At 7:20. The quench pad could be softened, allow you to move the radius short turn without breaking through. I believe the spark plug boss had coolant passages around it. That's the thin portion of the chamber. It was common practice for years to angle mill these heads, removing the coolant passage at the head/ around the spark plug boss and angling the quench pad.
With a smaller valve gives you more material to lay the short turn down. Which still isn't much but more than the larger valves would allow. Maybe is something to try?🤔😎👍
0:17 that area at 1 o'clock roof of the bowl , is that enlarged to help air flow transition to flowing down the helix ? there would be a reduction in velocity there (more area) compared with a conventional bowl which would help that.
11:26 , I call that casting mark the "twin towers" , the other mark to look for if there is no twin towers is a spike right in roughly the same area (also a 1.94 swirl port but 191 casting #) and i have a third variation where there is no markings at all and it has a flat roof exhaust port like a D port, and it has the valves slightly sunk in the chamber , like a step was machined in before the seat was cut, so ya there are at least 3 variations of the 1.94" swirlport that i know of. I have heard the 191 casting (the one with the spike) is a large chamber version but it certainly does not (heads side by side) look that way.
Would be cool to watch you use your sonic check on this as to give an idea how close they read
Not a bad idea. I may do a video like that if more are interested. Thanks
@@servediocylinderheads
Interested.😎👍
@@servediocylinderheads I'm also interested.
At 7:20. The quench pad could be softened, allow you to move the radius short turn without breaking through.
I believe the spark plug boss had coolant passages around it. That's the thin portion of the chamber. It was common practice for years to angle mill these heads, removing the coolant passage at the head/ around the spark plug boss and angling the quench pad.
Interesting idea
Thanks
The cutaway really shows a lot.
I love cutaways. It's always interesting to look at any core shift
I agree. Thanks
Like yo craftsmanship
Glad you do. Thanks
These types of videos are always a great reminder for me to never try and port my own heads! lol Thanks.
Do you think that is by accident? You need to be very special to port heads. Very special.....think short bus.
With a smaller valve gives you more material to lay the short turn down. Which still isn't much but more than the larger valves would allow. Maybe is something to try?🤔😎👍
The final design will use a smaller that 2.1" valve. Thanks
@@servediocylinderheads
Didn't you say the smaller 2.050" valve in the video?🤷😁👍
@@itseithergonnaworkoritaint7852 3:22 i think he's favoring a 2.055"
0:17 that area at 1 o'clock roof of the bowl , is that enlarged to help air flow transition to flowing down the helix ? there would be a reduction in velocity there (more area) compared with a conventional bowl which would help that.
I don't think so. I can't think of any purpose except saving iron or ease of production. Thanks
thanks for the extra info
Glad you like it.
Can you make another video with the areas 1/2" to 1/2"? Thanks
I have no idea what you are asking
Sorry
11:26 , I call that casting mark the "twin towers" , the other mark to look for if there is no twin towers is a spike right in roughly the same area (also a 1.94 swirl port but 191 casting #) and i have a third variation where there is no markings at all and it has a flat roof exhaust port like a D port, and it has the valves slightly sunk in the chamber , like a step was machined in before the seat was cut, so ya there are at least 3 variations of the 1.94" swirlport that i know of.
I have heard the 191 casting (the one with the spike) is a large chamber version but it certainly does not (heads side by side) look that way.
Good info. Thanks
??? epoxy the opening closed
Nope. Thanks