Head flow

Author
Discussion

Mignon

1,018 posts

88 months

Thursday 19th July 2018
quotequote all
stevieturbo said:
And I'm sure fitting some better valves would be worth even more...the stem on those is massive !!
It's a perfectly normal 8mm stem.

Mignon

1,018 posts

88 months

Thursday 19th July 2018
quotequote all
Kccv23highliftcam said:
Actually it's worth (4x2) 8 hp at the wheels according to Burgess/Gollan...
I imagine the world's authority on porting the CVH head might have something to say about that.

stevieturbo

17,229 posts

246 months

Thursday 19th July 2018
quotequote all
Mignon said:
It's a perfectly normal 8mm stem.
In a very tiny port.

Kccv23highliftcam

1,783 posts

74 months

Thursday 19th July 2018
quotequote all
stevieturbo said:
Mignon said:
It's a perfectly normal 8mm stem.
In a very tiny port.
It's a "spare" 88SM6090 head so YES it's a "small" port.

I'm sure the worlds authority on CVH head work would be able to advise on the reasons.. wink

Mignon

1,018 posts

88 months

Friday 20th July 2018
quotequote all
Kccv23highliftcam said:
It's a "spare" 88SM6090 head so YES it's a "small" port.

I'm sure the worlds authority on CVH head work would be able to advise on the reasons.. wink
That partial part number could apply to a number of different types of head and I'm not actually psychic.

PeterBurgess

775 posts

145 months

Tuesday 24th July 2018
quotequote all
This CVH port is more like it, 100 bhp a port turbot smile




Mignon

1,018 posts

88 months

Tuesday 24th July 2018
quotequote all
PeterBurgess said:
This CVH port is more like it,
Yep, that's about as straight as you can get them without hitting waterways.



PeterBurgess said:
100 bhp a port turbot smile
I can't parse that in English or any other language.

PeterBurgess

775 posts

145 months

Tuesday 24th July 2018
quotequote all
Tant pis mon ami, c'est l'argot d'un homme qui est un tête de piston smile

Pierre Le Bourgeois

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

254 months

Tuesday 24th July 2018
quotequote all
Mignon said:
PeterBurgess said:
100 bhp a port turbot smile
I can't parse that in English or any other language.
4 ports @ 100bhp each = 400 bhp. Using forced induction via fish driven compressor.

Kccv23highliftcam

1,783 posts

74 months

Wednesday 25th July 2018
quotequote all
PeterBurgess said:
This CVH port is more like it, 100 bhp a port turbot smile



Nice job!!

PeterBurgess

775 posts

145 months

Thursday 26th July 2018
quotequote all
It is a nice job. This head was done by Oli and Karl at NMS. It sits atop Oli's Escort engine. It probably made around 430 bhp when it gained the class mile record at Bruntingthorpe in 2007ish. I believe it still holds the record to this day, it hit 174 mph.
I looked at it the other day in their workshops. They think the same as myself and Dave Gollan with regard to power increases in stages with the CVH. It is nice to see some interest in such an old and little used (it would seem) head these days. We do one or two standard class tweak up heads but I cannot remember the last time we did a fully ported one. We do a few insert fits for NMS and made a batch of guides for them but there seems less general interest these days.
Some folk express alarm that we grind the bosses down. On most heads we would not do this. However, the CVH is an exception. The guides may well be the longest used in cylinder heads so the guide length left is still longer than most guides I can think of. The valve seat to guide is still a safe distance and less than a fair few heads that have shorter guides to boot.
On a happier note with CVH heads, Oli is trying to get the engine rebuilt in time for the RSOC National Day at Donnington, weekend of 27th August. We may get to run it on our rollers if Oli runs out of time to bed it in on the road.
Peter

Kccv23highliftcam

1,783 posts

74 months

Friday 27th July 2018
quotequote all
The thing is, if I may say as an amateur engine bod [and proud of it], I have been often told that"modern" heads are just not worth the time and expense for any fetling, power comes from "using up" what ever longevity reserve was written into the engine control software....
But is this actually the case? are modern heads really that good??
I have one example in 20v four pot turbo configuration sitting on the drive {where a "proper" four valve setup would in theory provide higher flow}do the manufacturers produce heads that do the business now, without the need for the practice of the arcane art????

