I've got a 292 that I haven't torn into yet but I'd like to bump up the compression a little. I've shopped around a little on the net and it looks like the LPG pistons (980P) are around $70 to $75 each. If it turns out that I need new pistons anyway I'll go ahead and bite the bullet on the $450 for the pistons. If the old pistons are okay and I don't need to overbore the clyinders, is there a cheaper way to get the same results? Can these heads be milled? I don't have any idea what that would cost. By the way, I'll also be adding a 4 bbl carb with offy intake; otherwise pretty much stock. Any suggestions for a cost concious (cheap) hobbiest will be appreciated.

A few years back, a series of dyno tests were done here on both a 292 and a 250. The 292 made 300 HP N/A with 8.8:1 compression using the stock open chamber head. If the LPG pistons can give you that much, it will be all you'll need. Milling the head excessively creates other issues that can add up to more costs and might even end up being more than a set of pistons by the time your through.

YOU,LL HAVE TO BORE THE BLOCK FOR SURE, ITS NORMAL FOR THIS FAMILY OF ENGINE. THE 2 FRONT HOLE RUNS ALOT HOTTER THAN THE REST SO THEY WARE THE MOST. I,VE SEEN ALOT OF NEVER TORN DOWN ENGINES THAT .060 WONT CLEAN UP. IT TOOK ME 3 292 BLOCKS TO GET 1 THAT .060 WOULD CLEAN IT UP...... EVEN THEN I HAVE TO SLEEVE #1 HOLE......... BETTER TEAR IT DOWN AND LET YOUR MACHINEIST MEASURE IT FIRST THING BEFORE YOU ORDER ANYTHING. AS FAR AS RAISING COMPRESSION ONLY 3 WAYS TO DO IT
1. LP PISTONS
2. CUT BLOCK/HEAD SURFACE
3. CLOSED CHAMBER 194 HEAD



292= BIG $$$$$$$

Do a search for the dyno threads I mentioned, that will help you make the right choice for your needs.

(cheap) hobbiest , cheap would be throwing on a small chamber 194 cyl head.
That will bump up the compression w/out having to change the pistons.
On the cheap, stock valved 194 cyl head, & mill it .040-.050"


MBHD

CHEAP 194 HEADS WITH SMALL CHAMBERS ??????? THAT ARE GOOD CORES !!!!! AND THE 6CYL HEADS ARE SO BAD ABOUT CRACKING AND CUTTING THEM SO MUCH WOULD MAKE THEM EVEN MORE CRACK PRONE JUST MY OPINION AND IT DONT MEAN MUCH

I have a 194 head that has been milled .060" no cracks & ran 12:0 compression ratio.
Do 194 cyl heads cost more than a 230,250,292 cyl heads?

Tlowe says those heads are pretty much garbage (the 194 head). do not use them. How can they be worth much?

The most I payed for a 6 cyl eng is $20.
The last complete 250 6 cyl w/a PG trans I got several months ago for free. Owner going w/a BBC.

Most all people want a SBC or BBC or LS engines these days, no?


I had one bad cyl head, buying it from a junkyard, otherwise I never cracked a cyl head also the front drivers side eng block was cracked also, a used unknown condition engine I aquired.

MBHD

Since I don't plan to run at WOT I think a 194 head would work fine for me if I can find one. I don't have easy access to a lot of salvage yards but 194 heads seem to be a little scarce. I've got one in my shop that I'm planning to use on a 250 but maybe I can find another one by the time I get started on the 292. I need to take a few parts off and see what I've got to work with before I go buy anything else for it. Thanks for the help.

TRY to by a closed camber "good" 194 stock head.

How can I identify a "closed chamber"? Is there a particular casting # to look for? Thanks.

its cheaper to by lp pistons as opposed to a 194 head

I would not say that, when I get 6 cylinder engines I do not pay more than $20 for them, guys usually just want you to pick up the engine & get it out of there way.

With pistons, you have to take the engine completely apart & go through the whole thing.

If you find a decent cylinder head, clean off the old gaskets & install just the head. Much easier.

I believe I have a couple 194 cyl heads.

But I agree, getting a valve job, guides, valves etc, can get pretty pricey.

MBHD

Starting from scratch either option can be pricey. With one, you basically have to do a complete teardown and rebuild to swap pistons. And building a head, you have valves, valve job, guide work, etc....

Not only cheaper but the forementioned dyno tests showed the stock 194 head didn't raise the power as the compression gains were offset by flow restrictions for a net HP loss. So the myth is exposed.

