From saltrat at pahrump.com  Thu Jun  2 18:11:02 2011
From: saltrat at pahrump.com (Skip Higginbotham)
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 17:11:02 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing Order
Message-ID: <D08DE429EA66473A9BAC28AB160B60AA@yourat5qgaac3z>

My new cam will change the firing order of my BBC to 18736542....this looks
good to me due to getting adjacent cylinders away from firing together.

What are the pros and cons?

Pros: Smoother running, few more Hp from not having 5 take the charge away
from 7.....?

Cons: ?

Now I'll have to put the same nozzles in all cylinders...........

Skip

From dahlgren536 at comcast.net  Thu Jun  2 18:18:56 2011
From: dahlgren536 at comcast.net (Dave Dahlgren)
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 20:18:56 -0400
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing Order
In-Reply-To: <D08DE429EA66473A9BAC28AB160B60AA@yourat5qgaac3z>
References: <D08DE429EA66473A9BAC28AB160B60AA@yourat5qgaac3z>
Message-ID: <3CEF2A414DE9465786E2783942A6920A@DaveSatellite>

Ok since when are not 4 and 2 together????? you fixed nothing only moved it. 
Every possible v8 90 degree crank has adjacent firing cylinders physically 
though sometime numbered to not make it apparent.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Skip Higginbotham" <saltrat at pahrump.com>
To: "Land Speed Team" <land-speed at autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 8:11 PM
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing Order


> My new cam will change the firing order of my BBC to 18736542....this 
> looks
> good to me due to getting adjacent cylinders away from firing together.
>
> What are the pros and cons?
>
> Pros: Smoother running, few more Hp from not having 5 take the charge away
> from 7.....?
>
> Cons: ?
>
> Now I'll have to put the same nozzles in all cylinders...........
>
> Skip

From joyseydevil at comcast.net  Thu Jun  2 23:28:50 2011
From: joyseydevil at comcast.net (John Burk)
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 01:28:50 -0400
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing Order .
Message-ID: <E27F0C219B5B429D929B7D3CB1C4334C@john>

Skip

The altered firing order cam would trade 5-7 interference for 4-2 
interference  wouldn't it ? Maybe it would reduce crankshaft harmonics by 
eliminating the normal 7,2 sequence crank twisting .

John



> My new cam will change the firing order of my BBC to 18736542....this 
> looks
> good to me due to getting adjacent cylinders away from firing together.
>
> What are the pros and cons?
>
> Pros: Smoother running, few more Hp from not having 5 take the charge away
> from 7.....?
>
> Cons: ?
>
> Now I'll have to put the same nozzles in all cylinders...........
>
> Skip
> _______________________________________________
> Land-speed at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe/Manage: 
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/land-speed/joyseydevil at comcast.net

From saltrat at pahrump.com  Fri Jun  3 08:44:09 2011
From: saltrat at pahrump.com (Skip Higginbotham)
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 07:44:09 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing Order .
References: <E27F0C219B5B429D929B7D3CB1C4334C@john>
Message-ID: <0B81831CCAE84B628205E41FB45BB75B@yourat5qgaac3z>

John,
You are probably on the right track. I would think that 5 and 7 firing 
together and being far away from the cam drive gear would impart more of a 
twist to the crank than would 4 and 2. If this is the case, then the rear 
cylinders could be closer to the correct valve timing with the new firing 
order. Dyno tests say it gives a little more power....more is better??!! and 
runs smoother....smoother would imply less interference from harmful 
harmonics. Small improvements sometimes result from subjective 
analysis.......I needed to chage cams anyway......
Skip

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Burk" <joyseydevil at comcast.net>
To: "LandSpeed List" <Land-speed at autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 22:28
Subject: Re: [Land-speed] BBC Firing Order .


> Skip
>
> The altered firing order cam would trade 5-7 interference for 4-2 
> interference  wouldn't it ? Maybe it would reduce crankshaft harmonics by 
> eliminating the normal 7,2 sequence crank twisting .
>
> John
>
>
>
>> My new cam will change the firing order of my BBC to 18736542....this 
>> looks
>> good to me due to getting adjacent cylinders away from firing together.
>>
>> What are the pros and cons?
>>
>> Pros: Smoother running, few more Hp from not having 5 take the charge 
>> away
>> from 7.....?
>>
>> Cons: ?
>>
>> Now I'll have to put the same nozzles in all cylinders...........
>>
>> Skip
>> _______________________________________________
>> Land-speed at autox.team.net
>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>> Unsubscribe/Manage: 
>> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/land-speed/joyseydevil at comcast.net
> _______________________________________________
> Land-speed at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe/Manage: 
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/land-speed/saltrat at pahrump.com

