforcer heads. only mods i will be doing is changing to 2.08 intake and smoothing with a 60grt cartridge roll and thats it for my 78 4 speed rally nova. should work good.
@@lukk4273 yeah the only reason you would lose power though is if your Port is actually way too small which would cause that extreme velocity. A lot of times it cannot make that short turn down into the cylinder because the airspeed is too high. That's why I said get as much as possible with a small a Port as possible. It's definitely not about being small but it's definitely not about being humongous I know that's confusing but there is logic to it it's just hard to explain sometimes through a text message
@@markbogle8062 wow man that's one of the hardest things to do. It goes back to what you want to accomplish with the engine. There are mathematics calculators and formulas that you can find online to tell you what that engine needs concerning airflow at a certain RPM. And that only tells you how much air it needs at that RPM that's all. And then you need to decide what RPM range you want to run in. And along with that decision the camshaft decision comes into play. A lot of times the size of the cylinder head depends on the bore size. Meaning if I have a really small bore I can't get but so much intake valve in that bore before it hits the deck. So if there's only so much valve diameter I can get in there that's going to dictate my CC volume of my cylinder head. Or actually I should say my cross-sectional area because I'm going to base that on my valve diameter. Those ratios right there are extremely important. Anyway it gets really complicated if you try to explain it through a text message but if I can help send me some information and I'll do my best to help you make a good decision. And just to give you a brief example I would not use a 2.05 valve with a 250cc intake runner. That is the biggest mismatch you could imagine and the engine won't get out of its own way. So let's say with a 4-inch bore I could get a 2125 intake valve in and I'm going to set my intake runner cross-sectional area to that valve size and there you have it. And I'm sorry if that seems oversimplified. But hopefully maybe that will make a little sense. But that's one reason you would use an 18 degree or a 15 degree and so on cylinder head because when it starts laying the valve towards the exhaust side lower you're able to get much bigger valves in the chamber. And when you do that you can now make your runner volume larger. Hope that makes sense
@@user-qd6ir5qg2v I think they're very good quality especially the metal and the machining. However I would never put them on any of my racing engines. They are drastically improving every year so that's not to say I would never do it. It's just right now I would not. But I cannot sell people heads at the price that they are buying AFR. But in my opinion they are a good company.
@@SalterRacingEnginesThank you so much, I believe your telling me, your heads outperform the AFR's, it's difficult to find a builder with competence, and a machine shop. Do you have your own brand of heads?
I was curious if the cylinder head choice was affected by being boosted or not. Thanks for the info. The gen1 4g63 intake ports are huge. The later versions came with significantly smaller intake ports.
@@SalterRacingEngines I see. I remember some time ago a oversees racing company saying that basically the better the engine performed N/A the better it would run when turbo charged.
@@SalterRacingEngines Does the fuel choice have much impact the specs for the intake port? Mainly asking from gas to ethanol or methanol in a 400-1200hp motor.
@@lukk4273 no not that I've seen. Air flow is a mechanical function you may need different timing or camshaft but the air flow is strictly dictated by intake and cylinder head design
Right now I'm up to my eyeballs with things going on I have maybe another month or two before my shop is ready to work out of. And I'm trying to keep up with what I already got going on. I would love to talk to you about this at a later time maybe in a couple months. Thank you for your question
Im really interested to talk to you about an engine im designing for a land speed racing class that is pretty new, but uses old tech, and the restrictions make for an interesting build. Ive sent you a FB message about it, you can contact me through there . The good thing is the parameters are narrow and the engine only has to do one thing very well.. so im hoping it's achievable! Thanks, Ben Thomas
Like Darren Morgan says, there are three things you need to consider when porting heads, 1) velocity, 2) velocity n 3) velocity.
Started watching from the first video. I’ve been in the engine design/build business and designing port configurations relatively unknown for many years. Finally somebody that speaks my language. Thanks sir. Great channel.
As a shade tree builder for years I love the information and experiences you give us. Thanks for the info on the road talks!
