cutting a slit in each chamber to relieve quench
that and when you cut that groove you're adding more quench area rather than tightening it. i have yet to see anyone say how good this idea is.
TECH Regular
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
The wedge head(turbulent head)...which has a squish/quench area that allows for turbulence,or cooling of the gases at low RPM's,unlike the open combustion chamber Hemi head which is of the non-turbulent type.The Hemi head is typically more efficient at high RPM's.A head such as the wedge can allow air/fuel to seperate at (high RPM's) due to this turbulence.This is basically the theory of why the Hemi head is efficient.Knowing the facts about a non-turbulent vs turbulent combustion chamber,how would you be getting more turbulence by removing the mixture from the quench area.This quench area is what causes the turbulence.To my understanding,the grooves are too slow this quench at higher RPM's.
Last edited by lovescamaros28; Jul 17, 2009 at 08:21 AM.
If you are going to spend the time and energy and money to remove the head to do this, you're better off just getting a thinner head gasket to cut down the quench distance to better optimize power. It's proven to work, and as long as you don't get stupid with going too thin, it's safe.
So pull the heads, and swap from a stock mls gasket of 0.056" thick to a cometic 0.040" gasket and you be able to run lower octane gas, increase compression a little, and reduce your detonation tendency all for the cost of a new head gasket and some labor.
So pull the heads, and swap from a stock mls gasket of 0.056" thick to a cometic 0.040" gasket and you be able to run lower octane gas, increase compression a little, and reduce your detonation tendency all for the cost of a new head gasket and some labor.
The wedge head(turbulent head)...which has a squish/quench area that allows for turbulence,or cooling of the gases at low RPM's,unlike the open combustion chamber Hemi head which is of the non-turbulent type.The Hemi head is typically more efficient at high RPM's.A head such as the wedge can allow air/fuel to seperate at (high RPM's) due to this turbulence.This is basically the theory of why the Hemi head is efficient.Knowing the facts about a non-turbulent vs turbulent combustion chamber,how would you be getting more turbulence by removing the mixture from the quench area.This quench area is what causes the turbulence.To my understanding,the grooves are too slow this quench at higher RPM's.
If you are going to spend the time and energy and money to remove the head to do this, you're better off just getting a thinner head gasket to cut down the quench distance to better optimize power. It's proven to work, and as long as you don't get stupid with going too thin, it's safe.
So pull the heads, and swap from a stock mls gasket of 0.056" thick to a cometic 0.040" gasket and you be able to run lower octane gas, increase compression a little, and reduce your detonation tendency all for the cost of a new head gasket and some labor.
So pull the heads, and swap from a stock mls gasket of 0.056" thick to a cometic 0.040" gasket and you be able to run lower octane gas, increase compression a little, and reduce your detonation tendency all for the cost of a new head gasket and some labor.
Still waiting on a guinea pig.
TECH Regular
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Hemi heads are irrelevant in this discussion. I believe the idea is to give the gases an easier way to escape the quench area, increasing the air speed and introducing more turbulence. Read the article, the whole idea is to increase turbulence. Turbulence makes better air/fuel mixture also helps cool hot spots, which makes more power.
I would think the idea is to do both.
Still waiting on a guinea pig.
I would think the idea is to do both.
Still waiting on a guinea pig.
Teching In
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Have not read whole thread. Is of no significance that have ever seen. Also that effort is decreasing effiective quench area. Not adding to it as someone had said earlier. This is nothing trick at all quench is decided on depending on build setup and is then calculated to achieve with decided build specs. Also alot of work is put into chamber design and can't see how that would benefit the chamber. a machininst would not setup his entire build sheet and then cut slits to relieve quench that should have been put into the equation at the beginning. there is just no need i can see power wise or any other reason. and just mentioning this (it all depends on the engine) but could be more prone to leaner areas within the combustion chamber. now im sure it would not make a difference on some street motor making 550. things are not at high enough levels to really see differences, and would say the same on many forced induction engines. But would never see that on a real n/a race engine
Last edited by avb0119; Jul 23, 2009 at 05:41 PM.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
Five Reasons the Camaro Was the Most Pivotal Player in the Pony Car Wars 2.0
Brett Foote
Teching In
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
I have read that the distance to the quench pad from the top of the piston makes a difference in power. This is proven and dyno numbers can show this. Most books say to set the quench as tight as you can without having the piston crash into the deck. This makes sense, in the moments before TDC DURRING combustion (starts way earlier than TDC) the piston squeezes the volume of mixture from the quench pad and violently into the chamber creating homogeneous mixture or somehow supplementing flame propogation.
We all know air flows the path of least resistance so am i to understand that the volume of air between the quench pad and piston is going to squeeze into a .250" groove instead of a 60cc chamber? And what is this supposed to accomplish that the proper quench set up doesn't already?
We all know air flows the path of least resistance so am i to understand that the volume of air between the quench pad and piston is going to squeeze into a .250" groove instead of a 60cc chamber? And what is this supposed to accomplish that the proper quench set up doesn't already?
Teching In
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
I have read that the distance to the quench pad from the top of the piston makes a difference in power. This is proven and dyno numbers can show this. Most books say to set the quench as tight as you can without having the piston crash into the deck. This makes sense, in the moments before TDC DURRING combustion (starts way earlier than TDC) the piston squeezes the volume of mixture from the quench pad and violently into the chamber creating homogeneous mixture or somehow supplementing flame propogation.
We all know air flows the path of least resistance so am i to understand that the volume of air between the quench pad and piston is going to squeeze into a .250" groove instead of a 60cc chamber? And what is this supposed to accomplish that the proper quench set up doesn't already?
