Close



Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 45 of 45
  1. #26
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry peachuer View Post
    Thanks for sharing articles

    Its all good. You can "ideal dimensions of Miss America" a set of Ford cylinder heads. But its not all about Sq inches Port Area, CC's per intake and CFM. Its principally about what makes power and torque where you need it.

    You can rule out GT40P heads or whatever by the Seven signs of aging like we do all 28 to 52 year old Supermodel's, but in an engine its about lots of other stuff.

    I've gotten more fun out of the 313 of the 340 or so total Richard Holdener video's on YouTube that I re-watched this 2020 year than anything I've read in the last 43 years since I first stated reading die-hard car books.

    In essence, private enterprise is all 100% supported by the US aftermarket industry, and long mote dat be.

    So when in the US, its always Alloy heads, Intakes and Cam. But More boost and a simple die grind will make a lot of power with less cash.

    I'm not suggesting we all go back to die grinding OEM iron heads and bankrupting aluminum head makers. What I'm saying is that power and torque is controlled not just by statistics I speak of, but by the whole combination.

    You can back off exhaust flow, add cam duration.
    You can Back off intake port flow, and add better lower and upper intake.
    An aggressive cam can rob low end torque but compensate up top, but only in Engine Masters and on Dyno sheets do they talk about average hp and torque, that's not how great street engines are devised.

    Some US V8's have crazy over supply of peak cfm at 500 to 600 thou, but others do more with a lot less. 8.2 deck Factory 5 liters are certainly like that.

    Great engines don't just happen. They are made. And I love 5.0's because you have the choice to do anything. Its your choice how you go about making it work for you.

  2. #27

    Default

    Delete
    Last edited by brian.aughe; 11-16-2020 at 01:38 AM.

  3. #28
    Venomous Moderator Hissing Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Wareham, Massachusetts
    Posts
    9,698

    Default

    In my humble opinion, it makes no sense to install inferior heads onto a stroker motor. Why "choke" it and have to change heads/headers later on? I would wait until you get enough money to get a decent set of heads and immediately enjoy the benefits of a well put together combo. With that being said, there are plenty of 331-347 combos out there that work and work well. Don't be afraid to ask people what their combos are because many are more than willing to share. Power levels are all over the place with 331's & 347's and it's a direct result of many different factors. Just be aware that they're not all created equal.

    My brother put together a very nice naturally aspirated 347 for me that makes 420 rwhp/380 rwt and with my 5-speed and 4.30 gears, it's enough to push my '79 Cobra (3,300 lbs. with me in it) to mid/high 11's @ 116-121 on 93 octane (10:8:1 compression). It's a very simple combo that is very streetable, idles at 1,100 rpms, revs to 6,500 and can handle all types of traffic situation with ease. The parts list is below.

    302 stock block (line bored and honed .030 over)
    Eagle 347 cast crank/cast rods (why put a $2,000 forged rotating assembly in a $200 block?)
    ARP main studs
    ARP rod bolts
    SRP forged flat top pistons
    Anderson N-91 cam (.240/.248 @ 0.50; .576/.576 on a 110 center line)
    ARP head studs
    Fel-Pro MLS head gaskets
    AFR 185's (58 cc's)
    AFR adjustable guideplates
    Comp Cams 1.6 Steel Pro Magnum rocker arms
    AFR valve train girdle
    Edelbrock Victor Jr. intake
    Holley 650 double pumper carb
    Edelbrock mechanical fuel pump
    Milodon 7 qt. oil pan
    MAC 1-3/4" longtubes, 2-1/2" offroad H-pipe, 2-1/2" cat-back exhaust
    MSD 6AL ignition, Blaster II coil, distributor

    Before you decide on anything. think of the easiest path to get to where you want to go and save the money required to get there.
    Last edited by Hissing Cobra; 11-22-2020 at 03:07 PM.
    Pete Slaney

    1979 Mustang Cobra

    347/T-5/4.30's
    420 rwhp/380 rwt (New Motor)
    11.49 @ 121.86

    306/T-5/4.30's (Old Motor)
    307 rwhp/278 rwt
    12.38 @ 111.38

  4. #29
    FEP Power Member Jerry peachuer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Royal oak Mi
    Posts
    1,432