From 23.weldon at comcast.net  Fri Jun  3 09:28:40 2011
From: 23.weldon at comcast.net (23weldon)
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 08:28:40 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing Order .
References: <E27F0C219B5B429D929B7D3CB1C4334C@john>
	<0B81831CCAE84B628205E41FB45BB75B@yourat5qgaac3z>
Message-ID: <00CE2D891EF94F42AA2E86F7A1F9A6D4@edc2750afa5a84>

Skip - Here's another way to look at this, I suppose an engineer's 
viewpoint.  Each cylinder is still making about the same amount of 
mechanical power.  But if it isn't getting to the flywheel then it is 
bouncing around inside the mechanism trying to break things. It may not seem 
like much; but think about the amount of work 5 or 10 horsepower can do in 
your shop cutting or hammering metal.
Ed Weldon

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Skip Higginbotham" <saltrat at pahrump.com>
To: "John Burk" <joyseydevil at comcast.net>; "LandSpeed List" 
<Land-speed at autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Land-speed] BBC Firing Order .


> John,
......... Dyno tests say it gives a little more power....more is better??!! 
and
> runs smoother....smoother would imply less interference from harmful 
> harmonics. Small improvements sometimes result from subjective 
> analysis.......I needed to chage cams anyway......
> Skip

From saltfever at comcast.net  Fri Jun  3 14:03:31 2011
From: saltfever at comcast.net (Kirkwood)
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:03:31 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing order
Message-ID: <89ED777140C440FAA038E6C00E73A545@dim8100>

Well, if you think of the crank as a long torsion bar with a load at one
end, what have you accomplished? As John points out, the crank does twist.
So with a 5-7 you apply a twisting force close to the reactive load. With
the 4-2 you have moved the twisting force farther away from the load. The
longer the torsion bar, the less stiffness. You are imparting more twist,
not less twist, in a 4-2 set-up. But maybe that is the purpose.  Skip, if
you have individual port injection; how can there be interference from
either firing order?

 

I have been reading about this controversy ever since marketing created the
idea to sell more cams. Regardless of the magazine article, I have never
seen an honest, factual engineering study with good data.

 

The altered firing order cam would trade 5-7 interference for 4-2 

interference  wouldn't it ? Maybe it would reduce crankshaft harmonics by 

eliminating the normal 7,2 sequence crank twisting .   -John

From dahlgren536 at comcast.net  Fri Jun  3 14:09:31 2011
From: dahlgren536 at comcast.net (Dave Dahlgren)
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 16:09:31 -0400
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing order
In-Reply-To: <89ED777140C440FAA038E6C00E73A545@dim8100>
References: <89ED777140C440FAA038E6C00E73A545@dim8100>
Message-ID: <B51A710197FD482BA3C967795618871E@DaveSatellite>

Marketing 101 introduce a new and improved verion at regular intervals to 
obsolete exisiting parts.
Dave
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kirkwood" <saltfever at comcast.net>
To: <land-speed at autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 4:03 PM
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing order
>
> I have been reading about this controversy ever since marketing created 
> the
> idea to sell more cams. Regardless of the magazine article, I have never
> seen an honest, factual engineering study with good data.

From saltrat at pahrump.com  Fri Jun  3 14:31:39 2011
From: saltrat at pahrump.com (Skip Higginbotham)
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 13:31:39 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing order
References: <89ED777140C440FAA038E6C00E73A545@dim8100>
Message-ID: <6503AF3EB98C47B2AEF3DA536218AB67@yourat5qgaac3z>

I think of the crank as a long torsion bar as you suggest but with a 
difference, the more the crank twists, end to end, the farther the cam gets 
out of position and the farther the valve timing is off. So if the major 
part of the torsioning force is closer to the cam drive the timing won't be 
as far off.
The port nozzle in 7 is smaller than in 5 (and the rest) due to plennum air 
taken away from 7 by 5 and this probably has more to do with it than 
anything else. This can be helped by a little longer intake valve opening on 
7.
Skip

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kirkwood" <saltfever at comcast.net>
To: <land-speed at autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 13:03
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing order


> Well, if you think of the crank as a long torsion bar with a load at one
> end, what have you accomplished? As John points out, the crank does twist.
> So with a 5-7 you apply a twisting force close to the reactive load. With
> the 4-2 you have moved the twisting force farther away from the load. The
> longer the torsion bar, the less stiffness. You are imparting more twist,
> not less twist, in a 4-2 set-up. But maybe that is the purpose.  Skip, if
> you have individual port injection; how can there be interference from
> either firing order?
>
>
>
> I have been reading about this controversy ever since marketing created 
> the
> idea to sell more cams. Regardless of the magazine article, I have never
> seen an honest, factual engineering study with good data.
>
>
>
> The altered firing order cam would trade 5-7 interference for 4-2
>
> interference  wouldn't it ? Maybe it would reduce crankshaft harmonics by
>
> eliminating the normal 7,2 sequence crank twisting .   -John
> _______________________________________________
> Land-speed at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe/Manage: 
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/land-speed/saltrat at pahrump.com

