I agree. But, it should be as standardized as possible, if you're just putting clay on by hand you're going to get slightly different results each application. Better than a bell or trumpet would be the actual intake. Once the ports are matched, we are going to be flowing the head with an intake in the car, so the flow with intake matters more than without.
@@SpecialEDy There is no way I would flow a head like that without some form of radius entry , while I agree about flowing the manifold that doesn't shy away from this is flowing the head wrong on its own, when I'm doing development on heads they are flowed first, once completed then will flow the manifold and then with carb wired open to get correct results. , that's only after all area, length, shape etc etc is correct first, flowing a head on RUclips with no radius and posting numbers etc is misleading and wrong.
Just found your channel. I'm not far away from you and got Cleveland heads too . I've got lots of V6 mitsi heads I'd love to get flowed. All the same but different. There's no numbers anywhere comparing them on the same machine.
Absolutely the LSA and the ILC advance are more critical than duration and overlap. Bear in mind the exact installed advance angle can only be determined by actual engine Dyno testing of the exact combination... Including headers and exhaust system AND intake system. Most people are guessing when buying and installing a cam. But that's what average Joe does.
They did fill the lower section of the exhaust, yes. However, filling the lower and side sections of the intake port is well documented. Drag Boss Garage does a video on the insets for the lower section.
If you don't use a radiused inlet at the intake face your numbers will be incomparable with others tested flow and will not accurately indicate flow. A 4V head should easily make 330 on the intake with a cartridge roll bowl blend and performance valve seat. 350 @ .600" lift with a proper short side and bowl port is attainable. Overall you're doing well.
Thank you. In my defense, I recognize radius entry will increase flow numbers. However, a radius entry doesn't copy how an intake manifold delivers air to the port entry. Some manifolds add flow where others reduce it. For me, as long as I am consistent, then the tests are comparable between other modifications and heads. As for comparison of my numbers to other benches, I am cautious. Just like dynos, it would be foolish to think that all numbers are what they say they are.
@@crd-nz_001 the radius is more important than you may think even at low lift flow. While manifolds do affect flow, they don't cause turbulence at the intake mating face, but most will reduce flow numbers. I've got 35 years experience with Clevelands and still run them today and if you don't mind reading search for George Pence Clevelands for a very good historical and developmental dissertation on them. He covers the history of them quite well. Keep up the good work, it's nice to see someone still curious about ancient tech.
Normally, it's a special two pack epoxy that is stable with both temperature and petroleum. However, the red stuff I am using is just modeling clay. It's a demonstration to see what flow restrictions port stuffers have. It's easy to use and cost-effective as I'm only flowbench testing. While they do lower flow, I suspected a much greater loss than what was tested.
@@crd-nz_001 l have thought a lot about doing this and have come to the conclusion that 2v is better. On a different note Perkins has had very good success doing this with holden vn heads and managed to open the top more and moreover had slide throttle, it gave him victory.
Price Motorsports sells cast aluminum stuffers with the epoxy needed and instructions. They're online and very nice. You can buy the port plates from MPG in Colorado who is also online
@@crd-nz_001without a radiused inlet you're causing turbulence that you won't hear but will cause a loss in flow especially after filling the port due to reduced area. You shouldn't be losing any flow with filled ports.
Totally agree , this concept that testing at 10 inches and converting to 28 or higher by mathematical formula is a myth, there's no way at 10 inches are you going to see or hear any turbulence going on in the port , plus no radius entry is also incorrect, its misinformation once again on RUclips
I run the 4v heads with port stuffers in my Windsor. Or did, just now changing over to chi 3v as I messed up a head by breaking a couple valves. Love the 4v
![Megan Thee Stallion - Roc Steady (feat. Flo Milli) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HozPPyqW0dY/mqdefault.jpg)
Great test and I appreciate the advice on advancing the intake cam events to create more "ram" effect into the cylinder.
Should have a radius entry to the port when testing.... either a radius plate or clay... not the sharp edge... 😉
I agree. But, it should be as standardized as possible, if you're just putting clay on by hand you're going to get slightly different results each application.
Better than a bell or trumpet would be the actual intake. Once the ports are matched, we are going to be flowing the head with an intake in the car, so the flow with intake matters more than without.
