![]() |
Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Home · Bulletin Board · Project Journals · Tech Article Wiki · Knowledge Base · Photo Gallery · Classifieds · Company Reviews · Calendar · T-Shirts |
|
||||||
|
|||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
#16
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
As I said in a previous thread, I knew a man who was doing this in '61-'63, some with 3 tapered grooves on each cylinder. His race engines performed well. I recall seeing a 2 cycle engine head he did that had 6 grooves because of the massive concentric quench area, tiny chamber, true flattop piston, and 14/1 compression. |
|
#17
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
Hi xntrik, the idea is really catching on locally. I have grooved several SBF engines. One in particular has been the biggest success to date. A local Super Pro bracket racer heard about what I was doing and came to me for help. He is running very high DCR with a dome piston and a relatively small flat tappet camshaft. Detonation at the starting line went unnoticed and was causing engine damage. We cut one groove in each chamber and opened his squish clearance to 0.070”. The car responded like I have never seen. The first night out it ended up on the trailer unable to control wheel standing. After a rear end gear change and chassis adjustment he is back on track running quicker and with more MPH than ever before. Here are some pictures: ![]() ![]() |
|
#18
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
the grooves??
do the grooves have to be strate or can they be at angels or curved? dose it mater how Minny grooves there are?? would it make a difference if the spark plug is lined up with the grooves wild that make a difference??
|
|
#19
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
Hi Rale, it has been determined that straight grooves provide greater benefit than curved. This is something that I have not tried; I’m reporting what I have heard from other people that have. One groove work’s well, additional grooves add to the benefits, the most that I have tried is three in each chamber. I’ll attach a picture to show you what I did. With the SBC chamber it is difficult to fit multiple grooves because the intake valve can be close to the deck surface. The grooves need to point towards the advancing flame front, not necessarily the spark plug. The objective is to create turbulence in the flame itself to speed up development. Here’s a post from another board that explains the benefits of turbulence in the combustion chamber. Quote:
![]() ![]() |
|
#20
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
dead for 9 months
yo. can't believe this thread ended after less than two pages. anyway.
auto breath, why are the groove in your pic above coming from the exhaust valve? how did this work in comparison to coming from the spark plug and how did the multiple lines work compared to the single? this is a great idea to me and my 400 pontiac because i am at .032 down in the hole and with a .039 gasket would be right at 71 down so perfect for this groove-thang!!! i have been planning on zero decking. |
|
#21
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
What piston design does the 400 have? What heads, 6X? Can you buy a 0.026" thick gasket? Two grooves are better than one, just more of the benefits. With the SBC the valves are very close to the deck surface, trying to fit multiple grooves in the squish area around the valves is difficult, thats why these are so close together. The vortec heads will be installed during the Collage Christmas break. The three groove edelbrock heads work great, better than the single layout. The two groove LT1 heads are going on a 383 street engine, haven't been installed. |
|
#22
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
cool xmas is coming. my poncho, unfortunately, has 8 eyebrow crap pistons i am using because they didn't have to be replaced. low miles on a 30 over rebuild i got for free. heads are awesome 061 castings, the first open head design with a 75cc chamber much like the sbc. valves of course are larger. i think they are 2.11 and 1.65 or .75 i don't know. they are stone cold stock. but i was pushing 9.6:1 c.r. if i zero decked. right now i am at a perfect 9.02:1 if i used a .039 head gasket. i can get thinner gaskets, i think a cometic is .015 or so. but that gasket will cost more than for me to zero deck. on the other hand, i could just buy it and be done with it, 'cept for the groovey grooves.
one of the other things i was going to have to do to run 9.6:1 was getta cam with alot of overlap and wife lobe sep. would i be able to run a comp xe type cam instead with the grooves? also, i noticed those heads have had the dogcrap ported out of them. does that matter? thanks also number two: what have you knowledge about cutting the grooves into the tops of pistons vs. the head? this q is posted on my pontiac site now, as is this whole thread via a link i made on a similar thread that was going nowhere Last edited by bullheimer : 12-06-2006 at 08:12 PM. |
|
#23
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
With those heads, I would put two to three parallel grooves in the squish pad angled towards the intake valve, 9.6:1 compression with a small cam should be fine with no detonation.
I’m able to buy a low buck Victor head gasket for the SBC that is 0.026” thick. I suppose they are not available for the Pontiac engines. Porting is not necessary with the grooves, porting is all about power! |
|
#26
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Little town between Shreveport and Alexandria. I am slowly piecing together a 383 for my '95 TBI truck. I bought a new set of pro topline stock replacement heads less the swirl vane. Looks like a good mod to do on them.
|
|
#27
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
auto B, you just told me to angle the grooves towards the intake valves. those would be the LARGE ones. all of your pictures show the lines headed towards the smaller exhaust valve. also, with a 26 thou gasket and 32 down i would be only at 58 quench, far from the 70-90 referred to earlier.
(Edit: previously you said 50-70, not 70-90) Last edited by bullheimer : 12-08-2006 at 01:38 PM. |
|
#28
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
When detonation is a concern, my opinion on piston to head clearance with a steel rod engine < 7500 RPM is 0.050" to 0.070", many people disagree with that. The wider clearance does cost some performance. |
|
#29
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Can you elaborate on why do you need to have a .070" quench for the grooves to work their best? Wouldn't tighter quench like .040" just make it even more turbulent?
|
|
#30
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
fiscus,
Every combination must be considered individually; on one extreme I have heard of people running low RPM engines with less than 0.030" piston to head clearance, other high level NOS engines like very wide squish clearance. I'm going with about 0.050" in the SBC engines I build lately; I find it’s a good compromise. I have done testing with several SBC engines in my Camaros over the last two years changing head gasket thickness to alter the squish clearance. The testing wasn't ideal because with a thicker gasket the compression goes down. I have tried 0.035", 0.045", 0.056" and 0.070", with my combination. With the grooves it ran best with 0.056" and no detonation. Performance was great at 0.035" but I had to keep a close eye on detonation. The owner of the Mustang posted earlier went with 0.070" clearance, it worked for him; personally I feel a little tighter would improve performance further. The car runs low 10s now and is no longer breaking parts. Somender Singh recommended the wider clearance, I tried it and I like it. I'm not sure that I fully understand why but I know the benefit of the wider clearance with grooves is related to reducing detonation, he feels it has to do with complete combustion in the squish zone. My thoughts are the grooves provide increased turbulence allowing a wider squish clearance that reduces squish zone pressure. This combined with faster flame travel allows reduced ignition advance ultimately reducing detonation tendencies. |
![]() |
Back to top |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads for: "Singh's Grooves in Ported & Milled vortec heads on stock 350"
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Stock 350 with 305 truck heads? | CrazyT | Engine | 3 | 08-04-2009 01:15 PM |
| vortec vs phase 2 heads | 71vegagt | Engine | 3 | 01-29-2006 05:12 AM |
| Exclusive parts for Vortec heads | mgray | Engine | 1 | 10-16-2003 06:38 PM |
| Collection of Ported Vortec Heads (pics) | Ken-96GMC K1500 SC | Engine | 2 | 06-08-2003 04:00 PM |
| 350 heads or 305 H.O. heads????? | crshrmn3 | Engine | 3 | 08-25-2002 08:51 PM |