From dahlgren536 at comcast.net  Fri Jun  3 14:33:31 2011
From: dahlgren536 at comcast.net (Dave Dahlgren)
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 16:33:31 -0400
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing order
In-Reply-To: <6503AF3EB98C47B2AEF3DA536218AB67@yourat5qgaac3z>
References: <89ED777140C440FAA038E6C00E73A545@dim8100>
	<6503AF3EB98C47B2AEF3DA536218AB67@yourat5qgaac3z>
Message-ID: <2C738AF5C2F4483DA7D10BEF37119375@DaveSatellite>

Or a better designed manifold....
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Skip Higginbotham" <saltrat at pahrump.com>
To: "Kirkwood" <saltfever at comcast.net>; <land-speed at autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Land-speed] BBC Firing order


>I think of the crank as a long torsion bar as you suggest but with a 
>difference, the more the crank twists, end to end, the farther the cam gets 
>out of position and the farther the valve timing is off. So if the major 
>part of the torsioning force is closer to the cam drive the timing won't be 
>as far off.
> The port nozzle in 7 is smaller than in 5 (and the rest) due to plennum 
> air taken away from 7 by 5 and this probably has more to do with it than 
> anything else. This can be helped by a little longer intake valve opening 
> on 7.
> Skip

From saltrat at pahrump.com  Fri Jun  3 16:14:00 2011
From: saltrat at pahrump.com (Skip Higginbotham)
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 15:14:00 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] BBC Firing order
References: <89ED777140C440FAA038E6C00E73A545@dim8100>
	<6503AF3EB98C47B2AEF3DA536218AB67@yourat5qgaac3z>
	<2C738AF5C2F4483DA7D10BEF37119375@DaveSatellite>
Message-ID: <CF2FB53E9CF7418B876CD110C1781124@yourat5qgaac3z>

Yep.....something is sure causing it.
Skip
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Dahlgren" <dahlgren536 at comcast.net>
To: "Skip Higginbotham" <saltrat at pahrump.com>; "Kirkwood" 
<saltfever at comcast.net>; <land-speed at autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 13:33
Subject: Re: [Land-speed] BBC Firing order


> Or a better designed manifold....
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Skip Higginbotham" <saltrat at pahrump.com>
> To: "Kirkwood" <saltfever at comcast.net>; <land-speed at autox.team.net>
> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 4:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [Land-speed] BBC Firing order
>
>
>>I think of the crank as a long torsion bar as you suggest but with a 
>>difference, the more the crank twists, end to end, the farther the cam 
>>gets out of position and the farther the valve timing is off. So if the 
>>major part of the torsioning force is closer to the cam drive the timing 
>>won't be as far off.
>> The port nozzle in 7 is smaller than in 5 (and the rest) due to plennum 
>> air taken away from 7 by 5 and this probably has more to do with it than 
>> anything else. This can be helped by a little longer intake valve opening 
>> on 7.
>> Skip

From drmayf at mayfco.com  Sun Jun  5 09:48:39 2011
From: drmayf at mayfco.com (Larry Mayfield)
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 08:48:39 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
Message-ID: <4DEBA557.6010700@mayfco.com>

Ok, those of you who consider me a crank can hit delete now, lol....

I am making or revising an old manifold for use on the Sunbeam. I notice 
that the runners are pretty dog gone rough and I want to do port 
matching and polishing.  My questions have to do with the smoothness of 
the air flow in the runners.  This is an EFI manifold so it is what I 
would call dry. No fuel in the manifold. So do I want a really smooth 
runner wall or rough? If smooth just how smooth? Should I have it 
extrude honed for smoothness and removal of any small turbulence 
generators? If really smooth would coating the runner walls with glyptol 
be a good thing? That stuff drys to a hard finish and is pretty slippery 
and dang near impervious to oils and anything else.

The manifold will be a short runner box with a plenum about 2/3 size of 
the engine displacement (an old rule of thumb I once heard and maybe be 
invalid) for use with my HP72 turbo(s).

Thoughts, comments, ideas? I'll listen to them all....

Just going to try and increase the Sunbeams speed over the old first 
Sunbeam top speed.  Class record speeds are way beyond my capabilities 
and pockets, lol...

-- 
______________________________
drmayf
Worlds Fastest Sunbeam, period.
204.913 mph flying mile
210.779 mph exit speed

From dahlgren536 at comcast.net  Sun Jun  5 10:24:57 2011
From: dahlgren536 at comcast.net (Dave Dahlgren)
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 12:24:57 -0400
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
In-Reply-To: <4DEBA557.6010700@mayfco.com>
References: <4DEBA557.6010700@mayfco.com>
Message-ID: <C29DB8EBC4C5461B9659BA509FDE5ED6@DaveSatellite>

36 to no finer than 60 grit is just fine.
You will be hard pressed to build a 200 cu in plenum...
10 X 5 X 4 =200 and will not reach the end runners very well.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Larry Mayfield" <drmayf at mayfco.com>
To: <land-speed at autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 11:48 AM
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)


> Ok, those of you who consider me a crank can hit delete now, lol....
> 
> I am making or revising an old manifold for use on the Sunbeam. I notice 
> that the runners are pretty dog gone rough and I want to do port 
> matching and polishing.  My questions have to do with the smoothness of 
> the air flow in the runners.  This is an EFI manifold so it is what I 
> would call dry. No fuel in the manifold. So do I want a really smooth 
> runner wall or rough? If smooth just how smooth? Should I have it 
> extrude honed for smoothness and removal of any small turbulence 
> generators? If really smooth would coating the runner walls with glyptol 
> be a good thing? That stuff drys to a hard finish and is pretty slippery 
> and dang near impervious to oils and anything else.
> 
> The manifold will be a short runner box with a plenum about 2/3 size of 
> the engine displacement (an old rule of thumb I once heard and maybe be 
> invalid) for use with my HP72 turbo(s).
> 
> Thoughts, comments, ideas? I'll listen to them all....
> 
> Just going to try and increase the Sunbeams speed over the old first 
> Sunbeam top speed.  Class record speeds are way beyond my capabilities 
> and pockets, lol...
> 
> -- 

From drmayf at mayfco.com  Sun Jun  5 10:55:54 2011
From: drmayf at mayfco.com (Larry Mayfield)
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 09:55:54 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
In-Reply-To: <C29DB8EBC4C5461B9659BA509FDE5ED6@DaveSatellite>
References: <4DEBA557.6010700@mayfco.com>
	<C29DB8EBC4C5461B9659BA509FDE5ED6@DaveSatellite>
Message-ID: <4DEBB51A.2030009@mayfco.com>

Plenum is to be made from 4 in sq tube, 1/8 wall for a 3.75 sq inside 
dim. and about 14 inches long. That covers all the runners and provides 
about 196 cubic inches. Plus the TB mount on the side will hang out a 
couple of inches for a few more cubic inches. And the motor will have a 
new smaller displacement. Will come pretty close to 2/3 displacement 
size. Important? I don't know. Wont be the first thing I have tried that 
didn't pan out, lol.

Curious as to the technical aspect of why some roughness or smoothness 
is needed. Seems to me that the smoother the walls the smoother the flow 
because of boundary layer thniness, ie velocity profile is improved.  
Again, I have no real insight to this though.

______________________________
drmayf
Worlds Fastest Sunbeam, period.
204.913 mph flying mile
210.779 mph exit speed


On 6/5/2011 9:24 AM, Dave Dahlgren wrote:
> 36 to no finer than 60 grit is just fine.
> You will be hard pressed to build a 200 cu in plenum...
> 10 X 5 X 4 =200 and will not reach the end runners very well.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Mayfield" <drmayf at mayfco.com>
> To: <land-speed at autox.team.net>
> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 11:48 AM
> Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
>
>
>> Ok, those of you who consider me a crank can hit delete now, lol....
>>
>> I am making or revising an old manifold for use on the Sunbeam. I 
>> notice that the runners are pretty dog gone rough and I want to do 
>> port matching and polishing.  My questions have to do with the 
>> smoothness of the air flow in the runners.  This is an EFI manifold 
>> so it is what I would call dry. No fuel in the manifold. So do I want 
>> a really smooth runner wall or rough? If smooth just how smooth? 
>> Should I have it extrude honed for smoothness and removal of any 
>> small turbulence generators? If really smooth would coating the 
>> runner walls with glyptol be a good thing? That stuff drys to a hard 
>> finish and is pretty slippery and dang near impervious to oils and 
>> anything else.
>>
>> The manifold will be a short runner box with a plenum about 2/3 size 
>> of the engine displacement (an old rule of thumb I once heard and 
>> maybe be invalid) for use with my HP72 turbo(s).
>>
>> Thoughts, comments, ideas? I'll listen to them all....
>>
>> Just going to try and increase the Sunbeams speed over the old first 
>> Sunbeam top speed.  Class record speeds are way beyond my 
>> capabilities and pockets, lol...
>>
>> -- 

From dahlgren536 at comcast.net  Sun Jun  5 11:02:52 2011
From: dahlgren536 at comcast.net (Dave Dahlgren)
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 13:02:52 -0400
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
In-Reply-To: <339172.56122.qm@web113810.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <4DEBA557.6010700@mayfco.com>
	<C29DB8EBC4C5461B9659BA509FDE5ED6@DaveSatellite>
	<339172.56122.qm@web113810.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1647006B92F4484C91984268499A5DB6@DaveSatellite>

You are absolutely right removing metal to make it pretty that is already
missing material only makes it worse..
Dave
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: dan warner
  To: Dave Dahlgren ; drmayf at mayfco.com ; land-speed at autox.team.net
  Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:38 PM
  Subject: Re: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)


  I had the opportunity to look at a set of stock high performance heads that
had just come off of a CNC porting machine on Friday. I was interested that
the port runners were not modified the total length. The porting machine had
hit the high spots only, the runners were still 'as cast' in some spots and
machined in others.

