Ron
I agree it is way too quiet on the forum. Here is a project that I have been working on for a couple of seasons that ought to stir some conversation. Or perhaps get more to thinking about that winter project. I am incurable when it comes to tinkering with motors and always looking for optimum performance from my "C". I came across an idea from a friend who told me about cutting grooves in the squish area of a head on an internal combustion engine to improve gas mileage in his 54 Ford Pickup. :drinking::eyeroll:. In fact I think I mentioned this on the other forum once just to get some input. :bouncing: So with tongue in cheek I put it to rest. But I couldn't stop thinking about all the experiences I had read on the Singh Grooves when I researched his site and followed scores of threads. In fact google Sing Grooves and see what comes up. Follow some threads. Or go to the Web site [www.somender-singh.com] or [www.mgccars.com] [speedtalk.com] See Automotive Breath. This guy has something here. Best of all it only costs a little time and a couple of gaskets.
By substantially increasing turbulence within the cylinder the Singh Groove enables more of the fuel to be burned and it burns at a faster rate. This promotes cleaner engine exhaust, cleaner oil, more power, lower operating temperature, no pinging and significantly increased engine power at all levels. Since fuel is being burned more completely, the engine runs clean and cool.
I will list a number of improvements that I have personally seen by cutting grooves in the head of an internal combustion engine.
1.) Run your vehicle on 87 octane pump gas with no pinging.
2.) Increase Fuel Economy 20-30%
3.) Increase Hp
4.) Increase Torque at all rpm levels
5.) Lower idle-not unusual to see 500 to 800 rpm and maintain smooth engine characteristics and smooth take off
6.) Lower engine and exhaust gas temp, typically 20 deg cooler = longer engine life
7.) Maintain clean oil - if this was all it did it would be worth it.
8.) Raise compression if you like. Recommend 10.5 to 1 and maintain .070 squish area, but will work with less. And still run 87 oct pump gas
9.) No other mod will get you this many benefits for the cost of a couple of gaskets
This car runs so smooth that I can idle it down below 500 rpm with no problem, however because the alternator needs more revs to come on I have it set to the 600 recommended by the factory. Maintaining N temp reading is routine. Mash on the throttle from 500 and it revs up w/o hesitation. Drive along in 4th at 1200 rpm, give it throttle and it will pull with no chugging. In fact the man who discovered this sometimes refers to it as direct drive. It has great low end torque and increased the power band from idle to farther than I wish to push it. I'm sold and have plans on doing another MGC as well as a set of Harley Heads. This is something any of you guys can do with just a simple dremel tool.
Respectfully contributed :beer:

Links:
[www.herningg.com]
[forums.turbobricks.com]
[www.rexresearch.com]
[www.v-twinforum.com]
[www.speedtalk.com]
[www.jeremiahsviolins.com]
[www.mpgresearch.com]
[tech.groups.yahoo.com]

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2009 12:20PM by emadak.

Sounds almost too good to be true. I've not looked at the websites yet...but I will be doing so shortly.

---

1968 MGC - 1969 MGC - 1974.1/2 MGB/GT V8 conversion - 1978 MGB

mowog1@aol.com

[www.MG2011.com]
[www.rallyetoreno.com]

This has been kicked about for years and I'd love to see some empirical data. The standard, and rational, response to claims of such gains with simple mods is usually that the automakers would be doing this already in their efforts to squeeze every bit of efficiency out of their engines. Sounds like snake oil.

Dave
You can put this snake oil on two and four stroke engines and see the benefits. Plenty of non solicited dyno testing out there if one is willing to look. Here is a guy that has been doing more than kicking it around. Check it out if you like.[speedtalk.com] see Automotive breath or [www.somender-singh.com] for a dyno.
Here is an excerpt from an email I received from Mr. Singh. It adds a little common sense to the reasoning behind the idea.
"The groove needs to do its job ~ Like blowing into the fire with the aid of a tube ~ Delivering and guiding the puff towards the stagnent portions to achieve a quicker light up !"
Cheers

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/25/2009 07:54PM by emadak.

I read the posts on speedtalk.com before I posted. I still ask why there has been no commercial application if fuel mileage of 20-30% can be realized. Someone would be a multi-millionaire by now and it would be on the front page of every newspaper in the world. Al Gore would have already claimed that he invented it.

Oh yeah, as of June of this year "Mr. Singh states that he has been trying to raise the needed eighty thousand dollars in order to pay for US Dept. of Transportation (DOT) certified testing. "It seems that in the current crisis, your government would be jumping at the opportunity to improve fuel and exhaust conditions by a third across the board, especially because my Groove works best in older American cars!" He expresses surprise that as yet, the DOT has not phoned him for permission to test his technology, which he would give willingly."

He was granted a patent in 2001 on this mod and in 8 years he cannot find somone to front $80k for a 100 fold return on investment.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/25/2009 08:36PM by workinearly.

Sounds good, but like the Fisk carburetter or the Tornado I have not seen it come to fruition. I will read up on it and show it to my machinest and see what he says. I guess I am too a doubting Thomas.
Having said that Ed, I like the idea of looking for ways to improve my car wherever they come from.
Ron

I agree on the question of lack of marketing and putting into use. It was one of the first questions I asked. Surely such a find would be well received. But seems all major mfg refuse to test this idea against their latest technology. Kind of like the Tobacco companies knowing for decades the downside of smoking or chewing tobacco. Racers however are a different breed and their go fast secrets are not so easily found out. There has been alot of head mods used over the years that approached the same basic element of directing turbulence towards the flame front. In fact that is what fuel injection is all about. Think of the amount of $ that could've been saved by the mfg's if they had instituted this simple technology pre FI. Automotive engine building could have taken a whole different path. But then again that would have cost alot of jobs. I have often heard of devices designed for increasing fuel mileage, mostly carburetors when I was growing up. Seems they were always followed with stories to the effect that the auto mfg or fuel companies frowned on them for financial reasons...... So to address the question of why major mfg are not using this technology...... I don't know!

I do know what I have experienced for the last 2 yrs and wish I had known about this when I was building bikes back in the late sixties.B) And I too was doubtful when I first heard of it. Along another vein of thought though, I seem to remember, that Thomas was enlightened by an object lesson....... so..... what was the lesson again?

I am happy to share with all my experience and if anyone can't rationalize it out that's ok too. I understand. Hope I am not hindering comments here! Keep them coming... All opinions are welcome this is an open forum after all.

I have done two heads. First was a single groove on a stock head and worked well. Immediate torque difference in motor response. Now I have the three groove and the head has been shaved .060. Other than that a stock engine with 123 ignition and headers. Too early to tell what other improvements as the weather here in Ohio has gone considerably cooler and comparison tests conditions are not even close. One thing is that with the complete burn of fuel there is no more bluish residue on the rear of the car from the exhaust. And the oil, you know how the 20w50w is heavy and gold in color and goes black easily before 3000mi are up, well now it is as clean as the day it went in. Well almost! with the single groove. I will keep an eye on it with the triple groove. And I can still run 87oct without pinging (pinking).
Compression numbers are 174 + or - 1 across the cylinders.

On a turbo car that is pumping tons of Hp there is a need to blend the edges of the grooves to avoid hot spots. I did not give that a whole lot of attention because the Mgc is not a ground pounding machine. But if there are concerns then simply file and blend. Carbon build up was negligible on the single groove head after two seasons. Hope to see less on the three but I won't be taking it off anytime soon.

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/26/2009 08:10AM by emadak.

I am also inclined to be skeptical here, though I now have someone one degree of separation from me claiming to have done it himself, so it becomes more believable.

One line of thought here is that, if this has only been around since 2001, the benefits are not there to be realized because auto manufacturers have already optimized the combustion chambers and fuel delivery to the point that there is no longer any benefit. This leaves old cars as the only remaining market. Owners of older cars are likely too cheap to remove the head, too skeptical to believe, or too concerned with originality to machine their heads (or all three!).

It would be nice to see someone here do this with before and after testing, rather than a simple butt-dyno. Also to verify that the carbs, dizzy, compression ratio, etc wasn't changed at the same time the head was off.

Tom

Tom
Actually been around since 1995 at least as far as Singh is concerned. Dyno butts have been replaced by actual test equipment already. Here is one of many examples. It is a pdf file of a dyno test from a guy in Michigan. [www.somender-singh.com] I find these hard to understand but the owner seems to know what he's got.

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/26/2009 06:27PM by emadak.

Ed,

I was thinking of empirical data from someone *other* than the people making the original claim....

Tom

Ed
How wide are the groves and how deep thanks
Russ

Tom
I may be missing something here so bear with me. None of the Dyno Reports are connected to or sponsored by Singh. They are all independent guys like you and me. Submitting posts only for the information of others. Now I have to get my dictionary out to look up empirical. Ok here it is. Empirical -based on or characterized by observation and experiment instead of theory or derived solely from experience:beer:

Russ my original single groove is .071in wide starting shallow just shy of the gasket and gradually getting deeper towards the cavity .162 deep. I went a little wider and deeper with the three groove.

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/26/2009 05:34PM by emadak.

Does sound interesting. Still a little gun shy. Will look over you supporting documentation. Yes measurements would be nice, easy for me to do as I have a couple of heads off now.
Ron

On the single groove I laid out the gasket on the head and used a sharpie to make an outline. Using a straight edge next to make a line pointing directly at the spark plug. Now take a dremel or similar tool and cut your groove. Just do not go past the sharpie outline where you would cause head gasket failure. Working towards the plug start shallow and go deep. Think it through! I believe my first ones were a little narrow and shallow. .071 wide and 0.162 at the deepest. So I went deeper and a little wider on the three.

When I did the three groove Singh suggested one pointing at the plug and one at the stem of each valve along with a .040 mill. I have seen grooves much wider and deeper. Some make jigs and use ball end mills of 3/32. There is no real science to it as you are only directing a puff of air towards the flame front.

General consensus is to keep the squish between .040 and .070 usually dictated by the head gasket. In our case I do not believe we have a choice.

I have attached a picture of a head with 20000 mi and a single Singh Groove.

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/31/2009 07:58PM by emadak.

Seems like cheap horsepower, I may ask Mr. Brown what he thinks about it when he P&P my head next year.

It was a very interesteing read.
Thanks for the info....

Peace,
D

More good reading. Some interesting comments on engine temps. It starts out about GM and Bosch research on HCCI. Then transitions to Singh Groove comments.
[www.greencarcongress.com]

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/03/2009 03:01PM by emadak.

Make sure you radius all the corners! Sharp edges will act as a stress-riser and could lead to cracks.

Hi Mark
Good suggestion. Although I personally did not for a couple of reasons, I guess I like living on the edge. However in retrospect the next head will be blended in with a radius on the groove edge.
Also of note, there have not been any reports of cracked heads since 1995. Which includes a number of high horsepower contributors which can be found in the provided links. I have noticed though, the more horses someone produces, blending the edges is a practice that has been suggested. Thanks for the reminder.

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]

I did grooves on a 2002 Subaru Outback 4cyl last week with 83,000 mi on the odometer and drove it up to NY about 500 mi. Mileage improvements were negligible, and could be better only 26 highway on an awd. But low end performance was improved and passing capabilities were better. An interesting note is that cruise in overdrive only downshifted once on any of the long inclines along the interstate. The mph never varied while in cruise. It is a 4 valve per cylinder head which burns pretty efficient from the factory. But the head gaskets failed due to unburned fuel in the cylinder. Since the heads had to come off and this manages more of a complete burn it seemed logical to make the improvement.

I have added a few links
[www.innovatemotorsports.com]
[www.pacificp.com]
[www.sepiamutiny.com]
[www.mazda626.net]
[www.rangerpowersports.com]
[pesn.com]
[forums.nicoclub.com]
[community.discovery.com]

[roadstarclinic.com]
[www.allpar.com]
[www.jalopyjournal.com]
[www.firstenergycorp.com]

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 11/17/2009 04:20PM by emadak.

I just looked at the dyno sheet comparison, as listed for a 2006 Chevy truck. Note that the dyno tests are on 2 different trucks, negating ANY gains. Unless you test apples against apples (use the exact same engine), the information is useless. There are so many ways to cheat at this, a 3rd party test facility with nothing to gain needs to be utilized. Dyno shops who intend to sell the work obviously have financial interests. Charge $100 per head or more to cut 3 grooves per cylinder?
Ka-ching!

Then, How many of these heads get a valve job while they're off?

---

jeff@advanceddistributors.com

Here is a picture of one groove in the 02 Subaru 16 valve with 83,000mi.
Note! a very small squish area. It still did the job of directing a current of air at the flame front. Exhaust gas is remarkably clean. Probably a combination of the four valve and the groove. I don't think I will ever see that on the MGC. However the black oil I used to get on the Mgc after a few hundred miles is completely gone. Now it is remarkably clean at 3000mi. I look for similar improvement on this Subaru.

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/17/2009 04:16PM by emadak.

I am in the process of putting together an Extrudabody injection system for Mine MG B to possibly improve performance and mileage,Now with this bit of new knowledge it looks like I got another job to do.:thumbsup:
Thank You for posting this information.
Maby I should try it on the heads of Mine 93 GMC that has 220000 miles on it I bet that would help it out too.

I read all his stuff (nothin' to do while I'm waiting for the garage to warm up)....and I'm not cuttin' grooves in any of my heads. Anyway, I better get my MGC distributor done right away because when all that CO2 is released and the next ice age comes.....I'll be down here in NM, but Jeff will be covered up by that advancing glacier up there in Minnesota.

---

sayings from a Northern Minnesota farm girl (my mom), but seem ever so true here.......

you can't teach a pig to sing....it wastes your time and annoys the pig........

some people feel the rain.....but most just get wet.........

Lloyd, that glacier started moving in 2 days ago. I'm not holding my breath that the "Singh effect" will save the planet any more than Al Gore.

---

jeff@advanceddistributors.com

Looks like you're running "E3" style plugs, Ed.

How do you like them?

---

1968 MGC - 1969 MGC - 1974.1/2 MGB/GT V8 conversion - 1978 MGB

mowog1@aol.com

[www.MG2011.com]
[www.rallyetoreno.com]

Rick, I like them very much. Not the "E3" but a very close resemblance. I chose the Halo Plugs (B-LR15YC) a recommendation from a friend. [www.haloplug.com]
Here's a blurb from their site.
"LSG Halo Spark Plug with 360° Firing Technology.
This patented spark plug features a circular, open-ring ground electrode and cutting-edge firing technology. The patented design provides optimum access to the spark by the air/fuel mixture, eliminating the “quenching effect” experienced with conventional spark plugs yielding emissions reduction and gas savings."/

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/04/2009 08:20PM by emadak.

You might like this picture, taken at the E3 display at SEMA this year...plugs came off of the same coil, so firing time was identical. You can "almost" make out the spark on the plug on the left.

Standard disclaimer.

---

1968 MGC - 1969 MGC - 1974.1/2 MGB/GT V8 conversion - 1978 MGB

mowog1@aol.com

[www.MG2011.com]
[www.rallyetoreno.com]

Impressive! Are you using the "E3"? If so what are your observations?
As for the Halo I do remember when I put them in the rpm's increased about 300 rpm and I had to readjust the idle. Cheers!:thumbup:

---

Regards
Ed
Amgcr#1419
[www.mgccars.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2009 12:00PM by emadak.

I've not changed over - yet - I've been talking with folks...Pete Mantell has also switched his MGC over to the E3-style...and you...this will be on my "to do" list for the next driving season.

---

1968 MGC - 1969 MGC - 1974.1/2 MGB/GT V8 conversion - 1978 MGB

mowog1@aol.com

[www.MG2011.com]
[www.rallyetoreno.com]