:::RHMT::: Real Home Made Turbo

General Category => Hybrid/Tech => Topic started by: Joseph Davis on August 28, 2009, 10:26:29 AM

Title: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on August 28, 2009, 10:26:29 AM
Is there any significant problem with running intake valves in place of exhaust valves, and vice versa?  This would be for a NA application, IIRC the exhaust valves on a turbo car are a different variant of stainless and of course all exhaust valves have more guide clearance. 

I'm sitting here fapping to a catalog of OEM valve dimension and my hamster wheel is spinning.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: dvst8r on August 28, 2009, 10:39:49 AM
I have run all intake valves in a cummins head with out issue. Many trips past 1800 F egt's. I would say most valves should be okay in either app.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on August 28, 2009, 12:04:16 PM
Why didn't you drown in the huricane?
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on August 28, 2009, 12:29:00 PM
Do you have a turbo car?
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on August 28, 2009, 01:09:17 PM
If I wanted a $500 kit making 225 whp I would have one.   :mexi:
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: DmC on August 28, 2009, 01:14:15 PM
If I wanted a $500 kit making 225 whp I would have one.   :mexi:
Why would you not want one. Are you fucking stupid?  ;D
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on August 28, 2009, 01:22:46 PM
If I wanted a $500 kit making 225 whp I would have one.   :mexi:
Why would you not want one. Are you fucking stupid?  ;D

225 isn't fun anymore. 
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: DmC on August 28, 2009, 01:23:54 PM
If I wanted a $500 kit making 225 whp I would have one.   :mexi:
Why would you not want one. Are you fucking stupid?  ;D
Whatever he's scheming on is going to fail again.  Only then will he see the light.
See this is where I have everyone on the site beat. Usually don't post to much about my car making claims and bragging. And when it does fail as all turbo cars do atleast once a year I get on it and have the thing fixed so fast that even locals never knew it was down. Except for Fowwee he holds my tools for me.  while he talks about things like tensile loading and his fasination with det cans.
  He truely is the only good help in town.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: DmC on August 28, 2009, 01:25:13 PM
If I wanted a $500 kit making 225 whp I would have one.   :mexi:
Why would you not want one. Are you fucking stupid?  ;D

225 isn't fun anymore. 
But 140 is?
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on August 28, 2009, 01:33:23 PM
If I wanted a $500 kit making 225 whp I would have one.   :mexi:
Why would you not want one. Are you fucking stupid?  ;D

225 isn't fun anymore. 
But 140 is?

From a stock cam D16?  Yup.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on August 28, 2009, 01:38:11 PM
High compression turbo D-series is the worst possible parts combination I think I have ever heard of.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on August 28, 2009, 01:40:12 PM
I have no desire to make an engine bleed oil into the combustion chamber due to poor design.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: 88dx on August 28, 2009, 02:24:23 PM
put a stick in that hamster wheel, when its spinning nothing good happens  :mexi:
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on August 28, 2009, 02:59:55 PM
Some OEM cars the exhaust valves have s black something coating on them where as the intakes don't. Mazdas are this way.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on August 28, 2009, 03:03:01 PM
Black Nitride coating I think, but no I really don't know. It's harder than the valve itself. A thermal barrier coating of sorts to keep the surface of the valve cooler.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on August 28, 2009, 05:22:17 PM
Black nitride and chromium are the two popular OEM coatings.  There are writeups on them, and the correct guides to use.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: d112crzy on August 31, 2009, 11:55:19 AM
He's building an NA K.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on August 31, 2009, 12:07:33 PM
Mr Davis.. answer my goddamn question.  What are you trying to achieve?

To increase headflow??  I thought it was fucking obvious, Dullard.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 08, 2009, 12:34:35 AM
They are on to much more advanced coatings and shit now..  Lookup Exceldyne

I think you'll be ok   Just have to keep your timing right
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on September 08, 2009, 09:59:37 AM
Ferrea is the only valve I've seen that withstands being revved past 8500rpms, and if you go to PRI and talk with the tech guys at each booth you understand why that is. 
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on September 08, 2009, 12:19:32 PM
Also, could a much larger exhaust valve (relative to the size of a given intake valve) hurt performance?
Yeap. If you make it too big it becomes too shrouded. And heavier.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on September 08, 2009, 12:28:13 PM
1.25:1 is the typical ratio of intake:exhaust.  This may change depending on port dynamics, flow, and ideal powerband.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 08, 2009, 08:02:02 PM
for a N/A motor,   Would the larger exhaust valves not help in a turbo application where you have higher backpressure than N/A or supercharged?

