land-speed
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Intake sizing.

To: Bryan Savage <b.a.savage@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Intake sizing.
From: "Thomas E. Bryant" <saltracer@awwwsome.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 07:30:56 -0800
Bryan,

This last weekend, Joe Mondello spoke at the NW Banquet revealing gobs 
of info on this subject. At one time it was thought that bigger was 
better, but that myth has been abandoned long ago. Joe talks about a wet 
flow bench that gives lots of info on the air induction, including what 
happens in the combustion chamber.

The appearance of the restrictor plate in Nascar has given a great deal 
of info in this area. The heads I have were purchased from the Sabco 
Team. They were restrictor plate heads. The intake runner was reduced in 
size by about 1/3 with epoxy. I understand that two things helped to 
overcome some of the HP losses in the restrictor plate engines were 
higher compression and higher intake velocity. Some of the same thinking 
is also used in getting the exhaust out.

If you remember the Ram Induction that Chysler was using in the early 
60s, you will note that their design was changed from the original long 
rams to shorter ones for high performance engines. The long runners gave 
gobs of torque in the lower rpms, but sacrificed hp on the top. The 
shorter runners moved the torque up the rpm scale. The idea behind this 
system was to use the momentum of the air movement to stack air against 
the intake valve while closed. This gave a more dense charge when the 
valve opened.

A Muffler Shop friend, Dave Hooper, and I did some experimenting with 
the exhaust system on my roadster in the early 60s. We used four 2" 
pipes, two on each side tying the cylinders in pairs to each pipe and 
extending them back above the rear wheels. It added a great deal to the 
low end torque. However, as in the case with the Chysler setup, it 
suffered on the top end. Just some food for thought!

Tom, Redding CA - #216 D/CC


Bryan Savage wrote:
> About 30 years ago a guy in L.A., Jerry Branch, said that air flow QUALITY
> was more important than quantity. And he proved it repeatedly.
> 
> Bryan






<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>