[jim brady]

I am sure thats true as he is a real book of knowlege ! You have to remember that he has run 10.62 at 128 mph.

[This message was edited by jim brady on June 28, 2003 at 10:35 AM.]

[Steve C.]

David Vizard has published a formula to determine the near-optimal primary exhaust pipe diameter selection. This formula considers the CFM flow of the "exhaust" port and the result is for the "inside" diameter.
If you apply his formula to a stock 72cc E-head's published 199cfm exhaust flow it results in a 1.72" indide diameter. If you take the same formula and apply it to a modified exhaust port that flows 255cfm it suggests a 1.95" inside diameter.

(add about .100" to the figures for outside diameter. Also, the formula has provisions for flow density based on a race application or a performance street motor, I used the latter)

[Ron]

Yes and he ran that 10.62 at 128 at the Never Be Seen Raceway. Dyno???? Desk top dyno!

Ron



[This message was edited by Ron on June 28, 2003 at 11:50 AM.]

[Cliff R]

On KRE's dyno we've made to around 600 hp on the smaller headers. Above that the 2" always show an improvment. I've only built/dyno'd a couple of engines in that power range so only going by a few examples that I've actually tested. KRE would be the ones to ask, they build/dyno engines well above 600hp and Jeff has mentioned several times the larger headers make more power.....Cliff

[jim brady]

I am sure they do. We run a 2 1/8 tube on the E heads on the 505, but in a stock chasis car it is hard to put the big tube headers on them and for most applications for members of this board they are not makeing big HP so the smaller header will be fine.

[Goatman]

Thanks for telling me I was correct gentlemen.

I too used David Vizard's formula when selecting my header size. Works every time and that's how I know what the new D-ports will need as well.

OMT, doesn't really matter how long it lasted, or who built it, it was faster than yours. A dedicated drag car, with better flowing heads, a Dominator, and bigger tires. Now that's embarassing.

You little girls can ramble on all you want about me, my car, or what we've accomplished together, but most of you haven't done better, and certainly not with cast iron heads in a street car.

Thanks for once again making my points for me, gentlemen.......

Causin' pain like two bad nurses.....

[Tom Vaught]

Quote:

"Our old S/G gto ran 9.40's with a 280 d port head and 1 3/4 in headers. No nitrous."

Jim, just for grins, when I sold you the 2" JR
Headers for your steel 64 GTO did you go faster or slower? I don't remember if they ever picked your car up or not.

I personally think this discussion is getting out
of hand as each person's personal resources can
have a great bearing on how fast someone goes. I
have a friend who bought a Butler 462, (He knows
nothing about engine building), dropped it into
a steel 1966 tempest, and with his beginner level driving skills has run 10.50s on a average track.

Posting a number on the board says very little
about engine building knowledge, driver skill, or
financial resources. Some great drivers like John
Force know nothing about an engine.

My opinion, this discussion about headers has digressed to personal attacks vs transfer of information which would help other board members.

The common thread appears to be Bruce's comments
and others replys to those comments. Bruce, I
hate to say this but sometimes you provoke people
like the "other" Bruce used to. He was a pretty
smart guy too but his total lack of tact destroyed
any chance of people listening to his comments.

Running 2" headers vs 1 3/4 or 1 7/8" headers on
a dyno will not show the same results as on a drag strip. Because each car is different unless
you run back to back tests on the same day you MAY not be able to see a difference. Even if the
headers work on one engine/car does not mean that
they will work the same on a different engine
combination. The only way to tell is to have each
car run the headers and see if the improvement or
lack of improvement is there. Too many variables.

Just my opinion.

ps, Horsepower/ rpm levels seem to have more of
a determining factor on the tube size vs an engine
size. Jimmy Keen's 1600 hp 347 cid engine picked up with "pro Stock" type headers "designed" for a
500 cid engine.

Tom V.

[Goatman]

You're right Tom, this has gotten out of hand.

I have no problem admitting that I provoke discussion on this BB. Others feel the need to take things to a personal level for whatever reason. That's fine too. I can do both quite easily, as most everyone knows.

