Funky airfoil in this intake bowl

[lil289]

Check this out.
http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2006 ... onhead.jpg

[Ed-vancedEngines]

Looks like maybe a high velocity low cfm swirl port head to me. I think it would be great for low to mid rpm use but would not have the total flow capacity for higher rpm.

Just an opinion.
Ed

[PWMAX]

I have seen similiar stuff on some raised runner pontiac/chevy 23 degree heads, for an old superstock, now comp combo. 340ish cubes. Single 4, sheet metal deal. Heads were done by Bud Harper. That side is epoxied in, very similiar, the port is ported into a semi oval shape on the roof, and epoxied into an oval shape on the floor. The front of the guide is also mudded up, to direct the air. The motor in question, makes 740 hp or so, and turns about 10,000 rpm. I know before the mods, the motor made similiar power, maybe a little more. The guy is changing and trying stuff a lot, so, its hard to say, if that work really helped, or not. It will definately speed up the velocity over the short turn, and direct the air more towards the center of the cylinder. My personaly opinion, is, I thinks its a band aid, "trick of the week", to soak another $1500 out of the guy.

Frank

[ccb]

It looks like an old set of plate heads when nascar ran 18 deg heads.Petty's were running that style in there engines.

[Darin Morgan]

I have seen similiar stuff on some raised runner pontiac/chevy 23 degree heads, for an old superstock, now comp combo. 340ish cubes. Single 4, sheet metal deal. Heads were done by Bud Harper. That side is epoxied in, very similiar, the port is ported into a semi oval shape on the roof, and epoxied into an oval shape on the floor. The front of the guide is also mudded up, to direct the air. The motor in question, makes 740 hp or so, and turns about 10,000 rpm. I know before the mods, the motor made similiar power, maybe a little more. The guy is changing and trying stuff a lot, so, its hard to say, if that work really helped, or not. It will definately speed up the velocity over the short turn, and direct the air more towards the center of the cylinder. My personaly opinion, is, I thinks its a band aid, "trick of the week", to soak another $1500 out of the guy.

Frank

That is definitely Bud Harper. I have never seen anything in it. I have found that taking it out actually lets the engine turn up and make more top end power. I have taken it out of some Buick heads, done some mods and made about 32 more HP. It may be of some benefit in Denver's thin air but I see nothing in it at sea level. Tried it on a Pro Stock engine once and killed the thing 56HP.

[Ron E]

It looks like an old set of plate heads when nascar ran 18 deg heads.Petty's were running that style in there engines.

We recieved a set of .cup 18-deg heads years ago to fix for a drag motor. They had a very similar wing epoxied into them May have been plate heads. They had weak flow through the range, and didn't make lift. So, we re-did them from the start.

-maybe some swirl directing,enhancing,canceling...
-maybe attempting to load the short-side
-maybe attempting to redirect some wet away from the long-bowl
-may have had some use in plate motors that escapes those (me) w/o such experience
maybe related to having gone to Woodstock. I don't know.

[ion442]

Its going to cause a LOT of high velocity swirl and cause a huge amount of turbulence.

They work VERY good on a restricted engine, you would def get more power under the curve with that, if combined with limited rpms, carbs, and restrictor plates.

[Dan Barton]

Have seen this type of thing many times before from Harper and some others, I believe this is what you get when you port and only look at flow bench numbers, have also taken it out and improved power and the engines seem to accelerate better, my experience with swirl is it can get you into trouble with to much being wasted energy that could better be used by filling the cylinder.

[lil289]

Here's a link to the article:
http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2006 ... index2.php

[maxracesoftware]

Have seen this type of thing many times before from Harper and some others, I believe this is what you get when you port and only look at flow bench numbers, have also taken it out and improved power and the engines seem to accelerate better, my experience with swirl is it can get you into trouble with to much being wasted energy that could better be used by filling the cylinder.

http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2006 ... onhead.jpg

Swirl-Bowl-Vane => (DragStrip)
the "Best" i've seen that Swirl-Vane do
is to make no difference in HP and Torque
and make no difference in ET/MPH going down DragStrip .
No gain , no Loss ..for all that hard Work !

Swirl-Bowl-Vane => (FlowBench)
on the FlowBench that Mod usually shows 10 to 20+ CFM gains
..its a great Mod only to give you
"FlowBench Bragging Rights "

if you like CFM FlowBench Numbers its great
if you like more HP/TQ plus quicker ET/MPH,
its not so great, especially if you use Methanol !

FlowBench =
DragStrip =

[Keith Morganstein]

It seems that these swirl ports have come and gone in the OEM heads too.

