Runner Volumes

Woodro Josey · 01-05-2009, 11:14 AM

I guess by now. all you guys have heard that NHRA is going to pour the heads and if your runners come up bigger than SuperStock numbers, you will be DQ'd. So all you guys that want to jump in here saying my heads have not been tricked up and will pass, better think twice. There are some heads that by just changing the valves will put them over SuperStock specs. All of you should pour your heads or at least get someone to do it for you! Its amazing how one year they come up and say they cant use SuperStock numbers and 3 years later they can now use them!

Tony Curcio · 01-05-2009, 06:33 PM

Absolutely true.

I just poured a set of 441 and 041 sbc heads that were junk yard pull offs from years ago, never been race prepped in any fashion.

The exhaust ports on both sets were within 1 CC of the superstock spec. A change to aftermarket valves will put them over the limit. A valve job as per the 2009 rules will also create an issue.

Greg Hill · 01-05-2009, 07:23 PM

This is one of the things that broke the camel's back as far as I'm concerned with the SRAC. Woodro has probably done as many stocker heads as anyone in the country over the years and given the changes in the rules; i.e. the valve rule change and the valve job rule change, the SRAC thought there should be runner volumes but they should reflect what the rule changes could mean. We talked to a lot of people to get input including some of the most prominent engine builders and head guys in the country and also some long time tech people from NHRA. The consensus was that the two rule changes could mean as much as 5 cc's on the intake and 3 cc's on the exhaust. Also if you had heads that were available with two different valve sizes and the heads had originally been poured with the small valves and you had an engine combination with the large valves it would help you with that change.

Our committee voted on this rule unanimously. This new rule change from NHRA is a punitive change that says directly we do not value your input and we are going to do whatever we want. In teardowns over the first part of last year on stock eliminator heads, 59 heads were poured and 48 of them were found to bigger that the super stock volumes. Of that number only three racers were disqualified. If you think your heads are okay you might be surprised. One set of heads that was poured was 17 cc's larger on the intake runner and was passed. If any of you are thinking about going to National events this year I suggest you take your heads off and pour them to see where you are.

Greg

X-TECH MAN · 01-05-2009, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GP Hill

One set of heads that was poured was 17 cc's larger on the intake runner and was passed.

Greg

HOLY CRAP......now I wonder what made that set larger in volume????? AND they passed !!!! LOL

stealy perf mach · 01-05-2009, 11:27 PM

greg
i went to the pri show, for the most part, to talk to bruce about this subject, myself and brian tilburg talked to bruce in detail about using the superstock specs which we both felt was a really bad idea for the majority of the racers!! i have cc'ed alot of heads and have seen a large range of numbers on the same head, {example } a 462 casting, one intake port was four cc's bigger than the port next to it if you ask gm, ford ,chry, if they have port specs the answer is NO! there is to much core shift in the older heads.it's easy to set port volumes on superstock heads with the epoxy! with opening up the valve and valve job rule, alot of heads are going to be over because of undercut stems,steeper bowl cuts etc. alot of heads are going to have to be cut or replaced, boy did they really open a big can of worms.
people, you just need to call bruce and voice your opinion!! big is not always faster but the whole idea was not have to go through the trouble to pour the stockers runners. but hey what do i know i only build these engines for a living. its just going to raise the price of stocker heads which is already out of hand. .a easy fix is to just give a three to five cc over the superstock specs, how much simpler can that get, if the superstock guys whine than let them whine !!

Mike Fuller · 01-06-2009, 08:25 AM

Back when Jim Skelly was still a member of the NHRA we had lunch together in Reading Pa. This was about 1994. At that time a number of people had been DQ'd for port volumes in their stocker that exceed the maxium and swore that they had not done any thing illegal to them. Well Jim tells me that he decided to do some investigation and went junk yard cruising. As stated earlier in this thread, he found heads that were over the volume limits that were taken of junk yard cars. Soon after this,the published volumes went from Stock/Super Stock volumes to just Super Stock volumes. Doesn't anyone rember this? So to sum things up NHRA should know that there needs to be some work done to make this a workable rule. They took a lot of time to come up with the assembley wieghts and dimensions for piston and rod combo's, they just need to spend some time to resolve this issue.

Alan Roehrich · 01-06-2009, 10:14 AM

This is just another example of how NHRA is completely out of touch with the sportsman racer, especially the class racer. There are a few exceptions, but as a general rule, they have no idea, and I doubt they care.

Dick Butler · 01-06-2009, 10:33 AM

How will they continue to call it tech if the rules do not mean what is written? How can people be expected to be "attracted" to run classes if they SEE this going on and read it? Could this be a way to just discourage Tech as a method used in Sportsman racing? Great men in some positions, just ignored when they try to make it work also for Sportsman Class cars.

Daran Summerton · 01-06-2009, 10:34 AM

Just pocket ported the crap out of a set of 441's and with pro flow valves I am reading 154 on a 161 max! Not sure what the issue is? Guess I have bad castings LOL

Alan Roehrich · 01-06-2009, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daran Summerton

Just pocket ported the crap out of a set of 441's and with pro flow valves I am reading 154 on a 161 max! Not sure what the issue is? Guess I have bad castings LOL

I wish I had those before you ported them.

01-05-2009, 11:14 AM	#1
Woodro Josey Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 805 Likes: 0 Liked 3 Times in 1 Post	Runner Volumes I guess by now. all you guys have heard that NHRA is going to pour the heads and if your runners come up bigger than SuperStock numbers, you will be DQ'd. So all you guys that want to jump in here saying my heads have not been tricked up and will pass, better think twice. There are some heads that by just changing the valves will put them over SuperStock specs. All of you should pour your heads or at least get someone to do it for you! Its amazing how one year they come up and say they cant use SuperStock numbers and 3 years later they can now use them! __________________ Woodro Josey 2002 STK

01-05-2009, 06:33 PM	#2
Tony Curcio Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: West Chester, PA Posts: 271 Likes: 1 Liked 4 Times in 1 Post	Re: Runner Volumes Absolutely true. I just poured a set of 441 and 041 sbc heads that were junk yard pull offs from years ago, never been race prepped in any fashion. The exhaust ports on both sets were within 1 CC of the superstock spec. A change to aftermarket valves will put them over the limit. A valve job as per the 2009 rules will also create an issue. __________________ Tony Curcio 1860 STK

01-05-2009, 07:23 PM	#3
Greg Hill VIP Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Louisville , KY Posts: 1,995 Likes: 68 Liked 279 Times in 68 Posts	Re: Runner Volumes This is one of the things that broke the camel's back as far as I'm concerned with the SRAC. Woodro has probably done as many stocker heads as anyone in the country over the years and given the changes in the rules; i.e. the valve rule change and the valve job rule change, the SRAC thought there should be runner volumes but they should reflect what the rule changes could mean. We talked to a lot of people to get input including some of the most prominent engine builders and head guys in the country and also some long time tech people from NHRA. The consensus was that the two rule changes could mean as much as 5 cc's on the intake and 3 cc's on the exhaust. Also if you had heads that were available with two different valve sizes and the heads had originally been poured with the small valves and you had an engine combination with the large valves it would help you with that change. Our committee voted on this rule unanimously. This new rule change from NHRA is a punitive change that says directly we do not value your input and we are going to do whatever we want. In teardowns over the first part of last year on stock eliminator heads, 59 heads were poured and 48 of them were found to bigger that the super stock volumes. Of that number only three racers were disqualified. If you think your heads are okay you might be surprised. One set of heads that was poured was 17 cc's larger on the intake runner and was passed. If any of you are thinking about going to National events this year I suggest you take your heads off and pour them to see where you are. Greg

01-05-2009, 11:27 PM	#5
stealy perf mach Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: east moline il Posts: 7 Likes: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re: Runner Volumes greg i went to the pri show, for the most part, to talk to bruce about this subject, myself and brian tilburg talked to bruce in detail about using the superstock specs which we both felt was a really bad idea for the majority of the racers!! i have cc'ed alot of heads and have seen a large range of numbers on the same head, {example } a 462 casting, one intake port was four cc's bigger than the port next to it if you ask gm, ford ,chry, if they have port specs the answer is NO! there is to much core shift in the older heads.it's easy to set port volumes on superstock heads with the epoxy! with opening up the valve and valve job rule, alot of heads are going to be over because of undercut stems,steeper bowl cuts etc. alot of heads are going to have to be cut or replaced, boy did they really open a big can of worms. people, you just need to call bruce and voice your opinion!! big is not always faster but the whole idea was not have to go through the trouble to pour the stockers runners. but hey what do i know i only build these engines for a living. its just going to raise the price of stocker heads which is already out of hand. .a easy fix is to just give a three to five cc over the superstock specs, how much simpler can that get, if the superstock guys whine than let them whine !! __________________ jeff stealy

01-06-2009, 08:25 AM	#6
Mike Fuller Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 947 Likes: 543 Liked 192 Times in 76 Posts	Re: Runner Volumes Back when Jim Skelly was still a member of the NHRA we had lunch together in Reading Pa. This was about 1994. At that time a number of people had been DQ'd for port volumes in their stocker that exceed the maxium and swore that they had not done any thing illegal to them. Well Jim tells me that he decided to do some investigation and went junk yard cruising. As stated earlier in this thread, he found heads that were over the volume limits that were taken of junk yard cars. Soon after this,the published volumes went from Stock/Super Stock volumes to just Super Stock volumes. Doesn't anyone rember this? So to sum things up NHRA should know that there needs to be some work done to make this a workable rule. They took a lot of time to come up with the assembley wieghts and dimensions for piston and rod combo's, they just need to spend some time to resolve this issue. __________________ Mike Fuller 396 STK

01-06-2009, 10:14 AM	#7
Alan Roehrich Veteran Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Murfreesboro TN Posts: 5,098 Likes: 1,550 Liked 1,778 Times in 404 Posts	Re: Runner Volumes This is just another example of how NHRA is completely out of touch with the sportsman racer, especially the class racer. There are a few exceptions, but as a general rule, they have no idea, and I doubt they care. __________________ Alan Roehrich 212A G/S

01-06-2009, 10:33 AM	#8
Dick Butler VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Richmond Indiana Posts: 1,196 Likes: 5 Liked 32 Times in 19 Posts	Re: Runner Volumes How will they continue to call it tech if the rules do not mean what is written? How can people be expected to be "attracted" to run classes if they SEE this going on and read it? Could this be a way to just discourage Tech as a method used in Sportsman racing? Great men in some positions, just ignored when they try to make it work also for Sportsman Class cars.

01-06-2009, 10:34 AM	#9
Daran Summerton Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Las Vegas nv Posts: 601 Likes: 18 Liked 66 Times in 37 Posts	Re: Runner Volumes Just pocket ported the crap out of a set of 441's and with pro flow valves I am reading 154 on a 161 max! Not sure what the issue is? Guess I have bad castings LOL