Well put.

Was there ever a dyno test w/a 194 & 250 stock head w/standard size valves 1.72" intake & 1.50" exhaust & do a direct head swap comparision?

That way you might be able to see @ least what a 1/2 point increase in compression can or cannot make more/less torque?

Also to see if it is a restriction w/stock size valve running a 194 cyl head.

I did mention to Tom to mill the head (the 194 head) more to bump it up even more than 1/2 point.

Just a thought.

MBHD

Yes Hank there was a run with a stock 194 head and a 250 and after 1200 or so rpm the 250 head out performed the 194 head. The problem if you look a sectional view is poor port design, the 194's have thinner head surfce metal to start with, which is why they are more prone to cracks near the front 2 cylinders. Granted with some porting and valve work they can make a good head but if you start with the 250 head and do the same work you are still better off. That was part of the reason I wanted to see the dyno results and paid to help Tom out. There were a few other surprises there as to where the torque and power was made comparing the cams and heads that dispelled a few more urban myths.

How much would you have to mill a 250 or 292 head to get the same size combustion chamber as a 194 head?

The chamber size is what kills the 194 head, it was designed for the 194 engine with a 3.312" bore size only, not the 3.875" or larger bore of the 230, 250 or 292's. Anything chamber size below 64cc begins to hurt flow and performance in these engines, and that is a proven fact. Since the stock 194 chamber size is already well below 64cc, it shouldn't even be a consideration for anyone looking for an upgrade, it actually is a downgrade because of its very shrouded chamber design around the valves. Putting larger valves into the head only makes it more shrouded and even less effecient. And with only a 1/2 a compression point gain, it is of no benefit to go to the expense to swap it. Even if you milled an open chamber head and gained a 1/2 a point in compression, you would never see or feel any gain. So many people have a misconception about compression and think you will get crazy gains by even the slightest increase, when you really don't. This myth is probably a carry over from some SBC guys who think the 461 V8 head was such a powerhouse even with 21st century cylinder clearly proving otherwise. Sure if you gained 3 or 4 points in compression you will see an increase, but you will never see a 1/2 of a point do anything but make your wallet lighter. An engine with 8-1 compression with proper quench in the chamber and piston deck height will give you a better engine than one with a poor quench and shrouded cylinder headed engine with 9-1/2-1 compression.

So, a little confused, one person says to look at a sectional view is poor port design, & the other says it's the shrouding of the chamber why it does not work well.

IIRC, I looked @ both heads & the port layouts looked really simular, but obviously the chamber is smaller & shrouding the valves.

jalopy45 #4899, says he payed for all the info on the heads & dyno testing etc, did Tlowes info state that the 194 cyl head is a poor port design?

MBHD

Nope, just a poor chamber to use because of it's restrictions around the valves.

Before posting this question I hadn’t been checking this site regularly for some time. After searching this topic a little I now remember how controversial the idea of using a 194 head seems to be. I’m not a professional mechanic, racer, or engine designer but I am an engineer so I tend to pay attention to test results. Since I have to rely on product testing in my job I also have learned that the results seen in the test lab don’t always run parallel with what happens in the real world. In this case, I think that the dyno tests may not accurately predict what a driver would feel when driving a “street” vehicle under normal driving conditions because the tests are done at full load and WOT. I think that under normal driving conditions I probably never approach full load and most likely run around 25% or so most of the time. Again, this is just my opinion and I can’t prove it, but I think that the flow losses seen at WOT when the engine is trying to suck as much air as it can get may not show up at all at lower throttle positions. It would be interesting to me to see fuel consumption data a partial loading that simulates normal driving. I would like to know if the various modifications that are used to improve power at WOT also result in gained efficiencies at lower loading and rpms. This probably would not be of interest to racers and hot rodders but with today’s gas prices it would be of interest to me. As expensive as this hobby is it would be nice to be able to afford to actually drive my truck a little more often.

Most all of the dyno pulls began at or by 2000 RPM and continued until 5000-5500 RPM depending on combos being tested. All tests showed results in 100 RPM increments throughout the RPM range being tested as well as all the test parameters such as EGT's, BSFC and air/fuel ratios, etc. These results are well within the cruise RPM range you will experience while driving and can translate directly to real world street driving scenarios as well as real world race track conditions. Since the bulk of the combos tested were intended and geared toward the street enthusiast, much effort was placed on this. A former GM engineer and highly regarded member of the Inliner community was also on hand during these tests to confirm the testing was consistent with how GM would have done the same testing to evaluate such components. His area of expertise was also the development of the inline engines such as the 250 and 292, and his day to day job while at GM involved the development of engine components and overseeing engine testing these components and packages. So he was satisfies the testing was done accurately and the results seen were conclusive and without error in the same manner as GM would have done the same testing and evaluation. He was also in agreement fully with the findings of these tests.

