BBC output overview.

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

PRH
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1501
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:16 pm
Location: S. Burlington, Vt.

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by PRH »

I’m just going to sit back and let the thread unfold........ and for the time being try my best to pretend it’s a non-interactive source of information and just see what information is presented(in an effort to allow the info to be presented as uninterrupted as possible).

When all the info has been put forth, then I’ll decide what/if/how any of it might be useful for the things I work on.
Somewhat handy with a die grinder.
Frankshaft
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:01 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by Frankshaft »

David Vizard wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:54 pm
Erland Cox wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 5:05 pm He is wrong on that but the porting discussion can become interesting if there aren´t to many side paths.

Erland
Because you are coming at this as a racer you are wrong on the red part of your quote. If you start thinking this out as chief engineer for a production line engine you will find a different outcome.
As for the blue part of your post - that is right on the money!
DV
But we aren't talking about production line engines. We are talking hi Performance and racing engines. We aren't talking, part throttle, off idle emissions or fuel economy, having to meet epa regulations, etc.
Frankshaft
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:01 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by Frankshaft »

David Vizard wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:57 pm
F-BIRD'88 wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:31 pm When a inline sbc type cylinder head becomes even competitive in pro stock let me know.

Build two 427 cid engines .one bbc and one with any sbc head. With inline valves. See which one runs best.
When prostock engines start coming off
GM production lines let me know!
DV
See above.
David Vizard
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1787
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:19 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by David Vizard »

Frankshaft wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:55 pm
David Vizard wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:24 pm Erland,

A reply to your last post.

I am going to be blunt and too the point here as questions like this are stalling me going to the next phase of my BBC stuff.

Q:- Please explain, how do you know that it needs more bias and not something else? 60 years of flow testing and data/trend mining the results.

Q:-From the flow curve it is easy to see that something is wrong with the port as it stops gaining flow with more lift. Sure you can see things are not optimal but saying exactly what is not so easy. What happens at the inflection point can be very informant.

Q:- I am not used to the cd curve it doesn´t tell me anything. I know you are jut more than smart so now might be a good time to learn.

Q:- Not that I cannot learn but to complicate things there must be a good reason. You are right - there is - and you need to let me push forward on this post to some logical conclusion before bombarding me with qestions.


Q:-Bias is mostly used because that is the only direction you can port, there is water and another port on the other side. Absolutely not so!

Your comment:- Usually I gain flow by centering the valve more over the port. This sounds like something you got from Grumpy's book. The times I spent with Grumpy were great learning experiences for me but some of his air flow stuff was out of line with the data I had. I told him about the fact that my tests with applied bias showed a centered valve was not the way to get best hi-lift flow. I did not see Grumpy for quite a while (maybe two years) when I did he pointed at me and said 'Mr. Vizard - that biased tip worked just the way you said'.


Erland - patience please - let me get on with the theme of this post. As I have said before we need to talk.
We have not done that for some years now.

Take care,
DV
He is telling you in a nice way, that HIS RESULTS and data, don't match yours. That we have yet to see.









Question - should I conclude that though my info was good enough for Grumpy it is not good enough for you?????


You must be an incredible engine builder, a grade or two above Grumpy Jenkins, but, as yet, I have learned nothing from you that will make my engines one bit better.

What are the chances you can post useful info that we can learn from even if it is only as frequent as the posts where you dish out negative criticism that serves no useful function.
David Vizard Small Group Performance Seminars - held about every 2 months. My shop or yours. Contact for seminar deails - davidvizardseminar@gmail.com for details.
David Vizard
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1787
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:19 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by David Vizard »

Frankshaft wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:01 pm
David Vizard wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:54 pm
Erland Cox wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 5:05 pm He is wrong on that but the porting discussion can become interesting if there aren´t to many side paths.

Erland
Because you are coming at this as a racer you are wrong on the red part of your quote. If you start thinking this out as chief engineer for a production line engine you will find a different outcome.
As for the blue part of your post - that is right on the money!
DV
But we aren't talking about production line engines. We are talking hi Performance and racing engines. We aren't talking, part throttle, off idle emissions or fuel economy, having to meet epa regulations, etc.
Geez - I think you see what you want to see and pick an argument based loosely on that. It has nothing to do with what I said only with just how much you can bend it to suit what ever cryptic mood you may be in.

