|
|
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 191
|
3.2SS head porting etc
G`day gents and coming Merry Christmas to you.
Well it`s my turn to ask silly questions about porting. I have a build going on based on 82 SC, 11.5CR, 98mm bore (classic) with Triumph ITB`s. The ITB`s seat on PMO style manifolds. I don`t remember off the top of my head but seems like ITB`s are 42 (45?) or so mm lower diameter, manifolds lower diameter is 30.3 mm, small sized ports on the heads. Wouldn`t those 30.3 mm work as a restrictor? So, I have a chance to port my heads, enlarge intake valves (51.5mm), match runners, what would you recommend to do with the manifolds? Keep them? Enlarge them? I`m planning to have a rev happy up to 8k rpm street car (pretty hot street car), with cams built to specs based on ported head flows, so kinda custom or semi custom. Or whatever profile will mach those flow charts. And what should I do about exhaust valves\ports. Share you wisdom would you. Cheers
|
||
|
|
|
|
It's a 914 ...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ossining, NY
Posts: 4,745
|
Sounds like a fun build! Re: manifold sizing, conventional wisdom is to match the upper manifold to your throttle bodies and the low manifold to your intake ports (and blend in between). I don't have hp numbers, but if you are optimizing other aspects of your engine for performance, I'd think it would make sense to match the manifolds as well.
Scott |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,244
|
Why are the PMO manifolds so small, what were they made for. 3.2 heads are 42-43 mm and SC heads are 38-39mm at the intake port. Bob
|
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,241
|
I'm running Triumph ITBs with Clay's manifold. The bottom of Clay's manifold where it meets the head is about 38-39mm, so port your intakes at about the same. I went with 38mm exhaust ports. I run a twin plug 2.8 with earlier heads. Love the EFI/ITB setup
__________________
No physical quantity completely explains its own existence |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 191
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Anyway thank you gentlemen! |
|||
|
|
|
|
It's a 914 ...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ossining, NY
Posts: 4,745
|
What is the intended use for the car? Street, autocross, track?
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 191
|
|||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 127
|
I would discuss the whole engine plan with the whiz doing the heads. If ya don’t have a whiz on the head work, it may be worth looking for one. The whole package has to be designed to work together to avoid disappointment. Been there, done that.
__________________
Mark 1987 3.2 "Nancy's ride" ('cause Nancy owned it for 27 years before me) 1984 3.5 “Charley” (Charles owned it for 27 years) |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
|
Quote:
Whats the size difference between the 675R and the 955? Are there any Triumph ITBs that are 45/46mm? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Josh @joshgrowth |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 191
|
|||
|
|
|
|
Registered
|
I highly recommend you find someone that understands how to properly port heads. My engine guy was a guru on porting heads. He let me work on them for a couple of days with his guidance and then he worked on them for a couple of days. They were beautiful when completed like a polished vortex. Removed a zip lock sandwich bag full of aluminum shaving . I have a 3.2 SS twin plug with 46 PMO carbs. Also running 98 JE 10:5 Good luck building a rev happy beast.
__________________
82 SC Twin Plug 3.2 SS ,46 PMO
|
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northeast
Posts: 464
|
Keep in mind the intended use. Intake velocity is important for a "driveable" car and going wild on port size can really kill low speed driveability. As has others have said-find a good head guy and match everything.
__________________
Mark www.exotechpower.com 1981 Targa-messed with. 91 C2 supercharged track rat Radical Prosport-irritates the GT3 guys 40 years of rebuilding services |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 191
|
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,964
|
macssc911 - what part of Charlotte are you in? I’m about 5 minutes from Forbes shop.
Todd
__________________
'81 SC |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
|
Todd, Think we know each other, I’m down in Marvin. I lived at Blackforest for a couple of years When we pulled engine last time and twin plugged I was out here ever week for about 6 months.
__________________
82 SC Twin Plug 3.2 SS ,46 PMO
|
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 191
|
Ok, so far I have an opinion about making those intake runners 39mm, my TB bottom ends 42mm diameter, so if I`ll go with 51.5mm intake valves (which are pretty huge) there is some sense in making intake runners of 41mm. One of the builds on PP is 2.8 with 39mm intake runners. This gives me an idea of 41 for 3.2 kinda not bad...
Any ideas? |
||
|
|
|
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
This. More than one engine has suffered from the bigger is better mentality. |
||
|
|
|