I was thinking 1:1 or close

and Ferrea valves are fucking awesome, unless you go del west or exceldyne :noel:
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 08, 2009, 08:03:06 PM
Also, could a much larger exhaust valve (relative to the size of a given intake valve) hurt performance?
Yeap. If you make it too big it becomes too shrouded. And heavier.

Pent roof chambers naturally unshroud the valves at higher lifts
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on September 09, 2009, 12:35:47 AM
for a N/A motor,   Would the larger exhaust valves not help in a turbo application where you have higher backpressure than N/A or supercharged?

I was thinking 1:1 or close

Everyone I've heard discuss it, who could find their ass with both hands, says make the intakes larger to get more air in and the exhaust finds it's own way out.  The 752 whp record setting D16 is supposed to have big intakes and stock sized exhausts.  There are a number of superbikes that increased power dramatically in the late 90s by making the exhaust valves smaller while keeping the geometry/CR/cams approx the same and bolting on some different induction and exhaust, Motoguy or whatever his name is who advocates the hard break in method has some writeups on it. 

Still, what an engine wants is what an engine wants.  I would not be surprised, at all, to find out that engines wanting bigger exhaust valves (especially in a non forced induction app) is commonplace.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 09, 2009, 07:02:00 PM
I figured the scavengin effect in a turbocharged engine to be minimal therefore larger exhaust valves would help compensate flow losses.   Theory for you...   

need to take a motor, run it, swap heads to the larger Exh valves run again and see what happens.   Might pick up, might need to be sent to the chineese for melt down...
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on September 09, 2009, 07:27:10 PM
Also, could a much larger exhaust valve (relative to the size of a given intake valve) hurt performance?
Yeap. If you make it too big it becomes too shrouded. And heavier.

Pent roof chambers naturally unshroud the valves at higher lifts

Higher lift and bigger valves are two different things. So what's yoru point?

You always want the intakes bigger than the exhaust. If you make the exhaust bigger, this compromises the intake size, which is more crucial. The engine has to do work to pull the air in. But on the exhaust side the valves are opened before BDC, and most of the mass of exhaust exits on its own before the engine has to do work to push it out.

Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 09, 2009, 07:46:07 PM
First off technically air is not pulled in.  its pushed from a higher pressure to a lower...  Understand that before you comment. 

A pent roof chamber provides little shrouding, therefore bigger valves should not have a problem with shrouding, regardless of lift. 

If Boosted with a Turbocharger, you have far more exhaust pressure and volume to release into a restriction, if the turbo is efficient and has low back pressure all is well, but is not always the case.  If you have a system where you have alot of backpressure, more exhaust flow will benefit.

Also, if the chamber is not entirely purged of exhaust gasses, your wasting energy re-compressing heated inert exhaust gasses from the previous cycle.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on September 09, 2009, 07:58:52 PM
First off technically air is not pulled in.  its pushed from a higher pressure to a lower...  Understand that before you comment. 

A pent roof chamber provides little shrouding, therefore bigger valves should not have a problem with shrouding, regardless of lift. 

If Boosted with a Turbocharger, you have far more exhaust pressure and volume to release into a restriction, if the turbo is efficient and has low back pressure all is well, but is not always the case.  If you have a system where you have alot of backpressure, more exhaust flow will benefit.

Also, if the chamber is not entirely purged of exhaust gasses, your wasting energy re-compressing heated inert exhaust gasses from the previous cycle.

You're wrong. The pressure in the cylinder right when the intake valve opens is higher than the intake charge. The residual exhaust gasses push into the intake contaminating the charge untill the piston decends and expands the chage in the cylinder enough that it's of lower pressure than the intake, at which point the charge flows in.

I said bigger valves will be shrouded more. There is nothing wrong with that statement. I also said bigger valves will be heavier, which is also true. You can talk combustion chamber design all day long, but my points still stand.

