Silverback
New member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2006
Huh, what do you mean by generation II, LT1?
-
Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software hereThank you for being a part of our community!
Groove Results - Tried & tested
- Thread starter xwave
- Start date
automotivebreath
New member
- Joined
- May 6, 2006
Silverback said:
When I say generation II, I refer to both the LT1 and the Vortec engines of the mid to late 90s. I realize they have differences; the only one I am familiar with is the LT1. I have modified several sets of heads of this design; I consider them to be the best production 23 degree SBC heads ever made. Too bad they won’t bolt up to my Gen I blocks.
Silverback
New member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2006
They’re actually not that hard to bolt on to gen 1 blocks… you just need to plug the Nebraska shaped holes on either end of the heads deck surface and either drill the manifold face for the coolant crossover in the front or drill and tap the accessory mount pads for fittings like Yunnick does for his cooling system modification.
BrickBaller
New member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2005
- Location
- Sacramento, CA
Groove results
Well, I finally got the beast up and running and can give some initial feedback. First, here are the grooves I cut:
They ended up being a little wider than I originally intended, and a little bit shorter. When cutting them (triangular file and hacksaw blade) I didn't like having a sharp transition from the angled file area and the hacksaw area - just looked like sharp projections and that can't be good.
I ended up filing a bit more to soften the edges, with the side effect of making them a bit wider as well.
I also feel like I was a bit conservative when it came to approaching the edge of the HG. The last thing I wanted was to get too close, and I may have gone the other way. I figure the sharpie marker adds about 1.5-2 mm from the outside edge of the gasket, and I stayed another 1.5-2 mm from the edge of the sharpie marker.
And another disclosure: before disassembly I had a burned valve, so I had reduced power across the range, but the low end torque was nowhere to be found. As RPMs were raised the missing parts of the valve began to play less of a role and power loss was less noticeable. Also, it has been a full 9 months since I drove my Volvo. I know, that's a long time for a valve job but that's not the only thing I had going on.
All that being said, I do notice a marked improvement with grooves. It may be difficult to isolate how much of the improvement can be attributed to the valve and how much can be attributed to the grooves, but they certainly didn't make things any worse. I got caught in traffic on the way home and enjoyed being able to leave it in 5th even when things slowed down to 35 mph.
You don't accelerate very fast, but then again if I wanted to go fast I wouldn't be in 5th at 35 mph. Less gearshifts = longer clutch life.
There is also a big increase in low end torque. Yes, some (most?) of this is probably due to the replaced valve but I'm sure the grooves have something to do with it too.
As far as gas mileage goes, it is too soon to tell for sure. Driving home from my parents' house used to take almost an entire tank (say, 11 gallons) and this time I still had a half tank when I got home. Again, most of this is likely due to the replaced valve, but some is also likely to be attributed to the grooves. I will get some specific numbers posted after I get my speedo/odo fixed.
Well, I finally got the beast up and running and can give some initial feedback. First, here are the grooves I cut:
They ended up being a little wider than I originally intended, and a little bit shorter. When cutting them (triangular file and hacksaw blade) I didn't like having a sharp transition from the angled file area and the hacksaw area - just looked like sharp projections and that can't be good.
I ended up filing a bit more to soften the edges, with the side effect of making them a bit wider as well.I also feel like I was a bit conservative when it came to approaching the edge of the HG. The last thing I wanted was to get too close, and I may have gone the other way. I figure the sharpie marker adds about 1.5-2 mm from the outside edge of the gasket, and I stayed another 1.5-2 mm from the edge of the sharpie marker.
And another disclosure: before disassembly I had a burned valve, so I had reduced power across the range, but the low end torque was nowhere to be found. As RPMs were raised the missing parts of the valve began to play less of a role and power loss was less noticeable. Also, it has been a full 9 months since I drove my Volvo. I know, that's a long time for a valve job but that's not the only thing I had going on.
All that being said, I do notice a marked improvement with grooves. It may be difficult to isolate how much of the improvement can be attributed to the valve and how much can be attributed to the grooves, but they certainly didn't make things any worse. I got caught in traffic on the way home and enjoyed being able to leave it in 5th even when things slowed down to 35 mph.
You don't accelerate very fast, but then again if I wanted to go fast I wouldn't be in 5th at 35 mph. Less gearshifts = longer clutch life.
There is also a big increase in low end torque. Yes, some (most?) of this is probably due to the replaced valve but I'm sure the grooves have something to do with it too.
As far as gas mileage goes, it is too soon to tell for sure. Driving home from my parents' house used to take almost an entire tank (say, 11 gallons) and this time I still had a half tank when I got home. Again, most of this is likely due to the replaced valve, but some is also likely to be attributed to the grooves. I will get some specific numbers posted after I get my speedo/odo fixed.
xwave
New member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2005
WHats everyone MPG before & after?
