Runner Volumes - Page 2

Greg Hill · 01-06-2009, 11:00 AM

Jeff I also talked to Bruce more than once last year about this. I think this was a mean spirited and punitive rule change that didn't come from Bruce but farther up the food change. I really think they don't care.

Greg

Ven302 · 01-07-2009, 08:34 AM

Consider this,
Maybe NHRA is trying to make the cylinder head issue so oblique that it will facilitate the introduction of "spec" heads from the aftermarket. If an aftermarket supplier can supply 80-90% of the class and provide accurate port dimensions, cc min and max, cross section, templates all of a sudden it makes sense.Will there ever be a 230 6 cyl head? Probably not, but the amount of those types of combinations are no where near the amount of sbc/bbc/ford/dodge V8s in stock(nitro joe would know). Is this "pure" as the old "stock" eliminator, probably not. If someone can buy some performer rpm (or whatever is approved) heads and build a stocker, it would appeal to a broader group (mostly those that do not see the merit of all of the hard work). I am not trying to p anyone off, ( I deeply respect what stocker engine builders can do) but when someone asks me if they can build a stocker and you explain what some of the stuff really costs they get intimidated. I am not trying to discount the efforts of those of you who are really good at what you do, but if NHRA will not consider the knowledge of Woodro, FJ, and any of the stocker "head guys" (even their own "pouring" records) what could possibly be next? They (NHRA) obviously have a different agenda then what meets the eye.

Dick Butler · 01-07-2009, 09:02 AM

New 207 carbs, New Aluminum heads for big blocks, New cranks, new rods new pistons to spec sheet. New Blocks for strength. We are there now we just need to find a company who wants the work. World might be the one to do it. Why buy old rusty castings and spend the work to be off on CCs and worse create all this foolishness of tech currently sees. Make some good ones with todays technology and move forward. Cut the crap and cost at the same time.
I hate to say it but I think making one casting for small block low pro and one for high compression for ALL stock and SS would be the smart way to create the large number needed to justify making them. Simplify tech and stop the frustration in tear down.
One casting of any family of motors the same thing. Just think it would also help stop the tech book finding an obscure combo wrongly factored and ignored by tech for 5 years too..
Thanks for listening... Dick

Mike Pearson · 01-06-2009, 11:10 AM

Hey Daran. Jay Slane had similar results with a set of 441 heads that he is working on. All of the small block heads that I have CC'd before porting have come up about 6 CC's smaller than the SS limit. I am not sure how that compares with big block or other brands. NHRA will probably just allow some mild porting and epoxy in the intake and welded exhaust like SS. They couldnt control the head rule in super stock so they changed the rules. They will probably do the same for stock. Then a good set of heads will cost 7500.00 but you wont have to worry about passing teardown. As long as the valve size is correct and the CC's are right you will pass.

Woodro Josey · 01-06-2009, 11:14 AM

Daran, FYI, there are 2 different castings in the 441's one type is bigger on intake runners than the other!

Lyn Smith · 01-06-2009, 11:38 AM

Why dont they just add 2 or 3 percent to all the SS volumes,and use that for both the STK and SS numbers? They should only have one list.Will be alot less confusing when you race a stocker in SS.

art leong · 01-07-2009, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bart Kilraine

We pay a horsepower penalty for those heads,I'd rather run the steel heads.The runner volumes are bigger in the after market heads......that's why the horsepower difference! All you people finding all these heads with way bigger volumes listed, since the '70's are mostly full of ****.

Bart I used to feel this way to, but not as brazen. But I was not up to snuff on the valve changes and the bottom angle (bowl porting) vavle jobs. Now allowed by nhra. It is totally possible that a stock (unmassaged) head can go over the cc's. If I had a (really) legal head and it was kicked out because of what nhra allowed me to do I would be more than upset.
On the other hand the massaging of the head stuff started back in the 70's and has been a snowball rolling downhill ever since.

01-06-2009, 11:00 AM	#1
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 Jeff I also talked to Bruce more than once last year about this. I think this was a mean spirited and punitive rule change that didn't come from Bruce but farther up the food change. I really think they don't care. Greg

01-07-2009, 08:34 AM	#2
Ven302 Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Stoney Creek Posts: 262 Likes: 41 Liked 34 Times in 7 Posts	Re: Runner Volumes Consider this, Maybe NHRA is trying to make the cylinder head issue so oblique that it will facilitate the introduction of "spec" heads from the aftermarket. If an aftermarket supplier can supply 80-90% of the class and provide accurate port dimensions, cc min and max, cross section, templates all of a sudden it makes sense.Will there ever be a 230 6 cyl head? Probably not, but the amount of those types of combinations are no where near the amount of sbc/bbc/ford/dodge V8s in stock(nitro joe would know). Is this "pure" as the old "stock" eliminator, probably not. If someone can buy some performer rpm (or whatever is approved) heads and build a stocker, it would appeal to a broader group (mostly those that do not see the merit of all of the hard work). I am not trying to p anyone off, ( I deeply respect what stocker engine builders can do) but when someone asks me if they can build a stocker and you explain what some of the stuff really costs they get intimidated. I am not trying to discount the efforts of those of you who are really good at what you do, but if NHRA will not consider the knowledge of Woodro, FJ, and any of the stocker "head guys" (even their own "pouring" records) what could possibly be next? They (NHRA) obviously have a different agenda then what meets the eye.

01-07-2009, 09:02 AM	#3
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 New 207 carbs, New Aluminum heads for big blocks, New cranks, new rods new pistons to spec sheet. New Blocks for strength. We are there now we just need to find a company who wants the work. World might be the one to do it. Why buy old rusty castings and spend the work to be off on CCs and worse create all this foolishness of tech currently sees. Make some good ones with todays technology and move forward. Cut the crap and cost at the same time. I hate to say it but I think making one casting for small block low pro and one for high compression for ALL stock and SS would be the smart way to create the large number needed to justify making them. Simplify tech and stop the frustration in tear down. One casting of any family of motors the same thing. Just think it would also help stop the tech book finding an obscure combo wrongly factored and ignored by tech for 5 years too.. Thanks for listening... Dick

01-06-2009, 11:10 AM	#4
Mike Pearson VIP Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,437 Likes: 611 Liked 1,904 Times in 571 Posts	Re: Runner Volumes Hey Daran. Jay Slane had similar results with a set of 441 heads that he is working on. All of the small block heads that I have CC'd before porting have come up about 6 CC's smaller than the SS limit. I am not sure how that compares with big block or other brands. NHRA will probably just allow some mild porting and epoxy in the intake and welded exhaust like SS. They couldnt control the head rule in super stock so they changed the rules. They will probably do the same for stock. Then a good set of heads will cost 7500.00 but you wont have to worry about passing teardown. As long as the valve size is correct and the CC's are right you will pass. __________________ Mike Pearson 2485 SS

01-06-2009, 11:14 AM	#5
Woodro Josey Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 805 Likes: 0 Liked 3 Times in 1 Post	Re: Runner Volumes Daran, FYI, there are 2 different castings in the 441's one type is bigger on intake runners than the other! __________________ Woodro Josey 2002 STK

01-06-2009, 11:38 AM	#6
Lyn Smith VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Pontiac,il. Posts: 1,194 Likes: 273 Liked 950 Times in 189 Posts	Re: Runner Volumes Why dont they just add 2 or 3 percent to all the SS volumes,and use that for both the STK and SS numbers? They should only have one list.Will be alot less confusing when you race a stocker in SS.