Pressure and flow are two different things. If you have high backpressure from an incorrectly sized turbine, then you need to select a correctly sized turbine, not change the exhaust valve size.

The chamber is always contaminated with exhaust gasses. Welcome to <100% VE.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 09, 2009, 08:10:37 PM

You're wrong. The pressure in the cylinder right when the intake valve opens is higher than the intake charge. The residual exhaust gasses push into the intake contaminating the charge untill the piston decends and expands the chage in the cylinder enough that it's of lower pressure than the intake, at which point the charge flows in.

I said bigger valves will be shrouded more. There is nothing wrong with that statement. I also said bigger valves will be heavier, which is also true. You can talk combustion chamber design all day long, but my points still stand.

Pressure and flow are two different things. If you have high backpressure from an incorrectly sized turbine, then you need to select a correctly sized turbine, not change the exhaust valve size.

The chamber is always contaminated with exhaust gasses. Welcome to <100% VE.
Look up Scavenging,  your off as usual, how do you think N/A motors can achieve VE's above 100%?
Scavenging and intake pulse tuning.

I said nothing about valve weight, easily overcome with spring pressure.

You really have no clue...
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on September 09, 2009, 08:22:00 PM

You're wrong. The pressure in the cylinder right when the intake valve opens is higher than the intake charge. The residual exhaust gasses push into the intake contaminating the charge untill the piston decends and expands the chage in the cylinder enough that it's of lower pressure than the intake, at which point the charge flows in.

I said bigger valves will be shrouded more. There is nothing wrong with that statement. I also said bigger valves will be heavier, which is also true. You can talk combustion chamber design all day long, but my points still stand.

Pressure and flow are two different things. If you have high backpressure from an incorrectly sized turbine, then you need to select a correctly sized turbine, not change the exhaust valve size.

The chamber is always contaminated with exhaust gasses. Welcome to <100% VE.
Look up Scavenging,  your off as usual, how do you think N/A motors can achieve VE's above 100%?
Scavenging and intake pulse tuning.

I said nothing about valve weight, easily overcome with spring pressure.

You really have no clue...
I see you're not arguing pressure anymore... :)
I'm talking about a turbocharged engine obviously. Even with a "100%" VE N/A engine, you still have a combustion chamber's worth of exhaust gasses. Over 100% and you begin to flush the chamber, but you'll never get all the exhaust gasses out.  I don't know. I understand.


Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on September 09, 2009, 08:31:42 PM
Eh, I'm siding more with Pat on this.  There are a lot of variables at play and some give-take taking place, but for the most part Pat is correct.

While exhaust pressure is elevated, so is intake pressure.  For the majority of turbocharged vehicles on this planet the ratio of inlet to outlet pressure is roughly the same as a NA vehicle.  The highest discrepancy with respect to exhaust is always before spool occurs... who cares, you don't make any power there anyway.

Also, pent roof yadda yadda.  4G63 are shrouded from the factory and flow like crap regardless of impressive static flowbench numbers.  They outflow Honda B-series yet make mediochre power.   There are other examples.

Using the piston as an expander on the inlet stroke is all well and good for a blower car, but when you are dealing with a Cup motor or a short RS high rpm NA setup or some turbo setups the piston very much sucks the intake charge past the intake valve restriction - lessening this restriction makes it easier to fit more air mass.  With respect to the exhaust, the gasses compress and if they take a little longer to escape the chamber well tuning the ignition timing to place the bulk of that exhaust pressure at a good rod angle simply means more of it is spent moving the engine down the road.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 09, 2009, 08:32:38 PM
This discussion specified Mr. Davis was considering N/A. 
if you read the opening thread you would not be talking...


Is there any significant problem with running intake valves in place of exhaust valves, and vice versa?  This would be for a NA application, IIRC the exhaust valves on a turbo car are a different variant of stainless and of course all exhaust valves have more guide clearance. 

I'm sitting here fapping to a catalog of OEM valve dimension and my hamster wheel is spinning.
Also still with proper tuning there will be a pressure pulse arriving at the tintake valve at the time it opens overriding any residual pressure in the chamber.   (runner length tuning)
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 09, 2009, 08:39:08 PM

 the piston very much sucks the intake charge past the intake valve restriction

Mr. Davis Im dissappointed.  Air in regards to Absolute pressure can never be sucked or pulled.  it is simply pushed from a higher pressure to a lower pressure.  when static, the air may have any pressure but no differential.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on September 09, 2009, 08:43:50 PM
This discussion specified Mr. Davis was considering N/A. 
if you read the opening thread you would not be talking...