Thanks! You're a great guy for sharing! Here's my novel, don't read it if you don't want to. You confirmed what I have observed with OEM heads on big block mopars. My buddy hogged so much metal out of a set of 516's they wouldn't hold a head gasket! Huge port windows, big valves, "big" flow, single plane intake 11.5:1 440 charger. car slowed down and was a turd, pushing the gas driving it around town was like stepping on a rotten melon! I was building my dad a replica of the 413 Dodge long ram he ran in a 1957 Chevy and a 1964 sport fury 4spd. There can be a huge difference in cams with what happens between the opening and closing on the same duration! He called Crane in 1968 and told them he was running long rams (32 inch runners) They said "here try this, it's experimental tell us how it does" boy howdy! Split a 727 bellhousing hitting third at 7500 after it flashed there when the ram and SONIC tuning came in. I have ran them on 5 engines. That cam went in many engines including a six pack, and a 383 8 bbl. It started slowing down by about 2 tenths so we pulled it. It had wiped 3 lobes down to .050 to .100 lobe lift. It was a 232/.455 on a 109, 302 deg advertised hyd. On paper. We put in a new mopar 234/.484 and SLOWED down 2 more tenths than the 13 lobe cam!We eventually called crane back and they gave us a 244/254 .524-.552 on a 108. Went 4 tenths faster than the 302 ever did. 7.75 cc'd cr stock 906 heads 446ci 6bbl 4680 lb race weight 4 door c body. 87 octane, 2800 stall, 4.10 gears. 107 mph, 13.41 in 1995. He bought an Erson 302 adv 230/.450 on a 108 they said duplicated the Crane 302 in 1970. We tried it Ha Ha, yea right! So, we kept the wiped out crane 302 and I sent it to Crower and they duplicated it for me (the only cam company that would) it uses a special big base circle blank. The old guy at Crower said "theres some weird majic going on in those lobe profiles, I'm keeping the blank for that one I want to know how it runs!" The lobes are "big, round, and close together in the middle" thats how dad described a good mopar cam by looking down it. He didn't like the look of the "modern " lobes on the mopar .234 he was right! He took the 324-.552 out of the box looked down it and smiled and said "now that's a cam!" He was right! (He was a dang good R&D engineer that hand and eyeball ground some welded up cams for single cylinder alchohol pulling tractors took second at the state finals, driveline failed) He said the 1959 imperial 413 that froze and broke ran way better than the 1965 413 he replaced it with. Everything's the same but the head casting numbers. Same valves, same port windows, closed chambers, same compression same flow within 4% on my home grown flow bench. BUT the 1959 "509" heads were listed as performance engines only in factory applications, same valves etc as 1959 pedestrian engines. Why?? The difference became apparent when I ran my fingers in the ports way smoother, less pinch at the valve bowl, and especially, when I took the valves out and put a light in the port and looked down from the manifold side. WAY more light visible and straighter shot on the 1958 509s compared to the 1965 516s those 509 and early 324 4 bolt VC heads have the best looking ports and casting of any standard port mopar head I have ever seen they were also factory gasket matched and had better unshrouded 81cc max wedge style chambers. They had 10% better low lift flow (.200) stock seats, especially before .050 lift. I went to a 30deg seat and did what the old guys said that makes a huge difference, unshroud the valves, and a good multi-angle valve job. Picked up another 30% before .200 lost 10% at .500. No problem, my cam is .455. Most mopar heads are done by .500 anyways. Then I took them to a great porting shop to have the larger 2.14/ 1.81 valves installed this was to pull the valves back out of their recesses and sit them basically on top. He looked at me and said "oh, mopar, I gotta do alot of grinding to make them work. I handed them to him. He poked around, scratched his head, looked again and said there's nothing have to do to them but a little guide work and a small bowl blend those suckers are sweet. What are they off of? I said 1959 Chrysler 300s he said "it figures, even in the mid 60's they were convoluting the ports on many engines to improve emissions, they knew laws were coming, many late '50s heads on many engines are great and get tossed. On these siamesed port engines when choosing factory heads for street/strip, ignore max flow numbers, just LOOK down the ports and see how much valve you can see then build low lift flow". Then I notched the cylinders for the valves with a jig and cutter I made, installed the heads, rolled the motor over and matched the chambers to the cylinders and notches slightly radiusing and mirrior polishing all sharp corners to prevent hot spots. (most mopar chambers are 413 size and overhang anything bigger.) I never took a grinder to the ports, just a bowl cleanup. It has his original 1965 pistons, rods and crank! Sadly he passed away from cancer before he could hear it run. Waiting to see how it runs. Waddya think?
John Kaase made a huge point about reversion in large cube engines and using old mild steel dyno headers. He figured out why his customers were killing their new engines and finding rust oxide throughout them.
Awesome explanation of head an cam design! Keep the knowledge coming!
I had a guy bring me the parts to assemble a 496 stroker BBC for street driving in a truck, with a couple of passes at the track just to see what it would do. He had chosen the biggest cc ports he could find thinking it would make big power. You’re right, it was a turd! Keep the information coming
Couldn't have said it better, I stuck with my street cam with larger heads and it's a beast.