Please state the units clearly ie US Miles per US gallons, cos US gallons are different from UK gallons, as are Tyres which they call tires, bonnet they call hood, boot thay call trunk, etc etc.
Although most things in the US are bigger their gallon is considerably smaller
1 UK gallon = 1.200950 US gallons
That would make their ten gallon hat only 8.3267413 gallons if measured over here.
Please state the units clearly ie US Miles per US gallons, cos US gallons are different from UK gallons, as are Tyres which they call tires, bonnet they call hood, boot thay call trunk, etc etc.
Although most things in the US are bigger their gallon is considerably smaller
1 UK gallon = 1.200950 US gallons
That would make their ten gallon hat only 8.3267413 gallons if measured over here.
Last edited:
Les slight limp
New member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2005
- Location
- clayhanger, uk
My mpg is up 15-20% round town so i'm well satisfied.
16 valve head
I am in the planning stages of my 16vt buildup in a 93 945 tic. I wonder if using these grooves on the 16v head would allow me to run the stock pistons from the b234 engine? I am going to try the grooves on my 8v head first. I currently have to run 93 octane so I don't ping or knock. So if this works I may be able to downgrade my octane? I will find out. The head should be ready in a month or so. I will post results later.
I am in the planning stages of my 16vt buildup in a 93 945 tic. I wonder if using these grooves on the 16v head would allow me to run the stock pistons from the b234 engine? I am going to try the grooves on my 8v head first. I currently have to run 93 octane so I don't ping or knock. So if this works I may be able to downgrade my octane? I will find out. The head should be ready in a month or so. I will post results later.
PetesDustyVolvo
one car, two bicycles
- Joined
- May 27, 2003
- Location
- caliper land
strouty said:
As in stock B230F/B230FT pistons? Unrelated issue
Les slight limp
New member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2005
- Location
- clayhanger, uk
Round town ie all 30-40 mph stop & start driving with maybe a 70-80 mph trip to tamworth 12 miles gives 26. odd to the british gallon, on the holiday trip which was pretty mixed driving is 514 miles on 81 litres and it's down to the top of the red, so about another 15? - 20 miles, i'm clocking all the fuel put in and doing a 1000 mile test, i've done 750 odd so far.
On 20 pounds worth of fuel i used to get 120 odd miles, when the fuel went up that came down to about 100 - 105 miles, now it's grooved it's back up to 120 odd miles, these figures are based on a weekly fuel allowance of 20 pounds so i notice how many miles i got, the fuel is actually slightly dearer now at 96 - 97 pence per litre, it was a pound a litre in wales.
On 20 pounds worth of fuel i used to get 120 odd miles, when the fuel went up that came down to about 100 - 105 miles, now it's grooved it's back up to 120 odd miles, these figures are based on a weekly fuel allowance of 20 pounds so i notice how many miles i got, the fuel is actually slightly dearer now at 96 - 97 pence per litre, it was a pound a litre in wales.
My experience with the Grooves in a 1988 Chrysler 2.2 Turbo intercooled. I have just completed the head swap a couple of weeks ago. I have noticed cool EGT temps. As low as 650F at idle though 700F is the norm. Around town 775-850F, highway about 857-950F, boosting to 12psi just breaks 1000F, though it may go higher and I just do not see it quick enough. These EGTs temps are ~200F below what others report as normal. With the boosting temps very low. I did raise the C/R .5 from 8.1 to 8.6 by milling the head.
A friend that had his EGT in before he did the grooves has seen a 200F+ drop in EGTs.
A friend that had his EGT in before he did the grooves has seen a 200F+ drop in EGTs.
Last edited:
Les slight limp
New member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2005
- Location
- clayhanger, uk
Thanks for the figures scotts, it's nice to have some hard data.
U
Unregistered
Guest
I just got through getting my +T back on the road with grooves. I used 2 grooves per chamber. Similar pattern to the ones pictured here.
Initial start-up, the engine ran notably quieter and smoother.
My short road test revealed the engine more responsive and quieter.
Obviously, I need more road time to deduce whether the grooves helped mileage or not. So far, I like the effect.
No mpg figures yet. My pre-groove mpg is 21 highway @ 70mph. I am hoping to improve on this by at least 15%.
I will post my findings.
Initial start-up, the engine ran notably quieter and smoother.
My short road test revealed the engine more responsive and quieter.
Obviously, I need more road time to deduce whether the grooves helped mileage or not. So far, I like the effect.
No mpg figures yet. My pre-groove mpg is 21 highway @ 70mph. I am hoping to improve on this by at least 15%.
I will post my findings.
xwave
New member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2005
Further Results
Hi all,
Has been a while since my last post.
I wanted to give plenty of time to reasonably evaluate some results & driving a few thousand miles before I posted.
Well I can say I am very pleased with the results.
I have upped the boost a little more, and still:
Fuel economy has been at a steady 28-30 UK MPG, consisting of mainly longer runs on A roads /Motorway runs, including some town driving, and being stuck in slow moving traffic on the M6 for over 1 hour - which is to be expected if you live in the UK.
Engine has been smooth and Quiet
The Turbo spooling sound is noticable, unlike pre groove, where it wasnt noticable at all.
Plenty of low end torque (takes off from 2400 RPM)
Engine oil still clean.
More Power (from increasing boost a notch)
I cant / dont need to put my foot right down, as now the extra torque is causing some slipping of my clutch!
(my 16T will need to wait a little beore going in!)
The engine seems to be running cooler. (I say seems as I think my temp guage has temp compensation board, so its not as straight forward to read from the gauge accurately, but has never been past (or even up to) dead centre, even on the occasions we have had exceptionally hot days for the UK. Pre groove the temp gauge was pretty much dead centre, but difficult to give an accurate indication on this.
Today I decided to index the plugs (a little better by moving them to other chambers) , and at the same time take a look at them visually.
Visually, from the plugs, the engine appears to be running well.
I was a little surprised that the plugs were pretty spotless round the ceramic surround centre electode side facing towards the main groove (or centre of the chamber) with light carbon deposits on the opposite side (near the chamber wall).
Regarding the indexing of the plugs, as you can see from my head groove photo (below), the spark plug on the right was probably in the WORST position regarding indexing terms.
Interestingly, the white surround on the centre electrode was still spotlessly clean on the edge near the main groove, and the coating on this spark plug ground electrode was this light blue colour, talked about.
Furthermore, the exhaust tailpipe exit, has a nice coating of light grey carbon, suggesting a good running engine and mixture.
My older exhaust pre mod, was much more sooty.
Also, (probably not due to the grooves in the most part) Oil consumption is very much reduced to zero. This is probably because beore I was running Mobil 1 (5w 30) or (10W30) cos 10W 40 doesnt seem available in the UK. I think this was too thin. Im now running 10w40 Amsoil. I am also not getting any in my Oil catchcan like beore. Like I say, this is prob not due to the grooving.
Overall all very +ve, and Im very happy. Recommended.
Hi all,
Has been a while since my last post.
I wanted to give plenty of time to reasonably evaluate some results & driving a few thousand miles before I posted.
Well I can say I am very pleased with the results.
I have upped the boost a little more, and still:
Fuel economy has been at a steady 28-30 UK MPG, consisting of mainly longer runs on A roads /Motorway runs, including some town driving, and being stuck in slow moving traffic on the M6 for over 1 hour - which is to be expected if you live in the UK.
Engine has been smooth and Quiet
The Turbo spooling sound is noticable, unlike pre groove, where it wasnt noticable at all.
Plenty of low end torque (takes off from 2400 RPM)
Engine oil still clean.
More Power (from increasing boost a notch)
I cant / dont need to put my foot right down, as now the extra torque is causing some slipping of my clutch!
(my 16T will need to wait a little beore going in!)
The engine seems to be running cooler. (I say seems as I think my temp guage has temp compensation board, so its not as straight forward to read from the gauge accurately, but has never been past (or even up to) dead centre, even on the occasions we have had exceptionally hot days for the UK. Pre groove the temp gauge was pretty much dead centre, but difficult to give an accurate indication on this.
Today I decided to index the plugs (a little better by moving them to other chambers) , and at the same time take a look at them visually.
Visually, from the plugs, the engine appears to be running well.
I was a little surprised that the plugs were pretty spotless round the ceramic surround centre electode side facing towards the main groove (or centre of the chamber) with light carbon deposits on the opposite side (near the chamber wall).
Regarding the indexing of the plugs, as you can see from my head groove photo (below), the spark plug on the right was probably in the WORST position regarding indexing terms.
Interestingly, the white surround on the centre electrode was still spotlessly clean on the edge near the main groove, and the coating on this spark plug ground electrode was this light blue colour, talked about.
Furthermore, the exhaust tailpipe exit, has a nice coating of light grey carbon, suggesting a good running engine and mixture.
My older exhaust pre mod, was much more sooty.
Also, (probably not due to the grooves in the most part) Oil consumption is very much reduced to zero. This is probably because beore I was running Mobil 1 (5w 30) or (10W30) cos 10W 40 doesnt seem available in the UK. I think this was too thin. Im now running 10w40 Amsoil. I am also not getting any in my Oil catchcan like beore. Like I say, this is prob not due to the grooving.
Overall all very +ve, and Im very happy. Recommended.
JonnyScorch
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2003
- Location
- Ont.
Glad to hear more about the grooves in the real world!
It would be neat to see before and after emissions tests to see just HOW much cleaner the engine is running...
I'll post up my emissions results once i get the 89 744ti back on the road(cause i need the test before i renew my plates anyhow), but i can't compare properly to before as it will be a new engine, vx cam, increased comp., different cat, new 02, etc..
It would be neat to see before and after emissions tests to see just HOW much cleaner the engine is running...
I'll post up my emissions results once i get the 89 744ti back on the road(cause i need the test before i renew my plates anyhow), but i can't compare properly to before as it will be a new engine, vx cam, increased comp., different cat, new 02, etc..
automotivebreath
New member
- Joined
- May 6, 2006
Somender Singh said:
Xwave,
Thanks so much for the up date. I?m very happy things are going well and Somender Singh is pleased to hear of the success.
Cylinder pressure must be getting high with indications of blue color on the plugs!
Don?t be too quick to credit the reduced oil consumption to the heavy weight oil. My findings are the grooves improve ring seal likely due to reduced piston rock and less carbon in the ring lands.
Cheers,
AB
xwave
New member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2005
Hi all.
JonnyScorch - I have a basic pre emissions test, which was apparantly seemed a little on the high side (0.78% CO)- until it was realised my car was pre-cat (or cat removed) due to the year. Then it was veiwed as ok/ good for no CAT.
This would be a good after groove test which will be observed on its next MOT. Particularily not having a CAT, which in not having wont mask the true results if no other mods are done till I get it done.
AB - Thanks for your reply. In honest reporting I have to say that on reduced oil Consumption I feel in part some /most is due to the change of oil - The 10W40 is not Heavyweight by any means - Its standard for this engine, and the Mobil 1 was def a bit thin in the weight I had. Hovever, indeed some or even majority could be due to the grooves. But Obviously its not something I can confirm with anything like 100%, although its good to hear that the grooves could/are helping in this respect. The oil being cleaner (with me & other grooving reports) also backs up the ring seal theory.
Also having a new head gasket and cleaned up head has got to help, although (for me), as all my cylinder pressures were high and consistent pre groove (175psi on all 4 cylinders) probably negates the gasket being a problem pre groove.
I suppose being one of the people doing the grooves with a good running engine and a head gasket that didnt need doing, hopefully reflects less indication that the beneits were attributed to other things, and is a relatively good A/B test as few things & no other major mods were performed at the time of grooving.
JonnyScorch - I have a basic pre emissions test, which was apparantly seemed a little on the high side (0.78% CO)- until it was realised my car was pre-cat (or cat removed) due to the year. Then it was veiwed as ok/ good for no CAT.
This would be a good after groove test which will be observed on its next MOT. Particularily not having a CAT, which in not having wont mask the true results if no other mods are done till I get it done.
AB - Thanks for your reply. In honest reporting I have to say that on reduced oil Consumption I feel in part some /most is due to the change of oil - The 10W40 is not Heavyweight by any means - Its standard for this engine, and the Mobil 1 was def a bit thin in the weight I had. Hovever, indeed some or even majority could be due to the grooves. But Obviously its not something I can confirm with anything like 100%, although its good to hear that the grooves could/are helping in this respect. The oil being cleaner (with me & other grooving reports) also backs up the ring seal theory.
Also having a new head gasket and cleaned up head has got to help, although (for me), as all my cylinder pressures were high and consistent pre groove (175psi on all 4 cylinders) probably negates the gasket being a problem pre groove.
I suppose being one of the people doing the grooves with a good running engine and a head gasket that didnt need doing, hopefully reflects less indication that the beneits were attributed to other things, and is a relatively good A/B test as few things & no other major mods were performed at the time of grooving.
Last edited:
JonnyScorch
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2003
- Location
- Ont.
This would be great to compare B&A. With all this talk about a more complete/efficient burn, the only real way imo tp actually prove this would be through emissions testing while keeping as many other variables constant... Can't wait to hear about the results!
I did this Friday.
And after 40 km this is my impression.
The engine is mutch smoother.
The turbo spools 500 rpm sooner.
I had to reduce my fuel 3-10 %
Strait a-b test i modified the old head.
Engine
Modefied B23 et
Megasquirt running the ekstra code WB lambda controller.
So far i?m very happy
BR
Morten
And after 40 km this is my impression.
The engine is mutch smoother.
The turbo spools 500 rpm sooner.
I had to reduce my fuel 3-10 %
Strait a-b test i modified the old head.
Engine
Modefied B23 et
Megasquirt running the ekstra code WB lambda controller.
So far i?m very happy
BR
Morten