Okay Now to just toss a monkey into all this. Here is a low down.
Fla. Altered Beats and sets a Track record from a 9.27 TO a 9.16
Head on a 250 block & Big chamber Brazed Lumps 9.27. To a Small chamber Unshrouded T6 bolt-in Lump kit. Runs the 9.16 And you still say a 194 head won't flow??????????????hmmmmmmmm

Well like they say, pics or it didn't happen!

I believe you completely,,, Mike B seems like a honest guy I will also add, he knows a thing or two about our inline 6's, you guys should take notes if you want a fast 6 & current standing record holder w/a 194 cyl head,,, AWESOME!!!!!,, & Mike Kirby has good things to say of the 194 Cyl head as do I.

I have always said, you need to know how to unshroud the chamber of the 194 cyl head, if you do not know how to do this, of course it will not flow as much or make as much power.

By just installing a pilot & using a cutter & only cut the side of the chamber is not properly unshrouding the chamber.

The dyno test were done @ W.O.T. not as you drive in a day to day trafic, stop lights easy throttle etc.
You cannot compare the engine dyno tests & say they are just like real world driving in a car.
A dyno test does not tell you how it's going to work in a car/truck period.

That's my 2 cents.

MBHD

Hank, you sound more confused this time than the other times you've been told the same thing. Nobody said the 194 head couldn't be made to work, in stock form it is not a good swap, with work in the ports and unshrouding valves it will work but you can start with a better head and end with a better performing product by using a 250 or 292 head.. Cough up a few dollars and purchase a set of the dyno test results from Tlowe and see it in black and white. A direct swap of a stock 194 head onto a 250 will not gain you any power, mothballs in the gas tank are in the same catagory.

jalopy45,

not confused @ all really, but when you post something that does not make sense & was never spoken about here, " The problem if you look a sectional view is poor port design,"
I was thinking I must have missed this dicussion or???

I will say it again, when I had a ported 250 head ,larger valves, I had appox 9:0 compression, then I installed a 194 cylinder head, w/1.85" intake & 1.60" exhaust valve w/minor port work,(I did not touch the chamber walls trying to achieve maximum compression) & milled the head which gave me 12:0 compression ratio, it was the BEST my car ever ran & made gobs more torque everywhere.

The engine had 220-230 psi of cranking pressure & ran fine on pump gas, 91 octane.
The pistons stick out of the bore .002"-.004" of positive deck height.

With the 194 cyl head, it was really unbelieveable how great it ran.

I ran @ the track w/my 250 cyl head & ran 14.3 seconds ( have time slip),which I heard would be a standing record today.
For me, running a 14.3 in the 1/4 mile was slow, this was my daily driver & I thought geees, man my 6 is slow.
I lost most of my races, I was always up against V-8's.

Granted, I did not run @ a track w/the 194 cyl head,,, but I did race against friends cars that went to tracks on a regular basis.
So not a great comparision but it was much much faster w/the 194 cyl head.

My testing was done on the track & streets, not dyno testing, which I believe is not a good indication how an engine is going to run in a vehicle. Good for tuning & bragging rights, but it's not the same. IMO.


When Tlowe shows me he can make a 6 cyl go fast as a direct result of the dyno tests,then maybe I'll think about purchasing info.
Not disrespecting him, just saying...

MBHD

Ohhh my, the full moon was two weeks ago !!!! Just saw on Bangshift.com where Leo went 279 today and posted time slips to prove it...Scrap

The dyno tests show that when a stock 194 head installed on a 250 it will result in a loss of power. If dyno results are no good then all the car manufacturers and pro race teams have been wasting 100's of thousands of hours and millions of dollars? Larry throws in the Fla altered but also says the head was heavily modified. The original premise was a stock head on a basiclly stock engine, ergo, a 194 head will result in a net loss of power, not a gain. and Hank if I was at home I would post the cross sections that are on my destop, right now I just have a laptop , but if you search you can find some detailed pictures and volume and flow figures comapring the 194, 250 Chevy and 230 Pontiac engines. I repeat stock heads

Man, You guys were busy here while I was at Bonneville! I'll have to do some catch up.