    Default

    ^^Potent setup nice outcome

    Richard holdner on youtube just did E7 vs the world and went through quite a bit of effort to report his findings .. this ironically just came up and the results are woth watching for real data

    It will clear this up by watching this 1 video and its on a 306 s
    Somewhat small roller cam setup worth your time watching

  5. #30
    FEP Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    south-central WY
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry peachuer View Post
    ^^Potent setup nice outcome

    Richard holdner on youtube just did E7 vs the world and went through quite a bit of effort to report his findings .. this ironically just came up and the results are woth watching for real data

    It will clear this up by watching this 1 video and its on a 306 s
    Somewhat small roller cam setup worth your time watching
    Part 1:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWSlYvstFIU

  6. #31

    Default

    The Holdner stuff is old news. All he is doing is putting his magazine articles in video form. It is great info but easily found with a Google search. I love the guy for his tech but hate his video format. ��

  7. #32
    FEP Power Member Jerry peachuer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Royal oak Mi
    Posts
    1,432

    Default

    Agree its old i like it because he's not trying to sell anything and great time went into this so its great that its raw and closer to real than magazineland

  8. #33

    Default

    Not that it matters to the subject of this thread but my curiosity gets the best of me sometimes. So can you explain to me how Holdner taking the dyno tests from 20 years ago that were published in a magazine and turning it into a video format is "closer to real"? Same info whether it is published in MM&FF or it is posted as a video on You Tube. If it was closer to real he would update the info with the newer pieces from each manufacturer. The AFR 165 Renegade head approaches the flow numbers of the old school 185 in that article/video and I would like to see how that compares real world.

  9. #34
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,673

    Default

    The wine Ford released in 1968 with the tunnel port heads and in 69 with the C9 Cleveland Boss 302 heads is better than the best Kaase or Blue Thunder can ram down your throat at 400 cfm. People have got a he!!ova lot to learn about how small blocks rocknroll. And they didnt learn any of it in 2001 when the 342 stroker got reheated 4 year old iron GT40P heads with a rehashed Cobra 5.0 SVT roller cam.

    Sometime, old wine has to be reintroduced to blast the mothers milk out of the new wineskins. And so it has when you have 713 likes in just 12 hours. Because ingnorance isnt always bliss...


    It will be reinjected in four truth serums. And people will lap it up. Because in 1968 and 69 ( and in 1999 to 2001) peeps thought it was all about flow rates and cam duration. Its not. Its about total combination. And it still kicks peoples butts.








    WESTECH PERFORMANCE GROUP

    GIANT 5.0L FORD HEAD TEST-PART 2 (10 HEADS TESTED)
    10,639 views

    720


    Richard Holdener
    116K subscribers

    SUBSCRIBED
    Published on Nov 20, 2020
    E7TE vs THE WORLD. HOW DID YOUR FAVORITE HEADS DO? CHECK OUT THIS TEST WHERE WE COMPARED THE STOCK 5.0L FORD HEADS TO 9 OTHER AFTER MARKET HEADS. WHAT ARE HEADS WORTH ON A 333 STROKER SMALL BL,OCK FORD? HERE IN PART 2, THE HEADS FLOW MORE SO WE USED A BIGGER, BETTER TEST MOTOR. PLUS BETTER DATA DISPLAY!

    Comments 155

    Add a public comment...




    reevin riggin
    It was interesting how even the HP numbers were considering the fairly large difference in port volumes. I will say that the TW head is deceiving in the fact that the port volume "appears" small. However with the relocated valve, the port is a bit shorter in length and that shows up as smaller, but the actual height and width measurements are quite comparable to the other heads. I was sure the Z304's would do better than they did just from the average of the flow numbers. I guess that's why we don't race flow benches!