So why are these designs such a "dud"?

[PWMAX]

I agree with larry, about the swirl deal. Where, you gain swirl, and loose a little flow, and, the car runs the same. One dynamic is making up for what the other lost. Gm had them in the ls1 heads originaly, or something similiar, that, you were always told NOT to touch, EVER, no matter what. Well, when you did, what ever they were on, loved it. Big block chevy Vortec heads, also had a similiar deal. For an oem application, it works fine. I think Gm did it more to aid swirl, which aids burn, which aids in emissions. Thats the the only reason its in there. Its not like they said, "WOW, putting a big blob of metal in the way of a high flow area, made 30 more hp!!". No, it was for emmisions.

I think some of these guys, sharp individuals, not taking anything away from them, see this stuff, and try it, and, wow, it helps with this or that dynamic, and, now, its the new trick of the week.

When ever I do an engine/head combo, that runs much better than its supposed to, I get this coment. "Wow, that thing runs that fast with those heads??". "how much epoxy do you you have in them? Man, it must be all epoxied up." My answer almost 99% of the time is NONE. You don;t get it. Thats one thing, unfortuanetly, that the Engine masters deal sorta did, was make the ue of epoxy a necessity in the mid of the regular reader, to make big power. Its handy, when your trying to use a head that flows really good, but is to big for a given combo, its almost always used, to improve velocity.

Frank

[maxracesoftware]

It seems that these swirl ports have come and gone in the OEM heads too.

So why are these designs such a "dud"?

I agree with larry, about the swirl deal. Where, you gain swirl, and loose a little flow, and, the car runs the same. One dynamic is making up for what the other lost. Gm had them in the ls1 heads originaly, or something similiar, that, you were always told NOT to touch, EVER, no matter what. Well, when you did, what ever they were on, loved it.

in this Picture, the Bowl-Swirl-Vane is made correct

the AirFlow is presented and utilized to the full width of the Short Turn Radius

in most cases you windup with MORE Flow CFM,
especially on Heads where you might previously
had Short Turn separation problems, this Swirl-Vane
eliminates all Short Turn attachment/separation problems
in Dry AirFlow FlowBench Tests....so you increase Bowl/Valve Cone
Swirl + you increase dry flow CFM numbers.
but on the Dyno/DragStrip, it makes no difference
and sometimes you loose quite a bit of HP/TQ
even though the FlowBench shows you picked up 20+ CFM

http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2006 ... onhead.jpg



these following Pics are GM's SBC Bowl-Swirl-Vane

http://www.maxracepics2.com/Chevy_Hi-Sw ... Bowl_1.jpg

http://www.maxracepics2.com/Chevy_Hi-Sw ... tion_1.jpg

http://www.maxracepics2.com/Chevy_Hi-Sw ... tion_2.jpg

the way GM fashioned their Swirl-Vane
"killed" CFM Numbers drastically ,
so they were Hi-Swirl + Low Flow CFM

the "correct way " to do this is if you want both Hi-Conical Bowl-Valve Swirl , plus Hi Flow CFM Numbers as well
=>

http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2006 ... onhead.jpg

as previously mentioned, none of these Mods make
any Power/Torque ET/MPH gains in real world tests i've seen so far !


There is another way/method to gain a ton of in-Cylinder swirl rotation
"without" any Flow losses , but again Tests show no differences
in Torque/HP yet.

the way i look at it is there are 3 major methods=>
1- Conical Valve/Bowl Swirl..sort of localized to Valve's Flow Cone region
2- in Cylinder horizontal spiral flow swirl pattern created by Port orientation to Cylinder Bore + Short Turn Apex height / Curve combination
3-Tumble in either Direction

[SWB]

My experience has shown that number 2 is all that's necessary and the cross sectional areas of the port can be kept "happy" for better power.

Just think of what the port slices must look like with those vanes in there? What kind of cross sectional areas are we talking about in this case? Is the vane really working the way it "looks" or is it simply altering the cross sectional size sufficient to be allowing the air to only approach the seat from a narrow "window" of upstream port opening? What happens when the pressure differential goes upwards of 80"Wc? etc.?

I think they are not the way to go.

SWB

[larrycavan]

It's been my experience with water tests in 2V hemi motorcycle heads to see spiraling flow in the bowl using normal porting shapes. Those tests were with the valve removed and the head laying upside down so you could see right into the bowl.

Water stays attached to the port. You can see it enter the bowl, spiral around and merge with the water flowing on the short side.

It definitely will show you if one port's angle of approach in the bowl is different than another.

I'm not saying it's conclusive proof of anything in particular but it does give you indications of the affect the port shape plays.