I Never said it was Heavily modified, Nore did I say what the CCs were on that head.

Yup modified and not a home shop modified head and definately not stock. Larry your parts work great and are A-1 pieces and Hank your brackets are works of art, but the bottom line is a 194 head neeeds work to make power, it's not a bolt on and go fast part. If you do the same amount of work to a 250 or 292 head you should even be farther ahead.

Hank,
Let's not kid ourselves; if I were to say: "When MBHD SHOWS me he can make an inline 6cyl go fast as a direct result of his turbo knowledge, THEN maybe I'll think about listening to him. Not disrespecting him, just saying..." you would take more than a little offense to my position huh? You might even go so far as to say I was being disrespectful. Just because someone says he is not being disrespectful does not make it so.
fasteddie455

[quote=Fasteddie455]

WHY DONT YOU MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS!!!!

Your always just stirring the pot.

No disrespect there, just saying how it is.

Do some contributing here, o,, that's right,,,forgot you do not have an inline, just a Poncho V-8.
Plus since you do not own an inline you can't possibly contribute.
If you want that Poncho to run fast, put a BBC in it. Keeping it real.

I say it like it is.
Running a high 13 & low 14 second 1/4 mile times are not fast IMO, in a turboed EFI intercooled 292, maybe in your book it's fast?

This is my opinion, & I have a right to state my opinion if I choose, I am not disrespecting Tlowe, I am saying his times are slow for all what is done to it.

I told him before his Elky has more potential.

If he thinks his ET's & MPH are fast, well,,,, that's his opinion.

Oh, BTW, I had a big influence on Douglas' turbo car, I know, I know, it's not my car.

My N/A daily driver car ran 13's.
My older N/A engine combo plain jane 250, clifford intake & 400 CFM Carter AFB carbed ran 14.3 daily driver. Time slip to prove it.
Not bragging @ all, actually was disappointed in the ET's, but just sayin like it is or was..

My car has never been set-up to run in a 1/4 mile. More set-up for road racing. Iroc wheels.
Koni adjustable handling shocks in the front,cut down BBC springs in the front,lowered, multi leaf springs, Gabriel adjustable "E" shocks in the back, front & rear anti roll bars. Full interior.

MBHD

Hank,
calm down, you are proving my point. The hypothetical statement I made was almost exactly the same as your statement. Either both of our statements are disrespectful,(in which case Tlowe has a right to be offended) OR both of our statements are not disrespectful (in which case you should't be upset with me!). Take your pick.... no disrespect there, just saying how it is.



I AM minding my business. This board is my business just as much as it is yours. There is room enough for everyone.

Hank, Buicks and Oldsmobiles both had 455's too, how do you know I don't have one of them? Pontiac made an inline 6 also; I COULD have one of them and still be "keepin' it real"! Just so you won't keep on guessing, I have changed my "handle". I think you'll find it more to your satisfaction.

Hank, I have read over Tlowe's dyno tests and they provide very pertinent and valuable information. The more air we get into an engine, the more gas we can add, the bigger the explosion, the more horsepower, the faster we go. Information like dyno tests and flow numbers CAN and DO affect our engines, but you must be willing to use some "boring" formulas to put it to good use.
Jalopy45 put it better and more succinctly than I was about to, so I'll quote him here: This is my opinion, & I have a right to state my opinion if I choose, I am not disrespecting you.
fasteddie250sprint (formerly fasteddie455)

P.S. Hank, beware! I know plenty of real Pontiacs that beat BBC's on the track AND the street(since that is where you do your "testing"),but I am not pretending that you'll believe me.

All you are proving is you have nothing better to do than to stir the pot.

Tlowe can take care of himself, he does not need you for protection.

I do not care about your statement "When MBHD SHOWS me he can make an inline 6cyl go fast as a direct result of his turbo knowledge"
That's a joke.
I do not even have one that runs, I have helped guys get turbos installed onto there cars, inline 4's & 6's.

By you stating you know plenty of real Pontiacs that beat BBC's proves my point.Thanks for the confirmation.