If the answer is a resounding YES, how boring is that!!

The cvh head is ripe for fetling as can be seen from above!!!


Edited by Kccv23highliftcam on Saturday 28th July 00:03

PeterBurgess

775 posts

145 months

Saturday 28th July 2018
quotequote all
I think we are thread drifting a little.
If the valves are large enough already, gains from fettling 4/5 valve set ups will be far more marginal than the good old 2v heads we are familiar with.
I tend to tell folk we can smooth out the (usually) poor area where the valve inserts are fitted and tend to have steps either from insert to port, port to insert or both and gain a little power and some smoothness, icing on the cake stuff rather than great chunks of cake!
Some 4v heads work well with increasing valve size/s and they tend to make good improvements but they are a rarity.
Overall the multi valve heads tend to have such good valve time area that it is hard to gain significant amounts from porting usually need head/cam/cr/induction and exhaust work to make a bigly difference to my way thinking.
Peter

anonymous-user

53 months

Sunday 29th July 2018
quotequote all
The simple fact is that the easy (N/A) gains have gone.

Back in the day, a typical 2l 8v would wheeze out 50bhp/litre, so even mild improvements would net large power gains.

Today, when factory engines make upwards of 80 bhp/litre even for a "low tune" engine, there is just not that much left to be gained. So you put in a massive amount of expensive, time consuming, work, and find just say 20bhp. Compared to forced induction, where the same amount of tuning work would double the engines output!


PeterBurgess

775 posts

145 months

Monday 30th July 2018
quotequote all
Seeing the post re the S2000 engine reminded me we have been testing a Honda S2000 for a customer. The epitome of development of 4v per cylinder in road use guise? In 5th gear it pulled cleanly from 1300 rpm to the 9000+ rev limit. The engine was standard apart from an aftermarket exhaust system. Wheelpower was 212.8bhp and wheel torque 151 lbs/ft, flywheel approximation 250.1 bhp and 174 lbs ft torque. Absolutely stunning! I wonder what they can make in race trim?

Peter

Inline__engine

195 posts

135 months

Monday 30th July 2018
quotequote all
people thought the m3 was fully developed when it had the highest specific torque of any NA production engine and 114 h p/ L back in early 2000's. with bolt ons people have been able to increase performance from 280 whp to 340 whp and torque 235 wtq to 250 wtq.

with opened engines the gains are further as the cylinder head can be made to flow 10-15% better with someone who knows what they doing

Edited by Inline__engine on Monday 30th July 11:19

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

254 months

Monday 30th July 2018
quotequote all
PeterBurgess said:
Seeing the post re the S2000 engine reminded me we have been testing a Honda S2000 for a customer. The epitome of development of 4v per cylinder in road use guise? In 5th gear it pulled cleanly from 1300 rpm to the 9000+ rev limit. The engine was standard apart from an aftermarket exhaust system. Wheelpower was 212.8bhp and wheel torque 151 lbs/ft, flywheel approximation 250.1 bhp and 174 lbs ft torque. Absolutely stunning! I wonder what they can make in race trim?

Peter
Is it coincidence that the first torque peak is at almost exactly half the RPM of the second peak?

227bhp

10,203 posts

127 months

Monday 30th July 2018
quotequote all
PeterBurgess said:
Seeing the post re the S2000 engine reminded me we have been testing a Honda S2000 for a customer. The epitome of development of 4v per cylinder in road use guise? In 5th gear it pulled cleanly from 1300 rpm to the 9000+ rev limit. The engine was standard apart from an aftermarket exhaust system. Wheelpower was 212.8bhp and wheel torque 151 lbs/ft, flywheel approximation 250.1 bhp and 174 lbs ft torque. Absolutely stunning! I wonder what they can make in race trim?

Peter
You should see one of their factory forged pistons and the clearances they run, that would give you something to think about. They run tighter bore clearance than you'll do on most cast pistons.
It's right there in the top ten best production engines ever built.