Toymods Car Club
www.toymods.org.au
F.A.Q. F.A.Q.    Register Register    Login Login    Home Home
Members Members    Search Search
Toymods » Tech & Conversions » Is 5 valve better than 4 valve?

Show: Today's Posts  :: Show Polls 
Email to friend 
Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
AuthorTopic
170bhp
Regular


Registered:
January 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 30 May 2005 09:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Witzl, I have thought many times about doing the whole stock motor thing on our engine dyno, including exhaust, then swap to extractors, air filter etc, but time to do this and money is against it. I have had a few 4age's on the engine dyno over the years, I will look for the figures, but what we did was dyno a stock big port, with 4-2-1's into dyno exhaust, and aftermarket ecu, then we took the factory manifold off and put on ITB's the gain was quite a bit. I have also dynoed 20v's (all silver) stock and with exhaust, no air box, mild cams etc, 16v big port with high comp, big cams ITB's and ae101 GZ, the GZ was stock boost, 4-2-1 aftermarket ecu, most of the motors have had adj cam gears which we could play around with to see the improvemnts/losses etc so I have a good indication of BHP on these, but like I said I'd love to start with dead stock including intake etc then slowly do mods and see the out comes, this would be great!! We have also had alot of Mazda BP motors on the dyno, modded heads , lots of cams, ITB's etc and they react quite funny to cams, too small not enough power, too big and very narrow power band, we tried recouping this with very high comp etc but to no avail, but by the same token they do put out good HP.
  Send a private message to this user    
170bhp
Regular


Registered:
January 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 30 May 2005 09:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
If someone is interested in donating a small port head and a big port head so I could put on the flowbench, then I could give flow figures for all three, the heads can be rooted aslong as atleast one cyl is good, and of course it has the intake and exhaust valves, I might even flow the intake manifolds on all types to see the losses these give, I know that the ae86 rwd intake manifold becomes restrictive when chasing power (above 165-170bhp)
  Send a private message to this user    
funkdoc
Regular


Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
February 2003
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 30 May 2005 11:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adding a VVT system on a 16v is a lil unrealistic...
Better idea... hows about disable the VVT on a 20v and add adjustable cam gears... pit that against the ITB 16v (with adjustable cam gears also if necessary)... both tuned to the maximum potencial using a motec or something equivalent....

I reckon in this configuration the 20v would beat the 16v... My reasoning behind this is because the vvt on the 20v is only activated for a very limited part of the rev range (low/mid only).... and mostly during partial throttle.... the 20v wouldnt lose power up top at all, if not gain a lil from the tuning... from what i've heard on the engine dynos (Stafford Tune - Motec Dealer)... a stock 20v produces anywhere from 145hp-160hp... i doubt a stock 16v with quads is gonna beat that...

But i guess most of the debate is aimed at the max potencial of the Heads... i'll just leave that to the experts...

2zz a great engine....hmmm.... i disagree ey... i've driven the celica and sportivo corolla's... i reckon they're pretty average ey.... the useable torque band is soo narrow... i remember the engine only gave decent acceleration from 6500-8000.... compared to the B18 out of a Integra Type R.... the 2zz is a joke.... no offence....

By the way... enjoying this debate very much! Very Happy
  Send a private message to this user    
Jonny2TG
Forums Junkie


Location:
Tasmania
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 30 May 2005 15:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
With N/A motors like this, I think cam profile and valve timing is one of the most important things. (Again, just putting together what I have read).

4AGE 16v cams are about 240 degrees duration? The 4AGE 20v cams are 250 degrees both on intake and exhaust. I think this is enough to make a fair difference. And with the 20v, the intake cam is timed at either 125 or 95 degrees depending on RPM. Exhaust cam is timed at 109 degrees fixed.

I think the basic way to get more power out of any 4AGE would be to get cams closer to 300 degrees, with the lobe centers closer to 100 degrees both exhaust and intake. (Less duration with lobe center at about 110 degrees would work better at low rpm).

The 2ZZ-GE is a great motor, I love it. (I get to drive them sometimes). But the way its makes power is still basic. Its just a 16v motor, which makes a bit more because its 1800cc and not 1600cc, and it uses bigger cams with more lift. 292 duration and 11.2mm lift on intake! 276 duration and 10mm lift in exhaust! for the big cams. But the 2ZZ-GE has 2 totaly different cam profiles on each cam. If you changed the computer to get the big cams going earlier, the power band would be more like 4000 - 8200rpm. But they have set it up to be very conservative up to 6000rpm from factory for some reason.
  Send a private message to this user    
Johnny
Forums Junkie


Location:
Sydney, OZ
Registered:
May 2002
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 30 May 2005 15:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Quote:

If someone is interested in donating a small port head and a big port head so I could put on the flowbench, then I could give flow figures for all three, the heads can be rooted aslong as atleast one cyl is good, and of course it has the intake and exhaust valves, I might even flow the intake manifolds on all types to see the losses these give, I know that the ae86 rwd intake manifold becomes restrictive when chasing power (above 165-170bhp)


Love two (if in sydney?)! I have on offer, 7A/4AFE head (same as Bills), Big Port, Small Port, Black top and a Silver Top all bog stock... So take your choice. All Have manifolds... and would be interested to see how restrictive the FE one is.
  Send a private message to this user    
Ben Wilson
Forums Junkie


Location:
Canberra
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 00:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bill Sherwood wrote on Sun, 29 May 2005 11:29

I forget the original reason I rang him for but we got talking about 16v 4AGE and how I wanted to attack one with a milling machine to rehsape the inlet port so it'd angle down into the head like a 20v one does.
That guy had apparently already done it, and said that at around 10,000rpm (I think, not sure but it was very high revs) was getting a bit over 290hp from it.


I know a guy who is currently looking into this very thing (he has borrowed all my spare heads for development). According to his calculations based on the biggest inlet valves you can fit in the head (without moving the valves), the most a 16v head can flow with ideal porting is 260hp.
  Send a private message to this user    
takai
Forums Junkie


Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
May 2003
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 00:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ben: Would this be Mark the amazing wacky head flow guy?
  Send a private message to this user    
Ben Wilson
Forums Junkie


Location:
Canberra
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 01:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Perhaps Smile
  Send a private message to this user    
takai
Forums Junkie


Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
May 2003
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 01:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Heh, i think there is only one crazy wacky headflow Mark in Canberra. Especially if you mention Indy.

EDIT: Both types of indy actually.

[Updated on: Tue, 31 May 2005 01:05]

  Send a private message to this user    
justcallmefrank
Forums Junkie


I supported Toymods

Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2002
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 02:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jonny2TG wrote on Mon, 30 May 2005 23:37

If you changed the computer to get the big cams going earlier, the power band would be more like 4000 - 8200rpm. But they have set it up to be very conservative up to 6000rpm from factory for some reason.

You'd probably find you would lose power. I dunno whether the changeover point wasn't put there to be conservative, it might just be that up till that point the smaller cams work better.

EDIT: This is mostly going off numerous reports I've read about people fiddling with VTEC controllers and the like. Any change either side made power go backwards.

[Updated on: Tue, 31 May 2005 02:09]

  Send a private message to this user    
THE WITZL
Forums Junkie


Toymods Social Secretary

Location:
Sydney
Registered:
July 2002
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 07:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Here is a 2zz-ge dyno graph from a chassis dyno, ZZE-123 corolla run in 4th gear. (note: same car run 6 mnths later on different dyno dynamics dyno in shootout mode got about 5kW more, and there were mods in between)

http://www.rollamods.com/witzl/sml-sportivo-dyno.jpg



Now at the 6000rpm "lift" point, its already making over 80kW at the front wheels. Compare that to my 4age making 70kW at 7000rpm on the same dyno on the same day..... note the speed differences, and calculating out the gear ratio differences so that RPM:speed match... the 2zz-ge makes the almost the SAME power at 6000rpm as what the 4age makes at 7000rpm..... and then the 2ZZ-GE hits the LIFT ZONE!!

**NB: ingore the "trough", that's knock control taking over on my rattly arse old engine from the bin. 4th gear T50 box and 4.11:1 diff
http://www.rollamods.com/witzl/sml-ae71-dyno.jpg

Now compare this to the following blacktop 20V in jasonp1977's old AE92, 4th gear on 5sp LSD 20v box.

http://www.rollamods.com/dynoday/015.gif


Now if the 20V configuration was such a MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT over a 16V design, then would we not be seeing a smaller gap between the 2zz and the 20V???


NOTE: all these engines are relatively stock and running stock ECUs. I know all these people and they can back up this data.

[Updated on: Wed, 01 June 2005 07:02]

  Send a private message to this user    
Jonny2TG
Forums Junkie


Location:
Tasmania
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 08:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
From those graphs the 2ZZ-GE is making more power/liter than the 4AGE 20v. But that would be because the 2ZZ-GE is useing bigger cams. The 2ZZ-GE with 292 inlet cam versus the 4AGE 20V with 250 cams.

Its my guess, that if both the 16v and 20v 4AG's had say 290 degree cams, they would be much more equal and both would have about 100kw @ wheels. And would be makeing the same power/liter as the 2ZZ-GE. ...if all were kept to the same rpm range.

But the graph of the 20v does look very smooth.
  Send a private message to this user    
Bill Sherwood
Forums Junkie


Location:
Brisbane / Gold Coast
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 10:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
170bhp wrote on Mon, 30 May 2005 19:18

If someone is interested in donating a small port head



*popping from Frankfurt*

Some flow figures from my small port head. It's been ported so it flows more than stock.

Inlet valve CFM IN Ex % Exhaust Valve CFM
.100 90 93% .100 84
.200 153.42 89.9% .200 138.4
.300 186.48 79.9% .300 148.49
.350 195.36 # 77.8% .350 152.10



From my site, some big port figures for a basically standard Toyota 4AGE TVIS 1600cc twin cam head @ 10" of water.
Inlet port -
Lift CFM

0.060" - 31.5

0.120" - 65.0

0.240" - 108.4

0.300" - 111.1

0.360" - 112.5



(Hope the formatting works ....)

[Updated on: Tue, 31 May 2005 10:39]

  Send a private message to this user    
170bhp
Regular


Registered:
January 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 11:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bill, you mention that '20v's have problems with flow interference between the valves at high speeds', I would like to know how you tested this phenomenon????I have talked to collegues and they too are interested in how YOU measured this!
  Send a private message to this user    
Bill Sherwood
Forums Junkie


Location:
Brisbane / Gold Coast
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 11:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
170bhp wrote on Tue, 31 May 2005 21:40

Bill, you mention that '20v's have problems with flow interference between the valves at high speeds', I would like to know how you tested this phenomenon????I have talked to collegues and they too are interested in how YOU measured this!



The guy I employ part-time, an ex-Repco-Brabham F1 engineer said they tested all of that sort of thing in the 1960's.
The gap between the valves get relatively little flow compared to the other areas, so it cuts back the total flow. The middle valve on the three inlet valves has two of these interference areas.
  Send a private message to this user    
Merudo
Forums Junkie


Location:
Central Coast, NSW
Registered:
February 2005
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 11:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
170bhp,


What I'm curious about is why you created a thread with the title "Is 5 valve better than 4 valve", only to vehemently deny peoples claims regarding the 4 valve engine and why it's superior. You're not even taking their side of the argument into account really
  Send a private message to this user    
xolent
Forums Junkie


Registered:
October 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 12:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Merudo wrote on Tue, 31 May 2005 21:57

170bhp,


What I'm curious about is why you created a thread with the title "Is 5 valve better than 4 valve", only to vehemently deny peoples claims regarding the 4 valve engine and why it's superior. You're not even taking their side of the argument into account really


Yeh I've been reading this tread for a while and have been wondering that myself.
  Send a private message to this user    
170bhp
Regular


Registered:
January 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 12:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
First off I wanted to get peoples attention to the subject and secondly if you read my intial post which has the findings by yamaha I thought it was answered Wink

Bill, so YOU actually didn't do any testing.....the '60's......so it LOOKS like it has bad flow interference.....OH PLEASE!!!!!
very scientific testing Bill Wink
  Send a private message to this user    
170bhp
Regular


Registered:
January 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 12:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
as for not taking 16 valvers ideas into consideration I find it funny how much the 16 valvers won't accept the 20v at all, they are prepared to live and die by the 16v, I liked em....just found something better!!! I wish all those people PMing me over this debate would put their support on the thread!!!
  Send a private message to this user    
Bill Sherwood
Forums Junkie


Location:
Brisbane / Gold Coast
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 12:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
170bhp wrote on Tue, 31 May 2005 22:25

First off I wanted to get peoples attention to the subject and secondly if you read my intial post which has the findings by yamaha I thought it was answered Wink

Bill, so YOU actually didn't do any testing.....the '60's......so it LOOKS like it has bad flow interference.....OH PLEASE!!!!!
very scientific testing Bill Wink



That Yamaha paper (Yes I've read it) is just one. However, it seems to be the only one that thinks five valve heads are better. It's also an old paper.
Real-world results almost always seem to favour the opposite.


And no, I haven't personally done any testing. Why should I repeat what's already been done by people smarter than me with better equipment?
What would be the point in that?


And again don't give me that 'hating 20v' shit - I'm building a turbo one.
So yet again, I have to say get your facts straight before you open your mouth.
  Send a private message to this user    
Bill Sherwood
Forums Junkie


Location:
Brisbane / Gold Coast
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 12:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
FWIW here's the estimate power run of the 4AFE I'm building.
This is an old run, I have got a little more out of if recently.

And yes I KNOW it's ONLY SIMULATED! Smile
The program I use has been proven to be accurate to within about 5% though for many engines. So I'm confident that it'll be pretty close to what you see there. It also matches the 'brother' engine it has in Holland to within a few percent.
I tried to get a good useable torque curve, and I think you'll agree it has one of those.

http://www.billzilla.org/4afepower.jpg

I'll be sorting the pistons in about a month.
  Send a private message to this user    
floody
Regular


Registered:
June 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 13:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
170bhp wrote on Sat, 28 May 2005 15:16

Why can't the NR750 motor be used in motorbike racing? I remember that one clearly(most of you guys probably were sitting around making a mess for your mums in ya nappies!!) but Honda bought out this trick oval piston 4 cyl motor, 8 valves per cyl, it was like a mini V8, two rods per cylinder, it didn't even get one race in, NEW RULE, one conrod per piston, overnight it banned it, so because that motor is not running in motorbike racing following some of your thoughts it must be a useless motor!!!!!

FUK I LOVE EXPERTS!!!


IIRC the NR500 Honda wasn't banned - however it was not anywhere near as powerful as the 2 strokes (despite turning a reputed 20,000+rpm), and was terribly complex, heavy and unreliable. The NR750 was only ever a road concept. It ran for nearly 3 years with very few race finishes and not one single win - HOnda gave up and built the very successful NS500 instead.

Currently oval pistons are not allowed in MotoGP (as of 2002), though in the current four stroke era nobody has even tried to build one.

Yeah, experts are wonderful.

Just something to note from motorcycle examples, Kawasaki's ZX10R motor at 998cc and 4 valves per cylinder makes 184hp/11,500, Yamaha's 5 valve R1 at 998cc makes a touch under 180hp/12,500. Bore/stroke is 76.0x55.0 and 77.0x53.6 respectively, compression ratios are 12.7 and 12.3 .
Torque is 115nm @ 9,500 for the kawasaki, 103.9nm for the yamaha at 10,500.
The Kawasaki runs 43mm throttles, Yamaha 45mm ones.

Neck and neck, though if anything the ZX10-R currently makes more grunt - of course it could be because of any of those factors.

I think in the end a 16v and a 20v will end up with similar power outputs, I'd be leaning towards a 16v motor.

[Updated on: Tue, 31 May 2005 13:08]

  Send a private message to this user    
takai
Forums Junkie


Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
May 2003
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 13:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Its a pity that a YZF-R1 is so much nicer to ride than a ZX10R. But thats more bike ergonomics. I love the ZX6R though, and the R6, but thats getting off topic. Although interestingly the R6 is a 4valve engine.
  Send a private message to this user    
Acoustic
Regular


Location:
Hong Kong
Registered:
November 2003
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 16:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bill Sherwood wrote on Sat, 28 May 2005 16:07

I very much doubt they have problems with flow interference!!
>

Yes they do.





Yes, flow interference exist, a crude example is we have difficulty breathing when going against the wind like riding a bike. It's not the same thing, but such things exist and more.

If we consider this, one wonders does turbo suffer the same fate?

I'm no engine experts, but my personal research into the ultimate hi-fi has lead to the discovery of very small / tiny items / properties to have major effects compared to larger items.

Sound is very similar to engine combustion, intake / exhaust. We cannot see them move. Weird things are happening inside the combustion chamber......

Another similarity between sound and engines is that both reacts in the "time domain" and their factor to "turns of events" if I can call it are even more significant.
  Send a private message to this user    
Acoustic
Regular


Location:
Hong Kong
Registered:
November 2003
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 31 May 2005 16:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
[quote title=Bill Sherwood wrote on Sat, 28 May 2005 23:58]
I have a copy of the 2003 regs (I suspect 2004 is the same) and rule 5.1.5 states that "Engines may not have more than five valves per cylinder." [\quote]

Alex Young was in this 2003 year in Minardi and they were the only one with 4 valves while everyone else is 5 and they had the older V75 while everyone else was V90. If I remember correctly.

No wonder they are always back makers Sad
  Send a private message to this user    
*rivmasta*
Occasional Poster


Location:
Sydney
Registered:
March 2003
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Wed, 01 June 2005 00:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
We're in the process of designing the new engine for the racecar, limited to 1650cc N/A.

We're going with the 16v as it seems that in stock form the 20v is superior (though Im not sure how much that has to do with the better intake/exhaust/cams/vvt as opposed to number of valves) but in a mild to serious build it appears that the 16v develops better power...

Mind you, this is based on talking to heaps of guys who have raced with both the 16v and 20v's, not on dyno numbers. You might say its 'seat of your pants' experience... but when you look at thier trophy cabinets most trophies are won with the 16v.

Real world experience from these guys say the 16v is better if youve got the money to turn it into a decent race motor, 20v if you dont.

We're going 16v... hi comp, 20v throttles, port etc, ze injectors (probably) 300deg (or a little smaller) cams. We'll be keeping a complete almost stock 20v as a spare ready to bolt in (just change the EMS ECU to the second set of maps)
  Send a private message to this user    
funkdoc
Regular


Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
February 2003
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Wed, 01 June 2005 12:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bill, i'm sure 4afe project will be a killer motor. But ur basically building ur own race purpose head. Ur just using the 4afe cuz it has more meat for u to shape. Thats not a very fair comparison to mass produced 20v engines.
As for the 4age 16v vs 20v debate. I truly beleive if a 20v has had as much development as the 16v... it would be equally as powerful in peak hp but provide a smoother (wider) torque delivery. I'm sure everyone agrees with the smoother torque delivery even if u dont about the max hp. Very Happy
As for 16v winning more races.... that hasnt got a lot to do with the motor, theres too many other variables... Look at Valinetio Rossi, he's winnin all the races...his yamaha motor must be more powerful than the hondas... Rolling Eyes
  Send a private message to this user    
Bill Sherwood
Forums Junkie


Location:
Brisbane / Gold Coast
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Wed, 01 June 2005 14:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
funkdoc wrote on Wed, 01 June 2005 22:41

Bill, i'm sure 4afe project will be a killer motor. But ur basically building ur own race purpose head. Ur just using the 4afe cuz it has more meat for u to shape. Thats not a very fair comparison to mass produced 20v engines.




No, it's fair I reckon.
It's made using almsot all stock Toyota parts. 2NZ cam buckets, 3SFE valves, etc.
(Well, I'm using specially made inlet valves but they're otherwise the same as stock 3SFE valves)
You could build the head quite cheaply.
A full-race head would cost more of course, but so would any race head.
  Send a private message to this user    
emmac
Regular


Location:
Gippsland Lakes. Vic.
Registered:
March 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Wed, 01 June 2005 14:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Intresting discussion.
On the subject of "flow interference between valves" my simple old mind would have me thinking that exactly the same thing happens with two inlet valves side by side as compared to only one valve,or a lump on a piston or the combustion chamber wall. But that even with perhaps more shaded or "interference" area's on the third valve that overall flow would still be greater even if not necessarily in proportion.I also really think you would need people with the extremely specialised expertiese & sophisticated scientific test equipment like Ricardo or MIRA to define this.I can't imagine this being a contributing factor to making a 5v-cyl. less functional than a 4v-cyl.IF IT REALLY IS.
IIRC the Cosworth History book had a piece in it by the great Keith Duckworth that wasn't very complimentary to 5v-cyl. or Yamaha's use of it.If i'd never lent the book I could tell you what he said.
I also think Yamaha's F1 5v engine from the 90's was used in a supercar they built for the road in more basic form. emmac
  Send a private message to this user    
rx-3 ip
Regular


Location:
brisbane
Registered:
October 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Sat, 04 June 2005 06:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
this is a very interesting subject.. i'm impressed
in the end , it all depends on how much money you can afford to put onto an engine either 4 or 5 valve , to build a very nice engine ( approx 240 hp ) will cost $40-50,000 like formula atlantic..my N/A 20v engine only cost me $3000 to make 190 hp , nice.. Cool
  Send a private message to this user    
off-road
Occasional Poster


Location:
Alice Springs
Registered:
February 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Sun, 05 June 2005 09:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
*rivmasta* wrote on Wed, 01 June 2005 10:38

We're in the process of designing the new engine for the racecar, limited to 1650cc N/A.

We're going with the 16v as it seems that in stock form the 20v is superior (though Im not sure how much that has to do with the better intake/exhaust/cams/vvt as opposed to number of valves) but in a mild to serious build it appears that the 16v develops better power...

Mind you, this is based on talking to heaps of guys who have raced with both the 16v and 20v's, not on dyno numbers. You might say its 'seat of your pants' experience... but when you look at thier trophy cabinets most trophies are won with the 16v.

Real world experience from these guys say the 16v is better if youve got the money to turn it into a decent race motor, 20v if you dont.

We're going 16v... hi comp, 20v throttles, port etc, ze injectors (probably) 300deg (or a little smaller) cams. We'll be keeping a complete almost stock 20v as a spare ready to bolt in (just change the EMS ECU to the second set of maps)

  Send a private message to this user    
off-road
Occasional Poster


Location:
Alice Springs
Registered:
February 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Sun, 05 June 2005 09:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
*rivmasta* We're a long way from you but its been a while since
I've seen a class 2 trophy won by a 16 valve! There were a few
'monster' 16 valves around before 20 valves came on the scene,
that made good numbers but you had to rev them over 8500.A 20
valve will make good power around 7500 and has the luxury of still having a bottom end thanks to VVT.
In the off-road community as on this forum there a 16 valve
fanatics and 20 valve fanatics but there aren,t to many fast
16 valves left regardless of budget and I seriusly doubt that any one that has campaigned BOTH would say that the 16 valve
is a better OFF-ROAD RACING motor.
If you want a serius motor stick a 4ag crank in a 2zz.
  Send a private message to this user    
170bhp
Regular


Registered:
January 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Sun, 05 June 2005 13:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
off-road it sounds like you are ACTUALLY involved in motorsport Wink yeah I know for quite a number of years the 20v's have been quite popular and done well. this debate reminds me of the guys I knew when I was younger trying to hang onto their beloved holden red motors Laughing Laughing Laughing
  Send a private message to this user    
Bill Sherwood
Forums Junkie


Location:
Brisbane / Gold Coast
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Sun, 05 June 2005 13:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Offroad - In one of the road car racing classes, Chris O'Shannessy runs a 16v 4AGE that has never been beaten by a 20v. He swapped over to a 20v to chase more power.

It's mostly in the preparation, but I still believe that a 16v suitably prepared will make more power. The VVT helps the 20v's a lot though, and so in your case will certainly help the point-to-point driveability.
  Send a private message to this user    
Kr0n1k
Occasional Poster


Location:
Rochester, NY
Registered:
February 2005
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Sun, 05 June 2005 17:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ok, this is all well and good, but for an N/A street setup, which one would be better? Always factor in the commoners who don't go to the track of have budget/know-how to build a Formula Atlantic or race-prepped motor or are using their cars to get to work and want to pull away from the light quicker than the Civc, etc. next to them.
  Send a private message to this user    
170bhp
Regular


Registered:
January 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Sun, 05 June 2005 22:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
I don't think anyone has seriously tried to develop a 20v, so comparing it is probably not comparing aplles with apples, If you look in Japan now, it is MORE common to see very moddified 20v's than 16v's, I get lots of ae86 books, vcd's etc and the tide in Japan is definately turned towards running a 20v. Of course the mainstream here will follow 20 years from now Wink
  Send a private message to this user    
off-road
Occasional Poster


Location:
Alice Springs
Registered:
February 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Sun, 05 June 2005 23:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bill Sherwood you are assuming off-road and circuit racing are the same in terms of motor requrements.In off-road bottom end is critical to come out of very slow corners and this why flat
4's and 6's were so sucessful for so long.I know that people have made over 200 hp with 16 valves but you have to rev them hard and they have no bottom end.The same applies to 20 valves-if you want over 185 hp people disconnect the VVT and put in huge cams.The result-no bottom end.
The other point is most cars in the 1650 class run VW transaxles
and a stock 20 valve is on the limit for these boxes.We have also found high revs is more of a drama than horsepower.
The bottom line is that 20 valves have dominated in class 2 against all comers regardless of make or budget.
The only people who claim the 16 valve is better for off-road
haven,t used a 20 valve and choose to ignore the results.
Also when 20 valves came onto the scene, well worked 16 valves
were getting flogged by standard 20 valves.
Everything I have stated is from results in off-road racing-
not on a dyno or a flow bench or on bitumen in a formula atlantic race car.
Results talk- bullshit walks and the weapon of choice for off-road racing in the 1650cc class is the mighty 20 valve Toyota.
  Send a private message to this user    
Bill Sherwood
Forums Junkie


Location:
Brisbane / Gold Coast
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Sun, 05 June 2005 23:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
off-road wrote on Mon, 06 June 2005 09:34

Bill Sherwood you are assuming off-road and circuit racing are the same in terms of motor requrements.


No, that's precisely why I wrote what I wrote.
  Send a private message to this user    
Bill Sherwood
Forums Junkie


Location:
Brisbane / Gold Coast
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Sun, 05 June 2005 23:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
FWIW here's the 249 hp offroader that has the brother engine to the one I'm building.

http://www.billzilla.org/4afeautocross1.jpg

http://www.billzilla.org/4afeautocross2.jpg


It thoroughly thrashes everything else in its class.

  Send a private message to this user    
EMP-2TG
Forums Junkie


Location:
Carlingford, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Sun, 05 June 2005 23:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
170bhp wrote on Mon, 06 June 2005 08:28

I don't think anyone has seriously tried to develop a 20v, so comparing it is probably not comparing aplles with apples, If you look in Japan now, it is MORE common to see very moddified 20v's than 16v's, I get lots of ae86 books, vcd's etc and the tide in Japan is definately turned towards running a 20v. Of course the mainstream here will follow 20 years from now Wink



i would have called it the other way
a few years ago in japan i would have agreed with that
but in the last few years its coming back to the 16v in a big way... btw im not saying thats for any reason, maybe 20v cost alot more over there?
  Send a private message to this user    
SEXY 16
Forums Junkie


Location:
ghetto area 2745
Registered:
November 2003
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 01:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bill Sherwood wrote on Mon, 06 June 2005 09:44

FWIW here's the 249 hp offroader that has the brother engine to the one I'm building.

http://www.billzilla.org/4afeautocross1.jpg

http://www.billzilla.org/4afeautocross2.jpg


It thoroughly thrashes everything else in its class.



bill
i would like to see the power and torque comparison of this motor compared to the 1600 ford zetec motor currently being
used in motorsport in ireland and the uk at the moment
  Send a private message to this user    
oldcorollas
Forums Junkie


Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 02:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
170bhp wrote on Fri, 27 May 2005 22:54

I have got my hands on an SAE technical paper


ahh, it`s good to see some people have learned how to look up journal articles....

it`s bad to see them taking them as gospel without a decent grain of salt.

the point of journal articles, SAE or otherwise, is to publish peoples opinions and findings.. but that does not mean that the information is actually true (take the tobacco studies as a good example of when things go wrong)

and before you ask, yes i have published articles Razz... in Micron, Materials at High Temperatures, and also Acta Materiala...

as Bill mentioned, this is just one paper of many, and if you go back far enough, there are some pretty crappy designs touted as "best thing since sliced bread"

170bhp, give it up or back it up..one paper doesn`t mean shit to a scientist.. remember, you ALSO DIDN`T do this work, so you have no idea if their experimental data is correct (one of my papers basically showed that the last 20 years of experiments in a certain subject were performed incorrectly Rolling Eyes )

Cya, Stewart
  Send a private message to this user    
off-road
Occasional Poster


Location:
Alice Springs
Registered:
February 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 02:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Might be a hill-climber but doesn,t look like an off-roader to me.That also looks like a swingaxle which wouldn't last too long off-road with 249hp!
And Bill the reason I had a shot at you was because you started your reply with the tired old line "I know of a 16 valve thats never been beaten by a 20 valve"
We hear that in off-road too but the fact remains the 20 valves are winning the national rounds and the championships.


  Send a private message to this user    
Bill Sherwood
Forums Junkie


Location:
Brisbane / Gold Coast
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 04:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Might be a hill-climber but doesn,t look like an off-roader to me.That also looks like a swingaxle which wouldn't last too long off-road with 249hp!
>

Yep, it is.
It's in Holland, not Aus. They may well have different rules there.


And Bill the reason I had a shot at you was because you started your reply with the tired old line "I know of a 16 valve thats never been beaten by a 20 valve"
>
So what?
It's a fact.


We hear that in off-road too but the fact remains the 20 valves are winning the national rounds and the championships.
>
Well good for them.
  Send a private message to this user    
oldcorollas
Forums Junkie


Location:
Kita-Ku, Sapporo, Japan
Registered:
January 2003
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 07:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
170bhp wrote on Mon, 06 June 2005 16:54

geez are you guys on yours knees all sucking off Bill or what!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!

Bill, I loved the 'so what' reply if I was a doctor I would diagnose you with a terminal case of handus cokilitus!!!


bill schmill, look at the incredible amount of thought that has gone into your reply and pull your head in.

since this argument started with your presentation of a research paper, how about you declare the other papers you looked at to cross reference the data, and make them available too.

unbiased reporting of single papers is terribly poor form in research circles.... particularly when commissioned by a company (probably close to a product release i would imagine.. fancy that...)
lets stick to the topic, and not to your fantasy abotu bill's bits.

Cya, Stewart
  Send a private message to this user    
IRA11Y
Forums Junkie


Club Member

Location:
sydney
Registered:
May 2002
   
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 07:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
170bhp your starting to sound a lot like an idiot weve had here before, in fact a small trace will confirm it quite easily. But just thinking about your forum name brings to mind another number quoted by this afore mentioned person and his claims of engineering prowess with his poxy little 20V.

So why dont you just slink right back in to your old cess pit again Smuggla.
  Send a private message to this user    
*rivmasta*
Occasional Poster


Location:
Sydney
Registered:
March 2003
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 07:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ive really liked this thread - im enjoying the thrash.

Off-road - most of the guys Ive been talking to are the nsw orc guys which was what we raced until the tree... new car will be national though - look forward to meeting you long weekend next year. Smile

170bhp - you're a dead set fuking knob. dont assume Im not a "real" racer just because I dont subscribe to your point of view. Why start a thread just to attack anyone who doesnt aggree? Im a racer mate - shoestring maybe - but Ive got a fair collection in the trophy cabinet. (ahhh - feel better now)

We're currently running comparisons on 20v vs 16v using an engine analysis program - Should have it finished by weeks end - I'd be happy to post stats when its finished.


  Send a private message to this user    
*rivmasta*
Occasional Poster


Location:
Sydney
Registered:
March 2003
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 07:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
oops sorry, I missed quoted - its ACTUALLY involved in motorsport. Pull your head in mate...

Off-road - will PM you so as not to drag the tread too far OT.
  Send a private message to this user    
Bill Sherwood
Forums Junkie


Location:
Brisbane / Gold Coast
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 08:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
170bhp wrote on Mon, 06 June 2005 16:54

geez are you guys on yours knees all sucking off Bill or what!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!

Bill, I loved the 'so what' reply if I was a doctor I would diagnose you with a terminal case of handus cokilitus!!!



*sigh*

My third answer on the second page is a suitable retort to that childishness.



170bhp wrote on Mon, 06 June 2005 17:21

oldcorollas....what about all the information I have been TRYING to relate back to our dynoing(I have mentioned many times my findings on our engine dyno)....R U GUYS F*&KING IGNORING THAT!!! It seems to me unless it something that doesn't go with what Bill says, you get a slamming!!!! Other people are trying to get into the debate stating FACT about 20v's in other forms of racing and when Bill says' oh no they're not' every one bandies around him like he's the king, If I was rich and could PAY to get everything done I'd probably be the king too Wink



No-one is ignoring it. The problem is that you are ignoring everyone else's results.
I also am willing to admit when I'm wrong and know that I can learn something from pretty much everyone.



170bhp wrote on Mon, 06 June 2005 17:21

FUK THIS, BILL YOU CAN HAVE ALL YOUR SHEEP FOLLOWERS!!!!

If Bill was doing all his own development and fabrication and dynoing I'd say yeah no problems but hey who can afford to PAY everyone to do it!!!Bill don't say you are cos I know people who know you!!


FFS I've been through this too many times with Idoit Boy.
1. HOW am I supposed to do all the work that my eight or so cars require if I'm overseas for something like 90% of the time?
2. I have never claimed that I do all the work myself. I actually pointed that out in this thread. To be more specific my Father does a lot of the work, and I also employ Adrian Brooke (ex-F1 engineer) part time. When I am home I do what I can.
3. I have also pointed out that I'm building a 20v myself. Have you also missed that?
4. I DO give real world results, just like you do. They come in two parts - The generic 4v Vs 5v and that is answered by F1 trying and rejecting them. You can try to spin that any way you like but at the end of the day they just don't make the power. B. Where examples of 20v's doing well are given, I can give examples of 16v's also doing well.
It's called debating and discussing the facts intelligently.
I see precious little of that from you.
5. You seem to have ignored the 20 odd years I have been in motorsport. And I don't mean just hanging around, I have been on Pole Postition for my classes National Championships about 30% of the time I compete in them. The car has broken down twice in said championships, though when it's finished I have never finshed lower than 3rd place.
The current car is now no longer anywhere near fast enough, hence the Mallock Mk31 that's about 80% done. I am confident that it will break all the lap records for the class where ever I drive it.

I could go on and on, but it's wasted breath and you're doing such a good job of making an arse of yourself anyway.

[Updated on: Mon, 06 June 2005 08:24]

  Send a private message to this user    
4agte
Forums Junkie


Location:
Toronto, Downtown
Registered:
September 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 08:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
all the n/a ae86 sprinters in the d1 granprix in japan all ran what appeared to be bigport heads as opposed to 20v heads but they all ran the 20v quads some with some insane sized bellmouths and no air filters
  Send a private message to this user    
takai
Forums Junkie


Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
May 2003
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 09:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Never forget that D1GP makes very little sense.
  Send a private message to this user    
4agte
Forums Junkie


Location:
Toronto, Downtown
Registered:
September 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 09:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
takai wrote on Mon, 06 June 2005 19:06

Never forget that D1GP makes very little sense.

it makes alot of sense especially when you see it for yourself in real life.
  Send a private message to this user    
floody
Regular


Registered:
June 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 09:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
4agte wrote on Mon, 06 June 2005 18:18

all the n/a ae86 sprinters in the d1 granprix in japan all ran what appeared to be bigport heads as opposed to 20v heads but they all ran the 20v quads some with some insane sized bellmouths and no air filters


Could it be that even in Japan 16v base engines are still cheaper and more accessible than 20v ones? Surely that would be a big consideration in a sport where the motors are constantly banging off the revlimiter, getting big shock loadings from "shift lock" corner entries and having oil sloshed god knows where under pretty abnormal g-loadings....
  Send a private message to this user    
4agte
Forums Junkie


Location:
Toronto, Downtown
Registered:
September 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 10:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
i doubt that has anything to do with it

edit: its not like they just whack any old 4age into a sprinter these things rev way past the factory rev limit i wouldnt be supprised if they reved to 9-10k by the sounds of it and they werent particularly caring about their engine internals considering they didnt have any air filters and then you add to the fact that they are competing against 500ps silvias and skylines i doubt they were internally standard or anywhere near standard.

They were also considerably slower drifting as they were constantly getting passed by more powerfull cars kinda sad really

[Updated on: Mon, 06 June 2005 10:14]

  Send a private message to this user    
takai
Forums Junkie


Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
May 2003
 
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 11:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
No, they very much arnt stock whatsoever. I would say that the 16v choice would go towards the lesser cost of 16v parts. Not sure where you get 9-10k from. Ueos car has a declared redline of 8500rpm, and is quite heavily modified.
  Send a private message to this user    
Bobski
Regular


I Supported Toymods

Location:
Perth
Registered:
May 2004
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 16:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
although this is most probably a waste of time ill point one thing out...

the way you deal with people is how they treat you....you could be the smartest person on this planet and know the most about "everything" but if u start raving and ranting and callin names no one will listen to you Rolling Eyes

Bill seems like a helpfull kind of bloke who posts his findings, makes web sites and shares what he knows...

there is no need for this online grudge match Laughing although it is amusing you guys wont come to an agreement

im not havin a go at ya but just stand back and look how ur acting

Adam
  Send a private message to this user    
Blown86
Regular


Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 23:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
I've been waiting to see some dyno charts from all the testing 170hp???
  Send a private message to this user    
Corona RT142
Forums Junkie


Location:
Campbelltown
Registered:
November 2003
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Mon, 06 June 2005 23:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
meh dyno charts mean nothin to easy to forge, we need a video of the dyno run showing the monitor.
  Send a private message to this user    
adamaw11
Regular


Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
February 2005
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 07 June 2005 01:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
I'm not taking sides at all in this discussion, but I just want to point out this particular article: (throwing steak to the lions I guess Evil or Very Mad )

http://www.bobnorwood.com/The%20Fastest%20Little%2 0Sports%20Car%20in%20Utah.htm

About getting the land speed record for under 1500cc, using a destroked 20 valve 4age

I'm surprised this article hasn't been brought up already, but it makes you think, would someone going for the land speed record really choose the 20 valve head for any reason other than maximum power?

Its a good read anyway.

  Send a private message to this user    
Bill Sherwood
Forums Junkie


Location:
Brisbane / Gold Coast
Registered:
May 2002
Re: Is 5 valve better than 4 valve? Tue, 07 June 2005 02:54 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
adamaw11 wrote on Tue, 07 June 2005 11:26


I'm surprised this article hasn't been brought up already, but it makes you think, would someone going for the land speed record really choose the 20 valve head for any reason other than maximum power?


I know the 20v head is a better thing for forced induction, due to the larger valve area and that the problem of flow interference is reduced by the air being 'pushed' in.
That's why (along with the VVT gear) I'm using one for the 7AGTE I'm building.

I emailed the guy overseas with the 4AFE offroader and he's trying to find a dyno run from it.
  Send a private message to this user    
Pages (3): [ «  <  1  2  3  >  »]   Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Previous Topic:reset ECU = better performance?
Next Topic:what is this thing?
Goto Forum:
-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Fri Mar 29 01:52:40 UTC 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.0075500011444092 seconds

Bandwidth utilization bar

.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 2.3.8
Copyright ©2001-2003 Advanced Internet Designs Inc.