104icl drawbacks - Page 2 - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Engine
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2013, 02:05 PM
vinniekq2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: BC,Canada
Age: 56
Posts: 6,773
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 240
Thanked 621 Times in 604 Posts
The heads flow less than 240 CFM,put them on a 283/302 or maybe a 327,other wise buy bigger heads for a bigger engine
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2013, 04:39 PM
techinspector1's Avatar
Senior Curmudgeon
 
Last wiki edit: DynoSim combinations Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hemet, California, USA
Age: 72
Posts: 12,284
Wiki Edits: 326

Thanks: 621
Thanked 784 Times in 667 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0trbo4myCHEVUICK View Post
I was thinking with just a little port work they would hold up to 6000..
They are thin-wall castings and subject to cracking anyway.....I sure as hell wouldn't be doing any grinding on 'em to make 'em even thinner. You want more power, use more head like Vinnie says.....
Rule of thumb....Roughly twice the intake runner flow capability equals possible horsepower with everything maxxed out (dyno'd at sea level, 60 degrees F. air), so with heads that flow about 235, you could make about 470 hp with them under ideal conditions. Rule of thumb, not carved in stone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2013, 05:42 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NorthRichlandHills, TX
Posts: 406
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 118
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Not planning on hogging them out or anything. The couple guys I know running vortecs have had work done to the bowls and exhaust ports pretty much leaving the intake alone. They are shifting from 58-6200 rpms.. Clearly not the best heads but will get me close to my moderate goals i think.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2013, 05:45 PM
vinniekq2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: BC,Canada
Age: 56
Posts: 6,773
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 240
Thanked 621 Times in 604 Posts
did you read post #14?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2013, 06:43 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NorthRichlandHills, TX
Posts: 406
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 118
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinniekq2 View Post
using those heads are more of a concern that the camshaft.the heads will be at max flow around 5200 rpm.It will rev higher,the power wont increase much.you need another 40 CFM to make big power over 6,000 RPM
What would you estimate the camshafts rpm range? 2-6000? Are you saying either get a smaller cam or get bigger heads?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2013, 06:47 PM
techinspector1's Avatar
Senior Curmudgeon
 
Last wiki edit: DynoSim combinations Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hemet, California, USA
Age: 72
Posts: 12,284
Wiki Edits: 326

Thanks: 621
Thanked 784 Times in 667 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0trbo4myCHEVUICK View Post
The couple guys I know running vortecs have had work done to the bowls and exhaust ports pretty much leaving the intake alone. They are shifting from 58-6200 rpms..
So, copy what they have done and be through with it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2013, 06:50 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NorthRichlandHills, TX
Posts: 406
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 118
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
I get that your trying to push me towards bigger heads but I didnt think the cam was over kill... Which brings me to another question, do you subtract 8 degrees from overlap total to account for hydraulic lifter travel?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2013, 06:55 PM
vinniekq2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: BC,Canada
Age: 56
Posts: 6,773
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 240
Thanked 621 Times in 604 Posts
that cam might make power to 6k in a 350,a little less in a 383.
put that cam in a 283 with those heads and make power over 6k
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 07-05-2013, 06:56 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NorthRichlandHills, TX
Posts: 406
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 118
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
I get that your trying to push me towards bigger heads but I didnt think the cam was over kill... Which brings me to another question, do you subtract 8 degrees from overlap total to account for hydraulic lifter travel?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 07-06-2013, 02:28 PM
techinspector1's Avatar
Senior Curmudgeon
 
Last wiki edit: DynoSim combinations Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hemet, California, USA
Age: 72
Posts: 12,284
Wiki Edits: 326

Thanks: 621
Thanked 784 Times in 667 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0trbo4myCHEVUICK View Post
I get that your trying to push me towards bigger heads but I didnt think the cam was over kill... Which brings me to another question, do you subtract 8 degrees from overlap total to account for hydraulic lifter travel?
I'll admit to being stymied over your question here concerning subtracting 8 degrees until I went over to Speedtalk and read up on where you got the idea. Subtracting 8 degrees is not to account for hydraulic lifter travel, it's for comparing a solid cam to a hydraulic cam, subtracting 8 degrees from the duration of a hydraulic cam in order to compute the same approximate duration as a solid cam, less valve lash. While I did learn something by reading the attached thread from Speedtalk, I think it's MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING in my personal opinion. I don't choose a cam by determining the idle quality and could not care less about it, as long as the cam makes power where I want it, based on compatibility with the static compression ratio of the motor and revs to the point that I need it to based on gears and and tire size.

Here's the link.......knock yourself out........
Why does overlap make a rough idle? • Speed Talk

Further, I am of the opinion that it is not so much overlap that gives you that erratic idle quality, as much as it is the piston rising in the bore with the intake valve still open and shoving mixture back up the intake tract. The venturi sees mixture going both ways and adds fuel appropriately to what it sees. This makes a very rich condition and even forms a ball of fuel mixture hovering over the airhorn of the carb that you can see with a strong light on a dark night.