Thank you Brian. Port velocity is very important, especially more so in engines built for street/track use. Keep the videos coming.
Thank you for going over reversion, I thought it was from the overlap period and bad exhaust scavenging at low rpm. Now I have a new way of looking at the event
@@vwbsean it still is from that as well you have version from two fronts one is poor intake flow the other is poor exhaust flow
❤@@SalterRacingEngines
All depends on what your requirements are. There's something out there for every need 😊
We ended up with Bob from AllPro for our Bonneville gig, 280cc raised runner deal, 53cc chambers with 2.18/ 1.6, we made 840 on the chassis dyno, pretty happy with 394” old Chevy SBC
You are absolutely correct, I learned that 50 years ago on my flow bench and dyno before computers
Great explanation on something I have been discovering for a while.. Keep up the good work. Thanks.
I think the industry is now trying to sell products regardless of their intended use. I see guys in town with these fancy intakes, heads and they talk they have a big cam. They want that 'cam chop' which in my opinion does nothing but put undue pressure on your valves and all they can do is sit in parking lots and rev the engine. It's becoming more of an appearance and sound exercise than anything else. The idea of building an engine for its intended use is becoming a thing in the past. I don't care about parking lots attendance or revving an engine just to sound like an idiot. I want my car to perform on the track, whether it's a 1/4 mile, road course or time attacks and such. I'm a endurance racing guy and if no one sees me or hears me, I don't care...they'll see me on the podium at the end however. Keep the videos coming.
🎯 "All for show and none for go" gets one in trouble no matter how much they know. (Show and go can easily make for big uh-oh even when you know no-no…)
We call those Posers! And for the younger generation... that is not a compliment! What is the point of all the noise if a Prius can pass you?
Tony Mamo explained this to me when I was looking into heads for my LS3.
nice ridin with ya lol,,,,a pt. 2 on the chalk board would help clear up the little stuff like reverion to alotta people
Very good incite on intake velocity, inertia, reversion, and the fact that the valve is in the low and mid range lift most of the cycle !
When you get bored, people learn things. Great video AGAIN
as usual thank you I'm learning more and more as I watch also you are confirming some things that I already found out thank you
Mr. Brian
Love listening to you explain how things work. The numbers sometimes get me but - does help understanding things. GREAT JOB 👍 LOVE the sound of a HEALTHY SB CHEVY, the smell of TURBO BLUE! 😁!!!
Totally agreed, head told be years ago (most flow through smallest hole will work best) and has worked well for me for many years and engines, (I don't do full out pro-mod or pro-stock stuff). Good show, thanks again 👍👍👍
Good advice pick a good company and take their advice. Afr is a good choice for the street strip scene. In my opinion
Nice Info. man.....Could not imagine drinking on a Saturday night with you with a bunch of Beer and start talking Chevy Engines!!!! Love it man.
Thank you, I am gathering as much information as I can so my build is right and you are helping that!
Thank you soo much for sharing you knowledge and experience! You are the man!!
I picked the trickflow 240 for my 470 cubic inch Mopar. Heads are pretty small for the cubic inch. I run a stock block so i don't want to spin it too the moon. Makes good enough power for the et i want to run.
thank you for saying this, i got laughed at when i picked my little XR280 ON A 108 STRAIGHT UP with AFR comp port 195s on my 350 easily walked past the 500 mark and kept climbing even with a dual plane and 750. bigger isn't always better
I’m picking up what you’re laying down!💯
Velocity matters
Brian love vids great information ,thank you. will have questions when i get some more parts together thanks again Rick
Thanks for the video Brian. i liked the 5p's. AG
I really enjoying learning from you. It’s nice just hearing talk and learning some times when you’re cruising down the road. You got on cams and it m made me think, Eric wiengarter is calling out all cam guru’s and grinders it and trying to have a ls cam shoot out yet thing, be better so many that comment on his channel I think, lol. You should check it out.
@@jcnpresser will do
How about a video on combustion chambers,I've ported hundreds of heads,probally ruined half or more learning,I've always known there is power to be found in combustion chambers but I've never really found it
Can you have too much velocity ? Is the an ideal range ? Does if differ per application ?
Yes
Yes
Yes
@@arthurking6549 Well that clears that up :)
Cfm/cc to valve size
Proof is the track...
Next engine will be a predator head 600 cubic inch with a big ol tunnel ram
Short of Sir Henry himself coming back to explain this stuff, these videos are the best at explaining the factors at work in an ICE.
The greatest man I know of these days is Dave Vizard.
@@skylinefever
This guy is right there with David
Too big ports equal lest torque in the rev range and thats facts for a street motor may be even street strip motors aswell
Thanks Brian for sharing.