One important distinction between me and the "other" Bruce:

I don't make a living doing this. People don't need to listen to me. However, the questions I asked are stil unanswered because, quite frankly, these guys don't know. Trying to compare these new heads to the cast iron D-port is NOT going to work. There was never a D-port head that flowed 280cfm without epoxy, never mind out of the box. Why start telling people that you can use D-port sized headers on these new heads now?

Makes no sense.

When someone proves to me that there is a valid comparison there, then I'll change my tune. Untill then, I'll keep on asking questions that make some people very, very nervous........

Causin' pain like two bad nurses.....

[Old Man Taylor]

Bruce - Let's go back to basics and something I posted earlier in this thread.

“I also do not understand why the criticism starts before there is any hard data. It is easy to claim what new parts won't do without data. However, how can you end up with a "good" new part without having a new implementation that has to go through testing and verification? I have no plans to use these parts, but I think that it is great that they are being done, and I do not believe the world is binary. As long as these heads are not a failure, which I do not believe will be the case, then I am sure they will have at least a niche market. After all, the entire Pontiac market is a niche to begin with.”

How can the benefits of something new be discussed when the product is too new to have any test data? Why is it fair to attack a new product because there is no data for it yet when it is impossible to have that data yet? With your approach and criticism we would never have any new parts at all, because none of it could be proven before the part was available. Objective skepticism is fine, but keep it a little more objective. These boards are to share knowledge and experience with others, not to say who is right and wrong. Please look up the definition of aggressive communication vs. assertive communication, then go back and read your posts. You will see why you create additional “discussion”. You might be surprised that I agree with a lot of your opinions, but they are not the only way to look at things. The fact that someone might do something a little different than you does not make them wrong.

I try very hard to keep my posts objective and factual. With the exception of something like leaving out the pipe plug in front of the distributor, I will not tell someone they are right or wrong or that I am right or wrong. I will only give my experience and the way I look at something. Someone else’s opinions or experience are not diminished because they happen to be different from mine. You state your opinions and experience as absolute! When you do that others feel a need to respond so that people with less experience don’t necessarily get led down the wrong path. If you would like to pursue this further, please feel free to mail me off-line. I can deal with it objectively, or down and dirty, whichever you prefer. However, I don’t believe that style is appropriate for public bulletin board posts. Both of my e-mail addresses are listed below.

JimTaylor1@cox.net
JimTaylor@sc.slr.com

http://www.jimspontiac.homestead.com/Index.html

[Goatman]

Jim, I think if you go back and look, my first comments, even on the link I posted, were of the same thinking. I think we are both looking at this the same, just from different angles.

You are saying that no one should be talking about this product untill it is tested and so am I. When I hear people saying "this is what you'll need for headers because my cast iron such and such's used them", that's saying to me, and maybe now you too, that this is already an absolute. While its true that D-port headers will physically bolt on to these heads, that doesn't mean they'll be optimal.

I still feel that a 280 cfm head is overkill for the street and I also feel that number was thrown out there bcause it rivals the E-head. Maybe I'm wrong, but again, what difference does peak numbers mean if its truely a street head? Sounds to me like a race head in disguise.

Again, you'll get no arguments from me that I'm agressive when I post. Its just me. If you know how its going to be, than either do your best with it, or give me your worst. We've both seen how each ends up, so what's the big deal? I'm not crying about guys giving me a hard time. What goes around, comes around and vise versa. I'm man enough to deal with it. Some maybe aren't.....

Unfortunatley, I am off to NH for the rest of the weekend for a funeral....ummmm, I mean wedding. Perhaps later on you'll hear from me via e-mail.

Causin' pain like two bad nurses.....

[firechicken]

Back to the topic, an aluminum head, with decent flow at a reasonable price. Where do I sign up? I don't care what shape the ports are. If I can reuse my cheap headers, BONUS. We lowly street strip guys on tight budgets are waiting anxiously for this. Sounds like a great filler between ported D's and E's. I love aluminum and would set my ported iron aside if I could afford aluminum even at 240 cfm.

[Brian Baker]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Goatman:
Ron, you're embarrassing yourself again. 642 HP at 6200 RPM. 288 cfm on the intake. RAIV heads. Tells me everything I need to know.

