|
Re: Hemi Vs Wedge Debate
[Re: Al_Alguire]
#176854
12/28/08 08:15 PM
12/28/08 08:15 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,619
Norwich CT USA
Defbob
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,619
Norwich CT USA
|
Quote:
Seems pretty simple. If the hemi was the be all and end all of naturally aspirated engines they would be ruling the heads up classes of the world. I think we can all agree that they do not do that.
funny, alot of n/a heads up classes ban the Hemi. I wonder why 
|
|
|
Re: Hemi Vs Wedge Debate
[Re: HotRodDave]
#176855
12/28/08 08:32 PM
12/28/08 08:32 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,635
Oakland, MI
dizuster
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,635
Oakland, MI
|
Quote:
A hemi port does not have to be huge to flow like crazy, look at the new version hemi for proof, ports are no bigger than a SB head but can easily flow way over 300cfm like a heavily ported W2.
Huh? A factory Hemi port is 1.84" x 2.00", thats 3.68 in^2. My fullly ported w9's are only 1.4" x 2.2" that's 3.08 in^2. My heads are 20% less port size then the hemi, and they flow about the same if not better...
(stock hemi port we're talking of course...)
The hemi head probably has the biggest port ever produced aside from the ford tunnel port stuff or a Ram Air 5...
|
|
|
Re: Hemi Vs Wedge Debate
[Re: Defbob]
#176857
12/28/08 09:01 PM
12/28/08 09:01 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,617
long island NY
Ari440
master
|
master
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,617
long island NY
|
the 440 wedge was never meant to be what the 426 hemi is
the block is weak
2 bolt mains
small port heads
if the max wedge moter was built past 1964 the maxwedge head would have improved , instead it was dropped to build the 426 hemi
as migthy as the hemi is
the wedge head stands beside it
two diffrent engines
compare the 426 hemi to fords 427 - 429 hemi
1.39 9.85 - 137 mph
|
|
|
Re: Hemi Vs Wedge Debate
[Re: dizuster]
#176860
12/28/08 10:21 PM
12/28/08 10:21 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 247
nc
moeflo
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 247
nc
|
Quote:
Quote:
A hemi port does not have to be huge to flow like crazy, look at the new version hemi for proof, ports are no bigger than a SB head but can easily flow way over 300cfm like a heavily ported W2.
Huh? A factory Hemi port is 1.84" x 2.00", thats 3.68 in^2. My fully ported w9's are only 1.4" x 2.2" that's 3.08 in^2. My heads are 20% less port size then the hemi, and they flow about the same if not better...
(stock hemi port we're talking of course...)
The hemi head probably has the biggest port ever produced aside from the ford tunnel port stuff or a Ram Air 5...
Huh? A stock 426 port has less area than a BBC rectangle port, Boss 302/351/429 or Ford SCJ as well as the ones you mentioned. Normally I don't compare flow rates between OE and race heads, but if thats allowable, a 6.1 hemi can flow around 400 CFM with a 2-1/8th valve.
|
|
|
Re: Hemi Vs Wedge Debate
[Re: 67HEMI]
#176861
12/28/08 10:41 PM
12/28/08 10:41 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
As long as it is a Mopar I am ok with it. Just one question, how many all motor wedge cars that weigh 3320 or whatever SS/AH minimum is, have run 8.30's @ 157 with less than 440 inches? Not very many that I know of. They are either super light, have 500 plus inches,or have nitrous or forced induction.
It might be very interesting to drop a 438 fully preped Max wedge motor in a SS/AH car..Of course use a sheet metal intake...Those cars have more tricks, ie.. suspension, trans/converter, weight disturbution than most would belive...The hemi would be faster due to the better factory heads..
I would bet the wedge would be well into the 8's as well 
|
|
|
Re: Hemi Vs Wedge Debate
[Re: moeflo]
#176864
12/29/08 08:27 AM
12/29/08 08:27 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,619
Norwich CT USA
Defbob
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,619
Norwich CT USA
|
 Quote:
A popular misconception about the Hemi is that the valve train is trouble. I know that Pro Stock racer Warren Johnson has been a vocal critic of the Hemi and comments that with pushrods going this way and rocker arms going that way, it's not his idea of a promising configuration. Actually it is an extremely durable valvetrain. You've got alcohol dragsters running 10,500 rpm routinely and the parts last for years and years and years. I've got Stage V Engineering rocker arms on several competitive alcohol cars that are ten years old. I can't think of a better testament to the durability of the double rocker shaft design layout and validity Chrysler's execution.
- Eric Hansen
|
|
|
Re: Hemi Vs Wedge Debate
[Re: HotRodDave]
#176865
12/29/08 08:37 AM
12/29/08 08:37 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 247
nc
moeflo
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 247
nc
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I don't know if a max ported W2 can flow 400 CFM
I do, and the answer is "no way".
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
but a ported 6.1 hemi head will and there not too far different in size, as best info as I can find on port size the W2 port is bigger. A more apropriate comparo would be the Max effort 6.1 Vs a max effort W8 assumeing you can get an aproprite displacement and or valve train for high RPM the hemi will make more power.
Two things other than the economy that are holding up race development of the 6.1. One is, it's not a Chevy. 30 minutes after the first LS motor hit the showroom, K Mart had several aftermarket head castings on the shelf. We're all used to that. Second, a 6.1 flow-wise takes a little more work to improve on than normal. The main weakness is the design and production of high lift valve trains. They will eventually come, but like a good 440 block, it will take a while. In the meantime, we'll keep hearing how a LS Chevy is sooooo amazing, how the LS motor is something revolutionary, etc., etc. But, when pressed, nobody can tell you exactly whats so revolutionary about them. But, we're used to that too.
Stuff like this is why I'm not so big into hemi vs. wedge debates. I'd just like to see what is hands-down the best new line of V8's get a little support in the market. But, being a Mopar guy at heart, I've learned patience. I don't like it, but I've learned it.
|
|
|
Re: Hemi Vs Wedge Debate
[Re: moeflo]
#176868
12/29/08 10:49 AM
12/29/08 10:49 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,635
Oakland, MI
dizuster
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,635
Oakland, MI
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
A hemi port does not have to be huge to flow like crazy, look at the new version hemi for proof, ports are no bigger than a SB head but can easily flow way over 300cfm like a heavily ported W2.
Huh? A factory Hemi port is 1.84" x 2.00", thats 3.68 in^2. My fully ported w9's are only 1.4" x 2.2" that's 3.08 in^2. My heads are 20% less port size then the hemi, and they flow about the same if not better...
(stock hemi port we're talking of course...)
The hemi head probably has the biggest port ever produced aside from the ford tunnel port stuff or a Ram Air 5...
Huh? A stock 426 port has less area than a BBC rectangle port, Boss 302/351/429 or Ford SCJ as well as the ones you mentioned. Normally I don't compare flow rates between OE and race heads, but if thats allowable, a 6.1 hemi can flow around 400 CFM with a 2-1/8th valve.
Sorry I thought we were talking about 426 hemi heads not new stuff... I was just making a point that the original hemi was BIG, and that's why a 450 cfm port would make less torque down low then the smaller wedge port.
As for new hemi stuff no doubt it's good. But I haven't seen any 400cfm #'s anywhere, 370cfm maybe, but not 400... Who's doing those?
And by the way you're right, I never realized how freakin' big a 302 Boss head was!!! LOL...
|
|
|
Re: Hemi Vs Wedge Debate
[Re: hemi_doug]
#176870
12/29/08 04:23 PM
12/29/08 04:23 PM
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 12,383
Taxes & Virus's R-US, NY
Dragula
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 12,383
Taxes & Virus's R-US, NY
|
Quote:
Quote:
Bob Reed says: "There are two types of people in this world, those who have Hemis and those who want Hemis".
I couldn't say it better myself!
He is wrong...there are acually three types of people....the two you listed and add to that the ones who have blowen them up....
Been there....spensive...
|
|
|
Re: Hemi Vs Wedge Debate
[Re: hemi_doug]
#176871
12/29/08 04:49 PM
12/29/08 04:49 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,763
Walton's Mountain, Pa
Steve1118
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,763
Walton's Mountain, Pa
|
You know, I've been racing Hemis since the late 60's and had exactly one (1) engine failure. In 1983 a rod broke, bent a couple of valves and busted the block around the pan rail. We sleeved two cylinders, put new valves in two cylinders, welded the block and raced that motor again the next weekend. That motor raced unti 2004, only putting in rings and bearings every couple of years. Don't give that unreliability crap. I've NEVER had a reliability problem, and I know that BG will tell you exactly the same thing. If someone does, it means they are overrevving it, which is totally unnecessary, or don't know what they are doing. 
"Old age and treachery trumps youth and enthusiasm, every time!" East Central Director / Chrysler Power Magazine www.reasbeckracing.webs.com
|
|
|
Re: Hemi Vs Wedge Debate
[Re: hemi_doug]
#176873
12/29/08 08:53 PM
12/29/08 08:53 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,763
Walton's Mountain, Pa
Steve1118
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,763
Walton's Mountain, Pa
|
You seem to have had more problems than most have. A stock rod breaking....that is possible, that is why we generally polish and grind the sidebeams. Are you sure a bearing didn't get tight? As far as a bad spring....that is not even close to being the fault of engine design. Valve float is caused by overrevving it, the wrong spring for the application, or a faulty or worn out part. That is why you keep after that stuff in a race car. Any race car.....any type of engine. You still are not going to convince me that a Hemi is an unreliable piece, if built and raced correctly. If not, no design will survive. I have forty years of racing them that says you are wrong. 
"Old age and treachery trumps youth and enthusiasm, every time!" East Central Director / Chrysler Power Magazine www.reasbeckracing.webs.com
|
|
|
|
|