    Thanks Richard for all this work.
    2 days ago
    7


    Dean Stevenson
    we dont race dynos either. But we need flow benches, dynos, and to re-check ourselves against 20 year old data!
    1 second ago

  10. #35
    FEP Power Member Jerry peachuer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Royal oak Mi
    Posts
    1,432

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jdsgallops View Post
    Not that it matters to the subject of this thread but my curiosity gets the best of me sometimes. So can you explain to me how Holdner taking the dyno tests from 20 years ago that were published in a magazine and turning it into a video format is "closer to real"? Same info whether it is published in MM&FF or it is posted as a video on You Tube. If it was closer to real he would update the info with the newer pieces from each manufacturer. The AFR 165 Renegade head approaches the flow numbers of the old school 185 in that article/video and I would like to see how that compares real world.
    Personally I can't, nor am I trying to point a direction.. just more in depth I guess than 3 paragraphs in a book marketed to sell on 2 pages which is prob in a magazine as old as the person looking to modify his engine..
    Manufactures give money to have there parts published and advertised.. where else can we see side by side flow graph in 15 minutes??? Im curious on this myself...and this is what I meant as raw data .. granted Google and its a head from 1987 Vs today

    Its just a p head question not more than that to original post.. he can use a p and be sad or pick anything from alum offering and be happy which is his intentions down the road

    However the shop i worked at i helped develop cnc tooling to hold 5 heads at 1 time and this was to amp up production on makino cncs which had multiple work centers 5 heads on each running on each work center..
    The tooling was to hold 5 dodge viper heads and mainly worked was for LS family and ford blue thunder heads

    The shop is now closed due to 08 financial fallout however the heads hit the market and can't meet production demand so we made fixtures with 4 sides and the topside as well held a fixture that swivels for 5 axis production

    These heads are not street but could be used i guess for that and bare casting was in the works but took time to make their own
    However they developed there port beyond what the market was offering especially for viper and blue thunder series

    I won't spill the name because I'm sure the machinists are still at it today and my bosses boat was his business card twin 502s with 1050 dominator and a system I helped with to water cool the drives which were signing at that rpm this was all NA and the motors were built with his top end pkg which gained 30 mph and this was not a hull to go that much faster

    It was a michigan based company


    There slogan was seeing is believing and if your a porter you may know who this is

    Not for this topic but these flow numbers are double what we think is great at this very moment and they did it with raised decks 2004 thru 08 they disturbed the market and was done with ultra precision machining and sealing with light weight materials on valvetrain

  11. #36
    FEP Power Member Jerry peachuer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Royal oak Mi
    Posts
    1,432

    Default Double

    Delete double
    Last edited by Jerry peachuer; 11-22-2020 at 03:26 PM. Reason: Double

  12. #37
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jdsgallops View Post
    Not that it matters to the subject of this thread but my curiosity gets the best of me sometimes. So can you explain to me how Holdner taking the dyno tests from 20 years ago that were published in a magazine and turning it into a video format is "closer to real"? Same info whether it is published in MM&FF or it is posted as a video on You Tube. If it was closer to real he would update the info with the newer pieces from each manufacturer. The AFR 165 Renegade head approaches the flow numbers of the old school 185 in that article/video and I would like to see how that compares real world.

    This is a score I'd like to settle. How can re-hashed stuff like this hit home?

    Well, due to emerging Modular 3.937 bore spacing programs, Ford had to be anti OverHead Valve 5.0 from 1989 to 2001.

    The old Iron headed or A3/B3/C3/D3 335 heads on a 5.0 stroker can kill any LS head with just a little clean up.


    http://www.carsales.com.au/private/d...-2111080/?Cr=5



    Any of the DSO/VIN H, B, T or P code 57 or 75 cc Aussie heads are matched by H or was it G code USA 74.5 cc 351M heads.

    The New South Wales Leaded RON 97 Emission XD engine codes* undisclosed HP loss
    H = 5.8 Cleveland 4V 2V head 200 hp DIN net single exhaust
    B = 4.9 Cleveland 4V 2V head 188 hp DIN net single exhaust,

    The XE leaded 97 RON engine codes
    T = 5.8 Cleveland 4V 2V head 200 hp DIN net single exhaust
    P = 4.9 Cleveland 4V 2V head 188 hp DIN net single exhaust,


    The New South Wales Leaded RON 97 Emission XE engine codes* undisclosed HP loss
    H = 5.8 Cleveland 4V 2V head 200 hp DIN net single exhaust
    B = 4.9 Cleveland 4V 2V head 188 hp DIN net single exhaust


    But its like there was a 212-275 cfm glass celling at Ford's OEM 5.0 and 5.8 SBF engines from 1989 to 2001. So people have some kinda voyeuristic love of old SBF tests.