Only a person will have a nickname fasteddie 455 & it is a Pontiac

olds 455's have proven they are fast from the factory, not pontiac 455's,Some HO's & SD's are OK you need to do a lot of work & aftermarket everything parts to beat a BBC. The factory heads on any v-8 pontiac completely suck. RA 4's are nothing to brag about. SD heads have too big a chamber to get any sort of compression unless you run popup pistons = not good.
Pontiac Edelbrock heads completely blow away any factory Poncho heads.
Also the cast rods GM put in most pontiacs are a joke also, thankfully there are aftermarket rods & heads & blocks available to try to keep up w/those BBC's.


All your posts are out there on the internet for everyone to see if you have an inline sprint6 & posted about it.

Bottom line about the 194 head is that you do not know one thing about it. Only from what you read about it here.

I made so much more power w/my 194 cyl head than any of my 250 heads, main reason being is because it made a lot more torque.

Going from 9:0 to 12:0 compression. Street tested.

I'm done again.

MBHD

Taking my big spoon in hand.
Although I lost all of Tom;s dyno results when my hard drive took a dump I remember the premise of his tests.. It was not to test race engines but to compare components that we might use on our street engines. So Tom set up a couple of short blocks, a 250 and a 292, and under took a grueling task of head & cam swapping, test runs, and tuning that gives me the he-bee-jee-bees just to think of. Knowing that a dyno is really not a daily driving simulator but is the best compromise to allow the massive tests to be done in a given time frame and with a modicum of control he took it on. He took things in stages much as most of us do and bolted on mostly components we are familiar with. A few odd ball pieces were thrown in just to see what worked or didn't. It was never claimed to be a definitive work or the "know all end all" so to speak but a lot is evident and some folklore was at least put up for serious questioning. No amount of proof will will ever totally dispel the myths and memories of our youth. There were a few things that absolutely did not work and one of those was a stock 194 head. None of the pundits in possession of one of the magic and mystical modified wonders would chance giving up their secrets and allow Tom use their power monster in the tests. That alone makes the 194 head useless for us. The reason there is so much confusion here is because every generation of Inliners has to reinvent the wheel because some folks take their secrets to the grave. It must be even darker and colder down there alone with your now useless information. It won;t open the gate. It also discourages a lot of young people.

So are Tom's tests a prefect compilation of facts to use to build every future 250 or 292? Probably not. Do they give us more comparative information than we have ever had? YES, they do. For me, my 292 will rarely see 4000 rpms. It will run mostly around 2000 and do a lot of work between idle and there. Things I learned from the tests will make my build easier and cheaper because I know some things to avoid.

Before my credentials are challenged I'll tell you I am not a racer but I've built some pretty respectable inlines in the past almost 50 years that like Hank's have embarrassed the crap out of some V8 guys. I built the 270 in my '53 Chevy pickup in 1978. I chose to use the small port head because Bill Fisher told me it is the best choice for a street engine. After all these years and a couple of rebuilds I still believe he was right. It preforms well and keeps out of other people's way. I'll race anything you have if I get to pick the race course. It won't be the same course for everyone. A few of you will beat me. All races will begin and end in my yard and if necessary some will be thousands of miles long. It is not a driver until you make it to my house.
Hank was that the engine that Douglas blasted into so many tiny pieces that he sold the car? I think some shrapnel beat him to the finish line. I was really fast while it lasted

Here's a quick recap of the the 194 head/open chamber head debate as some are kinda' fuzzy on the details, some guys are new to the forum and having difficulty finding the threads regarding it, and some are just confused as has been said by several.

A few years back, just over 200 dyno pulls were made with both a 292(first engine tested) and then a 250(also tested with a turbo and even side draft carbs). A large selection of cams, intakes and carbs, cylinder heads and headers were prepped and swapped to see how each combo of these components enhanced or not with other components. Starting with a baseline 292 stock engine, each test involved many possible combos of all the components already mentioned. The cylinder heads were available from stock size valves, unported stock castings all the way up to big valve(1.94"), lump ported. A variety of heads were also prepped that were everything in between. This variety also included both the traditional late model heads in the open chamber configuration, as well as the early 194 closed chamber heads. All cylinder head comparisons and swaps were made in conjunction with other cam and intake swaps as well, over 120 dyno tests were performed with the 292 engine alone. So you can imagine all the different combos of different components that were tested and evaluated. However, when it came to the cylinder head swaps, thats where some seem to get confused on what was said, what was tested, how the heads that were tested were compared, and how the heads were prepared and modified.

Starting with the heads, as I stated before, they ranged from stock valve size, unported to big valve, lump ported castings, both in the open and closed chamber variety. When it came time to swap between the open and closed chamber stlye heads, they were only compared on a basis as to how they were comparable to their open chamber equivalent in valve size, lump ported or not lump ported, etc....keeping all comparisons equal except for one has open chamber and the other closed chamber. All the machine work on the two seperate styles of heads were performed at the same time, the two styles of heads were given the same machine work procedures with no advantage given to either one so the only true difference between the open and closed chamber heads for any test comparison was the advantage that GM gave them originally, and that was the difference in the stock combustion chamber sizes.
The engine testing was helped in part by over 75 Inliners board members. All gave input as to what they wanted to see tested, and came up with a set of parameters that were to be followed. The first parameter was the engine must have 9:1 compression, that worked out good, because with the open chamber head the 292 had 8.8:1, and the closed chamber head yielded 9.25:1. The other parameters were the cams to be tested as well as intakes and carb combos.

Ok, back to the heads. Why has this become such a point of confusion. Some how the results has been twisted into being said that the closed chamber head is no good, it is worthless and a boat anchor, Elvis is still alive and in Florida....just kidding, but you see how it has escalated into such untruths.

Fact #1, the closed and open chamber heads recieved the exact same machine work and prep for each pair of heads tested. No trick modifications were done or elaborate "black bag" of goodies pulled out and done to one head and not the other. Both heads of each style had no advantage to the other besides what GM gave them originally, and again, that was the stock chamber size. Only one half of one compression point was the only difference between any head compared at any time. They each had the same valve size, same valve job, same valve part#, same everything....that was the only difference between any head casting tested and tested on a one-to-one basis for every dollar spent on one, the same dollar was spent on the other, neither given any advantage over the other.

Fact #2, Out of all the comparison tests performed involving the cylinder heads, the 194 casting closed chamber head never produced more power or torque than its comparably prepped open chamber head. It never made the same power or torque as its comparably prepped open chamber head. It only produced less power and torque than its comparably prepped open chamber head.

Fact#3, Its was always said and concluded that with additional machine work or modifications, the 194 head could have potential above what was seen in these tests. Hank without even knowing he did so, proved this point by his modifications to his own 194 head by milling it an additional .060" beyond what our test heads were prepped with. By doing so, he accomplished a compression ratio of 12:1, which is 3 compression points beyond the parameters set for our testing, but still shows and proves that the 194 can have potential if further effort and additional money are put into it. But working within the parameters set for our testing, it did not show that. So if it was said the 194 head was not a worthy swap, it was only meant within the context of our testing where the 194 head only had one half of one compression point advantage over the open chamber head.

Fact #4, 99% of anyone that is going to build a 250 or 292 for the street is only going to build and prep it for easy street driving and doing only the absolute minimum and basic in machining to do so. And when doing that, especially to a 194 head, you will never see or experience the gains Hank saw with his 194 head!

Hank, I am not stirring the pot, just sayin' how it is. No disrespect there.


What am I "protecting" Tlowe from? If you were not disrespecting him, then what would I be protecting him from? Are you actually ADMITTING to disrespecting him?

How does THAT prove anything? I also know of some Buick AND Oldsmobile 455's that beat BBC's. Does that mean I own a Buick and an Oldsmobile too? I only used the example of the Pontiac because a Pontiac is what you are accusing me of owning.
Hank, here is an idea that will blow your mind: MAYBE I own a Buick,Olds,or Pontiac 455 AND an inline 6!! Gosh then I really would belong here!!( even by your misguided standards!)Just another of the many possibilities that you overlook. You DO NOT know what I have and you DO NOT know what I know or don't know.
Was that meant to be disrespectful? It sounds very disrespectful and besides, you did not say anything about "no disrespect" or "keepin' it real" etc. etc. ad nauseum.


Exactly how much more torque did it make? Without using words like "alot" or "a bunch" or other subjective words like that, you can't answer that question. If you had run it on a dyno you could tell us exactly how much more torque it made. By eliminating variables associated with words like "alot" or "a bunch" etc. it might be a little easier to convince others.



Hank, again, how do you know what I know or don't know or better yet, where I learned it. What difference does it make WHERE I learn something? I have an opinion about the 194 head JUST LIKE you have your opinion on it. Just because I don't happen to agree with yours, does not make mine wrong! I believe it was Clint Eastwood who said "Opinions are like a**holes, everyone's got one and they all stink"!

fasteddie250sprint (formerly fasteddie455)

GUYS RELAX..... everybody has there own way of doing things so respect there views, its there privledge.

Yes it was fast & it was not even all sorted out.
What took the engine out was what Mike Kirby & I believe is that the right drivers side front of the engine block let go in a big way & took the whole engine out along w/it.

As some know, that is the week link of the standard low deck engine block.

His last pass was a 8.6 @ 165 MPH blowing up way before the end of the 1/4 mile.
Douglas had said it was on a 7 second pass.

MBHD

I knew the run was expected to be fantastic. And in many ways it was. 8.6 @ 165 is damn fast for a broken car! Heck that's fast for a good running one. What is Douglas working on now?

He is currenly looking forward to his 700 HP N/A 292 & run it in his SS orange Opala.

Street tire class I think the tire needs to be a 215 60 or 65 15?

Not drag radial class, regular street tire class.

I think the class record is 11.40 or there abouts?

MBHD

Should be easy for him to do, those Opala's are light compared to US hot rods. Wish him luck in getting the record.

I hope he takes some video for you to post. Thats a lot of horse power. Does he have a Kirby head?

Yes it has a newer version of the Sissell/Kirby cyl head.
He usually takes vids of his track times.

MBHD

I only wish you "experts" could spell as good as you can brag and posture yourselves. "weekside", "there privledge", " Payed", with statements such as these its hard to understand what possible meaning some of these posts really have-also some of these posts are really meanspirited. Sounds just like a bunch of gutless high school bullies hiding behind their keyboards thumping their chests.

Straighten up, youre an embarassment to the site, huh titan? Oh yeah, I almost forgot the disclamer "no disrespect" you stink-but "no desrespect" just my two cents thrown and MHO voiced.

Don't read 'em. Then you won't be upset or embarrassed. This is not required reading.

"Disrespect" is a word I'd rather never hear again.

[quote=preacher-no choir]I Sounds just like a bunch of gutless high school bullies hiding behind their keyboards thumping their chests.

Straighten up, youre an embarassment to the site, huh titan?

Or like guys who make fun of other people's spelling then misspell "you're" and "embarrassment" in the same post while trying to kiss ass. Or guys who post under two names to play games.

As far as mine is concerned,rest assured, it is no game!

Nice place we have around here, huh?

Since we are all in a nitpicking mood... technically, he did not misspell the word you're, he mispunctuated it.

fasteddie250sprint

I'll bet JeffF won't ask how to raise the compression on a 292 again.. , the only person not jumping in was EFI-DIY wanting him to install a 4200.

He'd still have to write it 10 times correctly before he got to go to recess.

[/quote]

He'd still have to write it 10 times correctly before he got to go to recess. [/quote]

Either that or maybe we ALL need a couple of raps across the knuckles with a ruler!
fasteddie250sprint

So. What IS the best inexpensive way to boost compression in a 292? Did we come up with anything? If you spend $450 for LP pistons wouldn't $600 for forged flat tops be better? Just $150 more with better pistons and more compression. Might a 194 head work at part throttle and low RPMs? You know daily driver stuff. They used to add metal to chambers to raise compression on early Chevys. Did that shroud the valves? They went faster.

Well, I think that the dyno tests showed pretty clearly that as long as you do the same mods to either a 194 head or an open chamber head and don't give either head an unfair advantage over the other and allow just the stock chamber size to be the only difference, that 1/2 a point of compression that is gained with the 194 head isn't going to amount to anything. Sure, Hank cut his 194 head excessively and got a good gain compared to the open chamber head he was running he did nothing to. Thats because he gave it an unfair advantage, if he had cut his open chamber head by the same amount as the 194 head, he would have been back to only the difference being the original chamber difference of 1/2 a compression point, and the .060" milled 194 head not being any benefit over the .060" milled open chamber head.

The pistons are just not easy to get around for a 292, they are expensive anyway you look it. But the forged will provide the better solution because you can get the quench where it needs to be by putting the deck hgt. closer to the top of the deck, and gain much more compression that just swapping to a 194 head.

The 250 head I was running had more porting & larger valves than the 194 cyl head I switched over to.

I am sure the 194 head flowed less than my 250 head, but I did not flow test the 194 head, only the 250 head, & those numbers were not that great mind you, I never had lower lumps in any of my cyl heads.
The only lumps I ever ran are on my current large chamber head & those were my own design & are upper lumps.

Trying to remember what cc's my current cyl head but it is roughly 80 CC's? It's been a while since a friend & I did this work.
Valves are sunk & chambers were all opened up.
I was not worried about airflow so much because I was going to run a Paxton supercharger on it & the air/fuel mixture was being forced into the engine, regardless of a worse flowing head.

