HP HOW TO: BBC HEAD TEST pt2
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 июн 2020
- FULL REC-PORT RESULTS, SPECS AND AIRFLOW DATA. 496 STROKER, WHAT WORKS? How much power can you really add with a good set of Rec-Port heads? Do Iron heads work? What about alum heads? Can oval-port heads compete with rec-port heads? what about port volume-is bigger really better? Was our 496 just scratching the surface of the power potential? It's all here.
Авто/Мото
Richard, this is my first ever comment on the tube. I'm a mechanic by trade been doing this for over 20 years. You sir are my hero you have tested so many combinations of everything across the board. My 72 chevelle has been in my dway since 97. You answer a lot of questions for people. I love all of your videos. I started to call you Mr horsepower. Thanks for all the tests that you do. You make RUclips in interesting. I put my project aside to raise my little girl. I don't know if I'll ever have the cash to finish and drive the chevelle. You are an amazing inspiration to us all. Thanks for what you do. I could only hope just to get the chevelle running let alone have my daughter ride in it. Keep up the good work Rich. Good regards from Utah.
thnx for making your first comment here-now get that Chevelle running
This guy is AWESOME!
I didnt read or see on the video. Which intake did you use on the AFR heads. I dont find this a surprise with AFR heads. They really make good stuff. Great test . Great cam for this much HP.
WOW 👀 Those oval AFRs and square Brodix... 👌😬👍
Thanks for more of "the other guys" content ! You're our saint ! 😂
Sometimes the "too much LSx" stuff makes it hard to breathe around here. 😛
Edit: I can't believe he's only at 71k subs.
Channels spreading stupidity and crooked facts are awarded but those with knowledge go by unrecognized. and ignored.
its climbing very quickly and I thank everyone for that
Share it on your instagram and Facebook I did
@@richardholdener1727 Any chance to test the AFR 300 CC OVAL Port magnum heads with a 250 duration @ 050s?
@@w41duvernay I would like to see a set of those on a 540 build myself! Heard great things about them.
@@w41duvernay I SO want to see the 300cc AFR heads on a 468 and 496 with a .650 lift ( the area that most street durations land, and what the heads are tailored to ), I had 265s on a 496 that made over 700hp...the 300cc weren't available then...
One thing folks should know is the 265cc AFR oval is perfect for a street 468 and they come fully ported, so they are one of the more value heads on the market
Many many years ago when I was at tech school, we watched a seminar that the guys at Reher Morrison put on. They went way down the rabbit hole showing that the basic design of rectangle port heads has a lot of dead air space where velocity is lost and tumbling can occur. This way before cnc machines took over the world. The Morrison guys said that they believed an oval port could made to be superior but the technology to do so didn’t exist yet, but that it would within the next 10 to 15 years. And now we have oval port heads that can do what tradition says is impossible.
When I was a kid just starting my apprenticeship one day we went out to replace the dust extraction system at a sugared almond factory.
The old system was square and full of sugar dust.
we replaced it with a new system made from round tube.
Reason was the dead spots in the square corners allowed the sugar dust to settle out.
I have heard similar opinings from a few guys involved at similar levels of competition.
Round will always flow better then square
the corners in a true rectangle are dead spaces for flow-round or roval is best
@@richardholdener1727 Correct. Roval was mentioned several times.
Every time you do a BB Test I want to rip the 5.3 out of my car 🤦♂️. Lol great video...
I done that long ago lol. Turbo 5.3 removed for a twin turbo big block....oh yeah haha
Lol
Angelo Vasilikos, I’ve done 3 LS swaps now, my next build will definitely be a big block...
@@Monte1970SS you will never go back either👆
@@HorsepowerHeadquarters454 I like both, but when you want all the power...yeah a big block only route! 600+ cubes just has the best sound too.
Dude!! Your information is impeckable. You are saving a ton of guess work that most gearheads go through when assembling any motor. Keep up the great scientific info. Right in your face HP and Torque specs. Excellent base lines to select from. I value what you do. Never stop.
I knew the AFR ovals would do well on a 496. 😎👍🏻
Bro the information is just the best💪🏾💪🏾💪🏾... Some Shops wouldn't even break it down to us like this... And those Iron Summit heads still made plenty of power....Thanks Richard
Please do a video on the effects on thermostats and horsepower. The majority of the audience will probably never now that these engine dyno test are ran around 140-160 degrees. Thank you so much.
I think it might depend on the engine also what temperature it makes peak power at. Nascar engines are run at around 280 degrees, I think more so because they are trying to limit the drag by not having much air go through the grille, but it might be worth testing on a older engine vs a newer engine
That could get messy being that some vehicles don’t kick on closed loop till 180 degrees which is why a lot of guys ruin transmission lock up /non lock up won’t happen till the computer tells it to which is based on heat of motor .thermostat trick works but that is more for carburetor days then fuel injection stuff but your right it can affect power for the better I’m more for putting big fans Big radiator and stock t stat to keep temps down to right when closed loop kicks in
I think it was done on engine masters on MTOD but cant remember the results. Maybe someone else can?
watch engine masters, colder water temp makes power
@@ryanaxberg9263 you probably ment 180° and yes a good equalizer temperature throughout the engine and using a good cool can and pulling outside negative pressure air from around the cowl area and with the aid of an electric fan you can expect a 9 too 15 hp.gain, and that's just for starters for free hp.
Thanks Richard you're awesome you always say what we want to hear
Great test Richard ,thank you.
We also had l88 heads back in the day. We had 396,402,454,496 engines. Turboing the ls6 or l88 was the hot ticket. And placing that in a 69 camaro or nova was awsome
Bloodviking
Damn! Those Brodix heads really brought in some power 🤘😁🤘!
the Bros work well
Loving what you Do Richard...Just completed a 496 BBC...with 10.6 to one and a hand ported Brodix 340cc and a 270 duration Solid Roller....700 lift...She belted out 700hp and 595 ft lbs of Torque...She fell right in line with your Test Motor....Enjoy your Videos...👍
I'm getting addicted to your tests
Thanks for the extensive testing. It makes sense that the shape makes no difference if the flow numbers are comparable. I recently looked at a 1,000 HP 565 BBC where the guy said "oval port heads". Turns out these where custom ground from Brodix blanks so they have no lineage to the production oval port heads. The AFR heads look amazing and have my full attention. I like the low-end torque that carries all the way through the RPM range. Thanks again for the data.
I love these head comparison videos! I watch them a couple of times! Quality entertainment. I'd like to see part numbers. I'm really interested in the Edelbrock, Brodix and AFR heads. Running a Blueprint 496 w/20cc dome & forged crank, comp XE284 flat tappet hydraulic and perforner rpm air gap proform 950 drag carb
This is exciting. The 489 I have in my 72 Monte Carlo is a weird little mix of the rec port and oval port motors you tested. 489 stroker with the xr300hr cam, 10.3 compression and the brodix race right ovals on it. My heads definitely flow a little less than the afr, but still makes the car feel like more than enough for the street
I'm running GM alum oval port heads (12263390) CHANGE OF NUMBERS (14331425) on a 10.7:1 496 tunnel ram engine dual 750 Demons 294 Comp hyd roller in a 3800 lb Firebird ...i couldn't be happier (except when the needle and seat o rings bypass fuel from sitting) smooth and torquey just strong EVERYWHERE !! Great show as always ... now i'm looking at the BR-300 maybe not ... lol
Those AFR heads are insane!
They also have the smallest chamber so highest compression ratio. That make power down low too!
Thanks for the test data and all that work you did.
Very welcome
I have listened to the advice of a lot of seasoned Chevy engine builders. All say , less then 510 cubic inch ( approx. ) use oval port heads. Seems they are correct. Another great, informative video.
Awesome video once again!
Port velocity again on the AFR's. The Brodix BB-3 Xtra O series 335 heads are just 🤤 O- face. Who needs Rec ports. Great video!
Dude you are so f awesome you need your own show you do alot better then any of them guys you knowledge and good personality
Thanks for your work I always like oval port for street and strip especially when new school car pulls up to me on the street
I love BBC's! Just hope this sentence doesn't get pulled out of context one day.
🤣🤦🏿♂️
LMAO
You dirty girl
The oval port heads were a big shock !!! , but AFR do kill it in the head game
Love these tests!!!
The AFR's were helped by having higher compression ratio, but no head had better average flow numbers. And AFR achieved those numbers with the lowest port volume of the bunch. Sort of makes me want to build a big block just so I can buy those heads.
Another great video. Afr are fantastic heads my brother has a 598 big compression nasty solid roller engine with the afr 345s. Had no idea the edlbrock heads was only 107 chambers the higher compression ratios of the edelbrock and afrs made the most peak hp.
What kind of power did your 598 make with 345s
Another Awesome Video,,,
This changes everything in my plan
Richard your car guru , I've seen or heard, or read about you everywhere. Last night I watched you on Netflix "The fastest car"
Very cool!
Love the channel too!
Great video
Thanks for the video love the info on big block builds. I was impressed the oval port and brodix were so similar wonder if there is a difference with boost.
Great info. I'm looking to buy the comp cam to put into the 496 i have.
67-69 big block Chevy engine's 427- 396 made 430hp and lower (smaller displacement) on large ovals heads the rec's weren't out yet. Didn't expect the ovals to come out of left field like that! 👍
Taking a cad 500 and putting a huge turbo on it on 89 to 92 pump gas with 600 to 700 hp was quite a street car in the 80s and 90s. And in a t bucket was the fastest street car around.
Great test. I use the AFR 305 square ports with good success. They seem to be very close to flow and port volume to the AFR oval 290's. The AFR ovals weren't even around yet when I bought my 305's. Keep up the great videos, excellent work. I especially liked the small block solid lifter engine comparison as I also run a DZ engine.
AFR 305 is a good head-used them a lot
I've been convinced for years AFR makes the best cylinder heads hands down.
You might want to talk to Profiler about that...
And I've been convinced hands up!!
I'm using 088 heads on my street 496 big block. I'm happy with them 💯👍
We built na engines back in the 80s and 90s that didn't come close to turbo engines. Big diesal turbos were great back then and not alot of money used. Garret,holset, mack etc were nice. And we usually needed just one to hit 800 hp on pump gas from a bbc or cadillac 500.
Bloodviking
Those Oval ports were surprisingly good but they look to be right in their sweet spot with the cam choice and cubes, If you went with more of either I think they would become a restriction compared to some of the other heads. More cam especially.
Awesome 👏
I'd really like to see what the outcome would be with a ported dual plain air gap and the oval 290's on the 496 compared to the single plain . curious if it's worth spending the extra bucks on the single for a street strip application and would be nice to see what you're giving up or gaining going either route
That's a badass 496. Those Brodix or AFR heads on a 540 would be absolutely nasty... Perfect nitrous oxide platform.
Great video.
My dragstrip buddies (30 years ago) used to all say that the iron heads made more power than aluminum.
They also said the oval port heads made more hp than the square ports, but for some unknown reason, the hot ticket was to run a square port intake on the oval heads.
Most of these guys were running 496s.
I remember those days. Similarly, back in the 70s, a Ford 429 with standard heads made more power with a 429 CJ intake manifold, despite a huge port mismatch! That was in Pat Ganahl's book on Fords.
I wonder why the mismatched intakes worked out better on both occasions
@@xmo552 It's still a mystery at this point...
Great job Richard! I bet it’s a pain in the rear to do all that swapping! I have a 489 in my Camaro with Dart Pro 1 345 (as-cast) so I was super excited to see where this engine stacked up. Looks like my estimates of mid 700s is “about” right! (I have more lift on the cam and more compression along with a few other small differences). Keep up the good work!
Have you ever dynod the car to see what it puts to the wheels
@@utahcountypicazospage5412 unfortunately I have not, the car has been 10.25@135 with a 1.43 60’ and weighs 3590 with me in it. It’s a foot-brake car and I left at idle on that pass.
What's cam are you using
Comparing GM rec ports to AFR anything don't show anything everybody knows AFR is some of the best you can buy, really enjoyed the video
Great video. I was searching for flow numbers on stock cast iron head 12562925 supplied on the 502 HO. I don't know if those heads compare to your 088 heads. I am hope they come close. I am assuming in your table flow in blue column is the lift opening of valve?? I will keep on viewing your videos and thanks for taking your time and money to provide good information. Keep it coming. Bert
Still waiting for the gen7 8100 vortec tests lol
yes
Dbl yes
Those heads would have shined even better with a .750+ lift, 280+@.050 cam, 13.5-1+ compression and a 1150 Dominator on a Super Victor intake. That would be a good pump gas driver tho.
I know it doesn't matter so much but I remember this test and y'all left a bunch of power on the table with the cam Choice! You don't even need a bunch more duration either
Would love to see a carb shootout ? Demon vs xp holley vs edelbrock vs quickfuel ? Cheers and love your content 😋
Thanks or including the oval port head. How well did the ports match the intake? It would also be cool if you ran the Edelbrock dual plane. Thanks again for these informative videos!
Do more PLEASE I just picked up a 2002 GMC Sierra 2500hd 8.1L
It seems that the heads with the bigger exhaust flow do better regardless of shape of port so maybe the choke up is in the exhaust for big blocks also smaller chamber which means more compression is playing a major factor but if you can make big power with regular gas that’s big especially since your gonna go thru a lot with a big block this test shows more a choice in octane then anything with the chambers Being from 107-123 stock and some of those big flow heads coming with 122 which could still be ran on 85-87 octane. To some that could be worth losing 15-18 hp
AFR FTW!
Rick I need your opinion. I installed an Edelbrock top end kit on a 460BBC (Edelbrock #2070). Its a stock bottom end maybe 9:1 CR. Using their aluminum performer rpm heads and the hydraulic roller cam supplied with the kit along with 1-5/8” headers and full 3” exhaust with an h pipe. It used Holley Efi and hyperspark ignition. Made 440rwho and 480ft lb. my issue was peak power was at 5200rpm??? What gives. I dont understand why its not revving out to 6-6500. Kit says it should make power from 1500-6500rpm
I wonder how my jegs 290 heads would do. That big block is similar to how mine is build(except I am running a slightly bigger SFT cam which might reduce power a little).
Congrats on another great video! I was wondering, did the heads with the smalllest chambers caused a raise in compression ratio too?
Another awesome test! This is why i watch and tell other people about you bro... All these tests may have been done before but not exactly this way... That's what it's all about. "The way you do the things you do, all day" 😁👍
Thanks again!
Starting to wonder if you ever sleep. 😂
Holy crap! With this cam, in a 496, the AFR ovals beat ALL the rec ports in every possible metric! But for the MONEY, the Summit iron heads are a tremendous option. And with a more streetable cam, they'd be even better. Yay Summit!
Hey Richard how about a big cube Ford head test. And include the Kaase stuff. I love his SR71 stuff!
I'm building an old school chevy gasser, and I am currently building the engine for it, I'm going to run a 496 BBC I'm just trying to get your opinion on what would be the best head/cam combo that will work with a dual holley 750 double pumper carbs with a tunnel ram setup, I may put nitrous on the car I am undecided on it, but I do want to take the car to cruise nights and to the drag strip on occasions so looking for a good combination that will give me the best bang and buck don't matter I am not skimping on parts so skies the limit!!!! Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks
Ran Dart 355s on a 496 13:1 roller motor w spray and the car was running 4s in no time..Had enough room later for a 565 and was deep 4s with that set up at close to 160mph..
Last year I had a 489 built for my 68 Malibu, 10.8 comp., Brodix RR Rec port 294 W/CNC chambers and cut to 115 cc, gasket matched Eddy AG W/AED 1,000 cfm carb & 1 7/8 headers for clearance in the car, cam was a hyd roller 231 int 239 exh .600 lift 110 lsa and made 600 ft lbs from 4200-4500, 589.8 hp @ 5700, I went small on cam for A/C
GOOD COMBO
Once again you blow the myths away with your common sense approach. Surprised to see all of the more serious power makers had very similar flows. What the flow numbers don’t give are the max and average velocities. Could their increase in performance be linked to an increase in port velocities? Just a question. Keep up your videos. They are definitely interesting and make a person think about the old wives tails we were raised on.
So the big gains came from the small chamber heads, i.e., Brodix, Edelbrock, and AFR. How do you separate gains from the C/R increase from the rest?
Like to see this same test on Merlin specially pt. 2 ❤
Man these series by this guy rocks I've got same bottom end as this with stock 049's and makes 600hp and 610ftlb large ovals rule, now put that T ram on it with twin 950s
I agree tunnel rams are pretty awesome.
obviously those chamber sizes make a big difference thats more than 1 point in compression so thats going to make more torque and power. if the dart head had a small chamber it would of trumped all
I’ve a set of those big ole heavy cast 781 heads with 2.25 and 1.90 valves on my 10.5:1 496 Stroker. I only hope when it goes to the dyno
Absolutely awesome test, very close to a motor I'm in the process of building. So extremely useful for me, thanks! Mine is a stock ls6 454 bottom end with as cast pro comps and just a touch bigger cam. I'm gonna guess I'd lose probably 50hp cause I don't have the stroker?
I bet you lose more than 50 HP. With the cost of the 265 AFR heads at just a little over $2k a set, I don't understand why anyone would mess with the offshore heads.
Richard, I'm building a 408W turbo. Question is; I have the pro-comp single plane that has power band from 3500-8000. But I'm limiting my build to 6500rpm. Should I swap to a dual plane intake to suite the RPM range or will it choke my total air flow?
In this test looks like the ovals made the best power overall would of been nice to see the over lays of the brodix and the afrs
Great test. I am a huge BBC fan. one thing I would have liked to see would be a lower rpm test for a BBC with oval ports vs square ports. every magazine and RUclips video compares them from 3500 on up. and most of the time I see the square ports win in overall power, they test being the only exception that I have seen. but no one ever show the power and torque curves from 1500-3000. which is where most street motors run around town and out on the highway. Racing is cool, however most car guys drive their stuff on the street, so I would love to see a test on a your average 454-468 with both oval and square port heads from 1500 rpm - 5500 rpm. most car guys never spin a BBC about 5700RPM. and also with cams that work will for cars with power breaks. say around 210 -240 degrees @.050.
we don't run WOT at 1500 rpm
Excellent video, like the other ones. I’d love to watch the same test on Big Block 440 Mopars.
It would be interesting for sure but there are just not enough aftermarket heads made for them. Also you would have to build a very good short block to be able to turn any meaningful rpm. Mopars have very heavy stock assemblies so everything would have to be lighter weight aftermarket stuff. A better solution would be the use a low deck 400 block so use could use a shorter rod. It would limit the absolute max cubic inches but would result in a better engine. The 440 has too tall a deck.
mike s although everything you mentioned is true there’s plenty of 440 engines out there and at least 4 aftermarket heads.
@@m.pietro9087 In that case we must petition Richard to go forth with such a test. Including of course the 906 heads would make 5 total so that would be good. I would like to know just for fun even though I do mostly GM and Ford stuff.
mike s that would be great, 😊. Actually I have a 440 with a pair of Stealth heads on it.
Me too! The BB Mopar is my favorite engine, and I've had at least a dozen! Between Brodix (B1 and B1-BS), Indy (many options), Trick Flow (240 and 270cc), and Edelbrock (RPM and Victor), it would be a fascinating (and expensive) test!
Just saw Texas speed video for the new intake you need to get one and let us know how it does please!!!!
It’s always the case that a head with the port volume to match piston demand works better than something too big, even more so when it also outflows the bigger heads in the mid lift region of the chosen cam. Cam would be miles better on a tighter LSA and get the tq/ci numbers towards 1.4
Not surprised on the ovals doing as well as they did at all. I'm really surprised that GM actually made rec port heads for BBCs since they never made these big cube engines in the first place.
I love the dyno tests. I wish we could somehow combine it with the flowbench testing to see what the velocity vs flow does to the HP number. I'm pretty sure the AFR oval port heads are putting out superior flow for the higher port velocity they have to have. Because the air pump never changed its demand at any given RPM so it stands to reason that the port was VERY efficient. OR was the port volume numbers kinda skewed because of valve location changes. Kinda like the early trick flow stuff. The port volumes were a bit misleading as the changed valve location made people think the port was smaller, when in reality it was not it was SHORTER.
Which leads me to my next "I wonder" moment. Since direct injection is becoming viable to gas engines I have to believe that fuel atomization is no longer a very important part of the equation. So, what would be the purpose to have ANY restriction to the intake tract? It really only inhibits flow, and is that not what we are trying to do efficiently? Are we not just trying to get as much air in as possible while minimizing pumping losses? Or do I have this all wrong, and the ram effect of the moving column of air aids in filling much more than no restriction at all.........inquiring mind want to know.
Thanks for the great info in this video! I’m wondering if many of these heads would like a bigger bore. Seems like that 4.310 bore might have shrouded the big chambers. Maybe test these heads on a 502 or 509, or maybe a 540.
would be better
afr does flow rec heads on a larger bore.
Interesting and educational comparison so bigger isnt better even with a 500 cubic inch engine.
Yeah i remember the BB and the 'reg' called passenger engines came with the OVAL and the 427/425 or 396/375 had the rect. but they also had bigger valves and intake along with that streetable solid cam so that probably accounted for the extra 25 of advertised hp.
Performance engine building has a great set of vids about making 650 with ported oval iron heads, yes lots of work but he sure knows what to do and his engines look STOCK when you pop the hood, so run a low 10 in your 1st gen. street Camaro then pop the hood and all people see is an intake and carb. Back in the day 400+ was a true accomplishment for a street engine and strokers were only a wet dream
Right on
Compression is king.
Then why does a 9.5:1 5.3 ls make the same power as a 11.5:1 327? Head flow is king.
Excellent tests but combustion chambers varied between 107-123 CC's. That's 16 CC's difference. I'd like to see all heads milled to the 107 CC's like the AFR. AFR is the winner but to be fair it had a compression advantage. AFR is pretty much the best in the business but I like to see a even playing field. With what I run and works! I'm restricted to 10.5 compression maximum, milled heads to achieve compression, flat top pistons and 87 octane pump gas! It's ideally where I want to be why? Because it's what I run proven and works excellent!!! No detenation, no engine run on and runs very cool! Because as any engine gets carbon black build up inside the engine, miles and compression loss, more chance for detenation over time. If you can start off running 87 octane when New you have room to grow on, up to 92 octane on when engine isn't as efficient. And I run care free 87 ethanol free pump gas. It's right at $5.00 a gallon as of 2-16-24 and keeps getting higher. I'm wanting and thinking to go to propane. It's higher octane, no carbon buildup ever, way less maintenance. The biggest thing I get a great deal on propane. And I have a pretty good stock of it. In my area propane is $1.99 a gallon. And I get a lot better deal than that. Propane Never goes bad I could go on and on about propane but most people don't care. I run a few Tri Fuel Inverter generators and only run propane! Propane is the opposite of gasoline it likes to run lean. If you run propane rich you can overheat it and burn it up. Biggest challenge where to mount a reasonably sized propane tank in my muscle car? You can run more compression on propane just not sure what's the maximum?
I did a little calculating and keeping all the specs on the compression calculator the same except the cylinder head combustion chambers cc's. Here is the results!
123cc = 10.04 compression
107cc = 11.55 compression
That's 1.51 more compression!!! in a 496 that's a good gain.
The larger the engine the bigger the gain in power!
Some might say I didn't know all the specs of the engine. That's true I'm just trying to show you it's 1.51 comprehension difference between the smallest to the largest combustion chamber head.
The problem I run into I couldn't run some of these cylinder heads my compression would be over 10.50 compression because I run a larger cubic engine. I stay at 10.54% that's a safe compression level with aluminum heads, pump gas and flat top pistons. And in my other comment as I stated I won't go above 10.5, flat top pistons maximum and pump gas ethanol free. No Mini or Dome Pistons For Me. Not not with pump gas! And it's too hard to find ethanol free gas in higher octane.
I've been down the road with too high of compression with pump gas, dome pistons and hurt a set of pistons. I babied that engine raced it a few times and only when I ran it hard I put race gas in it. And it just had a little light rattle to it mid and wide open throttle. After about 18,000 miles the pistons were shot. The engine never got over 178 degrees maximum water temperature. But I'm sure the exhaust gas temperature was too high if I would have had a gauge back then. Or a heat laser gun on the cylinder head and exhaust I would have seen it's to hot. But I wanted that little bit of extra power. But not thinking when you pull the timing back you kill power. And part of the reason I wanted to use some of the parts that I had sitting around. I had to high of compression with pump gas and some pistons. I had to turn the timing back so far the engine was lazy. The engine was no fun to drive I couldn't get into it on pump gas with out a light rattle. I had to put race gas in it and turn the timing back up to get into it. And once the engine is installed into the car with too high a compression and problems like I had. It's a lot less options once the engine is installed. You can run thicker head gaskets and change out cylinder heads to a bigger combustion. And they only make so thick of gaskets and so much cylinder head combustion chamber cc's. The other choice is pull the engine and do it right. And spend more time and money and possibly have an extra set of cylinder heads. And running thicker head gaskets is not ideal. And that only changes compression so much. With performance engines No One Ideally runs a very thick head! gasket
Do u still need to clean up the c&c ported
heads or just bolt em on?
Hey do you have a part number for the Edelbrock heads
Hi Richard, reading your 2012 article “Big-Block Heads Shootout - The Big O Vs. The Big R” The Edelbrock Victor Jr. 454-R intake used on the other heads, when you test the AFR 300cc oval port head was an oval port manifold used? If so, which manifold?
Thank you, Chris
I WOUL DHAVE TO LOOK IT UP-LIKELY A 454 O
Was the oval port heads ran with the rec intake or an oval one?
Lingenfelter covered oval port superioty 30-40 years ago, the comp 288 solid roller will rev 7000 rpm b4 I can make a manual 1-2 shift, why no Dart intake test ?
Iron heads are a real challenge for babyboomers, need more real world feedback, bbcs have no low end torque issues, different receipies for very different engines
I'd really love to see the results for a 460 or 467 BBC.
The big advantage the AFR heads had over the rest was the smaller chamber size, which boosted compression and thus HP. Given, they also flowed as good as or better than the rest of the heads as well, but there wasn't a clear advantage in flow which would account for the difference.
Paulster2 - Edelbrock had a smaller chamber at 107 cc vs 110 for the AFR’s.
Hey Rich.
If one were to do this combination with the 290 Oval heads, but using a cam with 10 degrees less duration on both exhaust and intake while keeping everything else the same, such as .650" lift, 290 heads, 454 intake, compression etc. How much power do you think would be lost from just running a bit less duration?
Also one other question. When swapping to the 290 Oval heads in this test, what intake did you use? The 454-O instead of the 454-R?
we use a 454 O
I think what I learned is if you deck those Brodix heads and up the compression and put on some high ratio rockers you should have a monster! :-)
What brodix head was he using? Brodix doesn't list a 332 rec port.
Do you think that 950 carb could have been choking peak power a little? Seems like a 1000 or 1050cfm, would have been a better match for this combo.
What do you think? Did you get vacuum readings during the run?
Baby carb and baby cam.
What was the compression with the edelbrock heads? Im looking to build another street strip 496. Your info has been great to watch. And the results have helped with my choices to build. By the way. I want to run on premium pump fuel. 92/93 octane.
I DON'T RECALL-US WALLACE RACING TO CALCULATE