Studytime

iTrader: (15)

Cool. Sounds like you have it under control then. Good luck.

Ben T.

moge11

If you are trying to be sarcastic....Dont. I worded it like that because I am not a pro. But I am NOT ****** stupid either. And like I said it aint rocket science, BUT ITS A DAMN CLOSE SECOND! .....Meaning, its a science in all of its own. A science I AM learning and studying. Dont knock the way I word stuff. I am not gonna say "I know how to do this, it aint hard, yada yadayada." I have the "know-how" and more ability than many. But I guess I will just have to prove that on the track, And... I WILL!
I was in the top 5 in my class in math and science. Yeah, I am only 23. But you know what? In 10-15 years when my brother and I have our own machine shop and are porting heads, building engines for cars and bikes alike, I will be the one on sites like this giving out information and directing younger guys like myself on how to make their own horsepower instead of buying it.
Oh, and I WILL be posting pics for you guys to check out in the next couple of weeks.
Later, Morgan


PS. Do you have any valuable tips on vortecs in particular? If so, please share. I am open to all suggestions. Like I said. This fairly new to me, an experiment if you will. You guys are the one's with the "real" experience.
Thanx again, Morgan

Studytime

iTrader: (15)

Naive Morgan, you were just talking to a head porter and I was going to give you some obvious suggestions, but I'll let you figure it out on your own buddy. Did you say "math and science"? As in calculus/differential equations? What science? Fluid dynamics, thermodynamics, chemistry, maybe even freshman biology? Something tells me that's not what you meant. High school's over pal. For what's it worth, I'm also 23, but I wasn't in the top 5 back in highschool, but I am graduating from LSU as an engineer in May.

Good luck building motors for "cars and bikes" ... in 10 to 15 years.

Ben T.

moge11

Was simply stating, that I am not an idiot and have the ability to learn how to do this "art". I figured and stated that you know more than I do. I am/was asking for your opinion. I am NOT being sarcastic with you. Just clarifying that I am not a dumb*** and want to and have every intention of being good at this. That is why I am asking for your help and for the help of 1997bird. You guys I believe are the men I need to be talking to. Sorry if my last post came off wrong. Just wanting to let you know that this isnt the first and only time. I want to perfect the art of porting the best that I can.
Thanx once again. Please share your info. I want to learn what you have to teach. I would truly appreciate any info you have to give.

and for what its worth, I fukked up and didnt go to the university I should have to be a mech. engineer like I was told to. I "thought" I wanted to be a mechanic. But really, who wants to work on everyones problems? Thats why, come march, I am taking my job offer as bike tech. Starting a the bottom and working my way up.

1997bird

iTrader: (2)

Make sure that when you are finish sanding roll the int runner's and valve bowls to use at the most a 80 grit sanding roll. I would also take as little material off of the int & exh floor as possible, as this is usually your lowest velocity point on your int side and fuel dropout occurs. Leave it ruff (or as cast) on the int runner floor so that when the fuel dropout occurs that it is easier for it to reatomize. Another critical point on your int runner is where it goes from your valve bowl to your int runner. Make it as wide as possible without going through your runner wall. On the exh side make your port as high as possible with your intended exh gasket. Try to make it as straight of shot as possible for the gases to leave. Just smooth your exh runner floor, don't try to take to much material away. But at the same time take as much of the lump off of the floor where it transitions from the valve bowl to the runner. Make your greatest width at the top of the port and the bottom your narrowest. I would then make your exh runner's as smooth as possible. Alot of this preaty basic stuff but then again maybe not, just wanting to put the info out there for you.

moge11

yes, seems pretty basic. Thanx for the suggestions. I knew about doing most of the work on the roofs of the ports. I thought that would be a good idea about the metal removal in the bowl/runner transition. Never heard anything about making max width at the bowl/runner transition... Would like to know more. And would like to know more about Max width at the top of the exhaust port...Because that contradicts the "D" port theory. Tell me more.
Thanx bird, I appreciate your time.

