Hi All,


Basic flow chacteristics=The amount and velocity of the air that can flow through the intake and exhaust ports of a given head, as measured on a flowbench.

http://www.jhsracing.co.uk/common/super ... _bench.htm

Regards, Norm

Hi All,


First post, fourth paragraph:





Depending on who he might be dealing with?


Didn’t even consider the possibility he has been misinformed?


No comment.


Not for $565.00.


Reference sources:
http://www.seriesoneperformance.com
http://www.yellaterra.com.au/index.php
and, of course, Rocker arms for 1991 3.8.

Regards, Norm

I am still of the opinion that the gains that you will get from this swap will not justify the time or the money spent on it. Why not just use SII heads and be done with it? I guess I dont know if they fit or not or if it is even able to be swapped, but it seems as if alot of time, energy and effort could be saved by doing that instead if changing the rocker ratio. Just my opinion, and I think I read this in this thread somewhere, but isn't chainging the rocker ratio without doing anything else just a band-aid for not doing a cam swap? But I am not an expert on the 3.1 "performance" stuff, and I have not doen any research prior to posting this, so idk if the SII heads will go on the SI block and work or not, just an idea.

Andrew

Hi andrewk, All


That is a fact, and it has been my point from the beginning. Even assuming the bogus figures to be correct, the return is not worth the expense.

The rocker arm salesman has an investment to protect. He cannot admit his knowledge is internet style misinformation for fear of losing his (self appointed) status as an expert/authority.


You cannot get any more basic than, "The heads are where the power is".

Head configuration is the only significant difference between the "air pumps" from different manufacturers, and between series I and II engines.

If DrJay were to sell a well designed aftermarket head for his engine, I would endorse it.



Unless I missed one, “Of course a camshaft is a better solutionâ€

Unless I missed one, “Of course a camshaft is a better solutionâ€

Hi Turbocharged400sbc, Norm, All,
So if you can in fact put SII heads on a SI engine, then why would anyone even mess with the SI stuff? Considering all the performance parts available for the SII, it seems to me that trying to tune the SI's, whether it's valves, rocker ratio, whatever, is a big waste of time and even more so a poor business investment. If you are willing to piss around with valve train geometry on the SI heads, then why not invest your time in the SII conversion and then work on different rocker ratios for that. I think Dr. Jay may be over thinking in this situation. I think maybe if he was thinking more outside the box that he might realize that the benefits of what Turbocharged400sbc is doing are far better than what he is trying to accomplish. I am not sure, however, if I have missed the point of this thread; are we discussing the theory of valve train geometry, such as it increasing duration, etc., or are we discussing the potential benefits of a geometry change on SI heads?


Andrew

Oh, and I typed 3.1 in my last post. I meant 3800, but I am sure you all knew that.

Hi Turbocharged400sbc, All,


Basic Hot Rodding, the way it was done in the 20s. Some time between then and now, knowledge and ingenuity were tossed aside in favor of assembling aftermarket parts.


Ah, the legendary FI heads. Great "WOW" factor from the double humped heads when the hood was raised. Out of the box they didn't make much of a difference. Later, renamed "fuelie" by the "car rags" because it looked cool on the front pages.

I did better with selected "Power Pack" heads, but I didn't just bolt them on.


More than most people realize, a lot more.

Regards, Norm

Hi andrewk, All


I think you over estimate DrJay and his knowledge of the basics.

His last two posts should have given you some insight.



The company that will manufacture his rockers (after he sells them) did not choose to make them part of their own line.

What do they know that he does not?


Actually the question that was asked in the first post, was answered in the second. From Hans first post on, it has been about internet misinformation and unethical sales practices.

I've seen little discussion. Basically, there has been DrJays theories, and everyone elses statements of fact.


I didn't notice, probably because you were not talking cubic inches.

Regards, Norm

Reference sources:
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/engine.htm
http://www.seriesoneperformance.com
http://www.yellaterra.com.au/index.php
and, of course, Rocker arms for 1991 3.8.

Hi andrewk, All,


Bingo!!!!! That's where the power is.


No help unless the cam is ground to work with that ratio. So you grind a profile that needs special rockers in order for it to work properly? I don't think so.

Regards, Norm

as I have found out through StreetCommodores.com there is a gentlman who took the SI (Buick) heads and had the valve guids spread to install valves of (real close) aproximate size to the factory valves in the SII heads with the guid work and valves seat machining he had (if I remember correctly) 2100$ AU invested in the mod and he got flow #'s slightly better than the factory (with mild bowl porting) SII head on the intake but equivalent on the exhaust (he didnt have a bone stock SII head to flow test at the time) he ended up with rockers that now pushed on approx 80% of the valve stem tip where as before it was dead center, now a small amount like that wouldnt hurt things and it looks like this will be something to look for on the SII heads onto the buick block (though lifter bore spacing remains the same (as much as a dial caliper is acurate from one block to the other so the factory prob moved the rocker pedestal a slight amount to counter the wider vlv guide spacing on the SII

all are are's I need to cover in my Hybrid buildup...but the point remains that there are people who spend cubic $'s on performance of the SI, and in the end it's one thing that most of us are looking for-BANG fer the BUCK!
a 500+$ set of rockers that add 10-30(?) HP versus a custom SI cam (available in OZ btw) at 350$ that would be better suited to making 30+ Hp with proper ECM tunning

but then again some people are hesitant to tear into their engines so for some people rockers may be a great deal....

I will try to find all the info I had saved on my puter in Han(g)over Park (right now I'm at my shop in Rockford) and see if i can find his flow data for his seriously reworked SI heads and the mild SII heads...
plenty of info on the SII heads at 3800pro.com (Intense racing board) but for the SI info ya gotta check out the auzzie's sites...
also some great info is on FTV6 -FullThrottleV6.com-
you can check out the custom sheet alum dual TB intakes those guys have made for the SI!

lowbuck hotrodding! (we rednecks dont have $ so we have to get by on a moonshine budget...)
case in point...instead of dumping 2-3 grand into the 3100 in Al's car we doubled the power by adding another engine fer 3 grand (so far lol)
James...

Btw I dont think Jay is belittling my work, as alot of people dont understand why I would be working on this ("just throw in an L67") but with PCM/trans/harnesss that $$$ adds up to allot more than I think I can put the hybrid together for...

as in most cases throwing money at a car doesnt make it faster (remember the prostreet trend in the late 80's early 90's HotRod (?) had a prostreet race and found out how slow some of those 80+ thousand dollar cars were...) you have to look at the whole package for max power, you change gearing, you end up having to change the Tq converter and cam to make the best use of the engine's power band...

but when tunning an engine combination different ratio rockers can be tested to determine whether the engine could use more valve lift to make more power...
and with mechanical flat tappets (i know doesnt apply here but to make a point) same way that tuners will change (test different) the lash specs to determin if the engine requires more/less duration for powerband tunning...
remember it is average power/Tq #'s that make a car fast/consistent where most manufactures like to give peak #'s that dont tell you squat!

Hi Turbocharged400sbc, All,

Remember: Since post #5, the entire thread has been about a rocker that does not exist, and there are no valid numbers to quote.


In the same way some people use a fart can on their exhaust to increase power? There can be a power gain with either, but is it worth the cost?

For return on ones investment, the fart can might be the better deal. It's up to the individual, it's their car, time, and money.

Efficiency is achieved by selecting a group of modifications that will work in unison. Not by adding parts at random and then throwing them aside when moving to the next mod.


This is a company that manufactures and sells both.

I would suggest one save his/her money until the cash is available to do it right. During that time a plan can be made to maximize the "bang for the buck".


Please excuse the bold font, but it appears I need them to make my point.

Nominal:
In this context, can anyone find a definition other than "small or nonexistent"?


They are the same people who believe assembling a bunch of aftermarket parts will result in a race engine.

Once Turbocharged400sbc proves his work to be viable and posts the road map, it can be duplicated (porting excluded) by any competent shop at a reasonable price. The R&D is the expensive part and it will have already been done.


The builders of those cars intended them to be showcars only and the articles were intended to increase circulation in the teenage population.

Since the early sixties, the rags have been geared toward those who do not know the difference between a street car, a race car and a show car. They are most likely to buy the advertised parts that the knowledgeable will not, and advertising is where the profit is.

BTW: They are the same group DrJay is trying to reach.


How many diferent sets at $400 each? Easier, cheaper, and many more times accurate to give the pertinent information to the cam grinder, and get the correct one in the first place.


You're right, it doesn't apply, unless you're doing a DrJay impression.

As valuable a tool in the 40s as it is now. The difference is the control of small amounts of lift and duration, as opposed to a hard choice between two very different lifts with no duration change.

The former is used daily as a tuning aid. The latter?

The portions of your posts pertaining to your projects, should be posted in your threads where they are more likely to to contribute to the readers education on those subjects.

I, for one, prefer to read them there, in their proper context, because here they confuse the issues even more than they are. Much like DrJays diversions.

Regards, Norm



Reference sources:
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/engine.htm
http://www.seriesoneperformance.com
http://www.yellaterra.com.au/index.php
and, of course, Rocker arms for 1991 3.8

Hi All,


So DrJay has something that cannot be compared to a near stock engine?

I think I said somewhere else: His would be more useful than numbers from an already modified Supercharged SSEi.

.
If I “builtâ€

wow....this could get good.... Pass the popcorn please!

Hi All,

It seems DrJays SI rockers do exist, and they are available in the US and Canada, through several distributors.

Look here for Holden/Buick V6.

Any guesses why his refusal to post the link, and why he needed to explain everything to us instead?

How can they be on so many engines and no one wants to give up any numbers?


A little frustrated because I don't go where wants me to?

Alternative thought might be that he realized he is in over his head.


Since he hadn’t seen it, he disbelieved it?


Interesting answer. Actually it's the opposite. Increased lift does not increase friction per say. The roller tip decreases side loading on the guide and reduces friction. Another hint that he hasn’t a clue.


He didn’t think anyone would notice the link was to a blown SII application? He didn’t think we would know the difference?

As we now know, it was he that didn’t know the difference.


Varies with the engine, and since he has no numbers, it’s just more smoke.


Salesman’s logic shows that ease of installation and less expense is why the rockers make the gains he claimed?



Since this is the company that manufactures and sells both, I'll believe them.


I guess he didn’t understand the concept of a factory redesign vs replacement of worn rockers vs needless replacement of good ones.


So now he wants me to prove his flawed theory to be fact. First his false statement about cam duration. now this.


Theory is not fact until it's proven. Your 8-10% remark was made with nothing to back it up.


Methinks the salesman doth protest to much.


Correction: Based on what DrJay has written in his web site, this and other forums. In his own words.


I believe someone with hands on, would be more than a match for me in the context of this thread, and one with an internet education would only be able to debate theory. He called me rude because he disagreed with me. I called him rude because he was rude.


Why does this sound like another sales pitch? Those parts are all available at any competent shop or parts supplier, but I guess DrJay doesn't know that because he only shops the internet.


Now, that’s funny. I think he covered it nicely. Here also.


More like, to put some teenage kid down because he didn't believe your bogus advertising and it looked like he might convince a possible buyer not to buy?


If one side does not know the subject as it relates to the thread, there will never be a discussion.
It frustrates a salesman when he cannot be the authority and take charge of a conversation.


Rude is rude. A good salesman makes his living by being rude and intrusive. I am one who doesn't like salespeople for that reason.

Just one of many examples of the misinformation found daily on the internet. Duration cannot be changed unless the lobe profile is changed.

This guy was wrong also. Surprised me because he is more knowledgeable than most on that forum.


The statement was false when he made it and it’s still false. Degradation? When one is wrong, one should expect to hear about it. It’s called being an adult.

The truth as he knows it.
I am suspicious of everything I see and hear until I can verify it as fact or fiction. When statements are made that I know to be false, I usually react the same as I have here.

Regards, Norm

Reference sources:
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/engine.htm
http://www.seriesoneperformance.com
http://www.yellaterra.com.au/index.php
http://bonnevilleclub.com/forum
http://www.3800tech.com/forum
and, of course, Rocker arms for 1991 3.8