The Cal-look Lounge
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 23:23:47 pm

Login with username, password and session length
Thank you for your support!
Search:     Advanced search
350689 Posts in 28577 Topics by 6823 Members
Latest Member: Riisager
* Home This Year's European Top 20 lists All Time European Top 20 lists Search Login Register
+  The Cal-look Lounge
|-+  Cal-look/High Performance
| |-+  Pure racing
| | |-+  JPM head/TF1 case build and car mods for Hot rod drag week 2019 in Old cabrio
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 18 Print
Author Topic: JPM head/TF1 case build and car mods for Hot rod drag week 2019 in Old cabrio  (Read 249229 times)
Lee.C
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6458


I might be an Idiot but I'm not an Arsehole!


« Reply #60 on: December 25, 2008, 02:05:00 am »

Looking good buddy Grin
Logged

You either "Get It" or you don't......
Udo
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2077



« Reply #61 on: December 26, 2008, 12:42:30 pm »

I don't know when Richie received his heads, but Johannes has invested in a wetflow system this last year. He told me that his 247 hp 1915 was disastrous in that respect, and that he had since gotten rid of the major wet spots. But he had yet to test it on the dyno.

I recieved them from Johannes at SCC this year so maybe he did have a chance to test them this way



Heres the figures that johannes supplied me as he is happy with them being posted here Smiley


Flow no at 25" H2O.
Lift(mm)                     Intake (49mm)                     exhaust(39mm)
2                               46,7                         36,2
4                               96,1                         77,26                             
6                              142,0                        108,0
8                              183,2                        129,1
10                            209,3                        148,6
12                            234,1                        163,0
14                            250,5                        175,1
16                            260,3                        190,9

The velocity in the intake port in the largest cross sectional area is 309ft/s and the ex velocity at the center of the flange is 334ft/s

cheers richie

Looks like the same numbers as the CB CNC ported , this is how they look like , not that big .

Udo
Logged

BeetleBug
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2836


Snabba grabben...


« Reply #62 on: December 26, 2008, 13:20:01 pm »

Please use the same flow bench my CB CNC competition eliminators was measured on... that should add about 70 cfm.

 Grin Grin Grin

 Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
Logged

10.41 - 100ci - 1641ccm - 400hp
richie
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5620



« Reply #63 on: December 26, 2008, 19:11:40 pm »




Looks like the same numbers as the CB CNC ported , this is how they look like , not that big .

Udo

Apples and oranges I think Wink

cheers richie
Logged

Cars are supposed to be driven, not just talked about!!!   


Good parts might be expensive but good advice is priceless Wink
Udo
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2077



« Reply #64 on: December 27, 2008, 15:18:15 pm »

Hi Richie

I wish you good luck with the engine , i am building a 2,4 turbo at this time for a friend  , hope it gets ready for next year .

Udo
Logged

richie
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5620



« Reply #65 on: December 27, 2008, 20:17:43 pm »

Hi Richie

I wish you good luck with the engine , i am building a 2,4 turbo at this time for a friend  , hope it gets ready for next year .

Udo

Thankyou Smiley

cheers richie
Logged

Cars are supposed to be driven, not just talked about!!!   


Good parts might be expensive but good advice is priceless Wink
Jon
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3214


12,3@174km/t at Gardermoen 2008


WWW
« Reply #66 on: December 27, 2008, 21:55:43 pm »

Apples and oranges I think Wink

I had the pleasure of comparing my CNC apples to JPM's oranges in his flowbench... that's why I said 70 cfm... Lips Sealed
Logged

Grumpy old men have signatures like this.
Airspeed
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 593



« Reply #67 on: December 27, 2008, 23:40:21 pm »

Apples and oranges I think Wink

I had the pleasure of comparing my CNC apples to JPM's oranges in his flowbench... that's why I said 70 cfm... Lips Sealed
Don't forget the MS230 heads cool for the street. Big difference there too. Plus cooler heads also perform better.
Those things don't show on a dynosheet either.
Logged