When GM designed the BBC it's primary purpose was to power street vehicles not race cars.

The chief engineer on the BBC project lived, or did do (he may have passed now) in Florida and was a friend of Harvey Cranes.
I have his phone # and could, at any time I wished, pick up the phone and asked what ever I might need to know.

My statement here was that a production vehicle would have been better served by a scaling up of the SBC head and some more use of a flow bench. The cost of the heads would have also dropped by at least 20% with no customer downside.

You may not have been talking about production engines but this thread is about stock or stock pattern heads although from some of the posts I am see it's looking like somewhere to nag DV again. Please prove me wrong!

DV
David Vizard Small Group Performance Seminars - held about every 2 months. My shop or yours. Contact for seminar deails - davidvizardseminar@gmail.com for details.
GARY C
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 6301
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by GARY C »

Frankshaft wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 11:39 am
RevTheory wrote: Sun Oct 14, 2018 12:07 pm Well, those are the prettiest damn seats I've seen. I'm guessing you've got the "fuel shear" argument addressed- perhaps forthcoming?
Radius intake seats flow a little better than a multi angle seat. But they don't make as much power from my testing. Or Rheere and Morrison's, Cfe's, Bes's, Sonny Leanords, Kasse's, Mbe, Frankenstein, Slick Rick, , Brodix, etc etc. With the exception of Brodix, I have NEVER seen a radius intake seat from any of them. Brodix USED to cut radius intake seats, many years ago, but have switched to multiple angles. I wonder why?

Dart has the most sophisticated wet flow testing rig in the industry, ask Richard Maskins what he says about radius intake seats. You don't even have to, not ONE head comes with a radius intake seat from them.

I have seen numerous sets of heads from Hendricks and Rcr over the years, EVERY single one had multiple angles on the intake seats. Ask Warpspeed if they use radius intake seats.

So, I guess, we are all doing it wrong.
Not wanting to start an argument here but if you go back to Darts wet flow testing you will find that David was involved with that from the get go, so my guess is he has data from that.

The best seat that my machine shop has found is a "multi angle" but looking at it you would think it's a "radius", is there better? most likely. Using what is done in mass production to conclude it's the best way would not be the best conclusion.

There are always innovations in the performance industry and some of those things come and go with different innovations. I remember when nitrous was considered disastrous (people learned how to tune) and then it ruled classes in drag racing, then it was over shadowed with turbo's...Then (progressive timers came out) now it's back on top.

DISCLAIMER... I am not saying nitrous makes more power or is better than turbo's!
Last edited by GARY C on Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
RevTheory
Guru
Guru
Posts: 5646
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:45 am
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by RevTheory »

Don't take the bait!
Frankshaft
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:01 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by Frankshaft »

GARY C wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:30 pm
Frankshaft wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 11:39 am
RevTheory wrote: Sun Oct 14, 2018 12:07 pm Well, those are the prettiest damn seats I've seen. I'm guessing you've got the "fuel shear" argument addressed- perhaps forthcoming?
Radius intake seats flow a little better than a multi angle seat. But they don't make as much power from my testing. Or Rheere and Morrison's, Cfe's, Bes's, Sonny Leanords, Kasse's, Mbe, Frankenstein, Slick Rick, , Brodix, etc etc. With the exception of Brodix, I have NEVER seen a radius intake seat from any of them. Brodix USED to cut radius intake seats, many years ago, but have switched to multiple angles. I wonder why?

Dart has the most sophisticated wet flow testing rig in the industry, ask Richard Maskins what he says about radius intake seats. You don't even have to, not ONE head comes with a radius intake seat from them.

I have seen numerous sets of heads from Hendricks and Rcr over the years, EVERY single one had multiple angles on the intake seats. Ask Warpspeed if they use radius intake seats.

So, I guess, we are all doing it wrong.
Not wanting to start an argument here but if you go back to Darts wet flow testing you will find that David was involved with that from the get go, so my guess is he has data from that.

The best seat that my machine shop has found is a "multi angle" but looking at it you would think it's a "radius", is there better? most likely. Using what is done in mass production to conclude it's the best way would not be the best conclusion.

There are always innovations in the performance industry and some of those things come and go with different innovations. I remember when nitrous was considered disastrous (people learned how to tune) and then it ruled classes in drag racing, then it was over shadowed with turbo's...Then (progressive timers came out) now it's back on top.

DISCLAIMER... I am not saying nitrous makes more power or is better than turbo's!
In response to the bold, if that is true, why do they use multi angle intake seats? Call Richard Maskins, CfE, mbe,etc, they will tell you the same thing.
GARY C
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 6301
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by GARY C »

Frankshaft wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:54 pm
GARY C wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:30 pm
Frankshaft wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 11:39 am

Radius intake seats flow a little better than a multi angle seat. But they don't make as much power from my testing. Or Rheere and Morrison's, Cfe's, Bes's, Sonny Leanords, Kasse's, Mbe, Frankenstein, Slick Rick, , Brodix, etc etc. With the exception of Brodix, I have NEVER seen a radius intake seat from any of them. Brodix USED to cut radius intake seats, many years ago, but have switched to multiple angles. I wonder why?

Dart has the most sophisticated wet flow testing rig in the industry, ask Richard Maskins what he says about radius intake seats. You don't even have to, not ONE head comes with a radius intake seat from them.

I have seen numerous sets of heads from Hendricks and Rcr over the years, EVERY single one had multiple angles on the intake seats. Ask Warpspeed if they use radius intake seats.

So, I guess, we are all doing it wrong.
Not wanting to start an argument here but if you go back to Darts wet flow testing you will find that David was involved with that from the get go, so my guess is he has data from that.

The best seat that my machine shop has found is a "multi angle" but looking at it you would think it's a "radius", is there better? most likely. Using what is done in mass production to conclude it's the best way would not be the best conclusion.

There are always innovations in the performance industry and some of those things come and go with different innovations. I remember when nitrous was considered disastrous (people learned how to tune) and then it ruled classes in drag racing, then it was over shadowed with turbo's...Then (progressive timers came out) now it's back on top.

DISCLAIMER... I am not saying nitrous makes more power or is better than turbo's!
In response to the bold, if that is true, why do they use multi angle intake seats? Call Richard Maskins, CfE, mbe,etc, they will tell you the same thing.
Years back Self Racing used a Brodix head and designed what is know as a Port Intruder to developed the most flow and power from a 23 Degree head at the time, Brodix sells the Port Intruder but why haven't they are anyone else incorporated it into their heads?

The answer to your question and to mine is because people use the things that work according to their modifications or so that is what I was told when I asked the people in the cylinder head development field. Brodix, Mamo and BES! I tried to mimic it on the bech to see what I could find and got no improvement so does that mean it didn't work or that I do not know everything they did to make it work... Based on the ET improvement of those who switched to Selfs heads I would say I didn't know what they know.

What DV is showing here is what he does and the results he has seen from it, I would not suggest that someone take one piece of it and try to incorporate it into someone elses work unless you test it.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
Frankshaft
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:01 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by Frankshaft »

David Vizard wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:11 pm
Frankshaft wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:55 pm
David Vizard wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:24 pm Erland,

A reply to your last post.

I am going to be blunt and too the point here as questions like this are stalling me going to the next phase of my BBC stuff.

Q:- Please explain, how do you know that it needs more bias and not something else? 60 years of flow testing and data/trend mining the results.

Q:-From the flow curve it is easy to see that something is wrong with the port as it stops gaining flow with more lift. Sure you can see things are not optimal but saying exactly what is not so easy. What happens at the inflection point can be very informant.

Q:- I am not used to the cd curve it doesn´t tell me anything. I know you are jut more than smart so now might be a good time to learn.

Q:- Not that I cannot learn but to complicate things there must be a good reason. You are right - there is - and you need to let me push forward on this post to some logical conclusion before bombarding me with qestions.


Q:-Bias is mostly used because that is the only direction you can port, there is water and another port on the other side. Absolutely not so!