Is there any significant problem with running intake valves in place of exhaust valves, and vice versa?  This would be for a NA application, IIRC the exhaust valves on a turbo car are a different variant of stainless and of course all exhaust valves have more guide clearance. 

I'm sitting here fapping to a catalog of OEM valve dimension and my hamster wheel is spinning.
Also still with proper tuning there will be a pressure pulse arriving at the tintake valve at the time it opens overriding any residual pressure in the chamber.   (runner length tuning)


I'm not a big fan of intake harmonics.  For every harmonic there is an anti-harmonic, it all averages out meaning if you mathematically masturbate to pipe organs have you accomplished anything other than wasting your time?  Exhaust harmonics are somehat important, depending on the application.



 the piston very much sucks the intake charge past the intake valve restriction

Mr. Davis Im dissappointed.  Air in regards to Absolute pressure can never be sucked or pulled.  it is simply pushed from a higher pressure to a lower pressure.  when static, the air may have any pressure but no differential.

Cool, let's kill the discussion off for the laymen: the near-atmospheric crankcase pressure on the bottom of the piston is one hell of a cockblocker that fights engine acceleration and a bigger intake valve helps.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 09, 2009, 08:46:18 PM
edit: You may also wish to consider crank case pressure, as it is reduced, your effective pressure above the piston rises in proportion.
I have a 5 stage dry sump setup for when I finally get my shit right.  (probably overkill)
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on September 09, 2009, 08:48:23 PM
edit: You may also wish to consider crank case pressure, as it is reduced, your effective pressure above the piston rises in proportion.

What? That makes no sense.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on September 09, 2009, 09:20:30 PM
It made sense, read it again.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on September 09, 2009, 09:57:56 PM
It made sense, read it again.
I don't understand it, please explain. And he or someone crossed it out too.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 09, 2009, 10:08:05 PM
I was saying the exact thing JD started off into, as I composed mine, JD posted
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 09, 2009, 10:09:35 PM
then he called me a Nigger on Myspace
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on September 09, 2009, 10:18:06 PM
I was saying the exact thing JD started off into, as I composed mine, JD posted
What he said makes sense. What you said does not. You're saying that by reducing the pressure on the bottom of the piston, the "effective" pressure above it will somehow change. This makes no sense.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 09, 2009, 10:20:08 PM
the differential of pressure is what moves the piston, reduce it on the bottom and it moves down easier.

that whole air getting pushed not pulled thing...
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on September 09, 2009, 10:36:29 PM
the differential of pressure is what moves the piston, reduce it on the bottom and it moves down easier.

that whole air getting pushed not pulled thing...
So you're saying that reducing the pressure of the air below the piston  means the piston does less work compressing the air below it as it travels up and down the cylinder. Yeap. But this does nothing to the pressure above the piston. Just means the piston does less work on the air in the crankcase.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 09, 2009, 10:39:33 PM
you look at ambient too much, you have to look at absolute.  there is a reason race cars run vacuum pumps and dry sump...  Dyno Proven Powa
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on September 09, 2009, 10:45:58 PM
you look at ambient too much, you have to look at absolute.  there is a reason race cars run vacuum pumps and dry sump...  Dyno Proven Powa
Oh I know it works, and so do you. You just explained it the wrong way. You wouldn't oil a rusty bearing and tell me it spins better because you reduce the effective pressure. It's because you reduce the coefficient of dynamic friction by oiling it. Similarly, vac pumps remove some of the mass of air out of the engine, so the pistons do less work moving it around. And the vacuum also helps seal the rings up too.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Conceptz-X on September 09, 2009, 10:52:47 PM
and Dry Sump helps remove the Oil Windage further reducing drag
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on September 10, 2009, 12:53:21 AM
you look at ambient too much, you have to look at absolute.  there is a reason race cars run vacuum pumps and dry sump...  Dyno Proven Powa
Oh I know it works, and so do you. You just explained it the wrong way.

