goldylocks and the three ports

[grumpyvette]

I got asked how to select the correct cylinder heads, and in respect to a 383 a guy was building, now that may seem like an easy question but the truth is that without knowing the intended cam, compression, rear gear ratio and intended power range,
thats about as easily answered as asking which girl will make the best wife!
yeah we have all heard some guys discussing which cylinder heads and theres always some guy that says that head (A) or (B) has intake ports that are too large or too small, and many guys never stop to ask WHY?... WHY? that particular cylinder heads to much larger or too small and how can you even tell? in fact how many guys can even tell you the measured difference in cross sectional area or that heads flow numbers?
well, lets look at the basics, all cylinder head flow is controlled by several factors,port flow is restricted by the smallest cross sectional area of a port, the valve curtain area, and the valve seat throat, but one basic restriction is valve size and how high the valves lifted off it seat (cam lift)and how long it remains open, (cam duration) this is the valve curtain area all ports must deal with,and Ive heard guys state that the higher the lift the more the port will flow,well the cam timing and compression all effect your potential results.

well lets put that myth to bed first, a port throat area rarely exceeds .90% of the valves diameter., and no matter how high the valve lifts off its seat the flow can not increase too significantly much greater that the flow reached when that valve curtain area equals the port throat cross sectional area, as the smaller forms a restriction to the other.
on some heads and intake manifolds the port cross sectional area is significantly smaller than the valve curtain,
http://www.airflowresearch.com/super-chevy-apr-2010-210cc-sbc.php

EXAMPLE
this is one reason the TPI intake is rather restrictive

http://www.wallaceracing.com/chokepoint-rpm.php

heres a typical flw vs lift graph, notice how the flow rate increases past .500 lift drop rather drastically

now holding the valve open longer allows more flow just like opening a door fully allows easier access to a room but at some point just like a door opening limits the number of people that can enter a room per second so does the port throat, curtain area and any restriction in the port.
lets take your common 2.02 small block chevy intake valve, its surface area is 3.21 square inches but the port throat restriction would be exceptionally good if it was at ,90% or 2.89 square inches, a 2.02 valve has a circumference of about 6.3 inches so at about .47 inches of lift port flow increases with further lift starts to drop off
you will want to match the cam timing to the intended power range, and match the engine static compression ratio to the cam timing to get a dynamic compression ratio that will work without getting into detonation issues with available fuel octane levels.
(READ THRU THESE LINKS)
viewtopic.php?f=52&t=82

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=5078

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=796

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=727

IF YOU HAVE A SET OF REALLY DEEP POCKETS
http://www.speierracingheads.com/SRH2.50.htm
CALCULATORS
http://www.wallaceracing.com/calcafhp.php

http://www.wallaceracing.com/calchpaf.php

http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/runnertorquecalc.html

http://horsepowercalculators.net/intake ... old-design

power generated by an engine is closely linked to how efficiently it makes torque, in a given rpm range and how fast the engine can be rotated to increase the number of EFFECTIVE power strokes per second, so it should be obvious that the larger the displacement the more fuel/air mix can be burnt and the faster each cylinder can be filled and fired and scavenged and recharged the more power can potentially be produced. smaller ports will have higher flow velocity's making them more effective at filling cylinders at lower rpms but restricting upper rpm power.
larger ports tend to be far less restrictive to flow but also tend to have slower response in the lower rpm ranges
as the engines ability to efficiently fill and scavenge the cylinders is based on both port flow and time available for that port flow as the engines rpm rate increases the efficiency increases with the air flow rate inertia in the runners and ports up to the point where time limits the ability for the ports to fill, fire and scavenge efficiently, thats why you torque curve and volumetric efficiency are so closely linked.
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/tfs-3 ... /overview/

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/tfs-3 ... structions

you are aware theres reasonably priced aluminum heads designed for a small bore sbc that out flow standard vortec heads
heres a few serious sbc heads

http://www.profilerperformance.com/sbc-heads-176.html

http://www.airflowresearch.com/index.php?cPath=24_33

here’s a chart FROM THE BOOK,HOW TO BUILD BIG-INCH CHEVY SMALL BLOCKS with some common cross sectional port sizes
(measured at the smallest part of the ports)
...........................sq inches........port cc
edelbrock performer rpm ....1.43.............170
vortec......................1.66.............170
tfs195......................1.93.............195
afr 180.....................1.93.............180
afr 195.....................1.98.............195
afr 210.....................2.05.............210
dart pro 200................2.06.............200
dart pro 215................2.14.............215
brodix track 1 .............2.30.............221
dart pro 1 230..............2.40.............230
edelbrock 23 high port .....2.53.............238
edelbrock 18 deg............2.71.............266
tfs 18 deg..................2.80.............250
you don,t generally find a ports most restrictive or smallest cross section at the intake to head gasket match so measuring a port at that point is usually nearly meaningless.
notice how the port cc range does NOT exactly reflect the cross sectional areas
also notice how the 210cc AFR port is only about 4% larger in cross sectional area, a change in area that will cause about a 150rpm change in the ports low rpm torque peak , but the increased flow will have a much more significant effect on the engines power, while its true that the smaller port will make a bit more low speed torque its also true that its smaller cross section is far more restrictive to upper rpm peak hp than the slightly larger port and its the, engine displacement, compression ratio, ignition timing curve, cam timing and intake runner and plenum, header length, collector design and and exhaust back pressure, selected that have by far the larger effect on the engines power curve in the low and mid rpm ranges

you will usually need snap gauges and a micrometer to measure the port throat and the area near the push rod passage where many ports tend to be pinched tighter

there are very useful calculators to use to calculate the ideal port cross sectional area, and to use to find when a ports to small and restrictive or two large and sluggish, but it requires measuring the ports to get the correct info

http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/runnertorquecalc.html

http://www.wallaceracing.com/max-rpm2.php

http://www.wallaceracing.com/max-rpm.php

http://www.wallaceracing.com/ca-calc.php

http://www.wallaceracing.com/chokepoint-rpm.php

http://www.wallaceracing.com/area-under-curve.php

http://www.wallaceracing.com/curtain-area-calc.php

http://2.3liter.com/Calc2.htm#MinCross


related useful threads, with a ton of related info that will help in any head selection
viewtopic.php?f=52&t=333

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=796

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=148

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=2630

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=266&p=322&hilit=215cc+vortec#p322

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=4664

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=4081

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=1563

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=4221

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=401

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=92

viewtopic.php?f=55&t=1038\

viewtopic.php?f=55&t=5378

viewtopic.php?f=55&t=4362

 

[Indycars]

no matter how high the valve lifts off its seat the flow can not increase too significantly much greater that the flow reached when that valve curtain area equals the port throat cross sectional area, as the smaller forms a restriction to the other.
Even thou higher lift than that lift that creates equal areas will not flow much more, it does increase flow at the lower lifts. Because it reaches the same .1, .2 or .3" sooner (in less duration). Since the nose of the cam cannot be square, you have to use the extra lift to decelerate the lifter/valve.

Yes, no or depends ???


heres a typical flw vs lift graph, notice how the flow rate increases past .500 lift drop rather drastically

Do you mean .500" in stead of .050" ???

This is a bit over simplified, but Port 1 and Port 2 would flow about the same CFM, because the restriction at section B is the limiting factor.

 

[grumpyvette]

DARN, Indycars, I WISH I HAD YOUR OBVIOUS MUCH BETTER THAN MY OWN, COMPUTER SKILLS





lets do a bit of math
just a bit of info on intake gaskets sizes to match port cross sectional areas

Calculating the valve curtain area
The following equation mathematically defines the available flow area for any given valve diameter and lift value:
Area = valve diameter x 0.98 x 3.14 x valve lift
Where 3.14 = pi (π)
For a typical 2.02-inch intake valve at .500-inch lift, it calculates as follows:
Area = 2.02 x 0.98 x 3.14 x 0.500 = 3.107 square inches
SO lets do a bit of math
a cylinder head with a 2.02' intake valve and a cam with a .450 lift at the valve with a 1.5:1 rocker will in theory produce a valve curtain area of 2.79 sq inches, swapping to a 1.6:1 ratio increases the lift to .480 lift 2.98 sq inches, increasing the available port flow potential at least in theory by about 6%, but keep in mind the port can only flow at full valve lift for the limited time the valve remains at full lift and if the narrowest section of the port cross sectional areas less that the valve curtain area that not the valve restricts flow
THUS the most you can reasonably expect is a 6% flow increase , from the rocker ratio upgrade but reality and the fact that the valve is opening and closing perhaps 57 times a second at peak rpms, and the port may be more restrictive that the valve curtain area, on many small block combos suggests the results will be lower

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=148&p=34936&hilit=calculate+port+stall#p34936

heres a chart FROM THE BOOK,HOW TO BUILD BIG-INCH CHEVY SMALL BLOCKS with some common cross sectional port sizes
(measured at the smallest part of the ports)
...........................sq inches........port cc
edelbrock performer rpm ....1.43.............170
vortec......................1.66.............170
tfs195......................1.93.............195
afr 180.....................1.93.............180
afr 195.....................1.98.............195
afr 210.....................2.05.............210
dart pro 200................2.06.............200
dart pro 215................2.14.............215
brodix track 1 .............2.30.............221
dart pro 1 230..............2.40.............230
edelbrock 23 high port .....2.53.............238
edelbrock 18 deg............2.71.............266
tfs 18 deg..................2.80.............250

USE THE CALCULATORS
http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/runnertorquecalc.html
http://www.wallaceracing.com/chokepoint.php
http://www.wallaceracing.com/header_length.php

COMMON SBC INTAKE PORTS
felpro # 1204=Port Size: 1.23" x 1.99"=2.448 sq inches

felpro # 1205=Port Size: 1.28" x 2.09"=2.67 sq inches

felpro # 1206=Port Size: 1.34" x 2.21"=2.96 sq inches

felpro # 1207=Port Size: 1.38" x 2.28"=3.146 sq inches

felpro # 1209=Port Size: 1.38" x 2.38"=3.28 sq inches

felpro # 1255 VORTEC=Port Size: 1.08" x 2.16"-2.33 sq inches

felpro # 1263=Port Size: 1.31" x 2.02"=2.65 sq inches

felpro # 1266=Port Size: 1.34" x 2.21"=2.96 sq inches

felpro # 1284 LT1=Port Size: 1.25 x 2.04''=2.55 sq inches

felpro # 1289 FASTBURN=Port Size: 1.30" x 2.31" 3.00 sq inches


the valve curtain area, cam duration and lift controlling that curtain area,or port cross sectional area will pose a restriction to air flow at some point,in the engines rpm band, but you can extend the effective air flow duration and efficiency with carefully timed exhaust scavenging, that helps draw in the intake runner inertia load of air/fuel,charge much more effectively if the peak negative pressure wave is correctly timed



CHEVY BIG BLOCK rectangle port
felpro # 1275 =Port Size: 1.82 x 2.54"

CHEVY BIG BLOCK oval port
felpro # 1210=Port Size: 1.82" x 2.05"

 

[Indycars]

What do you think Grumpy about my comments above ?

Seems we posted within seconds of each other, so I think you missed my post.

 

[grumpyvette]

"Even thou higher lift than that lift that creates equal areas will not flow much more, it does increase flow at the lower lifts. Because it reaches the same .1, .2 or .3" sooner (in less duration). Since the nose of the cam cannot be square, you have to use the extra lift to decelerate the lifter/valve.

Yes, no or depends ???"
yes thats true as you want to keep the rate of lifter acceleration/de-acceleration reasonably consistent and inertial loads reasonable so that requires lifting the valve higher and allowing it to drop back to its seal along a predictable path


THESE LINKS HOLD A GREAT DEAL OF USEFUL RELATED INFO
viewtopic.php?f=52&t=2627&p=6780&hilit=ramp+rate+lobe#p6780

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=3802

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=788

viewtopic.php?f=70&t=1701&p=4159#p4159

 

[grumpyvette]

http://www.popularhotrodding.com/engine ... shaft.html
look closely at the torque numbers, they use 210cc heads on a 383 build, the off idle torque might be less than ideal but the power curve comes on strong in the mid and upper rpm range, much of the lower rpm torque loss is a trade off as they wanted more peak hp, if the cam was lower in duration they would have sacrificed some peak hp for more low rpm torque
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/engine ... lults.html

by the time the pistons 60 degrees past TDC on the combustion stroke, theres a huge drop in cylinder pressure
small Block Engine Build - Cheap Swill!


Small Block Engine Build - Cheap Swill!
PHR builds two 500+ horsepower small-blocks for 87-octane
From the February, 2009 issue of Popular Hot Rodding
By Scott Parkhurst


|
|
Small Block

It seems gasoline prices are on a constant unstoppable climb. The rate of this climb changes, and in our current national situation these changes can be abrupt, but...it seems prices are always a bit higher than they were last year, and especially higher than they were two to five years ago. This steady-but-gradual increase in gasoline cost is making it tougher and tougher to justify building a street machine to run exclusively on premium gas--always the highest-priced option at the local pump.

We at the car magazines are guilty of showing almost nothing but higher-octane buildups and research. We typically want to produce solid power figures and are normally willing to pay the higher price at the pump when these project engines hit the road. Often, the engines built on the pages of your favorite magazines end up living in limited-use automobiles, so the commitment to premium gasoline is not a big deal.
Small Block

Times are changing, so we wanted to do something different. The overwhelming majority of daily-driven vehicles remain bone-stock, as the factories built them, and live on a steady diet of cheaper 87-octane brew. What if a reader wanted to drive his hot rod more often than on sunny weekends, and wasn't willing to drop the larger dough for premium gas on a regular basis? Can a true performance engine be built to live on 87-octane?
Small Block

We think so, and we've done the homework to find out how far it can be pushed. What we'll share is the bulk of the research we've accomplished toward getting this true street 87-octane engine going, and if you're considering something similar, we'll have a blueprint for you to follow. We based this buildup on the ubiquitous small-block Chevy because of its research-based existence, and the ease of parts and limited expense simply made sense in this vein. The techniques and ideas shown are quite universal, and should be on the list of "must-do" items for others pursuing the 87-octane dream regardless of engine make. We went a step further by building not one, but two small-block Chevys in both the popular 355- and 383-cube dimensions that most PHR readers favor. These tricks and tips will work just as well on any domestic V-8, and probably any piston engine, for that matter. It's bad news that 87-octane may be our future, but we're trying to make lemonade from this lemon.
Small Block Rod And Piston

THE BASICS--BLOCK, CRANK, RODS, and PISTONS
We began with '80s-era 4-bolt 350 blocks, with intentions toward stroking one up to the common 383-inch level and leaving the other at 355 (overbored .030-inch over stock.) We anticipate a hard life for these particular mills, which may include racing and nitrous use down the road. We chose a complete Lunati reciprocating assemblies for both, including the crankshaft (a good forged unit with aerodynamic counterweights and precision machining), forged connecting rods (in 6-inch lengths), and forged pistons (a flat-top design with two valve reliefs machined into their surfaces for adequate piston-to-valve clearances). Lunati offers both engine-reciprocating assemblies as internally balanced, pre-matched units.
Small Block Rod And Piston

Lunati sells these complete reciprocating assemblies in pre-balanced form, which saves time and money at the machine shop. They even ship with bearings. Their forged strength is not in question, and unlike 383s built using factory (400ci) cranks, these are internally balanced, which opens up parts selection dramatically versus the oddball, externally balanced 400-crank issues. Naturally, the 350 reciprocating assemblies are internally balanced as well. We ordered ours with 6-inch forged rods in both cases. For anyone considering a Chevy 383 or 355 at any power level, it'd be hard not to recommend checking out these impressive pre-matched kits.
Small Block Balancer

To beef up our bottom end even further, we equipped the 4-bolt blocks with an ARP stud kit. It's important to remind readers how these studs must be installed prior to machining the mainline, and also how their torque figures may vary from a factory specification. We prefer ARP studs for their increased strength, improved bearing cap alignment, and increased grip length surface area (due to the finer threads in the torqued fastener nuts versus the coarsely-threaded bolts).

This type of bottom-end fortitude should support plenty of power, and probably is capable of more than we'll ever make with these low-octane mills. In this case, overkill is fine, since we intend to push limits and justified the extra durability by knowing we'd have our toes close to the line in the development and tuning of this engine. Should we push too hard, we know we've got the strength inside to survive.
Small Block Cylinder Heads

Beyond strength, there's the issue of harmonics avoidance and the pursuit of smooth acceleration through balance. We've chosen to run a TCI "Rattler" balancer with its movable weight pucks inside, since we like the engineering of these pucks being able to move at will to correct any harmonic distortion instantly and at any rpm level. Unlike fluid-filled dampers, the Rattler design in unaffected by temperature and has instant response to varying harmonic interference. In a street-based car headed for the occasional racy jaunt, this type of engineering is a bonus. It doesn't suppress harmonics (like factory-type rubber-insulated dampers), it counteracts them with proper weight shift.
Small Block Flow Chart

CYLINDER HEADS
When pushing hard against an octane barrier, detonation avoidance becomes paramount and the heads are key. In addition to limiting compression (in our case, we've chosen 9.75:1), we wanted to have an efficient chamber design to make the most of what little octane we'll have. The ports need to be sized for optimal volume and velocity in the rpm ranges the engine will be running at (2,000-6,500), and our research led us to the AFR 210 (CNC-finished) aluminum units.

We were tempted to go with the zippy 190cc intake port, and also by the known-power made by the 215cc heads, but decided on the 210 to balance the aforementioned volume and velocity issues. We preferred the tried-and-true CNC-finishing to optimize the design, since the programming is proven and the port-to-port sizing is more accurate than any human hand could ever be with a grinder.

AFR 210cc HEAD SPECS: PN 1050
Basic Package Components:
100 percent CNC Ported Combustion Chambers
100% CNC Ported Exhaust Ports
70 percent to 100 percent CNC Ported Intake Ports
3-angle Valve Job
Intake Valve, 2.080" x .050" long, AFR #7018
Exhaust Valve, 1.600" x .050" long, AFR #7057
1.550" OD Roller Valve Spring, 220 lbs. on seat, .670" maximum lift, AFR #8000
10o 4140 Chrome Moly Retainers, AFR #8510
10o Valve Locks, AFR #9005
7/16" Rocker Studs, AFR #6405
5/16" Guide Plates, AFR #6105
Valve Seals, AFR #6611
Hardened Shims, AFR #8045
Intake Valve Seats, AFR #9060
Exhaust Valve Seats, AFR #9070
Bronze Valve Guides, AFR #9050
Special orders available on request.

Specifications, Features, and Supporting Components
Head Torque 65-70 ft.-lbs.
Rocker Stud Torque 55-60 ft.-lbs.
Intake Port Gasket, 1.310" x 2.180" w/ 3/8" radius, AFR #6820
Important: Do not port match your intake manifold to this Fel-Pro gasket, as they do not exactly fit AFR heads.
Intake Gasket Option, 1.280" x 2.090" Fel Pro #1205, AFR #6810
Exhaust Port Gasket Fel Pro #1406, AFR #6835
Head Gasket 350cid Fel Pro #1003, AFR #6800
400cid Fel Pro #1014, AFR #6802
Head Bolts & Studs Standard ARP, AFR #6310 & #6305
Head Bolt Washers Manley, AFR #6320
Stud Girdle AFR #6201
Spark Plug Starting Range Autolite 3910
Combustion Chambers 76cc
Spring Pocket can be cut to 1.750, no deeper.
Valve Spacing Standard
Rocker Arms Standard
Valve Angle 23o
Angle Mill (milling available) .008" per cc
Flat Mill (milling available) .006" per cc
Pushrods 5/16" Hardened, AFR #6601 thru #6604
Small Block Intake Ports

All detonation begins in the combustion chamber, so we were especially careful in designing the powerplant by choosing a good size chamber (at 76cc) and allowing the piston to sit "in the hole" by .012 to achieve our target 9.75:1 compression ratio figure. We then fortified the chamber with the addition of a thermal barrier coating, which will serve multiple purposes.

First, the Calico CT-2 thermal barrier coating will insulate and isolate the chamber from the rest of the head. Research has shown this to be worth power, but immediately one would think this insulating property would bring us closer to detonation. We feel it will aid in the distribution of heat across the chamber, and by engineering an efficient cooling system, we can maintain good detonation avoidance under full load. We hope to spread the heat out over the chamber and in doing so, bring additional detonation avoidance properties along. Another advantage of the Calico CT-2 thermal barrier coating is its ability to leave a smooth surface wherever it is applied. Being a ceramic type of material, the resulting surface of the coated chamber is nice and smooth. The lack of any sharp edges in the critical chamber area adds to the detonation avoidance characteristics, and will allow us to push a little further into the land of low-octane performance.
Small Block Intake Ports

We also coated our valves and ports. The thinking behind this is twofold, as the intake charge will be insulated from heat as it enters the combustion chamber (including the heat from the intake valve), and the hot exhaust will be escorted through a similarly insulated tunnel on the way out. Header wraps and coatings make power because they keep the heat inside the header. Hot exhaust is always trying to expand, and the insulated exhaust port aids in this quest. Once the hot exhaust gases reach the header collector, they are encouraged to expand and escape, as this is where we've designed them to do so.
Small Block

We chose to have the coating applied directly over the CNC-finished AFR chamber without any further prep work or smoothing. We did this so our research could be easily duplicated with out-of-the-box, unmodified heads our readers could get their hands on. Also, we felt that changing the chamber as AFR finished them would probably hurt more than it would help, since so much of their research has gone into these chambers. As a final point, the coatings are .001-.002-inch thick, and this served to virtually eliminate the already-fine CNC machine finish inside the chamber. This smoothing effect is precisely what we were hoping for in addition to the thermal barrier features the coatings bring to the party.
Small Block Intake Ports

By insulating the exhaust valve, we hope to minimize heat going into and coming out of it. Keeping the exhaust valve cool will also aid in detonation avoidance, since the exhaust valve and its surrounding seat area is always the hottest part of the combustion chamber.

|
|
Small Block Camshaft

CAMSHAFT
The camshaft defines so many characteristics of the engine; its design is always critical. In wanting to maximize the performance of these 87-octane mills throughout a wide rpm band, we contacted Comp Cams and got the advice of their experts. We decided on a solid roller camshaft, since we liked the benefits of the design (rapid valve action, minimal friction) and we've got no problem checking our valve lash occasionally. While some may balk at the idea of a solid roller in a daily-driven street machine, we actually enjoy the fine-tuning and occasional lash requirements, and we want to take full advantage of the capabilities this engine can bring. A solid roller can bring us more, and we chose Comp's Xtreme Energy part number 12-772-8 (grind number XR286R). The specifications on this cam are aggressive, with 286/292 degrees of advertised duration, a quick 248/254 at .050-inch lift, and 110-degree lobe separation angle. Lift numbers check in at .576/.582-inch with a 1.5:1 roller rocker, and we'll experiment with different ratios (including the proven Comp Cams 1.6:1 Magnum rockers) to fine-tune the best-possible scenario with this particular cam.
Small Block Intake Manifold

The idea behind the aggressive lobe is to shed a bit of compression at the lower rpm ranges to further avoid detonation. It's honest inefficiency and overlap will shed some cylinder pressure below 2,000-2,500 rpm, and the lower pressures should be able to support the low octane gas. Once the engine picks up speed (2,500-plus rpm), the overlap will add to the efficiency instead of taking away from it, and the engines should be able to start supporting real power numbers all throughout the midrange to the 6,500 rpm (or so) redline. As you'll read, careful carb tuning and fine adjustment of the ignition curve will also be incorporated at the critical lower rpm levels to offset detonation at this most-susceptible rpm level. Careful tuning of our extremely adjustable components and parts selection focusing on precision-crafted performance hardware should become our best weapons against the curse of low-octane detonation.
Small Block Carburetor

INDUCTION
Feeding this engine may seem like an easy task, but this is not so. We have a very efficient intake port in the AFR head, and feeding it becomes quite a task at low rpm. As we mentioned earlier, the properly sized port was the goal, and we were leaning toward a 190cc port to ensure good velocity. We chose the 210 for increased power potential upstairs and knew feeding it right off-idle may be a challenge. Also, knowing our cam of choice may be a bit choppy until it gets past 2,500 (or so) meant an efficient intake/carb combo was in order.
Small Block Ignition

We looked over all our previous research and decided on Edelbrock's Performer RPM Air Gap intake (PN 7501). This super-efficient piece has all the features we want in a performance intake while maintaining streetable manners. We also like their new Perma Star finish, so we ordered PN 75012 (right). The "as-cast" finish is shown on the left; also a Performer RPM Air-Gap (which won't be used or tested, but it is shown for comparison to a standard, "as-cast" intake finish). The RPM Air Gap's tall dual-plane design delivers torque down low without losing anything in the higher rpm bands, and since our redline will be in the 6,500 rpm neighborhood, the RPM Air Gap is a good match with the rest of our performance package. We'll run it untouched, just like the heads. The as-manufactured ports on the RPM Air Gap are slightly smaller than the 210cc ports on the AFR heads, and we're hoping the smaller intake port will feed generously into the center of the AFR head port without losing much power (versus a port-matched example). The chrome-like Perma Star finish looks great without the maintenance required by polished intakes, and looking good never hurts, especially when you can back it up with serious performance.
Small Block Distributor

We've chosen a BG Race Demon RS 675 carb with removable venturi sleeves (PN 3282010GC) so we can test different carb flow rates to find the best-possible scenario. Many tuners know how running the carb a bit rich can help keep detonation at bay, and should we encounter issues the Race Demon RS is flexible enough (through its wide range of fine-tuning adjustments in addition to the venturi sleeves) that we should be able to tune away any potentially damaging problems. We'll also test a series of carb spacers to see how they affect the results and if we can find more streetable power by using them. Both HVH Super Sucker and BG Fuel Systems spacers will be tested.

Spacer research is one of the hottest areas of innovation and development at this time, and hopefully our research results will help solidify which design is best for street enthusiasts using the popular Edelbrock Performer RPM Air Gap intake atop good-flowing cylinder heads like our AFRs. Dual-plane intake designs react differently to spacers than open single-plane intakes, and we're anxious to see how much can be gained, and which design is responsible for the greatest efficiency increase.
Small Block

IGNITION
An MSD ignition system (distributor PN 85551) will be utilized so we can fine-tune our timing curve to achieve the best-possible results. It's possible to add a few degrees of timing and add to the detonation avoidance in some cases, especially when a well-designed combustion chamber is part of the program. Having a surefire spark is an absolute necessity to try and burn as much of the 87 as possible, and having the multiple firings MSD is named for will assist in this further, especially at the critical lower rpm levels we expect the worst fighting to occur at. Having a tried-and-true MSD 6AL box (PN 6240) and coil attached will give us plenty of ignition power and the accuracy to fire it when we want, instead of when it feels like it.

Many enthusiasts run this basic MSD ignition system, and rather than choosing a more expensive digital or programmable setup, we felt it would be in the best interest of our readership to base our research on an ignition system many of our readers already know well.
Small Block

COOLING
Keeping temps down is a huge part of fighting detonation. We've added a Weiand high performance water pump (PN 8223, "short" version) to the engine to work in concert with the many other aluminum components we've got, and the teaming of these aluminum components will act as an efficient heat sink. It's also an "adjustable" design; with height adjustment possible through the twin bolts mounted over the upper mount bolts. In case you're racing with a single belt (no alternator for tension adjustment), this is how belt tension would be dialed in.We'll plug in a 160-degree thermostat and we'll be cooling through an aluminum high-flow radiator on the street, but for the dyno test-and-tune sessions we'll keep temps in the 160-170 range, like we hope the engines will maintain on the road. We will experiment with temperature ranges, but we're confident cooler will be better here.
Small Block

THE OILING SYSTEM
The lubrication system is also being treated like a cooling system, since in many ways, it is. Adding additional oil to the system (by using a deep-sump Milodon pan) is a big part of that, but also paying careful attention to windage control is a big part of our oil system design. While not directly cooling-related, it is still a power tip. An effective windage tray serves to pull oil off the spinning reciprocating assembly (which is also smoothed to encourage this action) and not force the crank to carry this additional weight around every turn. A lighter crank means more power to the flywheel, and that is precisely our goal. We kept a stock-type pickup and pump, and trimmed the integral louvered windage tray to fit around it.
Small Block

Like the crank/rods/pistons, we chose to run a "system" of parts designed to work perfectly in concert. The Milodon oil pan is engineered to provide outstanding performance in applications like ours, and we've chosen a Melling small-block HV pump and stock-type pickup. The pan is deceptively stock appearing, which means fitting in our street-based chassis will be no problem. Engineered inside is a louvered windage tray, which requires some minor clearancing to fit the stock-type pickup. We checked for clearance with clay between the pan and pickup and found approximately 5/8 inch, which should be fine for our street engines.

We topped the engines off with some Comp Cams valve covers, routed our MSD plug wires, and were ready to fire up. The power charts show we're on the right track, and know that if you're planning to build a new engine for your street machine, some careful planning and parts choices will make it possible to get very good usable power on 87-octane gas. For those special times when you'll be pushing it hard at the dragstrip, running nitrous, or spending a day on the road course for an Open Track event, filling up with higher-octane gas will only add to the insurance you've already built into your car.
Small Block

We can also see the power variations between identically built 355 and 383 Chevy engines, so the additional stroke of the 383 can be seen in the numbers. Many have wondered exactly how much more a 383 would be worth when compared to an identically built 355, and we were curious too. Now we know.These engines idle well, run cool, and make good power. They should serve as a good blueprint for small-block Chevy fans, and we hope the ideas behind their design will help all enthusiasts looking toward the future with an eye on saving some cash at the pump and not sacrificing the brutal power American V-8s are legendary for. Enjoy!

SUMMARY
We've done plenty of homework and have come up with a battle plan to fight for true street performance using the least-expensive fuel possible. We want to be able to rely on this engine to get us around town, and we've built in plenty of durability for weekends at the drags or on the road course. Should we encounter heat and/or detonation issues in the depths of the hottest summer heat or during heavy towing or racing, adding a mix of the pricier pump premium or relying on tuning information gleaned from our time on the dyno should clear everything right up. This has got to be a better daily driver option than a lifetime commitment to always pricey 92-octane. We have done our best to design a pair of detonation-fighting powerplants capable of serious performance on bottom-dollar gasoline. We think this is the kind of story readers want to see, and hopefully the tips and tricks we've shared will help make 87-octane performance less of a misnomer and more of an honest goal for the future. Unless gasoline prices begin to drop dramatically, we genuinely feel this route will be our future, and we're preparing for it now. Let us know how you feel about it.
Small Block

POWER FIGURES
The engines were both run on pump 87-octane gasoline. We are showing the power figures with the 1.5-inch HVH spacer in place, and the 1.6:1 Comp Cams Magnum rockers installed. Both engines were built as identically as possible, and these pulls were done at normal operating temperatures (coolant over 160-degrees; oil over 180-degrees) to best duplicate a street effort.

BTW JUST A BIT OF INFO
having built several similar engines, ID point out, that an engine combo like that needs a manual transmission or a 3200rpm stall converter, now theres a trade-off you might want to consider, on a heavier car with a 3.07-3.54 rear gear ratio the dual plane intake is about ideal, swapping to a different single plane intake, on an engine combo like that would shift the torque curve up higher in the rpm band, producing MORE peak hp and a bit LESS low and mid rpm torque, now obviously your car weight and gearing should effect that choice but in a car under about 3000lbs with a 3.73-4.56:1 rear gear its usually a good trade
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/HLY-300-110/