He did a lot more than grooves in the quench area.

 

They got just about what you'd expect from bumping the compression.

 

I dont see how there would be any gains from that modification.

The rule of thumb is the tighter the quench the better, in my oppinion that would relieve the quench erea therefore giving a less turbulance and hurting mixture and flame travel. That combined with the comp ratio being slightly lowered doesnt sound like a worthwhile effort.

Just my .02

 

Go back and read my post about how it creates a "jet stream" into the quench area creating turbulence and better distribution of the air/fuel leading to a more efficient burn.

 

By having the 4v SVT motor, you already have a super efficient chamber - not really any tricks or gimicks to make it better. That is why you can run 10:1+ compression and a blower on a 4v motor and still not detonate.

 

In theory it sounds great but..

Take a big thick book and slam the book shut, turbulant air will be forced out when its slammed shut. Take that same book and cut a slice out of the middle and slam it shut again, the air will have less force and turbulance due to being slightly relieved by the channel you cut in it. This is why a lot of people run a zero deck hight with the minimum thickness head gasket they can get away with. It is the best combination for enhancing the quench erea and promoting better mixture turbulance and flame travel. Cutting groves or lines in the quench erea would have the same affect as increasing the deck hight or changing to a really thick head gasket. You would lower the comp. ratio by doing this and you would also lessen the benifits of a tight quench.

I am by no means an engine expert but this is my logic.

 

The problem with your example is that the air is blowing into the room with nothing to stop it, we are talking about a contained cylinder under extreme pressure...totally different situations.

That groove is not enough to lower the compression much at all.

 

The groove may be 1-2CC's.
The groove isn't about anything but squishing the mixture toward the plug for a better and faster burn. If ya clean the quench area then there is not any left over mixture to cause detonation.

 

You wouldn't be talking about Johnny Pilcher would you? I asked him about doing some nitrous heads for me and he swore up and down the I should remove all the quench area in the chamber(although I'm not sure how). He said this really worked in Nitrous motors.

 

No.
I wouldn't remove the quench either. Ya need to talk to some of the big guns before ya do anything like that. Shannon Jenkins comes to mind.

 

Just by looking at the burn pattern you can see that there is a more complete burn. I wouldnt really focus on the performance benefits of this modification but more so on efficency and a cleaner running engine. Now my question to further this discussion would be......

Why does this modification allow the engine to idle at a lower rpm more "Happily"

 

Where did you read this?

 

It's suppose to smooth the idle and tame big cams.

 

Not really sure how that would effect how a large cam makes the motor idle.....those two should not be related?

 

Me either. Just what I read from some users.