Flow benched a couple sets of C302's

June 6 2003 at 5:59 PMDan Jones  (no login) from IP address 130.76.96.17
Not sure how the formating will come through. I'll try to pad the columns so they are the same width. Anyway, here goes. Had some fun over lunch Thursday flow benching a few heads:
 Valve  C302   C302     C302B  C302B    C302B
 Lift   Intake Exhaust  Intake Exhaust  Exhaust
 (inch) 2.15"  1.65"    2.19"  1.65"    1.65"
                               Tulip    Std (from C302)
 0.050  063    047      051    ---      047
 0.100  096    073      081    ---      073
 0.150  125    102      120    ---      111
 0.200  160    123      157    131      124
 0.300  218    155      223    180      156
 0.400  274    191      266    210      188
 0.500  313    220      306    223      206
 0.600  318    234      331    228      215
 0.650  ---    241      ---    230      220
 0.700  ---    242      ---    ---      222
The flow is in CFM and was tested at 28" pressure drop on a SuperFlow 600 flow bench at Stiegemeyer Racing Heads in St. Charles, Missouri. A 4.155" diameter tube was used to simulate the bore and the intake was flowed without a manifold, using a piece of clay around the intake port. No pipe was used on the exhaust. When Dave Williams had a pair of iron 4V Cleveland heads tested on Jim Kuntz's bench, the operator mentioned that naked intake ports usually flow 20-30 CFM less than a port with manifold. I'm also told an exhaust port with pipe picks up a similar amount.

Both sets of cylinder heads have had some work done to them. The bowls were blended and the ports smoothed but the ports were not hogged out and remain fairly small. I will measure the port cross-sectional areas this weekend but I still need to order a set of snap gauges to check the minumum areas. The C302B's, in particular, have a fairly small minimum throat area. My guess is they were originally set up for a restrictor plate engine. The C302B's were also fitted with titanium tulip exhaust valves. We swapped a standard exhaust valve from the C302 head to see how it compared to the tulip valve in the C302B. Note that the valve was simply dropped in the port and flowed, no valve job was done. Stiegemeyer says the tulip shape works even better on heads with large seat areas but makes the valve heavier. That's not a problem with titanium but I was planning on swapping to stainless steel instead. An intake valve in one of the heads was given a quick back-cut as he didn't like the shape. I forgot to note which set it was from so I'll need to disassemble them to know for sure. Stiegemeyer says he has had a problem with Del West titanium valves pulling the heads off the stems (monster spring pressure) but hasn't had any trouble with other brands. He did not like the teflon valve seals that were on the heads as they do not allow enough oil through for lubrication and pulled out another seal type that he uses now.

By way of comparison, I have some flow data on some old NASCAR racing heads that went through a shop that Chip Barret-Smith worked at. He said the bench they use posts numbers that are a lttle more conservative than what a Superflow reads.
Intake Flow

        Bud Moore       Wood Bros       Davis Racing    Stock
Lift    C302 canted     Yates head      Yates head      C302
-----

0.050   33.10           30.10           29.3            30.4
0.100   69.10           66.10           63.6            66.2
0.150   115.4           104.6           102.1           97.4
0.200   152.2           144.7           138.9           129
0.300   217.5           220.8           214.1           189
0.400   267.7           277.7           277.7           229
0.500   306.2           314.5           324.6           246
0.600   332.9           311.2           326.2           251
0.700   -----           -----           -----           ---
0.800   -----           -----           -----           ---

Exhaust Flow 

        Bud Moore       Wood Bros       Davis Racing     Stock
Lift    C302 canted     Yates head      Yates head       C302
-----

0.050   21.40           21.40           23.90           28.3
0.100   50.20           46.00           51.00           57.7
0.150   78.60           72.80           77.80           76.8
0.200   108.7           95.40           100.4           93.9
0.300   142.2           138.9           135.5           108.0
0.400   202.4           179.0           187.4           116.6
0.500   219.2           214.1           212.5           119.4
0.600   224.2           237.6           227.5           ----
0.700   234.2           249.3           230.9           ----
0.800   235.9           254.3           -----           ----
Note: The Yates heads have 2.1" intakes and 1.6" exhausts. The canted valve heads had 2.15" intakes and 1.65" exhausts.

Stiegemeyer likes high flowing, moderate cross-sectional area, cylinder heads mated to high flowing single plane race intake manifolds (Roush/Ford Motorsport, Edelbrock Victor and the like). More than just the raw CFM of the heads, he was quite impressed with the velocity of the C302 and C302B heads and thought either pair would make for a killer street engine. Actually, the heads flowed a bit better than the numbers suggest as the lifts were actually lower than the reading due to the angle required by the test fixture (the lift gauge was at an angle to the valve). It might be worthwhile to pour some rubber molds of the ports and make a set of templates.

Stiegemeyer usually starts flowing heads at 0.200" lift but Vizard's instructions for the cam selection software require low lift numbers, so I had him add a few low lift points. Stiegemeyer asked a few questions about the Pantera and wrote down some cam specs he thought would work well for what I wanted to do. The numbers were close to what I was expecting: single pattern, 260 degress @ 0.050" on a 108 LSA, installed at 105 degrees with 0.645" lift if solid roller, or 0.600" lift if hydraulic roller. That was assuming the independent runner EFI intake. He would drop the duration by 10 degrees if a single four barrel. He said the 4" stroke crank would cause it to peak at around 6000 RPM and thought I could make better power with a 3.75" stroke crank shifting at 6800 RPM. He said I'd give up some torque but wouldn't miss it on street tires. He also thought I should go no larger than a 1 7/8" header. After seeing the flow velocity of the heads on the bench, he thought the lobe separation could be widened slightly to 109 degrees.

I took along a stock rebuilt 1964 Buick 300 aluminum cylinder head to put on the flow bench. I wasn't expecting them to flow very well but wanted to get a baseline to compare a ported set against. They actually flowed better than expected:

 Valve  1964 Buick 300    Ford 5.0L
 Lift   aluminum heads    cast iron
 (inch) Intake  Exhaust   Intake Exhaust
        1.625"  1.312"    1.78"  1.45"

 0.200  105     096       092    078
 0.300  135     108       130    095
 0.400  142     115       141    102
 0.500  149     115       155    106
 0.600  154     116       158    105
Same flow bench conditions as the C302's. Stock heads with stock valves (standard valve job, no port work). The Buick 300 heads are an upgrade to the Rover and Buick 215 aluminum V8 engines but still have small ports and valves. For comparison, I've included flow numbers from a 5.0L Ford head from Fordmuscle.com. I had seen flow numbers that suggested the Buick 300 heads flowed as well as Ford 5.0L heads but given the smaller ports and valves, I really didn't believe them. I still plan to port the Buick 300 heads but was pleasantly surprised with the baseline numbers. It was funny but I think Stiegemeyer got a bigger kick out of the little Buick heads than he did the much higher flowing high port Motorsport heads. We discussed that engine project briefly and he offered to weld up the combustion chambers and rough them in for $250. I might just take him up on that. After reviewing the flow chart for the Buick head, he warned you against over-scavenging the exhaust side. I may head back with my home-ported Buick 215 heads to see how they do. I increased both the intake and exhaust valve sizes but went relatively larger on the exhaust and that was probably a mistake. I knew better but the valves were on hand so I went with them. I'd also like to get my A3's on the bench to see how they do.

Stiegemeyer's shop had a wide range of cylinder heads waiting to be worked on, including the usual small and big block Chevy and Ford, 392 Chrysler hemi, Ford 3.8L V6 (max effort pieces supplied to a Ford V6 specialist), Fiero four cylinder (tiny ports) and even a set of A3 high ports (for a sprint car). While we were talking, Stiegemeyer pulled out the flow sheets on some iron 4V's that he did as a "budget deal". No port work was done but different valve margins were tested, along with the Roush-type port stuffers. I didn't get a copy of the sheets but they showed a stock iron 4V head pulling 294 CFM (which just happens to be the same number that Dave Williams got on a set of stock 4V Clevelands). With no porting but with a fancy valve job and the port stuffers, he made 331 CFM with higher velocity. For so little effort, he was pleased with the results and said the engine made very good power.

In addition to the cylinder heads, there was lots of neat stuff around the shop including an old Mercury Comet rolling chassis (straight axle front, tubbed rear) set-up with a Donovan aluminum SBC, a 392 hemi with mechanical injection (along with a plastic mock-up). Stiegemeyer makes the nicest and strongest valve spring compressor I've ever seen but at $850 I won't be picking one up any time soon. While I was there, a guy rode up on a 3-seat SBC V8 powered trike that looked like it time-warped out of the 1970's and just before I left I got to help push a Chevelle up on a trailer after it twisted its driveshaft in two on the Dynojet.

Dan Jones