| Air Flow Research 195cc street head: DAN BURK L98 ANGLE PLUG | ![]() |
||||||||||||||||||
| 68 cc combustion chamber, 2.02/1.60 valve | |||||||||||||||||||
| 195cc intake port volume, 64cc exhaust port volume | |||||||||||||||||||
Test #1: BASELINE FLOW TEST BEFORE MODIFICATION The stock heads, as delivered, were nearly within 10 cfm at all measureable lifts. At .400" lift on-up, the heads are always within 6 cfm of advertised flow data. |
|||||||||||||||||||
| TEST#1 INTAKE BASELINE flow test | |||||||||||||||||||
| VALVE LIFT (inches) | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | |||||||||||||
| ADVERTISED | N/A | 132 | 198 | 240 | 260 | 262 | |||||||||||||
| MEASURED(cfm @ 28" test pressure) | 63 | 126 | 186 | 234 | 254 | 266 | |||||||||||||
| CFM difference | N/A | -6.0 | -12.0 | -6.0 | -6.0 | +4.0 | |||||||||||||
| %DIFFERENCE | N/A | -4.65% | -6.25% | -2.53% | -2.33% | 1.52% | |||||||||||||
| %DIFFERENCE = 2*(MEASURED-ADVERTISED)/(MEASURED+ADVERTISED)*100% | |||||||||||||||||||
TEST#1 EXHAUST BASELINE flow test |
|||||||||||||||||||
| VALVE LIFT (inches) | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | |||||||||||||
| ADVERTISED | N/A | 108 | 156 | 178 | 190 | 194 | |||||||||||||
| MEASURED(cfm @ 28" test pressure) | 59 | 107 | 151 | 173 | 182 | 188 | |||||||||||||
| CFM difference | N/A | -1.0 | -5.0 | -5.0 | -8.0 | -6.0 | |||||||||||||
| %DIFFERENCE | N/A | -0.93% | -3.26% | -2.85% | -4.30% | -3.14% | |||||||||||||
| BASELINE E/I FLOW RATIO | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | |||||||||||||
| ADVERTISED | N/A | 81.82% | 78.79% | 74.17% | 73.08% | 74.05% | |||||||||||||
| MEASURED | 93.65% | 84.92% | 81.18% | 73.93% | 71.65% | 70.68% | |||||||||||||
| %DIFFERENCE | N/A | 3.72% | 2.99% | -0.32% | -1.97% | -4.66% | |||||||||||||
| TEST 2: ADD A 30 DEGREE BACK CUT TO INTAKE VALVE. This improved low lift flow by a few percent. Less efficient heads probably benefit more than in our case. | |||||||||||||||||||
| INTAKE LIFT (in inches) | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | |||||||||||||
| Before MOD (stock) (cfm@28" test pressure) | 63 | 126 | 186 | 234 | 254 | 266 | |||||||||||||
| After MOD(30 degree backcut) (CFM @ 28" t.p.) | 65 | 133 | 189 | 235 | 255 | 267 | |||||||||||||
| DIFFERENCE (CFM) | 2.0 | 7.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | |||||||||||||
| %DIFFERENCE | +3.1% | +5.4% | +1.6% | +0.4% | +0.4% | +0.4% | |||||||||||||
| Test # 3: EXH MOD#1: RECONTOUR VALVE GUIDE IN EXHAUST PORT. This improved exhaust air flow by only a small percentage at lifts greater than .500", but may have sacrificed some low-lift air flow. |
|
||||||||||||||||||
| EXHAUST LIFT (in inches) | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.7 | ||||||||||||
| BEFORE EXH. MOD1 (cfm @ 28" test pressure) | 59 | 107 | 151 | 173 | 182 | 188 | 192 | ||||||||||||
| AFTER EXH. MOD1 (cfm @ 28" test pressure) | 57.2 | 106.1 | 151.4 | 173 | 182.8 | 189.7 | 194.6 | ||||||||||||
| DIFFERENCE (CFM) | 1.8 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0 | 0.8 | 1.7 | 2.6 | ||||||||||||
| %DIFFERENCE | -3.1% | -0.8% | +0.3% | 0% | +0.4% | +0.9% | +1.35% | ||||||||||||
| Test # 4: EXH. MOD#2 Slightly modify port under seat, clean up around seat opening, add 30 degree back-cut to exhaust valve. At last, something that made a significant difference at useable valve lift. I also had the exhaust valve undercut at the same time and polished the port, but I doubt they had as much effect as the area around (and just under) the seat. One thing to note is that the air flow is now within two percent of AFR advertised street-port flow numbers. | |||||||||||||||||||
| EXHAUST LIFT (in inches) | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.7 | ||||||||||||
| EXH. MOD1 (cfm @ 28" test pressure) | 57.2 | 106.1 | 151.4 | 173 | 182.8 | 189.7 | 194.6 | ||||||||||||
| AFTER EXH. MOD2 (cfm @ 28" test pressure) | 57.2 | 106.1 | 153 | 177 | 187 | 193 | 198 | ||||||||||||
| DIFFERENCE (CFM) | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.6 | 4.0 | 4.2 | 3.3 | 3.4 | ||||||||||||
| %difference, MOD2 versus MOD1. | 0% | 0% | 1.9% | 2.3% | 2.3% | 1.7% | 1.7% | ||||||||||||
| %difference, against advertised flow numbers. | -1.77% | -1.94% | -0.56% | -1.59% | -0.52% | ||||||||||||||
Test # 5: EXH. MOD#3 SQUARE UP THE "D" PORT & SLIGHT RECONTOUR UNDER VALVE SEAT (per test 4). Air Flow Research recommended making this change and it shows significant improvement at all valve lifts. However, some low lift flow improvement might be attributed to my recontour just under the valve seat. I removed a little more material (.025" or so). This will be my final change to the exhaust port. I've exceeded advertised "street-port" flow numbers at .400" on-up. Low lift is nearly the same as advertised flow numbers. |
|||||||||||||||||||
| EXHAUST LIFT (in inches) | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.7 | ||||||||||||
| EXH. MOD2 (cfm @ 28" test pressure) | 57.2 | 106.1 | 153 | 177 | 187 | 193 | 198 | ||||||||||||
| AFTER EXH. MOD3 (cfm @ 28" test pressure) | 57.2 | 107 | 155 | 184 | 196 | 203 | 209 | ||||||||||||
| DIFFERENCE (CFM) | 0.0 | 0.9 | 2.0 | 7.0 | 9.0 | 10.0 | 11.0 | ||||||||||||
| DIFFERENCE VERSUS BASELINE FLOW (CFM) | -1.8 | 0 | +4.0 | +11.0 | +14.0 | +15.0 | +17.0 | ||||||||||||
| DIFFERENCE VERSUS ADVERTISED FLOW (CFM) | -1.0 | -1.0 | 6.0 | 6.0 | 9.0 | ||||||||||||||
| %difference, MOD3 versus MOD2. | 0% | 0.84% | 1.3% | 3.9% | 4.7% | 5.1% | 5.4% | ||||||||||||
Test # 6: INTAKE MOD #2: RECONTOUR VALVE GUIDE, CLEAN UP AROUND VALVE SEAT. I noted that the intake vale seat was recessed into the combustion chamber, leaving a small "step". I used a 1/8 inch sanding roll to grind off the step, leaving a smooth transition from the top of the valve seat into the combustion chamber. I also found a tiny sharp edge inside the valve seat, where the seat meets the aluminum. A few seconds with a sanding roll and it was gone. In addition, I removed the three prominent ridges that are figments of the CNC program. Interesting airflow improvements resulted across all lifts. Low-lift flow improved considerably. High lift improved by a percent or two. Mid-lift (0.2 through 0.5 inches) still needs some help. Could the short side radius need attention? We'll give the intake port another modification & flow test before applying what we learned to the remaining ports in the cylinder heads. |
|||||||||||||||||||
| INTAKE LIFT (in inches) | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.7 | ||||||||||||
| INT MOD1 (cfm @ 28" test pressure) | 65 | 133 | 189 | 235 | 255 | 267 | 272 | ||||||||||||
| AFTER INT. MOD2 (cfm @ 28" test pressure) | 68 | 135 | 192 | 236 | 259 | 270 | 273 | ||||||||||||
| DIFFERENCE (CFM) | 3.0 | 2.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | ||||||||||||
| DIFFERENCE VERSUS ADVERTISED FLOW (CFM) | 3.0 | -6.0 | -4.0 | -1.0 | 8.0 | ||||||||||||||
| %difference, MOD2 versus MOD1. | 4.5% | 1.5% | 1.6% | 0.4% | 1.6% | 1.1% | |||||||||||||
Last modified January 27, 2003