The 250 head was not able to get to 12.0:1 compression like I got out of the 194 head, that is the only reason why I chose to use the 194 head.

The main reason I wanted all that compression was to try & get as much torque out of my engine.

MBHD

Glad you got that all worked out while I was gone. It was funny reading on my blackberry from the bleachers at the MOKAN dragsrip.
I about fell off them when I read about: OPINIONS.

OK, now for the group hug.

FastEddie and Hank that means you too.

We all have good things to bring here. Maybe we need to think about how brash we come across. Sometimes it is meant that way and other times not.
I personally like all the ideas we bring here. Memories do go bad or change with time. I like to have real proven tests as CNC stated to dispel any rumors. Maybe someone else can do a 194 head test. I am all ears.

Beat, I only post under one name, this is a test, what is the other one!

Also who is getting the kiss in that post?

It sounded like a big smooch aimed a titan but I could be wrong. It is really hard to tell the tone of all we do here. The two name thing was a sweeping generalization adding to the " gutless high school bullies hiding behind their keyboards thumping their chests." thing.

So how would you increase the compression in a 292 in a thrifty manor?

I suur woud not spend a ton of money on head mods and the weeken the light wait casting by milling it for a little compresion. Compresion is good but not that important when you gotta start braking the bank, buying four dollar ethyl. But if pistons and the cost of boring is what Ive bean hereing, I dont think Id do eather. In reading dyno six stuff from the past, on the 261s (tho differnt) more hosses and tork come by way of ainches. So overalls I think Id relie on the compression resulting from the cilinder volum, an wile atit get sum big,(.060 r mor) kiler pistons. So you probably shud bore it big and wile youre at itget the highest comp they mak. Ya get too bangs for youre buck that way.

I DONT SMOOCH THE GRAND TETON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'll PM you something when I get back from Corpus thursday or so.

Preacher,
I think I better go back to school after reading that one.

Rather than adding compression by doing it with head decking or pistons. Why not do it with a cam change? The dynamic compression can be changed easily with the cam swap. I have been working on some grinds to do exactly that. Tom

Now that thar post is a art work. a reel pease of litatur. Ewe kud rite buks en stuf.
What;s up in Corpus? Car stuff? Beater

I take it these would be high lift, short duration cams know as "torque" cams with as small an overlap possible during exhaust closing/intake opening- thats the probably cheapest way to build up the pressure in the c. chamber, limiting factor would be the tougher springs required to follow the more rapid opening and closing lifts, that would cheaper, maybe not quite as much extra pressure as the other ways-but bound to be worth the smaller bucks. I still mention some good profiles to look at would be those "068, and "067" Pontiac grinds ('cept they're for 1.5/l.65 factory rockers-but no hill for steppers). Pretty good idling and nice boost in performance-068 was the '66 tripower cam used in the 360 hp/389 throphy GTO motors.

Good less used approach to a vexing problem!

I put a "milage" grind when I replaced the cam in my '70 Blazer. (350 sbc) It is a low rpm torque grind. It ends up being a great street/off road cam in this vehicle. Lots of power from idle to 4000 rpm. Good economy. I can see how a similar cam for L6s would be a good street option.

I love RV grinds, especially when combined with bowl work to enhance port flow, they are a great combo for a snappy street driver.

Im surprized ya didnt like ol four dollar Ethyl down on th corner

Spell check on isle 8.

isle? you mean, like, water?

Me an' God saw a picture of kay sissell's 230 block w/292 crank in his '23 Tee altered about 1965ish with right side laid open like a butchered hog, exiting pieces pushed cam thru the block causing nothing good.

You can raise the cranking compression figure by just closing the intake valve very early - like right after BDC.
Example, using my estimating .xls: a 235 with 7.5:1 static CR and IVC at 48° (stock 244° cam) yields about 6.7:1 DCR and 129 psi gauge pressure. Closing the intake at 20° instead brings the gauge up to 147 psi and 7.4:1 DCR.
Why not do this?
Because it kills peak power. Inertia fill ABDC is a big part of the charge mass, as well as a major portion of the total intake event (time in degrees × average lift).
The theory is that if the rate of lift is fast enough, you'll still have good flow during the actual intake cycle (BDC > TDC) but in practice it's not enough.

Just checking if you were awake. It's not like you to mispell like I do all the time. Good job.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisle