83778-77756 ( HER.SELF ) Brings Call Girls In Laxmi Nagar
1997 Dodge Ram 1500 5.9L V8 Airflow Analysis
1. 1997 Dodge Ram 1500 5.9L
Magnum Air Flow Project
AUTO 310
Zachary Davison
Cody Gillean
2. Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3
Stock vs. Ported and Polished Intake ................................................................................ 5
Stock vs. Ported and Polished Exhaust ............................................................................. 7
Airflow volume with Throttle Body Spacer added ....................................................... 9
Stock Swirl vs. W/ added TBS .............................................................................................11
Ported and Polished Swirl vs. W/added TBS ................................................................12
Summary ....................................................................................................................................15
Type chapter title (level 3)Type chapter level (level 1) ................................................................ 4
Type chapter level (level 2) ............................................................................................................ 5
Type chapter title (level 3) ......................................................................................................................... 6
2
3. Our research is composed of several different modifications to find a way to
gain both airflow volume and swirl on a stock cylinder head. The cylinder head that
we tested was taken off of a 1998 Dodge Ram 1500 5.9L Magnum engine. The
different modifications to increase the airflow volume include adding a throttle
body spacer made by AirRaid bought from any AutoZone auto parts store. We
ported and polished the intake and the exhaust ports on the cylinder head and we
polished and cleaned the intake plenum runners.
’98 Dodge Ram 1500 Cylinder Head
Pneumatic die grinder tool
with grinding stone
attachment
’98 Dodge Ram 1500 Intake Plenum
Pneumatic die grinding tool with rasping
attachment
3
4. Our first flow test, all done on a Super Flow SF600 flow bench at 25” of H20
pressure, was a completely stock set up with the throttle body, the intake plenum
and the head all attached together in a realistic fashion, bolted together with
gaskets. The set up was mounted to the bench with a 4” diameter orifice plate that
we crafted ourselves with particleboard.
Cody drilling out head bolt mounting holes into orifice plate
Complete flow set up
Superflow Bench set up with Brezinski test tool
attached
4
5. Stock Intake Test Data
Lift/Diameter
Ratio
.05
.25
.15
Intake Valve diameter:
1.88”
Exhaust Valve
diameter: 1.617”
Valve Lift (in.)
.094
.282
.470
Test Flow
(CFM)
52.2
128
157.2
Ported and Polished Intake Test Data
Lift/Diameter
Ratio
.05
.15
.25
Valve Lift (in.)
.094
.282
.470
Test Flow
(CFM)
51.3
136.5
166
Airflow Volume (CFM)
Stock Vs. Port and Polished (Intake)
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Volume of air in CFM
(stock)
Volume of air in CFM (
port and polished)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Lift Points (inches)
5
6. The next flow test was the ported and polished intake plenum attached to our
ported and polished cylinder head.
Intake plenum polished (inner)
Exhaust port (port matched and polished vs. stock)
Intake plenum polished (outer)
Intake port (port matched and polished vs. stock)
6
7. Our test results showed us that at our decided lift points, the ported and polished
set up flowed about 5% better than stock in cubic feet per minute. It’s not much of a
gain but it is still an increase in airflow. This was found by doing a basic calculation
of dividing the larger CFM result by the smaller one. In this case, the port and
polished was the larger number.
Stock Exhaust Test Flow Data
Lift/Diameter
Ratio
.05
.15
.25
Valve Lift (in.)
.081
.243
.404
Test Flow
(CFM)
29.4
93.4
132.5
Ported and Polished Exhaust Test Flow Data
Lift/Diameter
Ratio
.05
.15
.25
Valve Lift (in.)
.081
.243
.404
Test Flow
(CFM)
36.3
100.1
139.5
7
8. Airflow Volume (CFM)
Stock Vs. Port and Polished (Exhaust)
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Volume of Air in CFM
(stock)
Volume of Air in CFM
(port and polished)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Lift Points (inches)
The CFM gains from exhaust we also very minimal but larger gains coming from the
exhaust side. This was to be expected, as the exhaust side of a cylinder head tends to
flow better since air is being forced out with pressure from the cylinder.
Our next flow test was to try the full stock set up with the added throttle
body spacer from AirRaid to find out how it affected the airflow volume.
Stock set up with throttle body spacer added
Throttle body spacer
8
9. Our findings with the throttle body spacer added to our set up showed that it
actually hindered airflow volume coming into the engine because of the “helix” that
protrudes into the orifice of the throttle body spacer. These “helixes” are built to
create added swirl into the intake plenum for extra torque and horsepower.
Stock Intake with Throttle Body Spacer Test Flow Data
Lift/Diameter
Ratio
.05
.15
.25
Valve Lift (in.)
.094
.282
.470
Test Flow
(CFM)
53.0
129.0
156.0
Ported and Polished Intake with Throttle Body Spacer Test Flow Data
Lift/Diameter
Ratio
.05
.15
.25
Valve Lift (in.)
.094
.282
.470
Test Flow
(CFM)
54.6
132.5
160.5
9
10. Stock/w TB Spacer vs P&P w/TBS (in
CFM)
180
Airflow Volume (CFM)
160
Volume of air in CFM (stock
w/ tb spacer)
140
120
Volume of air flow in CFM
(Port and Polished w/tb
spacer)
100
80
60
Volume of air in CFM
(stock)
40
20
Volume of air in CFM ( port
and polished)
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Lift Points (inches)
There were virtually no CFM gains to be made with the throttle body spacer added
to a stock set up. As for the port and polished side, the throttle body spacer actually
hindered airflow just a little bit. For CFM this particular spacer is not a very good
choice as it makes the throats of the throttle body smaller making it harder for air to
get in. The last thing we wanted to test with the throttle body spacer was how it
affected the swirl into the engine. Our hope with the spacer was that maybe the
helixes sacrificed a little CFM to create a decent addition of swirl, and in turn
creating more torque in the truck than it already does. Our findings for the throttle
body spacer were very bleak.
10
11. The arrows point out the difference in throat
diameters of the throttle body and the TBS.
Stock Swirl Test Flow Data
Lift/Diameter
Ratio
.05
.15
.25
Valve Lift (in.)
.094
.282
.470
Swirl
17
700
1720
Stock w/TBS Swirl Test Flow Data
Lift/Diameter
Ratio
.05
.15
.25
Valve Lift (in.)
.094
.282
.470
Swirl
0
650
1730
11
12. Stock Swirl vs. W/TBS
2000
1800
1600
Swirl
1400
1200
1000
800
Stock Swirl
600
Stock Swirl w/TBS
400
200
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Lift Points (inches)
The spacer did almost absolutely nothing for swirl on our stock set up. That
information in itself proved that these aren’t worth their money at all. But we
wanted to see how porting and polishing affected swirl and what the TBS did to that
set up.
P&P Swirl Test Flow Data
Lift/Diameter
Ratio
.05
.15
.25
Valve Lift (in.)
.094
.282
.470
Swirl
360
930
2150
12
14. Here’s a better look at how all four tests look together.
P&P Swirl vs. W/TBS
2500
Swirl
2000
1500
P&P Swirl
P&P w/TBS Swirl
1000
Stock Swirl
Stock Swirl w/TBS
500
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Lift Points (inches)
The swirl was most affected by the porting and polishing than anything. It’s
hard to see on the graph because the numbers are so close but the TBS did
absolutely nothing except hinder it a tad for the ported and polished set up.
14
15. Summary
The project has taught us how it truly feels to test a complete set up with a
cylinder head, intake plenum, and throttle body on a Super Flow SF600-FC. Making
the orifice plate is a difficult task in itself, at least in our case with the tools that we
had available to us. A lot of people underestimate how difficult it is to build and test
the heads and how careful one has to be when modifying such important
components. Porting and polishing is a task that I think a lot of people
underestimate the time and effort that goes into such a task as well. It took Cody and
myself about 8 hours to do an exhaust port and an intake port as well as both ends
of the intake plenum with both of us working. It definitely made the difference that
we were looking for and it does not cost extra beside the tools needed to do the job,
which can be bought at Harbor Freight. Nevertheless, to do this modification, the car
that is having it done will be out of commission for a decent amount of time.
There are a lot of different things to consider when doing modifications to
the top end of an engine and flow testing it. Every time we flowed the set up on the
bench we found something new that we had to pay attention to such as more areas
to cover up with duct tape to force air where we need it to go and to prevent
leakage. The first time we flowed we found out that our valves were bent which in
turn caused our valve seats to be completely out of round which didn’t allow them
to seat properly. This in turn made us have to cut the seats and buy new valves to
even make our tests viable. The board that we made our orifice out of had to be
15
16. drilled out so that it could fit over the bench studs to keep it centered. Once we got
past the obstacles of prepping the set up we wanted, it was fairly easy to get the
numbers off of the flow bench.
The modifications that we chose to test came from rumors online and word
of mouth from others that were “more experienced” saying we could get more
power and torque from the cylinder head that we decided to test. It was quite
difficult to find any actual evidence from any real online sources proving that there
is a significant difference in porting and polishing the cylinder head and intake
runners. The throttle body spacer was the hardest one to link any real proof of their
obnoxious claims.
This project gave us a perfect reason to see if any of this was true. It turns out
that porting a polishing a cylinder head and the intake runners ended up being
worth the work. The airflow volume into the head was not significant but the swirl
that it created was far more of a gain. Swirl is a great way to add torque to a sizable
engine such as the 5.9L Magnum. However, the throttle body spacer that we chose to
16
17. test was a disappointment. The design is poor with the helix protruding into the
throat of the intake, which inhibited airflow. The gaskets that came with it looked
cheap and so did the spacer itself with pits and nicks on the helixes themselves,.
Regardless of our first impressions, the tests showed that this particular throttle
body spacer does not work for airflow or swirl, but is a great way to donate $90 to
AutoZone.
This project gave wonderful insight on what it takes to make air flow
correctly through an engine. With our set up there were far more details that we
could have assessed, but with the time restriction we had to choose a couple. Our
work proved to us that this engine has great potential, and we are excited to see
how it truly affects the way this vehicle performs.
17
