Ah Joe, I didn't write gas velocity wasn't important for engine performance. Nor did I write that velocity measurements aren't a valuable tool when porting cylinder heads. For the life of me, I don't know how you interpreted that from my post if you read in context, as an answer to James K's first post. I was responding to a question about the 4V port and a commented James K made wishing he had a port velocity number for each of the heads. I advised James K that a port velocity number for each of the heads in his post would not be valuable, and I thought an average cross-section number may be more enlightening. I didn't think the statement was controversial when I wrote it. Was I being unreasonable?
In regards to a port velocity number for each ot the heads in question, I don't think any of the heads in question have a port velocity problem. That was my first thought. Then of course there's the issue of just what a port velocity number represents: the peak value, the lowest value, or an average value? Is that number plucked from the best port, the worst port, or an average port? And finally, how does James K relate that velocity number to the performance of an operating motor.
Since the ports of all 3 heads in question all have basically the same geometry, height, etc my gut feeling is James K would find the port with the highest flow numbers will have the largest average cross section, etc. Especially since two of them have been ported by the same person.
Kick Him Often Enough ... And Even A Dog Will Leave
To Find A New Home Where He Isn't Kicked