Over a month and no feedback.

Like I thought. No one has any valid information.
At least we don't have to suffer the bs from phony engineers and internet bullies.

Looks like you have catch breather Bob go take a nap again ...

I can't get behind something that hasn't been proven. You need to test 2 of them back to back using the same CR. One test using the stock chamber the other using the new chamber.Without doing a proper test like QD did you will never know where the power increase might be coming from.You are not comparing apples to apples by bumping the CR 2.7 compression points at the same time as chamber shape change.

Bob- Apparently you fell asleep during the lesson on the Toroidal Head and what the design of the chamber does during the combustion process.....You are totally wrong about the difference!....there was a difference using the Toroidal head go and read the results again......Dare you to post on JRCBD your negative, misinformation there instead of here.....if you do not want to be a phony or bully then get one to test and find out for yourself and not take anyone's word for the results...not even mine......otherwise stop blubbering dingbat postings and trying to cause an arguement when those that have tested and are using the Toroidal Head are having power gains that they have posted elsewhere as well as here on this fourm and those posts are done in a constructive manner in simple english.....yawn.... go take a nap.

Where is the difference? When the CR was the same between the 2 heads there was no difference.Swapping a stock for the t head made .2 hp less than 1/4 of a hp more than stock.
So where did the .2 hp power increase come from? the new chamber shape or the CR increase?
It appears the CR increase made the difference not the chamber shape because when the CR was matched to the new head the power was the same.
I'm posting the facts that Mitch reported.Based on those findings I'd say more development needs to be done.
I'm only looking for scientific answers to this design, I can't ask a question without 10 guys getting defensive and clouding the subject with opinions because I'm not just bowled over by its existence.
But if you want that I should do my own testing, then post the drawings of it so I can make my own to match the specs you use and I can test from there.

I'm skeptical of claims regarding certain things in the two stroke world.Heads and turbo cranks are at the top of the list.
I'm looking for pics of the "turbo crank" that the fan boys claim makes 10 hp over when in fact it dynoed less than 1 hp increase.

Here are two head examples that the fan boys drool over.
Do you think they work?

Bob- Those heads for the fan heads are known to go into the detonation zone quickly.
As for scientific proof....it is all in the design of the cylinder head.
When Hershey's & KFC release their recipes to you ...let me know so I can send you the prints I have for the toroidal heads.
It will be more cost effective money wise and time wise to just buy a head and I'll give you a break for $50. instead of $65 shipped free.

I'll make my own to my specs.After its flogged thoroughly with CFD analysis.i should add that I'm not working on zenoah size engines but an 800cc twin for a sled.
The power company is supposed to be coming to upgrade the shop so the 8 axis lathe will be running soon. Perhaps I can offer you a discount on making the parts.
You are getting raped by the guy who makes your heads.

I can do $15.99 plus shipping.

Hong kong can do it cheaper. Better sell as many as you can before the copy artists take notice.

Heres a CFD example

We finally got some snow to test.
1/2 mile drag on the lake showed 0 (zero) increase in speed (actually dipped) at stock compression.I'm not throwing any more money at this crap. It doesn't work.on big bores.

What's with the chatter marks in the head in the top picture. I wouldn't let something that looked like that out of my shop.