@@SpecialEDy There is no way I would flow a head like that without some form of radius entry , while I agree about flowing the manifold that doesn't shy away from this is flowing the head wrong on its own, when I'm doing development on heads they are flowed first, once completed then will flow the manifold and then with carb wired open to get correct results.
, that's only after all area, length, shape etc etc is correct first, flowing a head on RUclips with no radius and posting numbers etc is misleading and wrong.
Just found your channel. I'm not far away from you and got Cleveland heads too . I've got lots of V6 mitsi heads I'd love to get flowed. All the same but different. There's no numbers anywhere comparing them on the same machine.
My closed chamber epoxied 4Vs flowed IN at 0600" lift 321 CFM EX 219 CFM
Good info!
Man, Listening to the background, I would be hiding out in the shop making video's too !!!!!
Its picking the right cam is more important than the port stuffers
You are right I never used any of that stuff and my Cleveland's ran like scalded dogs.
Absolutely the LSA and the ILC advance are more critical than duration and overlap.
Bear in mind the exact installed advance angle can only be determined by actual engine Dyno testing of the exact combination... Including headers and exhaust system AND intake system.
Most people are guessing when buying and installing a cam. But that's what average Joe does.
I would be more interested in the port velocity than the CFM #.
And swirling
Hey mate I think they only do it on the bottom of Exaust side to get the gases away faster
They did fill the lower section of the exhaust, yes. However, filling the lower and side sections of the intake port is well documented. Drag Boss Garage does a video on the insets for the lower section.
If you don't use a radiused inlet at the intake face your numbers will be incomparable with others tested flow and will not accurately indicate flow. A 4V head should easily make 330 on the intake with a cartridge roll bowl blend and performance valve seat. 350 @ .600" lift with a proper short side and bowl port is attainable.
Overall you're doing well.
Thank you.
In my defense, I recognize radius entry will increase flow numbers. However, a radius entry doesn't copy how an intake manifold delivers air to the port entry. Some manifolds add flow where others reduce it. For me, as long as I am consistent, then the tests are comparable between other modifications and heads. As for comparison of my numbers to other benches, I am cautious. Just like dynos, it would be foolish to think that all numbers are what they say they are.
@@crd-nz_001 the radius is more important than you may think even at low lift flow. While manifolds do affect flow, they don't cause turbulence at the intake mating face, but most will reduce flow numbers. I've got 35 years experience with Clevelands and still run them today and if you don't mind reading search for George Pence Clevelands for a very good historical and developmental dissertation on them. He covers the history of them quite well. Keep up the good work, it's nice to see someone still curious about ancient tech.
Where can you get this port stuffer?
Normally, it's a special two pack epoxy that is stable with both temperature and petroleum.
However, the red stuff I am using is just modeling clay. It's a demonstration to see what flow restrictions port stuffers have. It's easy to use and cost-effective as I'm only flowbench testing.
While they do lower flow, I suspected a much greater loss than what was tested.
@@crd-nz_001 l have thought a lot about doing this and have come to the conclusion that 2v is better. On a different note Perkins has had very good
success doing this with holden vn heads and managed to open the top more and moreover had slide throttle, it gave him victory.
@@joseph317 Slide injection is more efficient as there no throttle shaft in the area of air flow
Price Motorsports sells cast aluminum stuffers with the epoxy needed and instructions. They're online and very nice.
You can buy the port plates from MPG in Colorado who is also online
@@crd-nz_001without a radiused inlet you're causing turbulence that you won't hear but will cause a loss in flow especially after filling the port due to reduced area. You shouldn't be losing any flow with filled ports.
Test pressure is to low! cheers
Totally agree , this concept that testing at 10 inches and converting to 28 or higher by mathematical formula is a myth, there's no way at 10 inches are you going to see or hear any turbulence going on in the port , plus no radius entry is also incorrect, its misinformation once again on RUclips
that area is a trashed out mess
why mess with these engines?They are not used by anyone in the US. Most dont even know what they are...
It's what I enjoy, and the veiwers like to see.
If you don't like that, it's a you problem.
I run the 4v heads with port stuffers in my Windsor. Or did, just now changing over to chi 3v as I messed up a head by breaking a couple valves. Love the 4v
Bob Glidden liked them
I've got stock iron cc 4v's with a port mismatching dual plane that makes pretty good hp and tq for what it is.
Both over 500 in my 393c.
Good vid. 👍
Must be a chev guy has no idea