Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

anybody?

it's worth doing if you're looking to make >450-500kw or the valve seats in the head are low. Cutting for bigger valves does give you a little more to work with on the short side plus it's easier to get the seats at a good height after you replace valve guides because they rarely end up concentric to the seat when you replace them.

Proengines above has likely given the best advice.

If you have the head off and you are overhauling it anyway, then it's probably not a bad option as the price of oversize valves isn't any greater than standard valves.

I used oversize valves as I was trying to extend the envelope of small turbocharges on a larger displacement engine. Installed high lift and long duration cams also for this reason.

If you are building a big HP engine with a single turbo, personally I wouldn't bother as any gains will most likely be overshadowed by the fact you have a big huffer installed.

it's worth doing if you're looking to make >450-500kw or the valve seats in the head are low. Cutting for bigger valves does give you a little more to work with on the short side plus it's easier to get the seats at a good height after you replace valve guides because they rarely end up concentric to the seat when you replace them.

yes its much easier to pick the seat with bigger valves if guides are replaced...it also makes full use of the port job if its ported.

There are some interesting schools of thought on valve sizes and especially valve size ratios as in inlet to exhaust .

I'm not home ATM and don't have a calculator handy , basically I think the valve area of the exhaust side needs to be something like 0.73 of the inlet to do well .

I like David Vizards books on performance engine building and the one on BL's old A Series has lots of good principles outlined by someone who speaks real english .

In the third revision which I have he speaks about valve size ratios in relation to static compression ratio and why that ~ 0.73 ratio works with low compression ratios where something like the 0.68 works out better for high CR engines with big cams . To be honest he was relating to NA engines but generally turbo engines are lowish static CR before they come on boost .

I'd always try to enhance the hot side of a turbo engine because when it comes on boost it acts like a larger capacity NA engine exhaust flow wise so if it is to run well you can't really have exhaust restrictions when its running in a supercharged state .

There are advantages to running larger valves and some say that its a bit like running higher performance cams only changing valves is more involved because they are not really a bolt on .

I'd do valves before big cams because mild cams with big valves still behave nicely because the mild cam timing , wild cam splutter to me has everything to do with trapping efficiency and overlap timing .

What I think is being sort after here is increased volumetric efficiency and while there's different ways to achieve it some give better overall results than others .

I am no one in the scheme of things but given a choice with an RB25/26/30 I'd like to go one size up on the exhaust valves , I get the feeling that RB26's that have done any considerable mileage need exhaust guides anyway so cutting the seats for a slightly larger valve is no biggie . Fresh valve stems are nice in new guides to , critical heat transfer points through exhaust valve seats and guides .

If you are careful with CR cams and turbo sizing I don't think you'd lose anything significant down low with slightly larger valves all round . I also think a well ported head makes a ig difference to the engines overall breathing characteristics .

Your call , cheers A .

But what brand of valve do you go for. The RB26, SR20 etc use soldum filled exhaust valves dont they, so help keep the exhaust valve cool. A simply stainless steel exhaust valve would almost be a downgrade wouldnt it when it comes to keepng combustion chamber temperatures down???????

We got good results with our head, full ferrea kit but we also did a plenum change so its hard to quantify the valves alone but torque is broader and holds 50nm at a minimum more to redline. ill post up a comparo 2moro. Haed is off again to test quench area mods as we speak.

actually comparo is here (ignore the difference in response as the second run was on a lower ramp rate for run in which was 6 seconds instead of 10) power is the same within 2 or 3 kw between ramp rates http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/Sh...96#entry4918296

Edited by URAS
But what brand of valve do you go for. The RB26, SR20 etc use soldum filled exhaust valves dont they, so help keep the exhaust valve cool. A simply stainless steel exhaust valve would almost be a downgrade wouldnt it when it comes to keepng combustion chamber temperatures down???????

From what I have read (which of course is not gospel - but another school of thought) there are pro's and con's of sodium filled valves. Ie. that the heat is drawn up the stem which then apparantly takes its toll on the valve guides.

Edited by juggernaut1
But what brand of valve do you go for. The RB26, SR20 etc use soldum filled exhaust valves dont they, so help keep the exhaust valve cool. A simply stainless steel exhaust valve would almost be a downgrade wouldnt it when it comes to keepng combustion chamber temperatures down???????

i use inconell exhaust valves :thumbsup:

But what brand of valve do you go for. The RB26, SR20 etc use soldum filled exhaust valves dont they, so help keep the exhaust valve cool. A simply stainless steel exhaust valve would almost be a downgrade wouldnt it when it comes to keepng combustion chamber temperatures down???????

not sure who does basic stainless alloy valves anymore. The fereas are all Tribological super alloys (superior to inconnel and lighter) The materials of these aftermarket valves be it super alloy or inconell are far superior than the std items sodium filled gear.

Inconell is exteremly heavy duty also but sometimes the extra weight is its downfall (valve float ect) for example its a nono in high reving big blocks or they become a consumable (ie every 20-40 passes)

I have nice site which explains all the alloys here: http://www.enginebuildermag.com/Article/25...so_special.aspx

Edited by URAS
Cool, but looking at their website Ferreas dont have off the sheld RB20 valves, lol so i am guessing that means more expensive custom :D

never looked for 20 vlaves TBH, i thought we were talking 26 :happy:

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...