| quote | Originally posted by Pyrthian:
can anyone post the CFM of each of these? and also the CFM a 2.8, a 3.1, and a 3.4 need with a stock cam @ 5000 & 6000 rpm? |
|
CFM of an engine is based on engine displacement and RPM.
The total CFM of an engine is calculated by:
Engine Size (c.i.d.) X Maximum rpm/3,456=cfm@100 percent Volumetric Efficiency (VE)
So as an example a 2.8L is 173 ci.
173 X 6000 / 3456 X 1.0 (100%) would be 300.3 cfm.
This would be the max the engine could flow at 100% VE.
Some things to also note,
VE of a stock natrually aspirated pushrod engine is around 85-87% VE. You can raise the VE (even over 100%) with mods like multi-valved heads, sonic tuning, and forced induction are some examples.
The CFM vs. HP as Kohburn lists is total actual CFM of an engine. Going back to the Fiero 2.8L with the lower VE (87%) it needs 261 cfm but with the intake runners, cam, and heads the actual true flow is closer to 200 cfm of the engine even though it has a calculated cfm of 300. Hence why the 2.8L has roughly 140hp.
Throttle body CFM is just a calculation. At 52mm the TB flow is about 308 cfm. At 57mm flow is 354 cfm. (These are max values and do not take into account the throttle plate and design of the TB.) But just because a TB can theoretically flow 308 cfm does NOT mean that the engine can utilize all of it. This is why just changing to a larger throttlebody only gives minor gains. If you want to increase power/flow drastically, everything in the path needs to be opened up.
To find the actual true flow of an engine would require a flow bench and an engine dyno.
[This message has been edited by Oreif (edited 10-11-2006).]