2x4 intake flow & performance data

Discussion in ''Da Nailhead' started by ahhh65riv, Nov 15, 2006.

  1. telriv

    telriv Founders Club Member

    I don't think ANY diesel can spin to 7100 as our "Nail" did & still make power. The last engine peaked at 5800, at about 450HP, & took a nose dive at 6000 . With the "Rockers" it went as far as we wanted, or dared, to go & at 7100 the HP was still at 420HP. All this is tellin' us is, I WANT MORE AIR!!!!!!! A cam won't do it, porting won't do it, pressurizing will help a hellava lot. The valves need to open a reasonable amount or it ain't gonna flow the amount of air needed to make any reasonable HP. Along with the increase in HP is naturally torque, since torque is what HP is factored from. For those who know & those who don't know how an engine works. Density (AIR) =HP which =RPM's. All internal combustion engines rely on AIR!!!! From the smallest to the largest it's all about passing AIR!!!!!!!
     
  2. D-Con

    D-Con Kills Rats and Mice

    Humbly butting in, Isn't the exhaust port the bottle-neck with the nailhead breathing? Believing that it is, supercharging, and even nitrous in fact WILL NOT make the same HP in a nailhead as in a better exhausting engine. If you can't allow all of the exhaust gasses to adequately exit the engine, you can't stuff as much fuel and air in. Even power-adder engines with good exhaust flow make more HP when the exhaust is made bigger than normal. Bigger exhaust valves, headers, and exhaust. All those burnt gasses have to go somewhere, whether they are created with forced induction or nitrous; if they can't get out of the exhaust they will take up space in the cylinder where fuel/air mixture should be.

    So, I respectfully disagree, an equivalent amount of nitrous in 2 engines with different volumetric efficiencies will not increase the HP by an equal amount. The potential is the same, but not the resultant output. The more nitrous added, the more pronounced the difference will be.
     
  3. telriv

    telriv Founders Club Member

    In a naturally aspirated application it's the INTAKE that's the bottleneck. For the last 50 or so years everyone thought it was the exhaust, not so. In a pressurized application it now becomes the exhaust that's the bottleneck. Now the proper cam comes into play. How many $$$$$$ ya got for experimenting???? After 10 or so different cam profiles it starts getting very costly. As an example. The last engine we spec'd another cam. Added 2* additional lobe separation. Added 4* intake duration at .050". Lobe lift & exhaust duration at .050" was the same. Results, 20HP. Removed heads. Removed all exhaust valves. Measured from top of head to exhaust seats. Sunk exhaust seats a little deeper. Cut a .015" groove around the outer top edge of exhaust valve. Smoothed all sharp corners. Left exhaust valve heights all different as we now have an adjustable valve train. Results, 22HP. Thought about adding 1*-2* more separation with another cam. Didn't do, have spent TOO MUCH already!!!!! Many applications are all different from each other. What may work for one will not work for another. Only thing I can say is that for most "Nails" they seem to like a wider lobe separation than most with a very fast rising ramp profile, somewhat like stock.
    Just my dimes worth for what it may be worth.
     
  4. tyoneal

    tyoneal Active Member

    --------===================
    Tom:

    My thoughts are for maximum Power IF we are unable to get better heads:

    Dished 8.5:1 Forged Pistons
    Roller Cam, Roller Followers, your Roller Rockers
    Cam- As much lift and the longest duration possible on the exhaust (Maybe intake also) This should be easier with dished pistons.
    Stock Heads fully ported
    (Maybe even a Holley EFI System)

    Should easily be able to get 7-9 Pounds of boost, With a good inter-cooler and if necessary a bit of added alcohol, 12-15 pounds of boost
    114-116 LSA

    From what I understand, at 7-9 pounds of boost we should see about a 55%-65% increase in Torque and HP and be able to spin the engine up a lot higher.

    At 15 Pounds of Boost, you could just about double you torque and HP.

    If 465 Torque (425 Stock Engine) @ 2800 RPM's (Per Buick Literature) and 340 HP with 4X1, WITH A PROPER TUNE!!!! (Carb Size etc) 800 ft pounds of Torque, and 600+ HP, should be enough to launch a Battle Ship. (Especially if it weighs 4400 pounds ;-))Assuming the Engine is Strong enough structurally to handle the additional stresses.

