Cylinder Head Grooves
 

Has anyone ever seen this site? www.somender-singh.com

I read his article in Popular Science a long time ago and it seemed legit, the info on his site and forum look good.

The groove lets you run high compression ratios on regular gas (10-11:1). This gives you more torque, so you can run lower rpms when driving for better mileage, it also decreases engine temperatures, so you can run lower octane.

I've been planning a 350 swap, so I figured I could do this to my 305. That way I won't feel as bad if it ****s out on me. And if it doesn't, all the better.

with out the use of a dyno and many hours your combo may want something different ( the cut 10* to the left made more power ) but to find that would take great effort and a pile of zoom and the cost would out weigh the cost savings i have done all kinds of things that as i read and agreed with, also the motors they showed in their pix none were low performance type all looked to me to be looking for max effort and you need high oct fuel for many reasons, i might be off bace but its the way i see it, could it hurt NO, if the motor is well known and repeats at the race track and you have the will and the time go for it than you will know for sure jz

I didn't really look at the small engine testing, although it seemed a single groove was best.

In the bigger car engines, it seems to make a "wild" motor (high compression, larger cam) behave better, this would let me pull more performance out of an engine and stay somewhat efficient.

I think I'm going to e-mail the guy named "automotivebreath". He has done it to a few chevy v8's including an LS1. I'll ask him how the motors have held up.

the question i would ask is how is the EGT affected is the plug temp ( heat range ) changed how is carb IE injection mixture affected ( jetting ) is the depth of the gruve in relationship to compression a play ( more deaper ? ) would a vortex intake spacer help ???? and some more jz

multiple flame fronts are not a good thing. the two fronts will collide and you will have a very unstable atmosphere in the chamber.

Thats a very interesting site, i looked at it and i gave the site to someone that i know he'll tell me if it is really worth trying, he's like a guru at cylinder heads to make the most power from very small intake runners and it works i have a set, my runners are at 257cc and flow 357 on intake, and motor made 844hp. JR1.

I saw this site a while back and posted the same question on the nastyz28 forum. The overall response was negative but I'm still curious. The main complaint was that the sharp edges created by the "groove" would create hot spots and this would lead to innefficient combustion among other things. I would like to give it a try myself on a cheap pair of Vortecs (maybe the 58cc 305 heads) and bolt them up to my 400 to see what it does. I'd probably radius the edges of the groove and the points at the edge of the chamber to reduce the chance of hot spots. If you end up trying this, make sure to post up your results.

I think in the guys "Rules" he says to file any sharp edges down.

Also, this groove doesn't do anything spectacular on its own, just putting the groove in without changing your combo would be pointless.

It essentially shoots a jet of flame into the quench/squish area. This makes a more efficient burn and lowering temperatures. This lets you increase compression and maybe run a slightly more aggressive cam, without losing manners or needing higher octane. More energy is used instead of slow burns that make more heat.

I definitely want to try it out, my 305 is the unwitting subject. This mod really seems to help a motor the farther it is from max efficiency. My LG4 in mostly stock form isn't making anywhere near its limit.

I my guess was just the oppisite air from the shelf has priority because it covers a larger surface and has a great deal of trapped air in a 3 sided box if you looked at the piston on the site it showed the machined valve pockets were altered but that is only because the valve sizes were increased the point at witch the 2 valves meet in the center that area was reduced down about 1/2 way and more interesting was the fact that the entire top of the .375 thous dome piston was blacked over not something you see very often meaning complete and total flame front burn for me, i think the gruve sprayes an air fuel mixture behind the burnt flame front coming at the shelf super idea what all this means ???? the charge is total and complete, does it make more power ? , but for sure if you have ever seen a real dyno run their is an elapsed time the run has logged from the time the throttel is put to wide open to max engine speed ( power ),( the time it takes to get their ) is where i think this has a play, not making more power but maybe you can actualy read , but in real life getting their quicker through the rpm range ( motor reves up faster under load ) a real good thing i have a j head bridge port in my shop you can use it to do the gruve if you are going to do it jz

If anyone tries this, dont do it on a motor you care about. Its a neat idea and in theory almost works, but if it really makes multiple flame fronts at once, its gonna detonate. Two flame fronts colliding is what you get when preignition happens or if a hot spot ignites the mix before the spark plug.

I guess its good that I don't hold any special love for my 305 then.

With pre-ignition the second flame front doesn't happen in sync with the one started from the spark plug. This is two at the same time, or, one with a jet coming off. This fast burning uses more energy and less heat, so it can get rid of detonation. Theoretically.

You want the flame to travel through the whole chamber and "swirl" when the plug goes off, thats why swirl port heads make great down low response. They stink because they have obstructions in the intake path that screw up all the mid-range to high-range airflow. A modded combustion chamber can do the same thing without putting crap in the intake path.

I can only think why this would work great and look at others results. The proof will be in the pudding sometime this summer if tuition isn't going to kill me.

true, pre-ignition is when one flame front starts before the plug lights off, but the actual "ping" noise that you hear when it's happening is the two flame fronts running into eachother. It's true that two flame fronts will make energy quicker, but it cannot make more assuming 1 flame front will consume all the fuel.

besides, you'd want the flame front to take its sweet time. the longer it pushes down on the piston, the more effective power you're making.