Excelenty presented. Thank yiu
It's easy to spend infinite dollars on a collection of mismatched parts and bits that don't do anything despite the marketing.
The (7) P´§, Positive Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance. 😊
350cfm at 260cc didnt sound plum terrible, for us non-nascar guys 350 at 300 would have made the point better, lol. The amount of reversion in an engine blows my mind, ive seen the smallest piece of shrapnel passed around to every cylinder and on a turbo engine.
Whos that handfull of guys?
@@jaythorne5208 Chapman is really good Morgan is good Kaase is good, there are some unknowns that don't want to be named that work for a couple of cup teams that are very good, Clements cylinder head is very good, and we're pretty good too.
Solid advice here.
We will put that 104-107 LSA in our n/a sbc though🫡
Nice information and please explain how to choose cylinder head valve size
@salterracingengines good stuff! Some porters are saying the cross sectional area above the short side turn pretty much dictates what the head will flow...given the throat and the rest of the port is sized correct. What's your thoughts on that?
@@roberthollinshead2325 there's a lot of Truth in that. But there's also a lot of space between the entrance of the port in the beginning of the short-term, you also have radius corners to deal with you can have floors that are too low, it's very complicated at times. But just making a gaping hole is not the answer.
Finally thank you
I am building a N/A Ls3 with a BTR Stage 2 V2 221/24× .619/.617 street engine for my swap. Stock rebuild with a cam. What you're saying pretty much since the stock 821 heads are are probably big enough. If I port them, it would be way too much. It would probably slow my velocity down, right? It may kill my bottom end? I'm not building a all out race engine, so just stock would be best then? It's going in a 03'Crown Vic Police Interceptor and she weighs 4200 lbs. I don't want to port them if I don't need to. I am not spinning her to the moon. Prob a little above stock. Everyone on RUclips is screaming PORT,PORT,PORT!!!! HMMMMMM I don't think it's right for every emgine. If I was spinning it to 8k RPMs it might help correct? But for stock, it would be a waste? Ish anyways lol. Thank you for the video brother. Great information.
@@GrandPitoVic sounds like a fun build and for that all I would do is make sure everything is clean in the runner you metal impeding or disturbing air flow. That head doesn't need much to be great but get a high flowing valve with a good valve job. That will make a big improvement without messing up the port.
@@SalterRacingEngines Great!!!! Thank you brother!!!! There is so many people yelling the same stuff on RUclips. And it's funny that alot of it us wrong lol. Not all. I really appreciate the info brother. Thank you.
Well said.... 🤙🏁
Be bored any time!
So when porting a head, think about making it straight and not big.
@@joe-hp4nk to some degree yes but like I said to somebody else the valve size in relationship to the port side is critical your corners are critical your short-term is critical the valve job itself is extremely critical. So there's actually a whole lot going on there.
Hello great video I have a 78 sbc all stock except the highest lift cam available for stock drive all street want low to mid power any suggestions would be appreciated
I be thank about put a 350 in my z28 and just drive it like a everything day car
Do you think 300 hp is go
For a z28 1985
AFR cyl heads MCSA minimum cross sectional area [pushrod pinch ]
Most inline valve heads suffer inefficient ports . Ford Windsor ,, Chev SB + others
Ford W 200cc = 2.160 sq/in mcsa and chevy 220cc =2.180
application 400cuin chevy sb 220cc 2.180 at redline of 6500 works
Other stock and mildy modified Big Blocks have around this mcsa
Proven Afr head 227cc N/A 400cuin peak hp 640 at 6800--7000rpm 12.5 to 1 cr 260+ SRoller
im building a 6" rod 406 and will be using 195 as cast enforcer heads. only mods i will be doing is changing to 2.08 intake and smoothing with a 60grt cartridge roll and thats it for my 78 4 speed rally nova. should work good.
My buddy got those heads on a 350 they are pretty good right out the box
Well, what is the plan for the car ? Like the man said 5 P's
@@mikasantos3774 absolutely but if you watch eric weingartners video of cleaning them up with a cartridge roll it improves them greatly.
@@Comet-hn3gm very hard street use.
@@w.stuart668 make sure to get the throat the correct size. Then have fun.
I understand what your saying
Brian, would u spec an LS cam for me?
Is there like a certain speed of flow in the port that is optimal? Thought i remember loosing power when it start getting closer to mach1.
@@lukk4273 yeah the only reason you would lose power though is if your Port is actually way too small which would cause that extreme velocity. A lot of times it cannot make that short turn down into the cylinder because the airspeed is too high. That's why I said get as much as possible with a small a Port as possible. It's definitely not about being small but it's definitely not about being humongous I know that's confusing but there is logic to it it's just hard to explain sometimes through a text message
Good information how do you pick a intake runner size for cu size
@@markbogle8062 wow man that's one of the hardest things to do. It goes back to what you want to accomplish with the engine. There are mathematics calculators and formulas that you can find online to tell you what that engine needs concerning airflow at a certain RPM. And that only tells you how much air it needs at that RPM that's all. And then you need to decide what RPM range you want to run in. And along with that decision the camshaft decision comes into play. A lot of times the size of the cylinder head depends on the bore size. Meaning if I have a really small bore I can't get but so much intake valve in that bore before it hits the deck. So if there's only so much valve diameter I can get in there that's going to dictate my CC volume of my cylinder head. Or actually I should say my cross-sectional area because I'm going to base that on my valve diameter. Those ratios right there are extremely important. Anyway it gets really complicated if you try to explain it through a text message but if I can help send me some information and I'll do my best to help you make a good decision. And just to give you a brief example I would not use a 2.05 valve with a 250cc intake runner. That is the biggest mismatch you could imagine and the engine won't get out of its own way. So let's say with a 4-inch bore I could get a 2125 intake valve in and I'm going to set my intake runner cross-sectional area to that valve size and there you have it. And I'm sorry if that seems oversimplified. But hopefully maybe that will make a little sense. But that's one reason you would use an 18 degree or a 15 degree and so on cylinder head because when it starts laying the valve towards the exhaust side lower you're able to get much bigger valves in the chamber. And when you do that you can now make your runner volume larger. Hope that makes sense
N/A ,, fuel type ,, engine brand , cuin , rpm peak hp , majority of torque power band ,, Air speed ,,, static and dynamic compression ,,, convertor stall,,, diff gear ,, cam lobe clearance
max valve lift ,, piston to valve clearance ,, Efficient port design ,, valve size for cuin /bore size .
Sir, Steve from California, you have your own cylinder heads for sale? How do you feel about AFR 195cc heads, and AFR heads in general, thank you.
@@user-qd6ir5qg2v I think they're very good quality especially the metal and the machining. However I would never put them on any of my racing engines. They are drastically improving every year so that's not to say I would never do it. It's just right now I would not. But I cannot sell people heads at the price that they are buying AFR. But in my opinion they are a good company.
@@SalterRacingEnginesThank you so much, I believe your telling me, your heads outperform the AFR's, it's difficult to find a builder with competence, and a machine shop. Do you have your own brand of heads?
Good chat
I was curious if the cylinder head choice was affected by being boosted or not. Thanks for the info. The gen1 4g63 intake ports are huge. The later versions came with significantly smaller intake ports.
@@lukk4273 it's all about ratios. Your port to valve size is critical.
@@SalterRacingEngines
I see. I remember some time ago a oversees racing company saying that basically the better the engine performed N/A the better it would run when turbo charged.
@@lukk4273 exactly
@@SalterRacingEngines
Does the fuel choice have much impact the specs for the intake port?
Mainly asking from gas to ethanol or methanol in a 400-1200hp motor.
@@lukk4273 no not that I've seen. Air flow is a mechanical function you may need different timing or camshaft but the air flow is strictly dictated by intake and cylinder head design
if you didnt have grease on your head hands the back of your arms then it wouldnt be a good video
What do you charge to assemble an engine for people, average people, NA, 350 with 12 to 1.
Right now I'm up to my eyeballs with things going on I have maybe another month or two before my shop is ready to work out of. And I'm trying to keep up with what I already got going on. I would love to talk to you about this at a later time maybe in a couple months.
Thank you for your question
Loaded question. Too many variables.
@@Comet-hn3gm my life is a loaded question!!!!! 41 Magnum ,
Im really interested to talk to you about an engine im designing for a land speed racing class that is pretty new, but uses old tech, and the restrictions make for an interesting build. Ive sent you a FB message about it, you can contact me through there . The good thing is the parameters are narrow and the engine only has to do one thing very well.. so im hoping it's achievable! Thanks, Ben Thomas
@@BenThomas-q4k
Send it to my email
bsalter@salterracingengines.com
6:30 - because you're gonna lose velocity out your azz!
sorry, i’ll finish watching now…..
3000 to 7200 RPM,
Thank you for your knowledge and videos USA TRUMP 🇺🇸
Take away here.. Stay away from turds
Good advice pick a good company and take their advice. Afr is a good choice for the street strip scene. In my opinion