[PYROTECH_J]

i just wanna say thanks. and i love the m.m. site i don't really have anything to say. my turbo is running fine thanks to you guy's and some of the past threads.so no questions this time. im truly extatic.imagine if you will an ed roth shirt.a norml long haired idiot.with his tongue slappin the tail lights.showing the 80 thousand dollar porsche owner his favorite finger from 3 car length's in front of him.yeah extatic. thanks everybody i'll take my 2thou over his 80thou. all day everyday. i know some of you feel the same. if it's got a title put it on the street.
HONK if you love m.m.

[zonker]

i'm liking this forum as well...

but since i'm driving a luke warm mostly stock $1k 2.3 mustang i'm not flipping off any $80k Porsche owners anytime soon.

so instead of horn honking, i'll have to give out a bicycle ring...

rrinngg rrinngg

[OHC230]

First of all, I say congrats on finishing your car. Any project like this, takes a lot of effort and $$. Sometimes the only satisfaction you will get is when you are on some deserted road and get a chance to floor it, as some guy in a super car wastes fuel trying to prove his is bigger.


As an owner of a Porsche 996 Carrera, I can tell you that the car is no slouch. New it cost $69,365 and is a stunning machine from every angle. I guess if you wanted to, you could add at least a dozen options to a Porsche, which would push the price tag up to 80 Grand. My car came stock with 355 HP and like a lot guys who own these types of cars, I get all kinds of folks trying to prove their car is faster. I know exactly what my Carrera is capable of and I will normally not even waste the gas on just about all challengers who aren’t on equal footing. When new, my Porsche ran 0 to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds and turned a quarter-mile time of 12.94 at 110. Since adding a supercharger I dropped a full second from both of those times and picked up a top speed of over 190 MPH. Pyrotech, it would give me great satisfaction to see your Mustang fly past my Porsche at 190 some day.

When that day comes you will have spent as much money as me.

BTW Rob, you should just flip me off anyway, so I'll know that it's you!

[zonker]

I'll flip you off just because you'll blow by my mustang in your mustang lol.

[OHC230]

Fair enough. Since you have all of those spare Mustangs lying around now, maybe I can persuade you into porting a head off one of them. I am still plugging away on a head tutorial and I have collected some good usable data which will help DIY head porters. The more I test the 2.3 heads, the more I notice that even subtle changes in the ports can make considerable differences in flow.

Take a look at the picture below. These are scanned and sliced images of 2.3 intake ports before and after mild porting was performed. The port on the right, in the first picture improved flow by 30% over the stock ports and was accomplished in 1 hour of porting time using a hand grinder. The difference in flow would equate to a 25 HP gain over a stock head, just from the porting.

[free2.3]

how much material was removed from the valve guide? and how much more could be removed from the bottom of the runner because it still seems to have a choke point between the valve guide and bottom of the runner. seems like it could be hogged out a lot more there to open up the runner to about valve size

[free2.3]

it also seems it could use some chamber work too in front of the valve too just some observations

[OHC230]

"How much material was removed from the valve guide?"

Take a look at the picture below, specifically the yellow reference mark. Since the material removal is asymmetric in this region, I can only give you an average here; it works out to about .09”


"How much more could be removed from the bottom of the runner, because it still seems to have a choke point between the valve guide and bottom of the runner?"

That is a good question, I am glad you asked this. First of all, let me point this out. Since what you are looking at is a 2D cross section view of the port, this choke point here at the guide, is going to look more pronounced, especially at this particular point. Since this a three dimensional object, we have to take into consideration that the port as a whole dictates what volume drop we will see from one end to the other, not one particular region. On the bottom runner (short side of radius) yes you could pull more material off of this, but it wouldn’t necessarily improve things for you, on an N/A head, which is what this head is being ported for. Why you ask? Some theory for you:


The idea here: is that we want to slow down the gas velocity just before it reaches the valve face. Slowing the gas flow at this point, converts some of the gas's kinetic energy into pressure energy. As a piston reaches bottom dead center on its intake stroke, it stops creating suction and increasing the pressure next to the valve helps to force more air into the cylinder, even though the piston is coming towards the valve at the beginning of the compression stroke. This becomes more important as you increase the duration of an intake valve closing event.


"It also seems it could use some chamber work too, in front of the valve"

De-shrouding of the intake valve, like most things, has its limits. “If a little bit is good, than too much should be just right” Yes….??

That statement applies here. Since the bottom deck thickness of the 2.3 head is .310” or less in some areas, I don’t like to remove more than 1/3 of that surface when milling for compression. Since enlarging the combustion chamber, by de-shrouding the valves, making the chamber larger, (not a good thing) should we ignore that and decrease compression and then make up for that by taking more off the deck surface and if we do that what extra gains are we going to see, if we widen that area further?

My short answer to that is: I think that the depicted port section offers a fair compromise.

[PYROTECH_J]

what can i say he wanted it.nothing against porsche. i would love to have an 87 911.
my car has no turbo emblems maybe he thought he was gonna push somebody around. what he got was smoked and he was wasting gas trying to catch up. im laughing at the money he spent to make himself look cool on a friday night.


i hear ya zonk my horn doesn't even work

[OHC230]

What kind of Porsche did you race?

[PYROTECH_J]

not sure what year im sure it was early eighties one of the oval looking ones what is it a 924 to be honest i never seen the tail to look at the lettering ha ha im normally one of those dude's that just cruise's around. im grown i dont usually waste time and gas myself. like i said he asked for it.

[zonker]

924's are sllooww... those things are powered by old audi motors (unless it was the one year only 80's 924S which used the 944 motor. Now those are not slouches relatively speaking.

And OHC, I'm ready to take you up on doing my first port job with your grind recommendations.

[PYROTECH_J]

he seemed to think it was something. the paint on one of his wheels cost more than my car. wasn't about the car really it was about some punk getting put in his place. he just happened to be in a porsche. guess ya had to be there.[ i want the shirt] not trying to make any enemies here.just trying to express how happy i am with my m.m it was a straight up drag car when i bought it i saved it from a cruel death. took the draglites off threw on my pony's and bam streetcar. please don't be offended if it stands up on your brand. i own a little bit of everything myself. i have left countless porsche's in my 78 limited regal too i think i paid 75 bucks for it 20 years ago. we haven't alway's had dragstrip's around here it usually comes down to scrotal fortitude.who's willing to stay in to win it
seriously how many of you have done hot laps at walmart ha ha
also i was checking out the diagrams and i have an extra head i have never done anything like that before but i understand the concept. it kinda looks like the piece you grind out for an auto bolt release on a 10/ 22. i'm gonna give it a shot. it's laying around anyway

[OHC230]

OK, I'm going to flood you guys with some pictures, to walk you through this step by step. Once you start doing this, you will find it incredibly addictive.

[Cgross609]

Awesome... I wana port my head. Will a dual plug clean up as nice or should i switch to a d port?

[OHC230]

Yes, but it will take 10 times the effort.

[zonker]

OHC, you damn 4 plug lover... haha

[Cgross609]

Lol well 4 plugs are just as good as 8 as proven by our little 4 bangers kicking massive v-8 ass lol. So if i switch to a 4 plug head, what would i have to do to make it work on a dual plug motor? Change the cam, change the lifters/followers, remove a coil pack? etc? lol

[zonker]

Originally Posted by Cgross609 Lol well 4 plugs are just as good as 8 as proven by our little 4 bangers kicking massive v-8 ass lol. So if i switch to a 4 plug head, what would i have to do to make it work on a dual plug motor? Change the cam, change the lifters/followers, remove a coil pack? etc? lol

mechanically all the parts swap, i think the fly in the ointment will be the eec looking for a second coilpack and possibly putting itself in a closed loop mode.

[free2.3]

if you switch to a 4 plug go to a early 80s ranger setup they still used distributors and f/i or you could get a more reliable early electronic(box) distributor and a 350cfm Holley. either way you have to change the intake, fuel delivery, and spark but its well worth it thats why i threw my 8 plug head away for a 4 plug this last weekend. looks like a 2.3 not some electronic f/i pos. all i have is a carb and dizzy to worry about, nothing else my life is now easy.