R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

This forum is devoted to all topics concerning high performance, Studebaker powered vehicles.
Post Reply
Jay Bradel
20 - 59 Posts
Posts: 27
Joined: 18 Apr 2018, 12:17

R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by Jay Bradel » 22 Feb 2019, 10:36

I just had my set of Lionel Stone's heads cleaned up in preparation for a new build I am doing. Just got them back from being flow tested. Here are the results.
Lift CFM
.100 - 60
.200 - 136
.300 - 184
.400 - 220
.500 - 240
.600 - 244

How does this compare to the Stock cast iron R3 heads?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
PackardV8
Studebaker Racing Team Member
Posts: 2589
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 09:51

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by PackardV8 » 22 Feb 2019, 13:42

Very nice looking build, Jay.

FWIW, supposedly LS had his intake port core patterns made from copies taken from Alan's original aluminum R3 intake port. How that compares with the cast iron R3 intake flow is a question yet to be definitively answered.

In any case, to get a direct comparison, the iron R3 heads would have to be tested on the same flow bench as your aluminum LS heads. Supposedly, each flow bench is calibrated to the same orfice, but differences and operators do make comparisons difficult.

There are many old numbers floating around in the etheric, but some are at 10", some at 25", and one @ 396 ft/sec. But thus far, your results are better than most anything I've seen posted for a Studebaker head.

Whose rockers are those?

jack vines

Jay Bradel
20 - 59 Posts
Posts: 27
Joined: 18 Apr 2018, 12:17

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by Jay Bradel » 22 Feb 2019, 14:22

Hi Jack,
I am waiting on the actual report and hopefully there will be more information in there.

I made the the rockers. They are offset for the R3 heads and since I was using an R3 cam earlier, I made them 1.6:1 ratio. Now I am going to use a roller cam and will make a set of 1.5:1 roller tip rockers.

Jay Bradel
20 - 59 Posts
Posts: 27
Joined: 18 Apr 2018, 12:17

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by Jay Bradel » 22 Feb 2019, 14:59

Okay, got the specifics. The test was done using the 400 scale and 28" water. According to the engine builder that is the current industry standard. Any thoughts?

User avatar
Jeff Rice
Global Moderator
Posts: 4743
Joined: 15 Jan 2004, 08:48
Location: Brooklet, Georgia,USA,Earth
Contact:

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by Jeff Rice » 22 Feb 2019, 16:49

That's 10 to 20 cfm better than the best of what has been seen in iron heads out there..
Jay Bradel wrote:
22 Feb 2019, 14:59
Okay, got the specifics. The test was done using the 400 scale and 28" water. According to the engine builder that is the current industry standard. Any thoughts?

User avatar
PackardV8
Studebaker Racing Team Member
Posts: 2589
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 09:51

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by PackardV8 » 22 Feb 2019, 19:11

Jay Bradel wrote:
22 Feb 2019, 14:59
Okay, got the specifics. The test was done using the 400 scale and 28" water. According to the engine builder that is the current industry standard. Any thoughts?
Agree, that's the current standard. I mentioned it because many of the older flow numbers out there are not directly transferrable/comparable.

jack vines

Jay Bradel
20 - 59 Posts
Posts: 27
Joined: 18 Apr 2018, 12:17

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by Jay Bradel » 22 Feb 2019, 20:25

Thanks, I am excited for this build!

When I get closer, I will be asking for help on the cam profile.

User avatar
PackardV8
Studebaker Racing Team Member
Posts: 2589
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 09:51

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by PackardV8 » 22 Feb 2019, 21:49

Jay Bradel wrote:
22 Feb 2019, 20:25
Thanks, I am excited for this build!

When I get closer, I will be asking for help on the cam profile.
Having actual head flow is the most important data point for choosing a cam profile. The second is intake manifold and exhaust headers. I've run dozens of DynoSim programs and it's not difficult to get the right cam if all the other variables are known.

jack vines

Jay Bradel
20 - 59 Posts
Posts: 27
Joined: 18 Apr 2018, 12:17

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by Jay Bradel » 23 Feb 2019, 08:33

I will be using LS aluminum intake also. The ports have been matched with the heads when ported and polished. There was much less work that had to be done on the intake. The heads were a mess and I had over a grand to get them to where they are today.

I will be using a set of R3 cast iron headers that were produced many years ago. Should I have the intake and headers tested for flow data?

Thanks for all the help!

User avatar
Jeff Rice
Global Moderator
Posts: 4743
Joined: 15 Jan 2004, 08:48
Location: Brooklet, Georgia,USA,Earth
Contact:

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by Jeff Rice » 23 Feb 2019, 09:39

Jay Bradel wrote:
23 Feb 2019, 08:33
<snip>
I will be using a set of R3 cast iron headers that were produced many years ago. Should I have the intake and headers tested for flow data?
<snip>
Tom C does that.
He does the bare head (port) with just a transition adapter block (or clay).
Then he does the intake (with all the runners taped off, but one).
And then he adds a carb.
That way he can benchmark each item in the intake chain (and verify gains/losses when changes are made).

User avatar
PackardV8
Studebaker Racing Team Member
Posts: 2589
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 09:51

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by PackardV8 » 23 Feb 2019, 11:20

Jay Bradel wrote:
23 Feb 2019, 08:33
I will be using LS aluminum intake also. . . . I will be using a set of R3 cast iron headers. . . . Should I have the intake and headers tested for flow data?

Thanks for all the help!
On the one hand, what you've got is what you're going to run. OTOH, knowing exactly how much the combination flows would be wonderful information to have.

Most desktop dyno programs do not have input for the actual measured CFM of intake manifolds or exhaust headers. They use an experienced estimate based mostly on how a given manifold affects SBC horsepower when used on a given CFM head.

If you mentioned whether this build is going to be supercharged, I didn't see it. The supercharger changes everything; that's why all the highest performance Studebaker V8s were supercharged. When the airflow changes from 1" of vacuum to 7 - 8 PSI of boost, very good things happen to air flow. Again, most desktop dyno programs have algorithms to match the output of the Paxton and other centrifugal superchargers.
I will be using LS aluminum intake also.
And there's the age-old problem. The tall Studebaker block and the low hoodline of the C/K/Avanti is the contradiction of building a performance Studebaker. I just can't bring myself to cut the huge hole and ruin the styling with the scoop necessary to accommodate a high rise performance intake. Even knowing that the high rise Mopar or SBC intakes might make 50 additional horsepower, I will always choose to keep the Studebaker look. It can be rationalized that if one wants ultimate horsepower, he'd be running an LS in the first place.

Fun stuff! Keep us building along with you.

jack vines

Jay Bradel
20 - 59 Posts
Posts: 27
Joined: 18 Apr 2018, 12:17

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by Jay Bradel » 23 Feb 2019, 13:20

Thanks for all the information Jack. This engine will be supercharged. Not sure how much pressure I will be supplying yet but I have a gear drive sn60 Paxton that I designed and developed. So far I ran it 8 hours at 5 PSI and disassembled it to inspect for wear. That is just another fun project I'm working on.

What pressures would work best with a 304 Studebaker engine? My goal is to keep this strictly stock looking.

User avatar
PackardV8
Studebaker Racing Team Member
Posts: 2589
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 09:51

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by PackardV8 » 23 Feb 2019, 13:49

Jay Bradel wrote:
23 Feb 2019, 13:20
What pressures would work best with a 304 Studebaker engine? My goal is to keep this strictly stock looking.
Survivable boost level is a matrix of coolant temperature, intake temperature, fuel octane, A/F ratios and spark control.

Those who know how are running way more than any Paxton can deliver. If it's available in your area, E85 is what most recommend for max effort. The evaporative cooling of E85 can enable high boost pressures without an intercooler.

FWIW, absolutely, positively, definitely, build in a direct readout O2 sensor and a pyrometer. We use Innovate Motorsports, but there are others.

jack vines

User avatar
Jeff Rice
Global Moderator
Posts: 4743
Joined: 15 Jan 2004, 08:48
Location: Brooklet, Georgia,USA,Earth
Contact:

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by Jeff Rice » 24 Feb 2019, 09:40

PackardV8 wrote:
23 Feb 2019, 13:49
<snip>
FWIW, absolutely, positively, definitely, build in a direct readout O2 sensor and a pyrometer. We use Innovate Motorsports, but there are others.
jack vines
Agree 1000%
I use 'dual' AEM 'Fail Safe' A/F ratio gauges.

https://www.aemelectronics.com/products ... safe-gauge

Image

These hook into my ignition and will cut out the ignition until the A/FR rises/drops into the set range.
I chose these because they react faster than I do.
O2 sensor(s) in each header collector.

Also run dual Autometer pyrometers.
Am running these in the '4th Dimension' header pipe (Good name, Jack :P ) so the exhaust temp is reading the center two cylinders on each bank.

https://www.autometer.com/2-5-8-e-g-t-p ... -comp.html

Image

Sorry for the long reply... My setup is super conservative because rare parts are expensive..
Jeff 8)

Jay Bradel
20 - 59 Posts
Posts: 27
Joined: 18 Apr 2018, 12:17

Re: R3 Lionel Stone's aluminum heads

Post by Jay Bradel » 25 Feb 2019, 08:20

This is great information, hope you won't mind that as I progress I will be reaching out for more help.

Thanks Jack and Jeff.

Post Reply