Michael.Lytton@sierra.com writes:
> Steve Darby contacted me after visiting my web page about his
> crossflow head for MGBs. I thought this info may be of interest. I
> have absolutely no knowledge or experience with this product, I'm just
> passing the info on.
I got a SnailMail packet from him out of the blue, and immediately tried
to figure out which party we must have co-attended. So I emailed him with
my two questions:
1. Why, given the vertical valve arrangement of our motors, is a
crossflow design inherently better than the stock Austin design?
2. How did you get my address?
His answers were brief and vague:
1. The flow direction, the size of the intake ports, the shape of the
combustion chambers and the ability to get the air in quicker and
out quicker.
2. mgs@triumph.cs.utah.edu
My thoughts on the above:
1. It seems to me that, valve sizes, valve orientations, and port sizes
equal, the gases wouldn't care if they flowed stage right or stage
left. Darby's head incorporates other improvements as well, so I
still can't deduce the amount of gain to be had strictly as a result
of a crossflow design. A few of us tossed around some ideas a year
or so ago, but not much came of it. Anybody feel like theorizing?
2. I can't decide whether Darby is a shrewd and intelligent Internet
marketer, or a pond-scum Spam King. I'm actually leaning towards
the former; after all, I AM publicly registered as being interested
in MGBs...
--
Todd Mullins
Todd.Mullins@nrlssc.navy.mil On the lovely Mississippi (USA) Coast
'74 MGB Tourer with, alas, the stock head...
"I could go at any time..."
|