Your comment:- Usually I gain flow by centering the valve more over the port. This sounds like something you got from Grumpy's book. The times I spent with Grumpy were great learning experiences for me but some of his air flow stuff was out of line with the data I had. I told him about the fact that my tests with applied bias showed a centered valve was not the way to get best hi-lift flow. I did not see Grumpy for quite a while (maybe two years) when I did he pointed at me and said 'Mr. Vizard - that biased tip worked just the way you said'.


Erland - patience please - let me get on with the theme of this post. As I have said before we need to talk.
We have not done that for some years now.

Take care,
DV
He is telling you in a nice way, that HIS RESULTS and data, don't match yours. That we have yet to see.









Question - should I conclude that though my info was good enough for Grumpy it is not good enough for you?????


You must be an incredible engine builder, a grade or two above Grumpy Jenkins, but, as yet, I have learned nothing from you that will make my engines one bit better.

What are the chances you can post useful info that we can learn from even if it is only as frequent as the posts where you dish out negative criticism that serves no useful function.
To answer your question on the bold, I simply don't believe you. How is that for an answer? Now your taking credit for his legend. Wow. Unfortunately, I can't prove you didn't, and you can't prove you did. So I guess it doesn't matter.

As far as useful information, I have given a lot of it. It's all over this site. I can't say the same for you. All your posts have a personal agenda. To promote a book, or your seminars, etc. I find that tacky. Sorry, but I do. As far as this thread, I have given plenty for the guys to think about. If I reply to a post, it's because I obviously don't agree fully with it. I am giving another perspective to think about. I am not the only one who doesn't agree either. I just am more direct. I haven't attacked you or have been negative in anyway. I have just as much right to say what I want as you do. Don will pm me if I cross the line and scold me, so far, no pm.

And just for the record, did I reply to anything about your bias section? Nope. I don't disagree with you on everything.
Frankshaft
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:01 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by Frankshaft »

David Vizard wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:28 pm
Frankshaft wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:01 pm
David Vizard wrote: Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:54 pm

Because you are coming at this as a racer you are wrong on the red part of your quote. If you start thinking this out as chief engineer for a production line engine you will find a different outcome.
As for the blue part of your post - that is right on the money!
DV
But we aren't talking about production line engines. We are talking hi Performance and racing engines. We aren't talking, part throttle, off idle emissions or fuel economy, having to meet epa regulations, etc.
Geez - I think you see what you want to see and pick an argument based loosely on that. It has nothing to do with what I said only with just how much you can bend it to suit what ever cryptic mood you may be in.

When GM designed the BBC it's primary purpose was to power street vehicles not race cars.

The chief engineer on the BBC project lived, or did do (he may have passed now) in Florida and was a friend of Harvey Cranes.
I have his phone # and could, at any time I wished, pick up the phone and asked what ever I might need to know.

My statement here was that a production vehicle would have been better served by a scaling up of the SBC head and some more use of a flow bench. The cost of the heads would have also dropped by at least 20% with no customer downside.

You may not have been talking about production engines but this thread is about stock or stock pattern heads although from some of the posts I am see it's looking like somewhere to nag DV again. Please prove me wrong!

DV
Again, what does a production vehicle or who you know, or who knew who does that have anything to do with it? Seriously. Is this not a site about Performance and racing engines? How does it matter that a BBC might not have been as good as a sbc for a daily driver production vehicle for this thread? And, the burden of proof, is on you. Your the one making all the claims. Yo have been challenged by at least 4 different people about the same thing, and as of yet, have given no response other than, your wrong, I am right.
Frankshaft
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:01 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by Frankshaft »

GARY C wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 4:16 pm
Frankshaft wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:54 pm
GARY C wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:30 pm
Not wanting to start an argument here but if you go back to Darts wet flow testing you will find that David was involved with that from the get go, so my guess is he has data from that.

The best seat that my machine shop has found is a "multi angle" but looking at it you would think it's a "radius", is there better? most likely. Using what is done in mass production to conclude it's the best way would not be the best conclusion.

There are always innovations in the performance industry and some of those things come and go with different innovations. I remember when nitrous was considered disastrous (people learned how to tune) and then it ruled classes in drag racing, then it was over shadowed with turbo's...Then (progressive timers came out) now it's back on top.

DISCLAIMER... I am not saying nitrous makes more power or is better than turbo's!
In response to the bold, if that is true, why do they use multi angle intake seats? Call Richard Maskins, CfE, mbe,etc, they will tell you the same thing.
Years back Self Racing used a Brodix head and designed what is know as a Port Intruder to developed the most flow and power from a 23 Degree head at the time, Brodix sells the Port Intruder but why haven't they are anyone else incorporated it into their heads?

The answer to your question and to mine is because people use the things that work according to their modifications or so that is what I was told when I asked the people in the cylinder head development field. Brodix, Mamo and BES! I tried to mimic it on the bech to see what I could find and got no improvement so does that mean it didn't work or that I do not know everything they did to make it work... Based on the ET improvement of those who switched to Selfs heads I would say I didn't know what they know.

What DV is showing here is what he does and the results he has seen from it, I would not suggest that someone take one piece of it and try to incorporate it into someone elses work unless you test it.
I am well aware of the port Intruders thank you. I have actually used them. The reason is, not every engine needs that much area. That option is still available for anyone to use if they see fit. The manufacturers don't implement them for the same reason. It's exclusive to Brodix also. As far as the rest of your point, I somewhat agree with what your saying.
GARY C
HotPass
HotPass
Posts: 6301
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by GARY C »

Frankshaft wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 4:37 pm
GARY C wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 4:16 pm
Frankshaft wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:54 pm

In response to the bold, if that is true, why do they use multi angle intake seats? Call Richard Maskins, CfE, mbe,etc, they will tell you the same thing.
Years back Self Racing used a Brodix head and designed what is know as a Port Intruder to developed the most flow and power from a 23 Degree head at the time, Brodix sells the Port Intruder but why haven't they are anyone else incorporated it into their heads?

The answer to your question and to mine is because people use the things that work according to their modifications or so that is what I was told when I asked the people in the cylinder head development field. Brodix, Mamo and BES! I tried to mimic it on the bech to see what I could find and got no improvement so does that mean it didn't work or that I do not know everything they did to make it work... Based on the ET improvement of those who switched to Selfs heads I would say I didn't know what they know.

What DV is showing here is what he does and the results he has seen from it, I would not suggest that someone take one piece of it and try to incorporate it into someone elses work unless you test it.
I am well aware of the port Intruders thank you. I have actually used them. The reason is, not every engine needs that much area. That option is still available for anyone to use if they see fit. The manufacturers don't implement them for the same reason. It's exclusive to Brodix also. As far as the rest of your point, I somewhat agree with what your saying.
I may be mistaken but I think the port intruder also would create port bias?

I have found over the years of following all this stuff that it seems almost everything that people said wouldn't or couldn't work someone else came along and showed it could. Don Garlets comes to mind. :)

If I am not mistaken at one point DV was not a fan of radius intake seats but I have had the privilege of talking to him over the years and in discussions about the equipment he has got to use and the possibilitys they open up, so it could be what radius is used in conjunction with his port work as opposed to just a radius.

My guess is this is something that wil have it's goods and bads through out cylinder head development.
Please Note!
THE ABOVE POST IN NO WAY REFLECTS THE VIEWS OF SPEED TALK OR IT'S MEMBERS AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS ENTERTAINMENT ONLY...Thanks, The Management!
Frankshaft
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:01 pm
Location:

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by Frankshaft »

Last couple weeks project.
IMG_20181007_141730515~2.jpg


Just in case you don't understand I actually do this for a living.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
user-30257

Re: BBC output overview.

Post by user-30257 »

David Vizard wrote: Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:43 pm FRANKSHAFT COMMENT:-
In response to the bold, if that is true, why do they use multi angle intake seats? Call Richard Maskins, CfE, mbe,etc, they will tell you the same thing.


AND WHAT EXACTLY WOULD BE :- 'the same thing' ?
DV
I can answer that.. they simply don't work. Especially with any amount of overlap. You can fix them by using sharp top cuts and undercuts. Then it is no longer a radius seat.
Locked