  Wonderful things are happening,
  DW

From dahlgren536 at comcast.net  Sun Jun  5 11:09:19 2011
From: dahlgren536 at comcast.net (Dave Dahlgren)
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 13:09:19 -0400
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
In-Reply-To: <4DEBB51A.2030009@mayfco.com>
References: <4DEBA557.6010700@mayfco.com>
	<C29DB8EBC4C5461B9659BA509FDE5ED6@DaveSatellite>
	<4DEBB51A.2030009@mayfco.com>
Message-ID: <C6EBF9E73D5747D59B9B6EB9046FB231@DaveSatellite>

you need 2/3 the port area in every directon from the port opening seens 
hard to thionk in will fit with those dimensions but might. Surface finish 
through empirical testing for 35 years..
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Larry Mayfield" <drmayf at mayfco.com>
To: "Dave Dahlgren" <dahlgren536 at comcast.net>
Cc: <land-speed at autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)


> Plenum is to be made from 4 in sq tube, 1/8 wall for a 3.75 sq inside dim. 
> and about 14 inches long. That covers all the runners and provides about 
> 196 cubic inches. Plus the TB mount on the side will hang out a couple of 
> inches for a few more cubic inches. And the motor will have a new smaller 
> displacement. Will come pretty close to 2/3 displacement size. Important? 
> I don't know. Wont be the first thing I have tried that didn't pan out, 
> lol.
>
> Curious as to the technical aspect of why some roughness or smoothness is 
> needed. Seems to me that the smoother the walls the smoother the flow 
> because of boundary layer thniness, ie velocity profile is improved. 
> Again, I have no real insight to this though.
>
> ______________________________
> drmayf
> Worlds Fastest Sunbeam, period.
> 204.913 mph flying mile
> 210.779 mph exit speed
>
>
> On 6/5/2011 9:24 AM, Dave Dahlgren wrote:
>> 36 to no finer than 60 grit is just fine.
>> You will be hard pressed to build a 200 cu in plenum...
>> 10 X 5 X 4 =200 and will not reach the end runners very well.
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Mayfield" <drmayf at mayfco.com>
>> To: <land-speed at autox.team.net>
>> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 11:48 AM
>> Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
>>
>>
>>> Ok, those of you who consider me a crank can hit delete now, lol....
>>>
>>> I am making or revising an old manifold for use on the Sunbeam. I notice 
>>> that the runners are pretty dog gone rough and I want to do port 
>>> matching and polishing.  My questions have to do with the smoothness of 
>>> the air flow in the runners.  This is an EFI manifold so it is what I 
>>> would call dry. No fuel in the manifold. So do I want a really smooth 
>>> runner wall or rough? If smooth just how smooth? Should I have it 
>>> extrude honed for smoothness and removal of any small turbulence 
>>> generators? If really smooth would coating the runner walls with glyptol 
>>> be a good thing? That stuff drys to a hard finish and is pretty slippery 
>>> and dang near impervious to oils and anything else.
>>>
>>> The manifold will be a short runner box with a plenum about 2/3 size of 
>>> the engine displacement (an old rule of thumb I once heard and maybe be 
>>> invalid) for use with my HP72 turbo(s).
>>>
>>> Thoughts, comments, ideas? I'll listen to them all....
>>>
>>> Just going to try and increase the Sunbeams speed over the old first 
>>> Sunbeam top speed.  Class record speeds are way beyond my capabilities 
>>> and pockets, lol...
>>>
>>> -- 

From saltfever at comcast.net  Sun Jun  5 18:19:36 2011
From: saltfever at comcast.net (Kirkwood)
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 17:19:36 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
Message-ID: <704E494525D34FE290AAA604579D3F3D@dim8100>

The founder of Go Power did this work while working on his PhD at Stanford
about 60 years ago. He was an avid go-carter and the emphasis in those days
was "port and polish" . . . with emphasis based on "polish". He debunked
that myth in his thesis.



You are correct in that here is a boundary layer. That layer also has
"static cling" LOL, or more technically "stiction", capillary attraction, or
call what you want, with the passage wall. The thickness of this dead-zone
layer is proportional to velocity. But, regardless of velocity, the flow
attached to the wall is essentially zero. So any protrusion in that area is
irrelevant. Only discontinuities sticking up through the boundary layer
influences flow. IIRC, anything with 60 grit (about 1/16") is fine. As Dave
has already indicated. I think some studies showed even a 120RMS had little
influence on flow.