"...these cars were preferred by the racers because the strut front suspension results in far superior handling than the regular torsion bar front end..."  - Keith Seume.
10.58 @ 130 mph (2/9/2022 Santa Pod)
Bruce
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1414


« Reply #68 on: December 28, 2008, 19:45:08 pm »

Apples and oranges I think Wink

I had the pleasure of comparing my CNC apples to JPM's oranges in his flowbench... that's why I said 70 cfm... Lips Sealed
At what pressure drop?
Logged
richie
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5620



« Reply #69 on: December 29, 2008, 00:26:01 am »

Well its all together for the final time,
First checked the cylinders for piston to bore clearance and that they were round,Then set the ring gaps,then loaded the pistons into the cylinders
got the lash caps from Roger crawford and Jeff D had an adjustable push rod to suit a motor this wide,so did the rocker geometry and got push rod length,
just need to get some longer push rod tubes as they Jaycee ones I have are to short as are the pushrods,
will get manton to make some up for me next week.
The compression is set at 8.5/1  and I have 670thou[about 17mm] lift so this is going to be alot of fun  Smiley
Need to make a couple of modifications to the car now to fit it in due to the width and will be building a new header as the 1 5/8 there at the moment is going to strangle this thing.

cheers richie


Logged

Cars are supposed to be driven, not just talked about!!!   


Good parts might be expensive but good advice is priceless Wink
richie
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5620



« Reply #70 on: December 29, 2008, 00:27:05 am »

and as it looks now Smiley

cheers richie
Logged

Cars are supposed to be driven, not just talked about!!!   


Good parts might be expensive but good advice is priceless Wink
AntLockyer
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 351



« Reply #71 on: December 29, 2008, 00:57:52 am »

Want!
Logged

12.618 @ 104.87mph
58vw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 520



« Reply #72 on: December 29, 2008, 03:02:10 am »

lookin good....ill have my car there tuesday so you can fit it.  Grin Grin
Logged

www.4inbore.com
Angleflows...order them now
Fastbrit
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4730


Keep smiling...


« Reply #73 on: December 29, 2008, 11:59:03 am »

Need to make a couple of modifications to the car now to fit it in due to the width and will be building a new header as the 1 5/8 there at the moment is going to strangle this thing.

cheers richie
Lookin' good!
Logged

Der Kleiner Panzers VW Club    
12.56sec street-driven Cal Looker in 1995
9.87sec No Mercy race car in 1994
Seems like a lifetime ago...
Mags
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 465


2,2L 577Hk.


WWW
« Reply #74 on: December 29, 2008, 12:46:47 pm »

looking good richie,
where is first race?

Mags
Logged
Udo
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2077



« Reply #75 on: December 29, 2008, 13:18:52 pm »

Apples and oranges I think Wink

I had the pleasure of comparing my CNC apples to JPM's oranges in his flowbench... that's why I said 70 cfm... Lips Sealed

Hi Jon
Turbo engines do not need much flow , so i think those smaler ports will work.

Udo
Logged

leec
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2585


« Reply #76 on: December 29, 2008, 15:58:20 pm »

Engine is looking awesome. Cant wait to see the numbers its going to run

Lee
Logged
richie
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5620



« Reply #77 on: December 29, 2008, 19:36:26 pm »

Need to make a couple of modifications to the car now to fit it in due to the width and will be building a new header as the 1 5/8 there at the moment is going to strangle this thing.

cheers richie
Lookin' good!


Thanks Keith for lending me you car,think it suits you more though Shocked Cheesy

any reason you wrote Brian on the back though?? Huh

cheers richie

Logged

Cars are supposed to be driven, not just talked about!!!   


Good parts might be expensive but good advice is priceless Wink
K-Roc
Full Member
***
Posts: 194


« Reply #78 on: December 29, 2008, 22:11:30 pm »

Please use the same flow bench my CB CNC competition eliminators was measured on... that should add about 70 cfm.

 Grin Grin Grin

 Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

Not sure why the Slamming on the CNC Comp Elims, Were making some pretty decent power with them here.. Lightly massaged Ex Ports, and a different Valve job. I think those heads are good value.
Flow Benches don't win races ( I Know.. I own one )

 9.66 @ 140  With a Stupid Holley and No intercooler. 



Soon to have EFI and Air to Water Wink
« Last Edit: December 29, 2008, 22:14:45 pm by K-Roc » Logged
stealth67vw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2261



« Reply #79 on: December 29, 2008, 22:13:18 pm »

Please use the same flow bench my CB CNC competition eliminators was measured on... that should add about 70 cfm.

 Grin Grin Grin

 Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

Not sure why the Slamming on the CNC Comp Elims, Were making some pretty decent power with them here.. Lightly massaged Ex Ports, and a different Valve job. I think those heads are good value.

 9.66 @ 140  With a Stupid Holley and No intercooler. 



Soon to have EFI and Air to Water Wink
On a single tire launch no less. Shocked
Logged

John Bates
JB Machining Services
1967 street bug 2020lbs w/driver
12.34 @ 108 mph 1/4
7.76 @ 89mph 1/8
Jon
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3214


12,3@174km/t at Gardermoen 2008


WWW
« Reply #80 on: December 29, 2008, 22:58:11 pm »

At what pressure drop?

Sorry, I don't understand the question. Embarrassed
Logged

Grumpy old men have signatures like this.
Jon
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3214


12,3@174km/t at Gardermoen 2008


WWW
« Reply #81 on: December 29, 2008, 23:07:30 pm »

Turbo engines do not need much flow , so i think those smaler ports will work.

In my opinion 260 CFM is a lot for a fully streetable head... I'm sure Richie will show us what they can do under a hairdryer Smiley
Logged

Grumpy old men have signatures like this.
Jon
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3214


12,3@174km/t at Gardermoen 2008


WWW
« Reply #82 on: December 29, 2008, 23:13:52 pm »

Not sure why the Slamming on the CNC Comp Elims, Were making some pretty decent power with them here.. Lightly massaged Ex Ports, and a different Valve job. I think those heads are good value.

It's not the heads that receive mixed emotions its the advertising and the CFM numbers therein

Flow Benches don't win races

You don't need to tell me, I own a set of CNC eliminators!! Grin Wink
Logged

Grumpy old men have signatures like this.
John Maher
Full Member
***
Posts: 140



WWW
« Reply #83 on: December 29, 2008, 23:54:28 pm »

At what pressure drop?

Sorry, I don't understand the question. Embarrassed

To make sense of flow numbers from different sources, you need to know what depression ("H2O) the tests were carried out at.
The higher the test depression, the bigger the flow numbers.

Old SuperFlow 110 benches were designed to test at 10". Some of the bigger SF benches use 25". Later SF600 uses 28".
28" is regarded by many as 'industry standard'.
Last time I looked CB were quoting figures taken at 25". JPM tests I've seen on here are also carried out at 25"
Therefore the theory is both sets of figures are directly comparable  Wink

You can convert figures taken at one test depression for comparison with those taken at a different depression using this formula...
Multiply current cfm by square root of new test depression/old test depression

Eg, to convert cfm from 25" test to 28" equivalent, multiply 25" test cfm by 1.058

Works pretty good when converting from 25" to 28" (or vice versa) because there's relatively small difference in test pressures but using the formula to correct figures taken at 10" and expecting the results to accurately reflect a test done at 28" is a bit of a stretch. Better to pull the actual depression - but that takes a pretty powerful bench when testing the real high flow stuff.
Logged

John Maher

John Maher
Full Member
***
Posts: 140



WWW
« Reply #84 on: December 30, 2008, 00:20:27 am »


Not sure why the Slamming on the CNC Comp Elims, Were making some pretty decent power with them here.. Lightly massaged Ex Ports, and a different Valve job. I think those heads are good value.
Flow Benches don't win races ( I Know.. I own one )

Have to agree with JHU - my own flow tests don't come anywhere close to advertised figures  Sad

Turbo situation is a lot different and more forgiving of lower flow/low velocity

IMO, based on cfm per square inch of flow area, Comp Elim CNC is lacking and certainly on n/a engine will deliver less performance than other well developed heads with smaller port csa and higher flow (ie more efficient).