Ask any _RACER_ about what you need and he'll tell you you're wrong. But that's nothing new. "I've been in the 12's for years......."

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!

Causin' pain like two bad nurses.....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not just the head flow on both sides, it's cam timing as well.

Wayne Garrison switched to 2" headers last year and with no other changes his 60' went into the toilet. This is a car capable of a little more ET and MPH than what Bruce's car did, but in the same HP range (Wayne's car being lighter). Took some tuning to get the 60' back.

[Brian Baker]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Goatman:
OMT: Slower than me, with over 20 cfm more on the intake. Even after 200 passes. You're gonna try and tell me something? LOL You wanna go fast, maybe you should ask my advice. I'm doing something you're not...........<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Like blowing up engines on the dyno and showing your a$$.

Sorry, Bruce...you had that one coming.

Attacking OMT is like attacking Mr. Rogers (in my book). You just don't do it. Especially when you're in your 20's and nobody here has ever seen you run that Orange Pontiac at any event.

[GONZO]

"Why is it that Pontiac circles seem to be so heavily populated with people who are never satisfied?

There are a plethora of aftermarket heads available for Chevies and Fords. For years I've been hearing Pontiac people saying "we're ignored in the aftermarket. Look how many different heads are available for Chevies and Fords but all we get is Edelbrocks."

Now a new aluminum head is coming out that will fill a different niche than the E-heads and people are whining and complaining again. "We don't need 'em, Edelbrocks are good enough, why would anyone want anything else." I've never heard such things from Chevy guys. Never heard one say "GM Fast-burn heads are all you need, why would you want anything different."

Fer cryin' out loud. Choices are good. Competition is good."

Seems like this statement by Will (with follow-up by OMT) makes the most sense to me. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy anything. You don't like em, Don't buy em'
There are 1000's of pontiac enthusiasts who have never heard of this forum, who may think of these heads as a benefit somehow. The more experimentation the better. Bring on the AL D-ports.

[SJMule]

Thanks Brian for stepping up

I'm a F.N.G. non racer with a love of the hobby.

O.M.T. has always been a gentleman on here.

My Great Uncle passed today who toiled the earth for this country longer than both our lives combined.

Needless to say I was more than pissed off.

I always liked the saying " Age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill "

And in the immortal words of Missus....blome

Mule

Earschplittenloudenboomer

[Ron]

Sorry for your loss.

Ron

[Tom Vaught]

Quote:

"My Great Uncle passed today who toiled the earth for this country longer than both our lives combined.

Needless to say I was more than pissed off."


I too am truly sorry for your loss! I hope that
he had a good life, a good family, and will be
remembered by all close to him. There is little more that you can ask for.

Quote:

"I always liked the saying "Age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill"

Sometimes with Age and Skill, you don't need the
Treachery part but most old guys can play the game pretty well by the time they get "old".

Tom V.

ps, I look forward to seeing the Kauffman head as
it may be one of the first true cnc heads for the pontiac market. If nothing else all of the ports
should be consistant in airflow if the program
was created correctly.

[Old Man Taylor]

Sorry for your loss SJMule. It sounds like your Great Uncle led a long life, and he was obviously important to you - and I am sure to others as well.

http://www.jimspontiac.homestead.com/Index.html

[SJMule]

My post wasn't appropriate for these boards.
I got the call while I was here. I was sickened by the turn of replies and disrespect.

Thanks for the kind words......Nuff said.


New Pontiac Heads are a great thing!!

If there wasn't a market why bother? I hope these are the best things since sliced bread.

I would run them just to be different than what every one else had to run for lack of choice.

Mule

Earschplittenloudenboomer

[JSchmitz]

I'm not an engine building expert by any means. My car has only run 12.60. I do however know that some of you are showing a lack of knowledge by arguing while only stating max intake flow numbers. The picture of how well a head will work is a lot broader than max intake flow. How about In/Ex flow ratio, volume vs. flow (efficiency), low lift flow, port swirl, etc. This pissing contest isn't proving anything. The truth will only be known after REAL numbers and REAL test data is available. Have a nice day.

[This message was edited by JSchmitz on June 29, 2003 at 03:12 PM.]