From Rick at RBMotorsports.com  Sun Jun  5 18:25:14 2011
From: Rick at RBMotorsports.com (Rick Byrnes)
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 20:25:14 -0400
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
References: <4DEBA557.6010700@mayfco.com>
Message-ID: <300CAAE738E74DC88F8E8C04153240AE@Rick>

CRANK?
Oh Doc, we NEVER think of you as a crank.....

From drmayf at mayfco.com  Sun Jun  5 18:40:11 2011
From: drmayf at mayfco.com (Larry Mayfield)
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 17:40:11 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
In-Reply-To: <300CAAE738E74DC88F8E8C04153240AE@Rick>
References: <4DEBA557.6010700@mayfco.com>
	<300CAAE738E74DC88F8E8C04153240AE@Rick>
Message-ID: <4DEC21EB.7060406@mayfco.com>

Well...I do seem to go around in circles a lo these days...  and I am 
not centered. I have been know to wildly break things, so I guess I am 
cranky...

What's up my friend?  And get your tongue out of your cheek, lol...

mayf

______________________________
drmayf
Worlds Fastest Sunbeam, period.
204.913 mph flying mile
210.779 mph exit speed


On 6/5/2011 5:25 PM, Rick Byrnes wrote:
> CRANK?
> Oh Doc, we NEVER think of you as a crank.....

From drmayf at mayfco.com  Sun Jun  5 18:46:21 2011
From: drmayf at mayfco.com (Larry Mayfield)
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 17:46:21 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
In-Reply-To: <704E494525D34FE290AAA604579D3F3D@dim8100>
References: <704E494525D34FE290AAA604579D3F3D@dim8100>
Message-ID: <4DEC235D.2010400@mayfco.com>

Good info. Thanks, Elon, Dave.

Now, anybody with a flow bench wanna test a manifold from smooth to 
gritty?  That should be a great se of data. Any old manifold would work. 
Polish it to a mirror, take data, add some git with glue and sand,  make 
another run, change grit and do it again...

I don't have a flow bench....

Elon, any idea where the thesis paper can be obtained?  Data is really good.

mayf

______________________________
drmayf
Worlds Fastest Sunbeam, period.
204.913 mph flying mile
210.779 mph exit speed


On 6/5/2011 5:19 PM, Kirkwood wrote:
> The founder of Go Power did this work while working on his PhD at Stanford
> about 60 years ago. He was an avid go-carter and the emphasis in those days
> was "port and polish" . . . with emphasis based on "polish". He debunked
> that myth in his thesis.
>
>
>
> You are correct in that here is a boundary layer. That layer also has
> "static cling" LOL, or more technically "stiction", capillary attraction, or
> call what you want, with the passage wall. The thickness of this dead-zone
> layer is proportional to velocity. But, regardless of velocity, the flow
> attached to the wall is essentially zero. So any protrusion in that area is
> irrelevant. Only discontinuities sticking up through the boundary layer
> influences flow. IIRC, anything with 60 grit (about 1/16") is fine. As Dave
> has already indicated. I think some studies showed even a 120RMS had little
> influence on flow.
> _______________________________________________
> Land-speed at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe/Manage: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/land-speed/drmayf at mayfco.com

From dahlgren536 at comcast.net  Sun Jun  5 19:20:46 2011
From: dahlgren536 at comcast.net (Dave Dahlgren)
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 21:20:46 -0400
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
In-Reply-To: <4DEC235D.2010400@mayfco.com>
References: <704E494525D34FE290AAA604579D3F3D@dim8100>
	<4DEC235D.2010400@mayfco.com>
Message-ID: <D7ADF18E76B34A689AECDE98D9A90B47@DaveSatellite>

Been there done that 3 decades ago did not bother to save the data just 
filed it away mentally. You need to keep reynolds numbers in mind when doing 
flow bench work BTW... Flowing at 10 to 28 inches of water will not generate 
real world air speeds but will sell cylinder heads. 60 inches will generate 
air speeds close enouigh to real world numbers. 

From jolylance at earthlink.net  Sun Jun  5 21:49:18 2011
From: jolylance at earthlink.net (Joe & Lynne Lance)
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 23:49:18 -0400
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
In-Reply-To: <704E494525D34FE290AAA604579D3F3D@dim8100>
References: <704E494525D34FE290AAA604579D3F3D@dim8100>
Message-ID: <9B051AEA970F46B8836A40E32EC154C3@josephb4d4bd9f>

Maybe some analysis would be useful if done as follows:

Assume steady state flow and an air mass flow rate thru a tube with
representative pressure and temperature conditions at the inlet or outlet.
The steady state flow assumption should be okay due to the air flow inertia
especially at high RPM.

Calculate the Reynolds number. My old textbook "Principles of Heat Transfer"
by Frank Kreith has a graph of friction factor (or pressure drop) as a
function of Reynolds number and relative surface roughness as many similar
textbooks   probably do. This is easier and more direct than trying to
calculate the boundary layer thickness--I'm not sure that a protrusion that
does not stick up out of the boundary layer can be neglected off hand. In
any case, starting with a boundary layer thickness calculation is the long
way around.  

Then one could parametrically explore a range of flow rates, tube diameters
and lengths, degree of roughness, and inlet conditions to see what amount of
roughness has how much of an effect.

My Kreith graph covers a range of relative roughness from 0.05 (very rough)
to 0.00001 (very smooth). Relative roughness is defined as the average
height of the protrusions divided by the tube diameter. 

Lance


--------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: land-speed-bounces at autox.team.net
[mailto:land-speed-bounces at autox.team.net] On Behalf Of Kirkwood
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 8:20 PM
To: land-speed at autox.team.net
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)

The founder of Go Power did this work while working on his PhD at Stanford
about 60 years ago. He was an avid go-carter and the emphasis in those days
was "port and polish" . . . with emphasis based on "polish". He debunked
that myth in his thesis.



You are correct in that here is a boundary layer. That layer also has
"static cling" LOL, or more technically "stiction", capillary attraction, or
call what you want, with the passage wall. The thickness of this dead-zone
layer is proportional to velocity. But, regardless of velocity, the flow
attached to the wall is essentially zero. So any protrusion in that area is
irrelevant. Only discontinuities sticking up through the boundary layer
influences flow. IIRC, anything with 60 grit (about 1/16") is fine. As Dave
has already indicated. I think some studies showed even a 120RMS had little
influence on flow.

From drmayf at mayfco.com  Tue Jun  7 08:56:03 2011
From: drmayf at mayfco.com (Larry Mayfield)
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 07:56:03 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] Pistons
Message-ID: <4DEE3C03.6070504@mayfco.com>

I am seeking pistons for a Ford 260 block. That is a 3.8 inch bore. Need 
to be standard bore size.  Would like high compression types, higher is 
better (14 would be lovely!).  Motor will be partially used to bragging 
rights in the Sunbeam Tiger community.  Not likely to wind up in the 
race car because an adapter to mate a 5 bolt bell housing motor to a 6 
bolt AOD is VERY spendy, lol...  But it might wind up in the Orange 
Sunbeam Tiger I own....

I just know that one or more of you have these sitting on a shelf 
somewhere, lol...get to looking! Good used is ok as well....new is even 
better.

mayf

-- 
______________________________
drmayf
Worlds Fastest Sunbeam, period.
204.913 mph flying mile
210.779 mph exit speed

From adin at frontier.net  Wed Jun  8 07:13:45 2011
From: adin at frontier.net (David)
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 07:13:45 -0600
Subject: [Land-speed] PistonHeads Headlines - Want To Help A Bluebird Break
	A Record?
Message-ID: <1CDDF032-5D12-47DC-A20A-E60C453A5ABE@frontier.net>

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=23729&utm_source=newslett
er&utm_medium=email&utm_content=html&utm_campaign=2011-6-8

From yesford at clear.net.nz  Wed Jun  8 18:25:28 2011
From: yesford at clear.net.nz (Chris R Harris)
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:25:28 +1200
Subject: [Land-speed] Bill Summer passes.
Message-ID: <4724E4D6FB1247DEAD2D26C28AB60A88@HarrisPC>

Got a note yesterday saying that Bill Summers had passed away.
What a great guy, a true gentleman.
On my first trip to race at Bonneville back in 88 he was the first visitor to
my pit. Was somewhat overwhelmed when I introduced myself and got his name in
return as the Summer's Brothers were my hero's, understandably. Also meeting
Tex Smith, Gray Baskerville, Jack Costello, Dick Williams, Don Garlits, Al
Teague, Bob Markley and of course Bob Higbee along with many other focal salt
racers certainly meant we'd be back again.
R.I.P. Bill Summers.

Chris Harris............NZed.

From dwarner230 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  5 10:38:27 2011
From: dwarner230 at yahoo.com (dan warner)
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 09:38:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)
In-Reply-To: <C29DB8EBC4C5461B9659BA509FDE5ED6@DaveSatellite>
References: <4DEBA557.6010700@mayfco.com>
	<C29DB8EBC4C5461B9659BA509FDE5ED6@DaveSatellite>
Message-ID: <339172.56122.qm@web113810.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

I had the opportunity to look at a set of stock high performance heads that
had 
just come off of a CNC porting machine on Friday. I was interested that
the port 
runners were not modified the total length. The porting machine
had hit the high 
spots only, the runners were still 'as cast' in some spots
and machined in 
others.

Wonderful things are happening,
DW
 
To: drmayf at mayfco.com; land-speed at autox.team.net
Sent: Sun, June 5, 2011
9:24:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)

36 to no
finer than 60 grit is just fine.
You will be hard pressed to build a 200 cu in
plenum...
10 X 5 X 4 =200 and will not reach the end runners very well.
-----
Original Message ----- From: "Larry Mayfield" <drmayf at mayfco.com>
To:
<land-speed at autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 11:48 AM
Subject:
[Land-speed] Intake Manifold Question(s)


> Ok, those of you who consider me
a crank can hit delete now, lol....
> 
> I am making or revising an old
manifold for use on the Sunbeam. I notice that 
>the runners are pretty dog
gone rough and I want to do port matching and 
>polishing.  My questions have
to do with the smoothness of the air flow in the 
>runners.  This is an EFI
manifold so it is what I would call dry. No fuel in the 
>manifold. So do I
want a really smooth runner wall or rough? If smooth just how 
>smooth? Should
I have it extrude honed for smoothness and removal of any small 
>turbulence
generators? If really smooth would coating the runner walls with 
>glyptol be
a good thing? That stuff drys to a hard finish and is pretty slippery 
>and
dang near impervious to oils and anything else.
> 
> The manifold will be a
short runner box with a plenum about 2/3 size of the 
>engine displacement (an
old rule of thumb I once heard and maybe be invalid) for 
>use with my HP72
turbo(s).
> 
> Thoughts, comments, ideas? I'll listen to them all....
> 
>
Just going to try and increase the Sunbeams speed over the old first Sunbeam
>top speed.  Class record speeds are way beyond my capabilities and pockets,
>lol...
> 
> -- 
_______________________________________________
Land-speed at autox.team.net
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive:
http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe/Manage:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/land-speed/dwarner230 at yahoo.com

From bennevl at bellsouth.net  Wed Jun 15 00:41:47 2011
From: bennevl at bellsouth.net (bill bennett)
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 23:41:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Land-speed] (no subject)
Message-ID: <10704.7893.qm@web83804.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Donbt be shy anymore! Ibll help you!.
http://arnau.cat/html/friends.links.php?amjhot=83j1

From b.a.savage at cal.net  Mon Jun 27 10:30:09 2011
From: b.a.savage at cal.net (Bryan Savage)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:30:09 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] Back
Message-ID: <4E08B011.8000408@cal.net>

I'm back and hope all is well with everyone.
Bryan

From b.a.savage at cal.net  Mon Jun 27 10:41:30 2011
From: b.a.savage at cal.net (Bryan Savage)
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 09:41:30 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] Back
Message-ID: <4E08B2BA.3090602@cal.net>

I'm back and hope all is well with everyone.
Bryan

From b.a.savage at cal.net  Wed Jun 29 11:57:20 2011
From: b.a.savage at cal.net (Bryan Savage)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:57:20 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] Back
In-Reply-To: <29443FDA7AEB45D29BBD5B9FA9CF5385@GlenPC>
References: <4E08B2BA.3090602@cal.net>
	<29443FDA7AEB45D29BBD5B9FA9CF5385@GlenPC>
Message-ID: <4E0B6780.3040103@cal.net>

Hi Glenn.

I couldn't take Otto's attacking one and all. I had my own problems to
deal with so
I bailed out for a while.

I been involved a bit with the USFRA Roadster training car.

Good to hear from you Glenn,
Bryan

speedtimer at beyondbb.com wrote:
> Where the heck you been Bryan. we missed you.
> Glen

From Rick at RBMotorsports.com  Wed Jun 29 16:01:22 2011
From: Rick at RBMotorsports.com (Rick Byrnes)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:01:22 -0400
Subject: [Land-speed] Back
References: <4E08B2BA.3090602@cal.net><29443FDA7AEB45D29BBD5B9FA9CF5385@GlenPC>
	<4E0B6780.3040103@cal.net>
Message-ID: <AC3547722843497FBF1AF0F6F227CF5F@Rick>

Brian
Welcome back.
Otto does that sometimes.
You were missed.

From b.a.savage at cal.net  Wed Jun 29 19:08:37 2011
From: b.a.savage at cal.net (Bryan Savage)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:08:37 -0700
Subject: [Land-speed] Back
In-Reply-To: <AC3547722843497FBF1AF0F6F227CF5F@Rick>
References: <4E08B2BA.3090602@cal.net><29443FDA7AEB45D29BBD5B9FA9CF5385@GlenPC>
	<4E0B6780.3040103@cal.net> <AC3547722843497FBF1AF0F6F227CF5F@Rick>
Message-ID: <4E0BCC95.401@cal.net>

Thank you Rick.

Bryan


Rick Byrnes wrote:
> Brian
> Welcome back.
> Otto does that sometimes.
> You were missed.