Been working on 46x38 CNC Comp Elims today and found a useful increase in flow and velocity by FILLING the intake port! .... as supplied it's wrong shape and too big.

Not on a mission to knock these heads - just a little disappointed to find they're not capable of getting close to the kind of power output the advertising blurb hints at.
Next time I'll start with non CNC version
« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 10:15:42 am by John Maher » Logged

John Maher

airstuff
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 431



« Reply #85 on: December 30, 2008, 10:45:08 am »

and as it looks now Smiley

cheers richie

hej Richie,

which sump are you using?
Logged
n2o
Full Member
***
Posts: 137



« Reply #86 on: December 30, 2008, 13:42:29 pm »

When I flowed my CE CNC 48x40 right out of the box, I got 230.6 cfm@18mm lift with intake on (25 inch of water, JPM's superflow 600). At that time the advertizement was 270cfm and this was the main selling point from CB performance.
I know there can be differences between flowbenches, with intake, without intake, different size of barrels etc.......but to get 40 cfm more??



Thanks
Roar

Logged

9.88 @ 134.25 mph
Jon
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3214


12,3@174km/t at Gardermoen 2008


WWW
« Reply #87 on: December 30, 2008, 13:55:36 pm »

At what pressure drop?

Sorry, I don't understand the question. Embarrassed

To make sense of flow numbers from different sources, you need to know what depression ("H2O) the tests were carried out at.
The higher the test depression, the bigger the flow numbers.

Old SuperFlow 110 benches were designed to test at 10". Some of the bigger SF benches use 25". Later SF600 uses 28".
28" is regarded by many as 'industry standard'.
Last time I looked CB were quoting figures taken at 25". JPM tests I've seen on here are also carried out at 25"
Therefore the theory is both sets of figures are directly comparable  Wink

You can convert figures taken at one test depression for comparison with those taken at a different depression using this formula...
Multiply current cfm by square root of new test depression/old test depression

Eg, to convert cfm from 25" test to 28" equivalent, multiply 25" test cfm by 1.058

Works pretty good when converting from 25" to 28" (or vice versa) because there's relatively small difference in test pressures but using the formula to correct figures taken at 10" and expecting the results to accurately reflect a test done at 28" is a bit of a stretch. Better to pull the actual depression - but that takes a pretty powerful bench when testing the real high flow stuff.

Thanks John!
I thought this was what Bruce meant, but I couldn't be sure as I have never seen that wording for depression.
Johannes is using a Superflow 600 with digital readout, he always measure in 25" to keep the confusion amongst his customers to a minimal.

So to answer Bruce, both tests was done at 25" at the same flowbench.
However I said 70 cfm as that's how I remembered the difference to CB's advertisements, this was not accurate, I have looked at the numbers again and the CNC 48x40 CE flowed 220 CFM at 16mm lift, where CB says 261 CFM...  so thats 41 CFM of difference, not 70... for this I apologize.

I'm looking into filling mine up with plastic to increase the velocity, and increase the efficiency.

  
Logged

Grumpy old men have signatures like this.
Bruce
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1414


« Reply #88 on: December 30, 2008, 16:36:25 pm »

....... the CNC 48x40 CE flowed 220 CFM at 16mm lift, where CB says 261 CFM...  so thats 41 CFM of difference, not 70....
The problem with your comparison is that CB does not give their flow numbers at 16mm of lift.  Only in increments of .050".  IOW, only at 15.24mm, and 16.5mm.
Logged
n2o
Full Member
***
Posts: 137



« Reply #89 on: December 30, 2008, 17:33:22 pm »

Richie, what kind of barrels do you use, and are the powersleeved?  I am looking for some good quality barrels to my 4inch engine (101,6x86)

Thanks
Roar
Logged

9.88 @ 134.25 mph
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 18 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!