| ||
Visit MustangSteve's web site to view some of my work and find details for: FYIFORD Contributors' PICTURES - Power Brake Retrofit Kits for 65-66 Stangs - Classic Mustang FAQ's by MustangSteve - How to wire in a Duraspark Ignition - Mustang Ride Height Pictures and Descriptions - Steel Bushings to fit Granada Spindles to Mustang Tie Rods - Visit my EBAY store MustangSteve Performance - How to Install Granada Disc Brakes MustangSteve's Disc Brake Swap Page - FYIFORD Acronyms for guide to all the acronyms used on this page - FYIFORD Important information and upcoming events |
Offline
Just saw a post about a guy wanting to un-shrould around the intake valve to "help" in his quest to lower CR from 13-something to 11:something.
Another guy recommended (while engine was on stand) to attach heads and from the inside of cylinders scribe around where head-met-block.(the overhang, if any).
Would this be a "good practice" to un-shroud around intake/exhaust valves to maybe pick up some HP or is this better suited for all-out race pieces?!
Anything other than brake and clutch cable questions!!
6s6
Offline
6sally6 wrote:
Just saw a post about a guy wanting to un-shrould around the intake valve to "help" in his quest to lower CR from 13-something to 11:something.
Another guy recommended (while engine was on stand) to attach heads and from the inside of cylinders scribe around where head-met-block.(the overhang, if any).
Would this be a "good practice" to un-shroud around intake/exhaust valves to maybe pick up some HP or is this better suited for all-out race pieces?!
Anything other than brake and clutch cable questions!!
6s6
Golly! Unshroud the heads to lower CR? If the guy has the wherewithal to build an engine with a CR of 13, he should have the wherewithal to replace his pistons with some that are dished. Modern aluminum heads have the best combustion chamber designs ever. Those valves should not need unshrouding. And the unshrouding work could reduce the squish of the heads also reducing power.
I haven't heard about unshrouding valves since early iron headed days.
Offline
Seems that Ford decided to mess with valve shrouding back in the '80s, and they completely screwed up the 5.0 engine family for a year or so. Sounds like a project designed to ruin a set of heads for sure. Now, if the heads in your mind are already junk, no worries. It is just money, right? The last time I set about to improve a set of heads, I assembled all tools necessary to do the job, opened the first one, drank it, opened another, drank it, and so on until I was satisfied the heads were good to go. Never laid a hand on the heads. Thats called the "pop-a-top" method.
Best
Al
Offline
The only reason to unshroud the valves would be if the valves were shrouded to begin with, and they aren't on most SBF heads unless you go beyond a 2.02 intake valve, and there isn't much reason to do that unless you are building a super high RPM engine.
As far as bolting the heads to the engine, uh, why not just use the head gasket as a template like people have done forever to establish the bore limits?
This sounds like a quest for a hemi headed SBF, which is going to create an inefficient engine that will make less power, as Al noted. The hemi is a terrible design, and if you look at the modern Dodge hemi; it really isn't a hemi. It has sqish pads and the dome has been greatly reduced in height so reduce the needed piston dome because all that surface area just makes it more prone to detonation and ruins the flame front travel (ever notice they run two spark plugs per cylinder on the fuel cars?).
Offline
Al Newman wrote:
Seems that Ford decided to mess with valve shrouding back in the '80s, and they completely screwed up the 5.0 engine family for a year or so. Sounds like a project designed to ruin a set of heads for sure. Now, if the heads in your mind are already junk, no worries. It is just money, right? The last time I set about to improve a set of heads, I assembled all tools necessary to do the job, opened the first one, drank it, opened another, drank it, and so on until I was satisfied the heads were good to go. Never laid a hand on the heads. Thats called the "pop-a-top" method.
Best
Al
This had me rolling on the floor!!! I'm using this method the next time I come up with some "bright idea" to add to the list of projects I have just to get the car done...
Last edited by tweet66 (10/06/2016 9:16 AM)
Offline
As I recall Ford had some unshrouding going on with the big block FE engines and the clearancing was done on the block, above where the top piston ring would travel. This made a notch at the top of each cylinder. Cannot remember the specifics, or the engine it was done on. But I remember seeing it a long time ago.
I think Al has the right idea. ABDFI PATA.
Ain't
Broke
Don't
Fix
It
Pop
A
Top
Again
Offline
Al Newman wrote:
Seems that Ford decided to mess with valve shrouding back in the '80s, and they completely screwed up the 5.0 engine family for a year or so. Sounds like a project designed to ruin a set of heads for sure. Now, if the heads in your mind are already junk, no worries. It is just money, right? The last time I set about to improve a set of heads, I assembled all tools necessary to do the job, opened the first one, drank it, opened another, drank it, and so on until I was satisfied the heads were good to go. Never laid a hand on the heads. Thats called the "pop-a-top" method.
Best
Al
Offline
Gotta admit the post was from a guy that had an alcohol fueled engine and he wanted to run a different fuel...I think.
It was also a full-on drag deal.
The post just got me to "thank'in" about shrouded valves and such. From the posts here....looks like that work would not be needed to improve on an other-wise "perfect" engine!
Butt then again IF I had NOT brought up the subject we would have missed out on an Al Newman philosophy
6s6
Offline
I have a DSS block in my 65 that has a rather distinct chamfer on the top of the bores. It is off-set to un-shrould the valves. It runs great, so I assume it works.
Offline
Almost all modern day over head cam engines can thank the hemi for their creation. As far as unshrouding the valves it does make a difference. Should you bother with a street car probably not, unless you know what you are doing. Multiple valve cylinder heads and a "semi" hemi design have been going hand in hand for quite some time already. With a canted valve design improves cylinder filling and multiple valves makes valve surface area larger while maintaining port velocity. There are plenty of books to read regarding this out there. If you are actually interested in learning more about cylinder head flow I would recommend reading one of David Vizard's books "How to port and flow test cylinder heads" Some of the information goes over the head of the regular Joe, but there is alot that a regular guy can relate to.
Offline
The hemi is a dated design that worked in the day when there was very little known about how an engine uses fuel efficiently. The issue with a hemi is that it requires a domed piston to achieve any kind of compression ratio because the chambers are so big. Great right? Domes pistons are high performance stuff! Well, sure, in the '60s, but not so much anymore. There are several problems with the design. First, it creates a tremendous amount of surface area between the piston dome and the chamber. There's literally no way to get more surface area, which is not a advantage for two reasons. First, its a lot of area for a flame front to travel when trying the burn the mixture, so the engine needs a ton of spark lead to burn all the fuel before the exhaust valve opens. Second, its a whole lot of area where a hot spot can develop and lead to preignition. This is one reason why the fuel cars all run dual spark plugs. This allows them to introduce two flame fronts simultaneously to ensure complete combustion, plus even if one plug doesn't fire it ensures at least partial combustion because as close as those engines are to hydrolocking with fuel if a cylinder didn't fire it would probably shear the crank in half and destroy the engine.
From an efficiency standpoint, for obvious reasons, the hemi needs more fuel to make the same power as a conventional modern style chamber and piston design. More of that fuel is also wasted due to the flame front issues. Sure, the most powerful engines on Earth are still hemis, but they run nitromethane and operate under completely different combustion characteristics than gasoline.
What engineers have discovered over the years is that squish makes a combination efficient. In fact, the best design is a dished piston with as little chamber in the head as practical. This creates maximum squish area and maximum efficiency, as well as maximum power. These modern engines look a lot like a Diesel with obviously much lower compression. Joe Sherman built an engine like this for one of the Engine Master's Challenges some years back, which he handily won. He used a dished piston and welded up the chambers in a set of aluminum heads to get them down to something like 30ccs.
What's that got to do with valve shrouding though? Well, when the chamber gets smaller it can be much shallower, which allows the valves to open up into the cylinder without a wall of a combustion chamber to shroud them. Take a look at a modular Ford some time. This is how they are done.
The modern Dodge "hemis" really aren't. They run squish pads and a much shallower chamber to still get some efficiency from the design. Though prior to cylinder deactivation they got truly terrible mileage, like 9-11mpg in the trucks, indicating that its still a compromised design.
Offline
I've heard of the dishes piston small cc deal. Wonder if you could get a taller piston head OR longer rod to move the.dished piston above the.deck and into the cc further to get back some compression lost with the dish?!!
Bet it's doable with dish pistons and 289rods in a 5.0 block
6s6
Offline
I've seen engines set up with positive deck height before (piston sticking out of the block at TDC). So long as you maintain quench distance it can work. You need that minimum 0.040" quench distance though. Anything less and you risk running the piston into the head at high RPM.
You'd also need areas where its flat on flat so to speak. In other words flat areas of the piston and flat areas of the head (keeping in mind that 0.040" quench distance). Those flat on flat areas are where you get squish, and squish is where the efficiency and power come from.
Offline
“Al” had another philosophy…
quote: “I personally would not slow down if I saw a Holley setup lying in the road.”
Offline
Talk about an OLDIE GOLDIE !!!!!! A 6 year old post comes to life.
(Great trivia question...........who hosted the MSB Bash in 2016 ??! Glenn?)
6sally6
Offline
Ed Winfield...who weren't totally stupid...said that there needs to be at least one thousandth of an inch all the way around the valve for each thou. of lift. He told us that Andy Granatelli complained that the Novi was making too much power and spinning the tires (front drive) on the back straight at Indy. His plan was to reduce the size of the intake valves. Ed told him that he had already done that and that it was the wrong way to go (effectively enshrouding the valves). Granatelli went ahead with his plan...picked up another 50 hp.
Years ago I built a 1600 VW. Street motor. I wanted as much low end grunt as I could get so I used the single port heads from a 1300 and fly cut the head to accept the 1600 jugs. Then I opened the chambers around the valves to the edge of the cylinder....unshrouding the valves. Then milled the heads for 8.75:1 compression. That engine stayed up with a 280Z between the stop lights and got a high of 37 MPG in a VW beatle.
Last edited by Bullet Bob (10/22/2022 8:01 PM)
Offline
The heads I have on the 302 for the convertible have Chebby valves in them. I had extensive port work done on them back in the 90s by a guy that knew what he was doing. That said, I seriously doubt any unshrouding work was done on the chambers. All the work was done in the radius area underneath the valves and in the ports. And that overall, I paid dearly. Doing it all over again, I'd have bought aluminum heads. That said, when I started my build, it was "sort of" a budget project and I ran with what I had. Short block coming from MS. When I put the heads on, I used play dough and didn't have any clearance issues.
One thing I can say, if it ever makes it out of wraps and into a car, I promise you I will never fiddle with it unless it has problems.
Offline
6sally6 wrote:
(Great trivia question...........who hosted the MSB Bash in 2016 ??! Glenn?)
6sally6
Bullet Bob Evans.
Offline
tweet66 wrote:
Al Newman wrote:
Seems that Ford decided to mess with valve shrouding back in the '80s, and they completely screwed up the 5.0 engine family for a year or so. Sounds like a project designed to ruin a set of heads for sure. Now, if the heads in your mind are already junk, no worries. It is just money, right? The last time I set about to improve a set of heads, I assembled all tools necessary to do the job, opened the first one, drank it, opened another, drank it, and so on until I was satisfied the heads were good to go. Never laid a hand on the heads. Thats called the "pop-a-top" method.
Best
AlThis had me rolling on the floor!!! I'm using this method the next time I come up with some "bright idea" to add to the list of projects I have just to get the car done...
I use Al's method to cut grass sometimes. Brenda asks, "Are you going shopping with me?" "No I have to cut the grass."
Offline
6sally6 wrote:
Talk about an OLDIE GOLDIE !!!!!! A 6 year old post comes to life.
(Great trivia question...........who hosted the MSB Bash in 2016 ??! Glenn?)
6sally6
Glen was 2012
REMEMBER!!! When posting a question about your Mustang or other Ford on this forum, BE SURE to tell us what it is, what year, engine, etc so we have enough information to go on. |