Flowbench Racing (kidding) Invite

[supertweet]

I'm taking my salvaged Escape motor apart during the upcoming week and'll be gathering dimensional and flow data on intake and cylinder heads. Stock cams Cam Doctor'ed, just for tolerance issues.


if anyone wishes to share their data once I post, be it comparable "oval port" info, "split port," or "hybrid" results, please do. If anyone wants to ship their gear for mutual testing or join in, I'm SF, CA based.

Typical tests ie- total averaged runner cross-section, overall runner volume, etc. SF600 bench-testing @standard 28" for rough comparison purposes. Gear will be flowed individually and as a unit. Dry flow only. Particular interest in CFM/Sq.in., port noise, etc. of stock 3.0 engine junk.

More casual observation (casting flash,runner shape, plug location/CC shape...) and subjective conclusions I'll leave out unless requested; those who've actually run these motors and done their own testing can answer w/ more authority what my results will do for power. For those who have, I'd welcome bulls_itting over interpretation.

I'm know this's been done and rehashed to death, but hopefully'll prove useful for those like me who're just getting into this junk.

[SpookSVT]

You don't want a "dry" bench test, you want a "wet" one. You need pressure readings to measure velocities in the ports. You want the most velocity without sacrificing the volume needed for a given RPM range. When you have started to restrict volume to a point where it is hurting power, then you can enlarge the port accordingly. Going too far will hurt lowend power and move the power peak up in the RPM range as a result of the larger port. It's a balancing act.

[DemonSVT]

Also 99.9% of the flowbenches will only going to give you max cfm flow. That will only tell you maximum power "potential" and nothing more. What about the quality of the airflow, the air mass, the velocity, velocity increase, et cetera?

Your title is perfect, no kidding. Racing flowbench numbers is as good as bench racing mods using manufacturer's quoted power gains and adding them up.

[supertweet]

You don't want a "dry" bench test, you want a "wet" one. You need pressure readings to measure velocities in the ports. You want the most velocity without sacrificing the volume needed for a given RPM range. When you have started to restrict volume to a point where it is hurting power, then you can enlarge the port accordingly. Going too far will hurt lowend power and move the power peak up in the RPM range as a result of the larger port. It's a balancing act.

You're absolutely right about wetflow for the cylinder heads; made a mental note not to post messages at 3:00-5:00am:biggrin:

Meant not dry flow intake only; I'm more of a shoe than a builder; my engine builder's going to be interpreting the results, hence the "You probably shouldn't ask me my findings" statement. It will be interesting to see where the vortices build up.

[supertweet]

Your title is perfect, no kidding. Racing flowbench numbers is as good as bench racing mods using manufacturer's quoted power gains and adding them up.

Yup, too many of us rely upon specific data gleaned at standardized parameters to determine performance, and then think those numbers will translate into X performance on the road. Unfortunately, I'm one of those who has to rely upon others' comprehensive knowledge to get the performance I want.

I do have my own opinions on flowbench testing usefulness and procedure, but will leave that alone as it's just that. I will agree that it's a comprehensive exercise to gain any useful data, calibrating for the day's air conditions,proper spring pressure for application, and so on.

I've brought my cam maven in to assist, more as an excercise. I'll be more than happy to post the specs and resulting perfomance of this road/casual autocross build once received, but don't hold breaths, as it'll be a bit.