I have been busy with much of the same. Most of my work is with race cars and an occasional street driven hot rod. Here's an example of my involvement.
A good friend, Glenn was having problems with his super pro 66 Mustang. Some of you may recognize the car from Ford races in the Houston, New Orleans or Gulf Port areas. He runs a small flat tappet cam shaft in a high compression 351 Windsor. The car was running mid to low 10s but he was having problems with trace detonation at launch with a transbrake.
I cut grooves in his AFR heads and he opened the squish clearance. Normally I would expect the reduced squish to create detonation. The result was low RPM power that was too much for the car to handle. I was there for the first night out after the modification. The car ended up in the trailer because he couldn't control the wheel standing.
He has now softened the combination to allow launch with out excessive wheel standing. Needless to say he's convinced.
Here's some picture from his project and other recent activities.
The grooves help excite the mixture in the chamber, create turbulence, and direct turbulence where it can be used the most, near the spark plug. The more turbulence in the chamber before the plug fires, the faster the air/fuel will burn, and the less heat/fuel is wasted out of the exhaust. On carbuerated engines with no other modifications, you can lean out your jets by 20% without doing any other major tuning. The Grooves' biggest advantage, however, is detonation resistance. Engines that have light pinging or are on the verge of pinging will benefit the most from the mod. Engines that don't ping would benefit from the groove and higher compression. Since the groove extends detonation tolerance, higher compression can be run without having to fill up with higher octane fuel. 10.5:1 on 87 octane fuel is pretty much the norm for an engine with Singh Grooves without worrying about detonatin/ping.
Bringing this discussion back to life, I talked to the mechanic that did the modifications to the 2.5L cylinder head. The 2.5L/Auto tranny Ranger was getting ~23mpg consistently over a 3 month period. After the head work, the power went up to 3.0L V6 levels and gas mileage went up to 29mpg. It also idles VERY smooth and tends to run a bit cooler.
i would like to know how they would do on a emmision testing seeing i have to do them here.
might be ok for mpg but might send the emmisions out of range
Numerous tests have shown emissions to drop through the floor. Can you fail for putting out too little emissions? HC, CO, and NOx go down, CO2 and H2O go up. Not a single car tested that have had these modifications done have done worse than stock; all of them have improved.
Interesting concept, but I do not see how it is improving MPG by any thing that significant.
I have a 2.5 in my 99 Supercab with a 5speed, is any info available using E85 as a fuel? I have a Custom Diablo chip burned to run E85 and am thinking of shaving the head and putting big pistons in to raise the compresion ratio to around 12 or 13:1 to burn the Ethanol more efficently.
Dan
theoretically it would increase mileage from the ability to run a higher compression ratio, which would increase your volumetric efficiency...theoretically. Also claims to be able to lean out the air:fuel ratio which would do it.
The increased compression ratio would increase cylinder pressure, which would then make your fuel mixture more explosive and release more energy out of the same amount of fuel. Therefore the added energy moves your vehicle further/easier.
__________________
2004 Focus zts (60 miles a day round trip to work, stuff it)
well i think its a mighty big claim
im not saying it dont work but if it do u think the car companys would have already have been doing this. im sure the cost of cutting the groves in the head would be a cost factor
for me im kinda on the fence on this 1. i think id like to see some dyno numbers before i beleave it
well i think its a mighty big claim
im not saying it dont work but if it do u think the car companys would have already have been doing this. im sure the cost of cutting the groves in the head would be a cost factor
for me im kinda on the fence on this 1. i think id like to see some dyno numbers before i beleave it
ditto, Im still very intruiged. Even if it only reduces detonation so I can run 10.5:1 on 87 ill be laughing. Also if thats the case then I should be able to run like 14:1 on propane.
__________________
2004 Focus zts (60 miles a day round trip to work, stuff it)
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.