    Holdener proves beyond reasonable doubt that Ford USA had OHCammer fish to fry, because its a crying shame that no other 205 to 275 cfm heads got released ex factory from 1989 to 2001.
    It was not allowed to match the

    1.1969 4V Boss C9ZE-6090-A or C, D1ZE-6090-A, the D1AE-6090-A 275 cfm,
    2. the 1971-1985 closed chamber 57 cc Aussie 2V heads 205 cfm flow ratings.
    3. The 2V 103 or 74.5 cc M-block 400 or 351M cylinder heads, which equal the 351C 2V heads flow of about 206 CFM.

    Quote Originally Posted by https://www.fordforums.com/threads/how-much-hp-do-2v-heads-flow.124835/
    I find flow figures to be rather misleading.
    A head can flow a gazillion HP on a flow bench but without a cam and set-up to match its irrelevant.
    Id say the most you'll get from stock 2V heads with a big Hyd cam and 5.8l would be probably mid to high 300's
    Saleen used alloy Edebrocks on the R351 and got 371 hp without boost and the awful cut and shut Watsons EFi intake.

    Despite the 1993 SVT Cobra 5.0, the 1994 Saleen R351, the 1995 SVT Mustang Cobra R, the 1994 351 F150 Ford Lightening, the screws were set on every production 5.0 or 5.8 from 1989 to 2001. Except the 335 hp 342 stroker.

    In 1989 a man took charge of Ford Australia, where he had started his career in 1968, with Falcon XT GT 302 Designer John J. "Jack" Telnack.Like Jack Telanack, Jac Nasser was born to be a Ford man.

    After Jac Nasser got taken out of the loop, we can go back to rekindling Windsor plant 221-255-26-289-302-342-351 love. Its about towing the party line, fellows. Henry Ford II decreed in 1979 that the V8 Cleveland engine was a doomed entity, and in 1983, it became fact in the Bronco and F150's and Falcon/Fairmont/Fairlane/LTD lines. So the idea of just adding a cam and intake and headers to make a factory head 380 hp Small Block Ford died that year.

    Holdener is the lighting box to re-light the 31 years of hobbling the finest race horse engine ever. Down with years of miss-information.

  13. #38
    FEP Power Member Jerry peachuer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Royal oak Mi
    Posts
    1,432

    Default

    a set of CFE inline heads and there intake and some q16 with a .970/.990 solid roller would be cool to see dyno graph line

  14. #39
    FEP Power Member Jerry peachuer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Royal oak Mi
    Posts
    1,432

    Default

    Great info from across the pond xctasy

  15. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry peachuer View Post
    Personally I can't, nor am I trying to point a direction.. just more in depth I guess than 3 paragraphs in a book marketed to sell on 2 pages which is prob in a magazine as old as the person looking to modify his engine..
    Manufactures give money to have there parts published and advertised.. where else can we see side by side flow graph in 15 minutes??? Im curious on this myself...and this is what I meant as raw data .. granted Google and its a head from 1987 Vs today
    Call me old but it is a whole lot easier for me to place paper graphs on magazine pages next to each other and compare than try and do it on a computer or TV screen. Then again I will also still walk down the hallway to have a conversation with a coworker instead of using the office phone/intercom. ��

    As far as flow numbers on LS, Blue Thunder or Viper heads compared to a SBF it is comparing apples to.oranges. Blue thunder and Viper heads would be considered big block heads, which means if they are flowing double what is now considered good means they better be over 600cfm....... The LS head follows all relavent theory on how a port should be designed. Which IMO is why it works so well. Comparing any of that to 40's era technology and the confines of which all aftermarket heads adhere to for ease of installation purposes is ridiculous.

  16. #41
    FEP Power Member Jerry peachuer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Royal oak Mi
    Posts
    1,432

    Default

    Can't speak of port development I know they were known for the LS family series of heads and they did lots of marine because of constant rpm for miles no speed limit fun kind of thing

    They did do small block stuff too.. roundy rounds and marine and Harley screaming eagle kits
    They built horsepower

    As far as flow numbers.. you wouldn't believe it.. seeing is believing .. I will look for their advertised numbers which get ridiculous above 600 lift

    There heads are still out there I'm sure and im curious what info you can share for pump gas na combo for today's 331 ci per original post if you could

    I'm a machinist not porter tolerances are my thing

  17. #42
    FEP Power Member Jerry peachuer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Royal oak Mi
    Posts
    1,432

    Default

    Close your eyes and its year 2005
    225 cc heads flowed 320/236 intake/exhaust at 700 lift
    4inch bore at 28"
    Copper seats
    Enconel valves or titanium
    1600 for custom rocker shaft setup
    Bare cnc heads would set you back around 3000
    Assembled around 4k

    The 265 heads 2.100 intake and 4.100 bore
    500 lift 326 intake
    750 lift 380
    This is 15 years ago when they first started going
    Double cfm no.. I'm incorrect.. these numbers are published on another forum

    However- why wouldn't you run hissing cobras above recipe?? Sounds like perfect recipe NA pump gas


    Personally I'm sold on vic jrs and there single plane from 30 years ago because it works still today with compression

  18. #43
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jdsgallops View Post
    Call me old but it is a whole lot easier for me to place paper graphs on magazine pages next to each other and compare than try and do it on a computer or TV screen. Then again I will also still walk down the hallway to have a conversation with a coworker instead of using the office phone/intercom. ��

    As far as flow numbers on LS, Blue Thunder or Viper heads compared to a SBF it is comparing apples to.oranges. Blue thunder and Viper heads would be considered big block heads, which means if they are flowing double what is now considered good means they better be over 600cfm....... The LS head follows all relavent theory on how a port should be designed. Which IMO is why it works so well. Comparing any of that to 40's era technology and the confines of which all aftermarket heads adhere to for ease of installation purposes is ridiculous.
    That's how I do things too Jdsgallops

    What damages the quest for horsepower is the simple SuperFlow 110 logic that says 25" cfm times 2.2 equals horsepower. Or 28"CFM times 2 equals horsepower.



    Yeah man, that's where Ford in 1968 got into so much trouble with the off the scale Tunnel Port 302 verses the LeMans Heavy Duty HIPO 289's and later 275 cfm Boss 302 C9ZE's.




    The problem is still the universal Big Port LS1, LS3, 4v Cleveland, Boss 302 style 2500 to 2800 torque hump hidden on all Holdener's vids.

    Ford always assured THREE THINGS.
    1st. The exhaust was compromised to block through flow.
    2nd. When intake flow was great, FoMoCo Cam timing was always very conservative on the 290 Boss 302, the 4V HO Cleveland's, the Boss 351 compared to Chevy 302/327/350's.
    3rd. Ford always attempted to widen the Lobe Centre as the emissions era and EFI hit, so 109 became 115.

    Example of 1. On the Windsor style 221-255-26-289-302-342-351's,Exhaust flow was controlled by really poor porting, down sized from



    Modern day 4.8/5.3/5.7/6.0/6.2's have the same soggy hump that results in having to carry extra revs often. The ports are objectively 20% too large and flow 20% too much to get a normal low to mid range 90 V8 response. Its a symptom of GM Powertrains need to protect the 1.Chassis, 2. Gears, 3. Emissions and make the 4. ESP and 5. Traction Controls less invasive. The paddle wheel mixture motion and the way the fuel and ignition strategy was worked with the two knock sensors gave GM the economy and emissions they needed, but the 4.6/5.0/5.2/ 5.4/5.8 Mod Squads and later DOHC Gener's make far more power and torque per cube. Ford just started the OHC thing on the 3.937 bore spacing engine, not the 4.527. So Ford got the marketing raspberry for a lack of low end torque for years compared to the Chevy 4.40" 4.8/5.3/5.7/6.0/6.2's and the 4.38" 302/331/347/351/392/408 engines.

    The cam has to be carefully matched duration and lift wise to avoid drivability problems. Chev stole Fords expanded LSA idea, and made it an ethos, while taking the big port area idea to the extremes as well.


    The Miss America target fixation with the big three , Port CFM, Port area, and Port capacity has to be reigned in to avoiding the low end air speed crash. On Foxes, you probably WANT to loose low end velocity due to 1. Chassis and 2. Gear (Trans, Axle) protection.

    And where the 15 degree Wedge Cathedral port 1996 5.7 aluminum engine lost so much low end torque over the 23 degree L31 10239906 or 12558062 "906" headed Vortech. The whole philosophy was sound...they made 100 SAE Paddle wheel intake spin, and GM Powertrain created a 9.2" deck Cleveland without the 25 degree twist, and no canted valves ( there is no Boss 302 style 3 deg exhaust valve, intake valve side cant of 4 deg-15 min or 9 deg 30 minutes valve angle on both valves). The rec port LS3, it's an early Essex 90 3.8 or SVO Brodix E9 ZM 6049 J380 style Essex 90 4.5 head with its wedge the average of the two (22 plus 10 is a 16 degree average).

    So with a 331 or 347, you have to mealy dial up the attributes that make the right torque curve.

    But you can do it all with iron, and far less Port CFM, Port area, and Port capacity focus. 300 rwhp with GT40P's is a doodle.

    For more than tat, its all about what happens with valve twist from 0 to 25 degrees possible, wedge angle and how they interplay with all facets of combustion chamber and cam duration. The options in alloy will get you a result, but for bang for the buck, you have to consider what You can cope with on the street and what you may need on the strip. And the old iron or alloy knock-offs are really great.

    Best proof for me of Ford Iron canted valve head superiority was the Roush Yates A3 4V alloy heads with 3.9 sq inches of port area instead of 4.37 sq of the old iron C9ZE - D1AE's.

    Of course, just like the N351 verses the lightweight N352, NASCAR instantly made them illegal over night because of the rail differences, but the NASCAR 1983 to 2005 heads are pretty much state of the art, based on a 1969 design.

    There was never a low speed torque problem with the old Iron headed C9ZE-D1AE Canted Valve SBF heads, it was far superiors to the 302 Tunnel port and Z28 302DZ. The same stuff continued with the 351 4v, HO, Boss 351, compared to the two versions of the Z28 350 LT1 option.

    The anti canted valve NASCAR style Cleveland/Boss 351M/400 and 335 head info out there was all based on visualized journalistic thought, the same stupid low hanging fruit hype as the anti four stud wheel Fox brigade.

    Ask a Maserati Indy owner how a 300 hp 4.9 liter 3700 pound car coped with 165 mph and 13.9 second quarters.




    I've gotta say. I'd forget the stroker. And down here, we use open chamber 351C2V heads for 490 hp install's, and in the USA, there are 74.5 cc 351M heads.

    They don't have Pro Am sized intakes





    On a 5.0 and the NASCAR MotorSport 12.7:1 Pop tops, B&A intake from TMeyer,



    pop in some studs and add a 4 inch high port the iron rail for injectors like the SuperCoupe 3.8 engine...Sort of a Gilden on Intake.






    I get really scared when people do the feature creep and start adding thigs to go with things. Id say a nice 5.0 liter with hp engine like HissinCobras could be done in iron for a lot less


    This is a 331 with

    Ford Racing Boss block
    90mm LMAF with 42lb injectors
    90mm Accufab TB
    B&A designed Track Boss single plane intake modified for EFI by Wilson Manifolds
    Trick Flow PowerPort 190 Cleveland style heads
    FTI cam .611"intake/.590"exhaust lift, 224*intake/230*exhaust duration with a 111* separation
    1.73 Comp rockers
    Probe forged 331 crank, h-beam rods, pistons
    Hedman 1-7/8 headers with full 3" exhaust including x pipe..
    On the engine dyno, 455hp with the timing set at 32*. Maximum torque was 414 with the timing at 34*.
    In the car, on the dyno, 379hp/342ft-lbs, peaking around 6000.


    see https://youtu.be/If6Y-5Vlw5g
    https://youtu.be/Ycurjh1cK6E

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyYx...nnel=moose4130

  19. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry peachuer View Post

    There heads are still out there I'm sure and im curious what info you can share for pump gas na combo for today's 331 ci per original post if you could
    If you have been paying attention you will remember my first reply to this thread, before it got off track, answered this question. Post #11 in this thread.

  20. #45
    FEP Power Member Jerry peachuer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Royal oak Mi
    Posts
    1,432

    Default

    I only see post 12

    And offered a link that was meant to help..

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •