When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Trying to figure this one out but not having any luck.
I'm hoping to build another motor for the 78 next year, and right now NOx is a potential enemy.
I would like to increase CR (currently ~8:1) to about 9.5 - 10:1.
Running aluminum heads, 216/216 110 hydraulic flat cam. Would probably up to like a 218/224 112 hydraulic roller cam for the next motor.
Heads are AFR 195, pre-eliminator. May up to eliminators.
Could do 350 or 383, might do the latter to keep the Rs down.
So I know that by increasing the CR I run the risk of increasing NOx. My quench right now is probably garbage. I have no idea what it is, but it's likely BIG. (74cc heads, 0.039 gasket, flat top pistons some level below the deck).
How would tightening the quench up affect smog levels?
A longer duration cam with increased overlap will reduce NOx (exhaust reversion lowers cylinder temp). Downside is it increases HC and CO.
Cam pattern is basically how they eliminated EGR in the LSx series motors... but they run much tighter NOx than my 78 by a WIDE margin, even with a functional EGR.
I guess the more efficient combustion chambers helps as well.
@TSW - going to have to get myself some more Vizard books.
From: Graceland in a Not Correctly Restored Stingray
Sorry, after scanning thru several titles I haven't been able to put my finger on it yet. Maybe it was Voegelin, Staffel, or someone else, but I do recall it being fairly clear and by a reputable source. Based on whatever was the text, I've actually looked into this matter for my own purposes, and the sims I've run with this in mind have certainly been favorable. Figure if a build isn't a max-effort one anyway, why not try to clean it up a bit where practical?
Hmmm... for some reason I thought raising compression would raise NOx. Do you have any recommended reading for this one?
We have a WINNER! Thats the reason Chevy gave up the good style Fuel Injected combustion chamber in the 71 model year, same for the big block excepting the LS-6 but the lowered the compression to eliminate NOX emissions.
With out really knowing the answer to your question I would say that a more modern head like the AFR's would be more efficient, and therefore more carbon frendly. I do know on a Diesel we used to use Starting Valves, a small Valve in the Cly Head that opened to allow Compressed Air in to start the Engine. It worked well and there wasn't any starter motor. But Emissions have put an end to them, as the extra Valve made a dead spot in the Quench killed emissions. I would assume polishing the Combustion Chamber would do just the opposite and Help Emissions.