a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Topic: a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting (Read 5194 times) previous topic - next topic

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

March 21, 2012, 03:34:21 PM

So after reading these articles Im very skeptical of everything I thought I knew about porting... to the point that I have an idea to redesign a flowbench to actually mimic a cylinder, instead of vacuum cleaner.

Start with article 18, or 17 so you have a grasp on his way of thinking of engine phases. He definitely lacks enough volume of proof to make this a complete game changer but I think he has something here, and its not at all new.
http://mototuneusa.com/thanx.htm

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #1 – March 22, 2012, 12:37:05 AM

can someone summarize for me.. my ADD just kicked in and i left the page after 'in january of 1992..' LOL

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #2 – March 22, 2012, 01:51:36 AM

Interesting. Very interesting. I wonder how much of this transfers to a fuel injected car engine as opposed to a small motorcycle engine. I'd love to see some dyno results for part 19, where he puts grooves in the intake ports.

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #3 – March 22, 2012, 02:29:40 AM

whoa.. no no no no no.. NOOOOOO.. grooving is BAD.. it's been tested by micro engine builders (on CBR600RR, ZX636, GSXR600 and R6 motors) and it made performance WORST than stock.. it was also tested by a builder that goes by the name of maveric on 2 strokes.. i had 2 of those experimental cylinders and they were GARBAGE.. it was also tested on a couple YZ450F's with piss-poor results.. i just skimmed through some of article 19 and i'm horrified by what i read..

ask anyone here who has run their heads stock, then removed them for portwork.. they will all agree, performance was increased.. making ports smaller? really? way to kill the flow rate.. motorcycle manufactures use large ports and restrict them by using smaller TB's/carbs and headers.. removing the stock, junk header for a performance unit is a VAST improvement.. i had a 98 honda F3 on the only 600cc micro i ever ran.. it was mildly built with a stock cam trick (a factory intake cam in place of the exhaust cam), an S&S 4-2-1 header/ler combo, 36mm keihin flatslides (over the factory 33's), some sort of aftermarket ignition (dyna2000 i think?) and massive portwork.. the motor dyno'd 149 @11500 (rev limiter set to 12500).. guess what it dyno'd with a stock head? 122 @10200.. this guy is a crackpot, hands down.. i dislike streetbikes, but i'm willing to bet i could build 1 that smokes his, if he's really performing the work he posted on his site..

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #4 – March 22, 2012, 05:01:12 AM

well the latest details of his work end around 2007, at which point we've already discovered every trick we have in the book to this date. And shadow, you totally fell into the trap he mentions over and over and over. Like i said, he lacks the extensive proof to make me a believer, but I see very good physics in his theory. especially when he's comparing the gsxr 1000 to the fzr400. Also note he doenst think this will work as well on a 2v as it does on a 4v.

Break it down like this too, how many people have you ever known that had port work done, and NO OTHER MODS at the same time? its pretty rare. And so often in port work, you're removing obvious restrictions along with hogging out the port so most likely you're gonna come out positive anyway. The dynamic events happening during a cycle do hurt us in many ways as we increase flow. Plus im 100% convinced he's right about the complete failure of a flow bench to mark the performance of a port as the motion of a cylinder not only varies in suction but also in direction while the port is still open.
Is he right? maybe, is he wrong? maybe. He'res where it gets me tho, look of the shape he puts into that port... isnt it a lil familiar, havent you read "dont take material off the bottom wall!" havent you seen the extreme effects that venturi tuning can have on performance? Or maybe he's just a crackpot and no other person on this forum should bother reading the articles.

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #5 – March 22, 2012, 01:08:09 PM

i vote crackpot lol what trap? i can't read the whole article, my mind won't allow me to sit still that long.. as for 'only portwork,' it's rare occurrence.. i've only done it twice for 1 customer (2 different cars), without messing with anything else (except VGS lol)

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #6 – March 22, 2012, 06:59:26 PM

Easy fix. Get boost and port till ya can't port no more. He has an interesting point, but so did the guy who invented the flowbe.

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #7 – March 22, 2012, 07:18:35 PM

It was an interesting read, I personally have no idea if he knows what he is talking about though.

Thanks for sharing! :D

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #8 – March 22, 2012, 10:10:01 PM

I wonder what he would do to my 5 valve headed 998 Yamaha?

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #9 – March 22, 2012, 10:30:19 PM

close the ports completely by the logic i get out of it LOL

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #10 – March 22, 2012, 11:42:47 PM

No just to 65% of your valve.

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #11 – March 23, 2012, 07:44:48 AM

LOL i'm going to attempt to read it all today.. then i can really pick it apart :p

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #12 – March 23, 2012, 09:44:21 AM

Quote from: atroxr7;384790

The dynamic events happening during a cycle do hurt us in many ways as we increase flow. Plus im 100% convinced he's right about the complete failure of a flow bench to mark the performance of a port as the motion of a cylinder not only varies in suction but also in direction while the port is still open.

isnt it a lil familiar, havent you read "dont take material off the bottom wall!" havent you seen the extreme effects that venturi tuning can have on performance? Or maybe he's just a crackpot and no other person on this forum should bother reading the articles.

Unless you FULLY understand how a process works, you'll never fully optimize it by throwing broad general theory at it and playing trial and error. I've wondered this as well about "flow testing". How is a flow bench set up? What moves the air through it? A "bladed" fan like you would expect to see in front of a car radiator or in your house? Compressed air from a tank? A squirrel-cage fan? As you stated, air flow out of an engine is PULSED. Could is be "better flow is better flow is better flow"? Sure. Could it not be? Sure. You won't know until you put your input parameters into the "black box" and see what comes out. That's testing. The scientific method. :)

At some point I want to learn how and port things on my own. Kind of along the lines of my freakish exact-factory-appearance with non-factory performance fetish

But I need to read through that article, I'm very curious to see what he has to say as well. It is a busy-looking page, probably keeps you interested with the jumping around and colors and everything lol.

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #13 – March 23, 2012, 11:56:32 AM

Quote from: ZondaC12;384969

At some point I want to learn how and port things on my own. Kind of along the lines of my freakish exact-factory-appearance with non-factory performance fetish

google 'how to port cylinder heads' and you'll find some step by step how-to pages.. it won't make you a pro, but it'll get your foot in the door

a VERY DIFFERENT approach to porting

Reply #14 – March 23, 2012, 12:06:07 PM

Biggest thing is slowly accumulating some junk/cheap heads which I am doing from time to time so I can practice practice practice and if I ruin 'em...oh well :hick: