quikshee Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 Anyone on here rechamber stock heads? I bought a .030 milled stocker and it wasn't rechambered, I tried putting two head gaskets but still my squish was .032. Just seeing if anyone knows someone who does it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spurdy Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 Anyone on here rechamber stock heads? I bought a .030 milled stocker and it wasn't rechambered, I tried putting two head gaskets but still my squish was .032. Just seeing if anyone knows someone who does it. Kevin at HJR can have it done I believe. I'd also bet Jeff at FAST could have it done but not sure. SP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quikshee Posted June 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 Any idea on a price? I searched their sites but couldn't find the service or a price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spurdy Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 Any idea on a price? I searched their sites but couldn't find the service or a price. Nope. You would just have to give them a call. HJR 760.815.1316 FAST 785.364.5325. SP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BansheeDan Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 Nope. You would just have to give them a call. HJR 760.815.1316 FAST 785.364.5325. SP It was 95.00 to have my stock head cut and rechambered from Kevin. Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClimbAnyHill Posted June 3, 2009 Report Share Posted June 3, 2009 Wildcard Raccing!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowit Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 Anyone on here rechamber stock heads? I bought a .030 milled stocker and it wasn't rechambered, I tried putting two head gaskets but still my squish was .032. Just seeing if anyone knows someone who does it. If you can wait a bit, we have been cutting stock heads for many years. Just very busy this time of year. We don;t send them out as most do, and all our products are CNC machined in house. Several members run our heads. I can nearly guarantee you will be happy with our geometries. I will say that .032" squish is in the ballpark and will work great for a pump fuel 350 motor. The geometry of the head is what will make the difference in combination with the squish clearance. Brandon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckheight Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 You realize that with just a faced mating surface, but otherwise typical OEM dome geometry... .032" squish clearance will yeild an MSV in the mid 30's with pump gas compressions and the usual aftermarket tuned exhaust type maximum rpm's right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowit Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 You realize that with just a faced mating surface, but otherwise typical OEM dome geometry... .032" squish clearance will yeild an MSV in the mid 30's with pump gas compressions and the usual aftermarket tuned exhaust type maximum rpm's right? With who's calculator? is 30s bad? One thing worth noting is gas speed is only one element of the equation. There are just many other factors at work. Any consideration for eddy currents in the chamber? B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckheight Posted June 7, 2009 Report Share Posted June 7, 2009 With who's calculator? is 30s bad? One thing worth noting is gas speed is only one element of the equation. There are just many other factors at work. Any consideration for eddy currents in the chamber? B LOL! With all due respect, I had thought you might have just made a typo or something... I use the same calculator that anyone with a few hundred$$$ to spend can use also. IMHO, given the parameters of this particular thread... "Not Good" would probably be a better fit. "only one element of the equation"... Really goes without saying don't you think? Funny you should ask... I did in fact consider the effects of eddy currents in 2-stroke hemisperical combustion chambers in the mid 80's and again in the mid to late 90's. Unless there is something new and improved going on with it, thanks but no thanks. Best of luck with it though :biggrin: :biggrin: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowit Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 I use the same calculator that anyone with a few hundred$$$ to spend can use also. Precisely my point. Many people rely on others math. I am just not comfortable with it. Not saying it is wrong but when I cannot see the equation, I am not comfortable using the data. Please feel free to visit any engineering firm with a "mysterious" calc and see how that works out... Just prefer to drive my own data. Again, there are some bright minds that come up with them though. Different strokes for different folks I guess... We have cut hundreds of Banshee heads for people all over the globe. Not sure what to say but we will stick with what works for us and our customers. :biggrin: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckheight Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Hmmm, not sure what to think about that... In your opinion, are Blair's math calcs incorrect? Last I heard his SAE papers were proven?? I could be wrong??? I can certaintly appreciate not being comfortable with someones elses math, data, etc. However, I am not sure what your point is with regard to "mysterious" math? Exactly on the "different strokes"... As I have already stated, I keep things pretty basic around here... I am defenitely not in a competitive or an adversarial position. :cool: ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowit Posted June 9, 2009 Report Share Posted June 9, 2009 Hmmm, not sure what to think about that... In your opinion, are Blair's math calcs incorrect? Last I heard his SAE papers were proven?? I could be wrong??? I can certaintly appreciate not being comfortable with someones elses math, data, etc. However, I am not sure what your point is with regard to "mysterious" math? Exactly on the "different strokes"... As I have already stated, I keep things pretty basic around here... I am defenitely not in a competitive or an adversarial position. :cool: ? Mysterious math just means an answer without knowing how it was derived. No equation means we cannot use it. We basically had to go back through and "prove" some things for ourselves and learned a few things along the way. Understand that we were just educated in the aerospace world that everything (math) gets proved and checked. Our numbers do come out differently than Blair but that is because we caught some design issues. Math is right, geometry is not from our observation. Again, that is only our observation but it has not failed us yet. Not rewriting the laws of physics over here but do like to make sure 5+3=7.. :biggrin: B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deckheight Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 I'm good with that. You did catch my attention with the "mysterious" math comment however. :woot: Always searching for the perfect combustion chamber for a specific application, who isn't... When someone I consider competent speaks I at least listen, sometimes ask questions too. Again, I had just thought you made a typo. We are obviously applying different methods to control CC temperature issues. Is it possible that you could elaborate or no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowit Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 (edited) I'm good with that. You did catch my attention with the "mysterious" math comment however. :woot: Always searching for the perfect combustion chamber for a specific application, who isn't... When someone I consider competent speaks I at least listen, sometimes ask questions too. Again, I had just thought you made a typo. We are obviously applying different methods to control CC temperature issues. Is it possible that you could elaborate or no? Well, I would not say we have all the answers. Just not enough hours in a day I guess. We have learned some unique differences in chamber designs relative to plug gap, heat range, spark kernel distance from piston, etc. That all plays in. You will also notice we do some squish work with our heads. It is our engineering goal to push the limits of MSV and heat because that ultimately drives the efficiency of an engine. An overall reduction in spark timing is what we are after because advanced timing is negative work done. We have been able to take timing well beyond what is typical and still get performance improvements. That just means there is a lot to be desired in the CC. Just monitoring AFR and EGT are very interesting with CC and timing work. MSV also has drastically different effects depending on fuels. Even for pump fuels, state of origin, and time of year purchased. ie, what additives are in the pump fuel. In a nut shell and to be honest, it is bothersome that we can only get 50% efficiency from the chemical to mechanical conversion of gasolines. We are always trying to find a way to increase efficiency. In a perfect world, efficiency and power should always go hand in hand. B Edited June 10, 2009 by blowit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.