We all know air flows the path of least resistance so am i to understand that the volume of air between the quench pad and piston is going to squeeze into a .250" groove instead of a 60cc chamber? And what is this supposed to accomplish that the proper quench set up doesn't already?
We all know air flows the path of least resistance so am i to understand that the volume of air between the quench pad and piston is going to squeeze into a .250" groove instead of a 60cc chamber? And what is this supposed to accomplish that the proper quench set up doesn't already?
Exactly. Valve closing (just to pick number ) 70 degrees abdc. Timing is (also just to pick a number ) 30 degrees btdc. Cylinder pressure extremely high @ tdc although highest optimaly x amount of degrees atdc. Pressure differential occurs in which pressure is always trying to equalize. Cylinder pressure benifitted signicantly as well as in a major part flame propagation
Teching In
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Read it again it was said. But if unclear I understand. Not best at translating mind to mouth. This turbulence is talked as if combustion hasn't taken place yet when it has. The quench pad can make for better air fuel Atomization.the shittier the fuel system the more the difference but is not the main point. Air fuel atomization is not key to take place in the Chamber, should happen when the two are first introduced. If the fuel system is good then will not affect it near as much as the pressure gains from the pressure differental created. Resulting in more power that is The real gain. Any attemp to relieve this is not something to do for power
Last edited by avb0119; Jul 24, 2009 at 04:39 PM.
Acting like a know it all is enough for me. I know what stripe said, I guess you didn't understand what I said. So don't get pissy about it.
My point is that just because you don't learn something at a school doesn't mean it isn't possible. With a quick search I can find a few positive results for these grooves. So how can you say for sure what is going on if you haven't tested it yourself.
And there are great minds outside of S.A.M., with results to prove. So what does that say?
My point is that just because you don't learn something at a school doesn't mean it isn't possible. With a quick search I can find a few positive results for these grooves. So how can you say for sure what is going on if you haven't tested it yourself.
And there are great minds outside of S.A.M., with results to prove. So what does that say?
Teching In
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
They teach how to think with logic at the School of Automotive Machinists, but if you still think i'm "over thinking" bring that trans am down to Houston with some money in your back pocket
Do the heads used on the cars you mentioned have quench pads? And what works on one thing may not work the same way in other applications. That's logic.
Just because air it seems to follow the less resistant path may not be for that reason alone. I'm sure it doesn't go the way of most resistance. However, the grooves in those heads would allow for a lower pressure area at TDC than the surrounding area. Thus causing some of the airflow to follow that path towards the combustion chamber which ultimately has an even lower pressure. So isn't that what you were arguing to begin with? Maybe I confused "over thinking" with "under thinking".
What does my car have to do with anything? Do you have a faster car? Does that mean that you're smarter? There are lots of faster cars than me, that weren't built by SAM alumni. So what?
Just because air it seems to follow the less resistant path may not be for that reason alone. I'm sure it doesn't go the way of most resistance. However, the grooves in those heads would allow for a lower pressure area at TDC than the surrounding area. Thus causing some of the airflow to follow that path towards the combustion chamber which ultimately has an even lower pressure. So isn't that what you were arguing to begin with? Maybe I confused "over thinking" with "under thinking".
What does my car have to do with anything? Do you have a faster car? Does that mean that you're smarter? There are lots of faster cars than me, that weren't built by SAM alumni. So what?
Dont even know where to begin. Not taking credit away from anyone in any relation school or not. Still missing the entire point this has become more Hassel than worth paying attention to.bash a school that is constantly machining building and testing, not guessing on outcomes. Graduates in all forms of racing .... Constantly getting information in. This is not know It all thing. Am not a know it all. Trying to help on the topic or possibly get help and could still be proven wrong. Has become way out of original purpose of thread. One more thing though, I personaly work and machine on engines/cylinder heads everyday. Have tried to explain my point buy you obviously don't know a damn thing about airflow/ movement from what you have said. determine airflow on the Internet all you want. I'm going to go "overthinking" things and actually machine something
for the racing comment by stripegt not my business. would imagine aggravation getting the best of someone. Proves nothing allthough can understand aggravation for someone with no results mocking a place that has proven results times over
for the racing comment by stripegt not my business. would imagine aggravation getting the best of someone. Proves nothing allthough can understand aggravation for someone with no results mocking a place that has proven results times over
Everything that you've said may apply in most cases, but there could be a possibility of something else going here. True it may end up 99% of the time just ******* up a head, but who's to say.
I googled it, seems like most of it was from mpgresearch.com. There were a handful of claims of better low end and MPG, but no real proof or evidence so no real need to post. All that I saw were on small engines (4cyl).
ok so then whats the problem? if those are just claims and you're backing this yet never tried it yourself what proof do you have that this actually works? because, in every other scenario it doesnt. mainly of what everyone else said hot spots and the increase in quench area. those two things are major reasons why this wouldnt work in a internal combustion engine. now maybe this technology applied to a air pump that doesnt produce thousands degrees in exhaust heat i might agree but for us in the auto performance world i wouldnt chance it.
There is no problem. I'm not backing anything. I'm trying to get some one with some time to kill and some spare heads to give this a go.
Yeah, you can read a lot of things that people say on LS1tech, that doesn't make any of it true. It does sound like a goofy idea, and I'm sure that I would never do it myself even if some gains were had.
If it's tested thoroughly and fails, then I'd give major props to whomever tried it. Won't bother me either way.
Yeah, you can read a lot of things that people say on LS1tech, that doesn't make any of it true. It does sound like a goofy idea, and I'm sure that I would never do it myself even if some gains were had.
If it's tested thoroughly and fails, then I'd give major props to whomever tried it. Won't bother me either way.