Angle flow heads available again

[Marty]

Those are some REAL good flow numbers now!

[NoBars]

Now digitize them and go into production...

Why bother buying intake manifolds? 2 flanges, create the runners with weld...

In all seriousness, Really nice work.

[ugly duckling]

thanks guys. youl see some better #s ive got a few more trickes up my sleeve. UD.

[kev d]

Nice work

Would these work for a street motor though or just for the drags?
Cheers,
Kev

[Liou]

wow I love see UD word this heads lol big nice valve !!
great job
liou

[richie]

Nice work

Would these work for a street motor though or just for the drags?
Cheers,
Kev

Kev


I think they have been proven on the street

Jeffs own car was driven all over with those heads on his 3litre in his blue bug,then on the real street cruise from LA to Las Vegas only on pump gas and they travelled about 75/80 alot of the way where traffic conditions would allow,then raced them,then drove back home again

cheers richie

[Austin Larsen]

anyone know what the heads flowed stock?

[danny gabbard]

WOW! jeff nice work. the only complaint I've heard is that those dog's need a ride with those new heads. Keep up the good work and I hope everythings going good.

[Austin Larsen]

At your .700" number...

54mm Valve =  3.55" Sq.  at   288 CFM  / 3.55 = 81.12 CFM of flow per Sq in. of valve area

56mm Valve =  3.81" Sq.  at  306 CFM  / 3.81 = 80.31 CFM of flow per Sq in. of valve area


For comparison a decent 42mm T1 head Flowing 200 CFM at .650 lift

42mm Valve = 2.14 " Sq.  at  200CFM   / 2.14 =  93.45 CFM of flow per Sq. inch of valve area

K-Roc,

I was thinking about this today
and instead of comparing flow to surface area of the valve
SA(V)= D(pie)
compare flow to the surface area taht air is cactually flowing through
wich would be teh circumfrence of teh valve times liift
SA(F) = (Rsquared)(pie)(lift)
So the 54  gives 2.48" SA or 115CFM/"
the 56 gives 2.67" SA or  114CFM/"
lastly the 42 gives 1.39" SA or 143 CFM
but for my valve surface area im getting
54=6.67"s not 3.55
56=6.92"s not 3.81
and 42=5.19 not 2.14
maybe my converzion is wron im using
1 millimeter = 0.0393700787 inches
taking the MM(0.0393700787)(pie)=SA

[dangerous]

Have you been drinking energy drinks Austin?

Not sure what you are getting at completely, but I have an idea.

It may be more clear if you use different terms to describe what you men.

Valve AREA is (pi)x (radiusxradius), and really the valve throat area is relevant if that is the minimum cross section in the port.
(not always at the valve seat throat )

Also relevant is the CURTAIN AREA, which is the VALVE CIRCUMFERENCE multiplyed by lift.
Circumference is = (pi) x diameter

Both these calculations, and the actual flow numbers are handy when comparing various valves and their flow numbers at different lifts.

Guys like Jeff, Darren K, Pat D and the hell-guys from Heads-Up! know what numbers are representative from their vast experience,
so they can compare apples with apples.

Interestingly a 4 valve chamber has massive curtain area, and large low lift flow numbers without the large cross section.
But this may not be an advantage as you may first think.
Although the japanese designers seem to have made the most of both low and high lift flow numbers in some production engines.
Normally they use smaller duration to avoid too muc low lift flow, too early....typical of 4-valve, or any large-curtain-area/excessive low lift flow combos.
     

[dangerous]

Sorry about the verbal diarrhea.

[Austin Larsen]

Also relevant is the CURTAIN AREA, which is the VALVE CIRCUMFERENCE multiplyed by lift.
Circumference is = (pi) x diameter

thats what i meant
wouldnt it be better to compare flow to curtain area instead of valve area?

[drgouk]

Have you been drinking energy drinks Austin?

Not sure what you are getting at completely, but I have an idea.

It may be more clear if you use different terms to describe what you men.

Valve AREA is (pi)x (radiusxradius), and really the valve throat area is relevant if that is the minimum cross section in the port.
(not always at the valve seat throat )

Also relevant is the CURTAIN AREA, which is the VALVE CIRCUMFERENCE multiplyed by lift.
Circumference is = (pi) x diameter

Both these calculations, and the actual flow numbers are handy when comparing various valves and their flow numbers at different lifts.

Guys like Jeff, Darren K, Pat D and the hell-guys from Heads-Up! know what numbers are representative from their vast experience,
so they can compare apples with apples.

Interestingly a 4 valve chamber has massive curtain area, and large low lift flow numbers without the large cross section.
But this may not be an advantage as you may first think.
Although the japanese designers seem to have made the most of both low and high lift flow numbers in some production engines.
Normally they use smaller duration to avoid too muc low lift flow, too early....typical of 4-valve, or any large-curtain-area/excessive low lift flow combos.
     

Dave, I have been following your progress on the aussieveedubbers with your new head combo, very nice, always good to start with a clean sheet of paper. I am doing the same thing with a pair of comp "e" heads.
It will be very interesting to see what happens at the dyno.

[ugly duckling]

some more head candy.

[ugly duckling]

this will be the round int/ex street/race port. valve size is 50x42 the ex seat will except a 40 but wanted to see what it would flow with the bigger 42 will see this week. you turbo guys may like this set up. again there is no weld what so ever on the head casting and the manifold this time as well. the rnd int is smige bigger than the original port just slitely warmed over  .  UD

[ugly duckling]

more to come. when we head over to the over size vacume cleaner. enjoy. UD.

[71CALRIPPER]

what about rocker shaft support for those high lift motors ? will there be extra support ?

Cheers

[58vw]

hey wont the engine run funny with the different ports like that?

[ugly duckling]

hey rob. when i do the crower conversion rocker set up there will be plenty of support. as far as your standard rocker set up the rocker blocks on these heads are alot bigger than the early 80s style angle flows and in my opinuon shoudent be a problem. UD.

[Austin Larsen]

is that a CNC mill?

[redbluebug]

Nice!

[ugly duckling]

naw austin. are you gonna get one for me for christmas. come on be a pal.  .  UD.

[Austin Larsen]

u might be able to buy mine if u can come up with the right amount of $$$
need a  5 Axis

[71CALRIPPER]

 

[Martin]

hey rob. when i do the crower conversion rocker set up there will be plenty of support. as far as your standard rocker set up the rocker blocks on these heads are alot bigger than the early 80s style angle flows and in my opinuon shoudent be a problem. UD.

Hello Jeff, man there looking good, been following this thread witha lot of interest.

I've done the Crower rocker Conversion on my motor and i must say its great! even running the 700lb springs they just seam so stable.

Keep up the good work!!!

Woper says Hi

[58vw]

holy crap batman

[Austin Larsen]

that looks like a CNC to me
A D^MN 5 AXIS CNC at that
WITH A ATC!!!!

[stealth67vw]

that looks like a CNC to me
A D^MN 5 AXIS CNC at that
WITH A ATC!!!!

Looks like a Haas VF-0 or VF-1. I've got 9 years on these machines.

[karl h]

how much would a CNC set be?

[ugly duckling]

i have to say these manifolds blend very nicely to the head ( smooth transition) not like  other brand heads that i have worked on. the angle flowes are deffenetly match port freindly.UD