And if this "groove technology" is so amazing, why dont they use it in racing?

What type of racing are you referring to?

I know a several cars with grooved heads running NHRA sportsman categories in division four.

I truly can't see how this mod is giving those types of gains?

Isn't this s cheap-man's version of the swirl port / fast burn heads? Couldn't the same results be achieved by installing "the Tornado"? Don't people drive differently when being conscious to save fuel?

I'll admit I didn't read all the stories, but the ones that I did read seems they all machined the heads or other changes, they didn't simply take a motor with many miles, pull the heads, cut the grooves, and reinstall and get big gains. No, they took old motor, rebuild and machine the heads (which reduces the C.C.) and then they saw gains. DUH, They'd see gains without the freaken grooves!

11:1 Comp on pump gas? And how much compression is the cam bleeding off?

Sorry, I might believe a 2-3, MAYBE 5% increase my turning your old heads into a semi-late model swirl port, but these numbers just aren't logical to me.

Take a new car with an LS2 motor, Get MPG and dyno, do nothing more then the grooves and don't tell the owner ( so they don't drive any differently ).

Then give me fuel consumption and dyno results and I'll be a believer.

I didn’t post here to argue if this works or to defend the claims of others. I don’t have anything to sell or services to provide. On the other hand I have experience with this and can provide details if interested.

Certainly, I have no problem with being made a believer.

I have grooved a couple of dozen engines, mostly gen I, II & III SBC for high performance use. The groove alters squish flow to provide a high velocity stream of turbulent air fuel mixture into the developing flame kernel. The effect of the turbulence is to promote mixing of air and fuel into a more homogenous mixture that burns more quickly and efficiently. Here's a set from a 383 LT1 street engine I'm finishing up.

http://members.cox.net/dwynne7/june%204.4.jpg

The people at www.mpgresearch.com and http://forums.turbobricks.com/ are using the idea to reduce fuel consumption with 4 bangers.

My favorite project was Paul Pitre's Super Gas car; powered by a grooved 355 CI SBC.
9.90 ET at 140 MPH on the throttle stop, idles at 600RPM cold.
Low 9's off the stop

http://members.cox.net/raunch/pitre%20r111.jpg

http://members.cox.net/dwynne7/pitre%20r1.jpg
Cheers,
AB

It's the man himself from Mr. Singh's site!

I wish I could try this, but being a college student with one car, I don't have much money or time for this. Maybe by the end of the summer I will have the funds.

Animal
 

Hi Animal, I spent some time in Jersey a while back, especially enjoyed two visits to Atco.

Good luck with your studies and projects to come, always remember to keep your priorities in line.

Well i have enough bracket info with different weather to be able to tell our 468 BBC in our s/g car runs 9:30 @ 145 in good air off the stop with ported 315cc AFRs the motor is apart it swalowed a pebble on the return road held and exhaust valve long enough to tweek it and put a scrach in the cyl anyway i am going to do this mod and will picture it up if i can figure out how to do that when its done hope to get it finished in 2 weeks for august points a e town if what i see works i will like the mod jz

So, i have a sbc-440" n/a with iron protopline r/r 256cc that flow 357 @ .800 on int., 268 @.800 on ext., from your point of view, do you think it would be worth doing that or would it hurt it, the car is a 84' firebird, car weighs 3095lbs.w/me, ran [email]9.23 @ 149 @ 3325lbs. on stock style susp.,n/a, i run VP-144plus race gas,any more info. you would need shoot me a PM.thanks. JR1.

I have been involved with dozens of engines that have this modification. Never have I heard of a problem, all positive. Improvements in combustion efficiency are very different from improvements in volumetric efficiency, more difficult to quantify. Expect improved idle, throttle response, cleaner oil & plugs, reduced fuel consumption, less detonation tendencies and more power.

Here’s some pictures from Bart Jr.s Nova, he made a final round appearance at the Sports Nationals at No Problem Raceway. Piston and head pictures are after plenty of run time. The incredible part of this story is the car is no E!


http://members.cox.net/dwynne7/jr%20r10.jpg

http://members.cox.net/dwynne7/jr%20r9.jpg

http://members.cox.net/dwynne7/jr%20r2.2.jpg

http://members.cox.net/dwynne7/jr%20r4.4.jpg

Has any one here decided to try the grooved cylinder head modification?

How about a small write-up on how to do it? I'm getting ready to drop some worked Vortecs onto my 406 and I wouldn't mind giving it a try.

I mark the bore diameter on the head then I draw a line on the deck surface at a right angle to the intake gasket surface right between the valves up to the gasket area. I then cut a slot 0.060" wide a 0.060" deep with a ball end mill being careful not to damage the head gasket area. I widen and deepen the groove into the combustion chamber cavity to 0.125" with a hand held hacksaw blade and a triangle file.

http://members.cox.net/dnaquin/josh%20RHS1.jpg