    With the additional Modifications mentioned above, YEE HAW!!!!! Bring on the Vettes.

    Thoughts?

    Regards,

    Ty

    BTW: Here is the link for the Diesel Truck that Pulls 5000 RPM.

    http://www.bankspower.com/DmaxTypeR-ProjectOverView.cfm

    Main Web Site

    http://www.bankspower.com/
     
  5. 56familykar

    56familykar knuckle banger

  6. 56familykar

    56familykar knuckle banger




    This is True! Moderation is the key to survival. Anything out there can put up with a meager 4psi of boost and the gains are noticeable. And Forcing exhaust out with a means of pressure would be helpful.
    The exhaust is a pain. Tom, I need to ask you more questions because I cant get this thing to respond!

    Mike
     
  7. D-Con

    D-Con Kills Rats and Mice

    Very interesting! I don't profess to be a nailhead expert. I think they are a great nostalgia engine, and love everything Buick. Possibly the best looking mass-produced engine ever except maybe a decked-out flathead Ford.

    Just looking at the crazy profile of that exhaust port is enough :idea2: to lead to the conclusion the exhaust is the issue.
     
  8. wkillgs

    wkillgs Gold Level Contributor

    So on a blown Nailhead, using a cam with some valve overlap would help push the exhaust out using the pressurized intake charge!
    Most blown applications don't have much overlap in the cam profile....so the Nailhead is once again different.
    Wish I had a dyno.....and a million dollars:laugh:
     
  9. telriv

    telriv Founders Club Member

    The bigger the intake charge the more pressure that will be generated when the exhaust valve opens, everything else remaining equal, so it WILL go out, it has no choice, it HAS to. Then again, how efficiently it goes out is another matter.
     
  10. wkillgs

    wkillgs Gold Level Contributor

  11. tyoneal

    tyoneal Active Member

    ==================================
    When I was Mentioning a Blown Nailhead I was talking about 114-116 LSA (IS: Very Little Overlap)

    Overlap in the cam profile will lower your cylinder pressure. Overlap on Cams are with a Lobe Separation Angle of 106* to 110* or there about.

    Ty
     
  12. ahhh65riv

    ahhh65riv Well-Known Member

    My testing of the 2x4 intakes is complete.

    I wish to give to those individuals that have made contributions to this cause the FIRST LOOK at this long awaited data. Those that have made contributions to the dyno fund will receive the dyno pull sheets in a personal email from none other than yours truly. :Comp: These dyno sheets will contain the intake comparison tests of the Edelbrock B262, the Weiand WB4D, and the Eelco 2x4 intake manifolds.

    There is still further testing in progress! Next I am taking off Tom Telescos Roler Tip rockers, and installing a set of stock rocker arms, followed by installing the stock exhaust manifolds instead of the Sanderson BNH headers.

    Its not too late if you wish to be added to the list! As it is I am way deep in this thing. I don't want to think about what the final bill is going to be...:ball:

    If you missed that thread, Last minute donations can be made here at paypal:

    https://www.paypal.com/us/verified/pal=browneyesvictim@yahoo.com

    If you aren't/weren't able to donate- that's ok- just remember to give me (your fellow nailheader) your 2 CENTS WORTH when I have a silly question to ask here on the board!!!:beer

    Erik Schmidt
     
  13. jamhdit

    jamhdit Just nuts about buick's

    So Now Your Going To Keep The Results Secret From Those That Can't Afford To Donate?
     
  14. doesnt seem right to solicit donations and then only offer your results to those who have paid you. not the way things typically happen on V8Buick.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 11, 2008
  15. DualQuad55

    DualQuad55 Well-Known Member

    EASY guys, if you read the post- it says he is giving FIRST LOOK to those who have contributed to the costs of testing different setups. No where does it say that he will not post the info for everyone to see later. I think this is just his way to say thanks to those who helped him pay for some of the testing.
    As far as soliciting money, if I recall correctly( without going back and re-reading all the posts on this thread) Erik had been asked by several people to try several items on the dyno for comparison. When he said that he could not afford all the dyno time required to try so many items, this is where donations came into play.
    As far as how much HP he is making-I don't really care either, but it is nice to get an idea how much HP I can make or expect depending on what similar mods I do. I don't think this is a 'Look at me' type thing, just some useful info on parts available to us. The magazines do this every month and people pay money to buy each issue. How many times do you need to read how to make xxxHP in a SBC, SBF, etc...
    We are finally at the point where new aftermarket parts are being made and someone took the time and cash to do some actual unbiased testing of them. Obviously results will vary depending on each individuals complete setup, but atleast now there is a starting point. It sure beats buying a bunch of parts and trying them out, just to find out which ones make more power. After about three or four different intake and carb setups, I don't want to spend anymore on them personally.

    ps-I have not been able to contribute financially to the cause, so like many of you I await the rest of the results .
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2008
  16. doc

    doc Well-Known Member

    Well said, Joe.
     
  17. ahhh65riv

    ahhh65riv Well-Known Member

    Dear fellow Nailheaders!

    Thanks for hanging in there. I would like to apologize for the delay. I know a lot of you folks have been keeping a close eye out on this thread. It has also been gaining a lot of steam! You know I started this thread over a year and a half ago with the SOLE INTENTION of sharing my data with this group. I am still unwavering in this resolve! If I could please indulge your forgiveness, everyone will see this has not been without good reason for this delay. I am pleased to announce Rodders Journal has offered to publish this data in their magazine as well! As I'm sure you can all understand this will be great publicity to get a bit of credit for our beloved yet under-rated Nailhead! I did however, wish to keep true to the contributing members of the V-8 Buick board that have made contributions toward this effort FIRST! My fear was that posting my results here would kill the article. As of this evening, I have confirmed this article will run in addition to my results being posted here. I hope you can see there was a "bigger picture" here.


    At last! Here is the final 2x4 intake data we have all been interested in. Attached is the "All B.S. aside", "apples to apples", "side by side", "100% independent" comparison of three dual quad intakes: Edelbrock B262, Weiand and Eelco. This is the first of 4 posts in a row I will make. The next 3 posts will contain the specific dyno data for each intake manifold.

    The attached sheet is the comparison chart. Here is the legend:

    Square (425ES014) = Eelco
    Circle (425ES013) = Edelbrock
    Diamond = Weiand

    Lately there has been discussion about the HP and Torque ratings from recent dyno sessions that have shown the actual HP and torque numbers acquired that barely match- or sometimes rate below the ratings Buick published over 40 years ago. So did Buick embellish their numbers? My testing leads me to believe this could be true, yet at the same time Craig Schuck (Shuck Motorsports- dyno owner/operator) has made a comment that he has had customers that have tested their same engine on his competitors dyno 17-20 HP higher than on his. Therein I have come to believe that there are just as many other variables that can sway the data one way or the other. Another point of note is, all of these tests were performed WITH heat applied through the exhaust crossover. Certainly I COULD have gained a few more horsepower, by blanking them off without any other modifications at nearly ZERO cost. I COULD put in a bigger cam and gain more horsepower. My point is, I never was out to build the ultimate high performance nailhead. So I'm not hung up on the numbers. What is important is that what you are getting is comparative data of different intakes on the same engine on the same dyno, on the same day, with the same carbs, etc. In the end, I will have an every day driver that will last for a long time, made from the highest quality parts and machine work that are available today. I will still be able to dish out some punishment to the punk in the import with bad exhaust on and off the strip and be consistent. I will do it riding in style and comfort with the A/C on and the windows open! Oh, and did I mention when I lift the hood for onlookers I will be watching the reaction of every single person that sees that dual quad "eye candy"? My conclusion is each "speed part" has its own benefits and weaknesses. Selecting the right part is a personal choice that is right for what YOU want.

    I wish to thank every one of you for your patience, generosity as well as those that have made a financial contribution to help offset a portion of the cost of dyno time. Most importantly, I would like to especially thank everyone for their support guidance and camaraderie' on V-8Buick.com. If you are like me, it didn't take long to realize the value of knowledge and information to be gained on the site; however, there are often opinions that are disguised as facts. There are so many claims and theories! How does a person discern fact from another persons opinion? This information I am sharing is small token of REAL DATA to hopefully help others make informed decisions about the parts they choose to install on their nailhead. I realize this is only comparing intakes, but this has taken over a year and a half and cost thousands of dollars to get this far. I'm here to tell you the data did not come cheap! In the end I am going to take my nailhead home and install it in my 65 Riviera Gran Sport, and will KNOW I have one of the best built hot-rod engines ever produced, and enjoy cruising in it for years to come! You can find me talking about it and "sharing the pride" on V-8Buick.com and other forums on the net.


    Your fellow rodder,
    Erik Schmidt
     

    Attached Files:

  18. ahhh65riv

    ahhh65riv Well-Known Member

    And the winner is....

    Eelco! ...just slightly.

    Highlights:
    Max torque is 468 ft-lbs @ 3600 RPM
    Max HP 365.5 and HELD through several hundred rpms!

    Looking at the Brake Specific Fuel Consumption(BSCF), I am real happy with this pull!

    *EGT probe #7 was in-operable
     

    Attached Files:

    • 1a.jpg
      1a.jpg
      File size:
      29.7 KB
      Views:
      57
    • 2a.jpg
      2a.jpg
      File size:
      70.9 KB
      Views:
      89
    • 3a.jpg
      3a.jpg
      File size:
      70.4 KB
      Views:
      40
    • 4a.jpg
      4a.jpg
      File size:
      61.2 KB
      Views:
      35
    • 5a.jpg
      5a.jpg
      File size:
      65 KB
      Views:
      34
  19. ahhh65riv

    ahhh65riv Well-Known Member

    In third place (performance wise) is the Weiand. Although very rare, this manifold is all about "looking good"!

    On the graph, it shows (average) 27.2 FT lbs less torque, and 21.8 less HP than the Eelco, however there are some features that I like about this intake.

    1. I like the carb spacing. There is more room to work on it, get at vacuum ports, mixture screws etc., One would also be more likely to find an air cleaner that will fit this spacing.

    2. There is more space underneath the plenum- no need to grind off fins on aluminum valley pans.

    3. Has a lower overall profile height- probably for better hood clearance. Even more could be taken off from the bottom.

    4. It is more efficient, by using less fuel.

    When we installed the cabs on the manifold we had to be real careful as the secondary butterflies liked to hang up on the inside bores of the intake. Centering within the "slop" of the carb mounting studs was critical. Furthermore when looking down I noticed the port openings of the intake were smaller than the diameter of the carbs! It was very clear that this cut down on flow! With some "garage mechanic" level skills one could easily "port match" the intake openings to gain HP. If it wasn't "borrowed" I probably would have done that to see what we could pick up. (You can relax Russ!) :)

    Again, the Brake Specific Fuel Consumption(BSCF) has the same good curve in the middle (a little better actually).


    *EGT probe #7 was in-operable
     

    Attached Files:

    • 1b.jpg
      1b.jpg
      File size:
      30.8 KB
      Views:
      29
    • 2b.jpg
      2b.jpg
      File size:
      73.4 KB
      Views:
      36
    • 3b.jpg
      3b.jpg
      File size:
      73.4 KB
      Views:
      25
    • 4b.jpg
      4b.jpg
      File size:
      63.2 KB
      Views:
      22
    • 5b.jpg
      5b.jpg
      File size:
      66.6 KB
      Views:
      25
    Last edited: May 12, 2008
  20. ahhh65riv

    ahhh65riv Well-Known Member

    A very close second place behind the Eelco is the Edelbrock B262. The long regarded reigning champion is just a couple points shy of 1st place. As it was expected it performed very much like the Eelco... or vise versa. Just how far? Perhaps enough to win/not win a race?

    Average difference:
    Torque: 3.6 Ft-Lbs (437.5 - 441.1)
    HP: 2.7 Ft-Lbs (337.4-334.7)

    There are certainly a lot of variables that come into play that could have changed the results, but on this day, on this dyno, on this engine, these were the numbers. and the number don't lie!

    Please reply and let me know your comments and/or questions!

    Erik Schmidt
     

    Attached Files:

    • 1c.jpg
      1c.jpg
      File size:
      31.3 KB
      Views:
      28
    • 2c.jpg
      2c.jpg
      File size:
      71.5 KB
      Views:
      35
    • 3c.jpg
      3c.jpg
      File size:
      72.6 KB
      Views:
      25
    • 4c.jpg
      4c.jpg
      File size:
      63 KB
      Views:
      22
    • 5c.jpg
      5c.jpg
      File size:
      65.4 KB
      Views:
      20

Share This Page