Here's what Iskenderian has to say about it.......


Tech Tip - 2002
What Causes Intake Reversion? Once and for all, let us have the TRUTH!

With the proliferation of the Motorsports Industry over the years, many new faces have come on the scene. In the cam grinding business today, there are many younger, less experienced companies struggling for recognition of their talents and a few have turned to postulating new theories in order to attract attention. However, they are I believe unfortunately, too often guilty of shooting from the hip.

Two in particular are responsible for perpetuating the "myth" that an earlier opening of the intake valve (even by a mere 2 or 3 degrees) causes the phenomenon known as "reversion". Nothing could be further from the truth! This misconception not only defies common sense, it also establishes a false premise from which other, incorrect conclusions can be drawn. Simply put, those who focus on overlap are on the wrong end of the cam-timing diagram!

Reversion, carburetor/Injector "stand-off" or the general effect of the backing up of the intake Fuel/Air charge normally associated with longer duration high-performance camshafts is actually caused by a Later Intake Closing! How do we know this to be true? The answer lies in the basic principles of physics. For as with geometry and trigonometry, these sacred truths do not change simply because someone chooses to ignore them in an attempt to garner a reputation.

Specifically, when the intake valve opens some 40 or more degrees before T.D.C. at the end of the exhaust stroke, very little (virtually no) exhaust gases remain in the cylinder. The piston is in the vicinity of T.D.C. (only .425" down the hole @40o BTDC - on a typical 350" Chevy with 5.700" rods) and no appreciable threat is posed to the forthcoming intake charge. The "False Reversion Hypothesis" taken to an extreme would lead one to the equally false conclusion that any overlapping of the intake and exhaust valves is totally undesirable. Automotive engineers of the late 1800's and early 1900's used to think this way. They were deathly afraid of overlap, so much so they actually employed "Negative" overlap (minus 5 or 10 degrees) to be absolutely sure none would occur. What was the result? These engines were severely "throttled back" or limited to low speeds and mediocre output. [ Reference: Iskenderian's Tech Article "Cam Degreeing is Simple"] But, more progressive engineers of the early 1920's who performed "brazen experiments" with longer duration cams proved these overlap fears to be only so much "stuff and nonsense", as both power, rpm and performance were actually improved. These engineers demonstrated that overlap did not cause engines to quiver, backfire or lock-up on the spot! Although, the ignorance displayed by their predecessors is easily explained by their lack of experience, (internal combustion engine design being in it's infancy) it was none the less the result of an incorrect hypothesis.

Should you need further persuasion that reversion is not caused by earlier intake opening and the resulting extension of valve overlap, consider this: What happens when you advance any camshaft? The intake as well as the exhaust valves open earlier. Does this advancing of the cam cause more reversion? Of course not. Throttle response and torque are enhanced. Yet, if these theories were correct wouldn't the engine run more poorly, especially at lower RPM? The answer is obviously yes, and because so, these theories are invalid. A brief look at what's happening on the other end of the valve-timing diagram will tell you why.

For when a camshaft is advanced, not only do both valves open earlier but they of course also close earlier - and here in lies the key to reducing Intake Reversion. Close your intake valves earlier and any tendency for the occurrence of Reversion or the backing up of the intake charge as the piston rises on the compression stroke will be reduced. It's not complex, nor is it a mystery. And the circumstances surrounding it's occurrence have not changed. In fact any experienced mechanic could tell you as much, for, as Ed's good friend the legendary Smokey Yunick might say, "Only country smarts are required to solve the problem."

Last edited by techinspector1; 07-06-2013 at 02:36 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to techinspector1 For This Useful Post:
0trbo4myCHEVUICK (07-06-2013)
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 07-06-2013, 02:42 PM
How fast is fast enough?
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 28
Posts: 8,247
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 13
Thanked 223 Times in 208 Posts
Vortex heads can be used into the 450hp range but its not advised. I would have just ran 210cc import heads for under 700 bucks. It also allows you to run a standard pattern intake. Your combo is already together though and it'll run fine. Shifting at 5800 rpm is probably about ideal for that combo maybe a hair low actually. May want to try 6000 at the track. If everything else is spot on you should be near the 425hp mark, not bad for such a mild combo. It'll run on 87 octane too which is always nice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to ap72 For This Useful Post:
0trbo4myCHEVUICK (07-06-2013)
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 07-06-2013, 03:06 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NorthRichlandHills, TX
Posts: 406
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 118
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Wow, great info tech. Much appreciated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Engine posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Any drawbacks to larger Ujoints? curtis73 Transmission - Rearend 3 09-29-2007 01:33 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.