First he hops on me for speaking layman, and now you hop on him.  Let's just get over that shit because it impedes the exchange of ideas.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: DmC on September 10, 2009, 02:08:30 AM
Guys who use big words to impress have small ideas.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: widebody93 on September 10, 2009, 03:21:22 AM
Lol true story Dennis.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on September 10, 2009, 09:12:30 AM
you look at ambient too much, you have to look at absolute.  there is a reason race cars run vacuum pumps and dry sump...  Dyno Proven Powa
Oh I know it works, and so do you. You just explained it the wrong way.
First he hops on me for speaking layman, and now you hop on him.  Let's just get over that shit because it impedes the exchange of ideas.

I didn't realize what he was saying because he said it wrong. He'd already posted some other shit about pressure that was wrong, so I was thinking WTF. We don't need any more misinformation out there. Big words or not.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on September 10, 2009, 09:17:34 AM
Guys who use big words to impress have small ideas.

My small ideas are power, and traction.
you look at ambient too much, you have to look at absolute.  there is a reason race cars run vacuum pumps and dry sump...  Dyno Proven Powa
Oh I know it works, and so do you. You just explained it the wrong way.
First he hops on me for speaking layman, and now you hop on him.  Let's just get over that shit because it impedes the exchange of ideas.

I didn't realize what he was saying because he said it wrong. He'd already posted some other shit about pressure that was wrong, so I was thinking WTF. We don't need any more misinformation out there. Big words or not.

Pot, kettle, black.


Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: patsmx5 on September 10, 2009, 09:19:11 AM
Guys who use big words to impress have small ideas.

My small ideas are power, and traction.
you look at ambient too much, you have to look at absolute.  there is a reason race cars run vacuum pumps and dry sump...  Dyno Proven Powa
Oh I know it works, and so do you. You just explained it the wrong way.
First he hops on me for speaking layman, and now you hop on him.  Let's just get over that shit because it impedes the exchange of ideas.

I didn't realize what he was saying because he said it wrong. He'd already posted some other shit about pressure that was wrong, so I was thinking WTF. We don't need any more misinformation out there. Big words or not.

Pot, kettle, black.



ok
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Robb on September 10, 2009, 01:37:55 PM
You guys are Aaron Caking up this thread. 


Reported.

























Jd, I remember reading in that faggot Taylor's 1st book about how he believed a I to E valve ratio closer to 1:1 would make more midrange torque, then proceeded to do nothing to verify the claim other than reference some dated materials others wrote.  What is your take on this?  Also, what does Sir Harry Ricardo think about it?
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on September 10, 2009, 03:30:07 PM
Taylor didn't do anything, not even write his own book.  He left that for undergraduates to do.  Try to verify his referrences, a good third of them have nothing to do with what he's saying and another third don't quite mean what he's saying.   Still a good primer.

As for Good Sir Harry, http://s256.photobucket.com/albums/hh166/joeymisanthropy/Literature/Ricardo/ (http://s256.photobucket.com/albums/hh166/joeymisanthropy/Literature/Ricardo/)
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Robb on September 10, 2009, 03:38:24 PM
Those fucking rotary coils in your fotofuket crashed my work computer.  Goddamnd rotaries.  >:(
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on September 10, 2009, 03:50:05 PM
The burned out Ignition #1, #3, #4, and Aux Out drivers in this Haltech, courtesy of Vlad the impaler, crashed my paycheck for today.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Robb on September 10, 2009, 03:57:13 PM
The burned out Ignition #1, #3, #4, and Aux Out drivers in this Haltech, courtesy of Vlad the impaler, crashed my paycheck for today.

Really?  Aaron Cake would tell you that they are more reliable than the Sun, and make rotaries produce no harmful gases, and emit only flowers and kittens from the tailpipe.

Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Joseph Davis on September 10, 2009, 04:33:56 PM
I thought only Microtech was Cakeboy approved?  Not that I paid enough attention to remember.
Title: Re: Valve interchange
Post by: Robb on September 10, 2009, 04:49:11 PM
I thought only Microtech was Cakeboy approved?  Not that I paid enough attention to remember.

No he was all about some fucking haltech.  Piss poor shielding my biggest complaint, Ign. interference and other junk.  Supposedly the new stuff is better, but somehow I doubt it.