1997bird

iTrader: (2)

If you look at David Vizards book "How to build & modify Chevrolet small-block V-8 Cylinder Heads", on pages 60-69 (Chapter six) he expands on the int valve info. Also on page 33 he helps show where your velocity points are on the exhaust runner. The part where I was explaining about keeping the floor of the exh runner narrow & the ceiling of the exh runner wider I came up on my own(this could be some one elses idea to for all I know). Just putting together info from head porters that I know and from what I have read about. I used this theory of mine on those old 882 heads, with a 1.6" nothing special, straight stem, and a non swirl polished valve, I got them to flow 180 cfm @ .500" lift WITHOUT a pipe. Nothing real extavagant but a decent upgrade from 142 cfm @ .500" lift w/o a pipe.

moge11

yeah, your theory makes sense seeing how that is where most air flows. And Vizards book is a good one. I need to buy it. I have read most of it several times in the bookstore, but never bought it...Yet.
thanx for help bud.

01WS6/tamu

iTrader: (37)

The vortec motors respond real well to heads and cam work. I had a vortec 350 with the stock injection and a lt4 cam and 1.6 rockers in a monte carlo I built. I never had time to take it to the track but with 4:10 gears it was brutally fast on the street. There are faster but for what it was and the little amount of money I had in it, it was damm quick. Gm learned from all the screwups on their lt1 and ironed them out when they built the 96 up truck engines. If they had done their homework on the longeivity of their pos fuel pumps and intake gaskets they would have really had a winner.

1997bird

iTrader: (2)

Actually the cast iron head LT-1's in the caprice 5.7L motors have almost identical flow #'s (almost the same at every point). The L98, LT1, LT4, and vortec's share the same design on the combution chambers.

QUEST4-10S

iTrader: (1)

I didn't really read the whole thread but I wanted to give my .02 worth of experience with Vortec heads. I have an '85 z28, .60 over, Vortecs, XE284 hydraulic, Holley 600 replacement carb, AirGap intake, TBrake'd 700, 3.70 gears and gutted interior and this car ran consistent 11.8 - 11.9. I now switched to AFR's and go 11.40's. Oh and this was with SLP shorties. Vortecs were unported just shaved for 11.3 Compression, nothing fancy just a kick *** combo.

moge11

Makes me feel better about the 4776 600 Double Pumper that I'm starting with. What was the MPH in the 1/4? 1/8 ET and MPH? AND.... 60'?
Pump Gas? 91,92,93, or 94 octane?... or race gas?

QUEST4-10S

iTrader: (1)

Fuel was usually 3 gal of 93 and two of C12 race fuel timing was around 32 total advance, 60 ft. was a slouchy 1.7xx range and our track didn't measure 1/8 times. I'll have to look for my old time slips to verify mph, but if I remember correctly they were around 116 - 119 area

moge11

sweet. An EXACT figure on the MPH would be nice. If you get a chance, look at one of ur slips.
thanx, Morgan

joewee350

So you got well over 400whp from that combo??? Either far-fetched or impressive. Looks like a 315whp combo to me though, maybe less.

QUEST4-10S

iTrader: (1)

Never wasted time at the dyno, I just did a lot of fine tuning, (carb, timing etc...) and seeing how it would react at the track. I spent my weekend at the track racing my GTO so I never looked for my old time slips. I'll get the numbers to you.

The stunningman

iTrader: (47)

To original poster.... 110 MPH tops. Thats IF you don't mess the heads up to bad with your home porting. Hope you don't hit a water jacket. The most flow gain on the exhaust side is streamlining and narrowing ,ever so much, the guide boss. Your ET will never meet your MPH because you will have to granny shift not to explode the tranny. I predict mid 12's at best. 600cfm is not enough carb for your set-up.

Keep everyone posted.

The stunningman

iTrader: (47)

you run pump gas with that kind of compression and vortec headed set-up? What exactly is a 600cfm holley replacement carb?

QUEST4-10S

iTrader: (1)

It's a carb that is sold on the shelf at the AutoZones. I **** you not. I originally built this car for just hotrodding in the streets. but I felt it was rather healthy. So just started building and tuning til I got those awesome times.

chevydad

i loved my vortec heads till i wanted to put a bigger cam in it, then they weren't worth it. i could have bought a set of aluminum heads for the amount it would take to do it.

i'm running a 91 350 from a caprice with vortec heads and a roller cam from a 94 lt1, performer rpm intake and a carter 750, stock flat top pistons.. the tranny is a th350 with 3800 stall and 3.42 gears. my truck weighed 3750 it went 13.58 @99.88.

i was happy for all that it was. i had 800 bucks into the whole drivetrain.

a similar motor with a lighter car and a bit more cam should be well into the 12's.

here is a short vid.

http://s100.photobucket.com/albums/m...whitetruck.flv