FE Power Cylinder Heads

[67428GT500]

The SE version of my heads will fit shock tower cars and any headers that will fit a 427 or 428CJ exhaust port.

Jay, would there be a notable difference in power over the Edelbrocks?

[Gaugster]

The SE version of my heads will fit shock tower cars and any headers that will fit a 427 or 428CJ exhaust port.

Jay, would there be a notable difference in power over the Edelbrocks?

I'm not Jay.  So been pondering the same. For MAX performance the flow numbers at high lift suggest that they will with ease. This is considering both RE and SE "as cast" flow numbers vs Edelbrock again "as cast". The vendor section has the latest details.

Max Flow cfm isn't everything and the velocity at lesser lift/RPM has a big impact for street use. Jay's heads are no slouch in that department either.

With that said I was at a performance expo today (noob with primitive knowledge) and could see the Edelbrock and TFS heads side by side. The ED combustion chamber is a more traditional quench band type whereas the TFS has a more modern look. Jay's are the most modern of all considering the repositioned intake port. The question comes down to the definition of notable. In all cases the pistons need to be a good match for the heads with the cam being right for the application. I'm thinking TFS and Jay's heads will be in a dog fight for the medium power crowd (me?) but the Edelbrocks get left behind. MAX power will be owned by Jay's heads because of the design as well as the matching uncompromising intake options.

Port work changes everything however.

[jayb]

The SE version of my heads will fit shock tower cars and any headers that will fit a 427 or 428CJ exhaust port.

Jay, would there be a notable difference in power over the Edelbrocks?

My heads will SLAUGHTER the power output of Edelbrock, BBM, Blue Thunder, or Trick Flow heads.  If they don't, then the design isn't successful and I won't go forward with them.  But I'm not worried

[wcbrowning]

Does the slaughter level of performance apply to both the SE and RE versions of your heads, or only to the RE version?  Will the SE & RE versions blow away the BBM CNC ported heads across the lift range, or mainly at maximum lift?

The SE version of my heads will fit shock tower cars and any headers that will fit a 427 or 428CJ exhaust port.

Jay, would there be a notable difference in power over the Edelbrocks?

My heads will SLAUGHTER the power output of Edelbrock, BBM, Blue Thunder, or Trick Flow heads.  If they don't, then the design isn't successful and I won't go forward with them.  But I'm not worried

[JERICOGTX]

Engines are nothing more than a air pump. More air, more power. Jay's heads, no matter the exhaust port, will out flow any FE head on the market, with the exception of a Cammer head, and even that is close...

Plain, and simple Jay's cylinder heads will change the FE world.

[351crules]

don't know if this was asked or mentioned but do any of the push rods protrude into the port like the tunnel ports? hard to tell with the pictures provided

[e philpott]

don't know if this was asked or mentioned but do any of the push rods protrude into the port like the tunnel ports? hard to tell with the pictures provided

No they don't go through like a Tunnel Port … Jay has some off set rockers , Like you I'm also having trouble visualizing it too and thought about asking for a picture with the Valve Train mock up

[jayb]

Does the slaughter level of performance apply to both the SE and RE versions of your heads, or only to the RE version?  Will the SE & RE versions blow away the BBM CNC ported heads across the lift range, or mainly at maximum lift?

The "slaughter level of performance" LOL!  Cracks me up

I don't want this to sound like an advertisement, but here is the deal with my heads.  They have an unfair performance advantage over all the other heads that are currently out there.  The whole idea behind the head package is similar to the idea behind a Yates style 351C head package, where the ports are raised so high that a special intake manifold is required. 

On the FE Power heads the intake port is raised nearly 1-1/2" over a factory medium riser port.  It is higher than a high riser.  The valve cover rail is also raised proportionately.  This allows a very generous, smooth short turn on the port.

In addition, the port is straightened out.  Stock FE intake ports, except cammer and tunnel port ports, all hook towards the center of the engine and aim the intake charge at the cylinder wall.  My heads straighten the intake port so that the cylinder wall is less of an obstruction to flow.

Also, the valves in my heads are moved from the stock location.  This again gives room for a better chamber, and better flow into the cylinder.

The net result is a head which flows 60% more than an Edelbrock head, with the same port cross-sectional area.  The flow is dramatically improved at all lifts over 0.200".  For example, stock Edelbrock intake lift at 0.300" is 182 cfm, FE Power head at 0.300" is 233 cfm.  At 0.400" lift, stock Edelbrock intake flow is 214 cfm, FE Power intake flow at 0.400" is 294 cfm.  At the .100" and .200" valve lifts, the numbers are close to the same, although the Edelbrock head is slightly better at 0.100" lift (89 cfm vs 77 cfm), and at 0.200" lift the FE Power head is slightly better (160 cfm vs. 156 cfm).  Flow numbers at 0.700" lift for the stock Edelbrock intake port are 260 cfm, and for the FE Power intake port the flow numbers at 0.700" lift are 403 cfm.  Again, this is with the same cross sectional area for the port opening.  It is a huge, huge improvement.

I don't have flow data for BBM CNC ports, so I can't compare to those.  However, I assume that to make good flow numbers, those ports have to be enlarged.  This means port velocity will be reduced due to a larger cross sectional area of the port.  This will reduce the port's ability to flow as the intake valve is closing.  It's not just about flow, after all, flow and port velocity, and of course the valve job, are all very important.

I think that the RE (Raised Exhaust) version of the FE Power heads will make more power than the SE (Stock Exhaust) version, just because they flow a little better, and also a better header design can be fabricated without the shock towers in the way.  But the SE exhaust port still flows way, way more than a stock exhaust port, so despite being down 20 cfm from the RE exhaust port, it is still capable of supporting a big power level.  In fact, the SE exhaust port flows 248 cfm at 0.700" lift, which is almost as much as a stock intake port flows!  Imagine that...

So, here's the downside of the FE Power heads:  No stock FE intake will fit, and stock FE rocker arm assemblies will not fit.  One of my special intake adapters, with raised ports and a raised valve cover rail, will be required with these heads.  Also, either a custom fabbed intake, or one of my three intake versions, will have to be used on the intake adapter.  And, in order to miss the port with the pushrod, a large offset is required on the intake rocker.  Here are two CAD drawings of what the pushrod configuration looks like:





As a result of this, the whole package, including heads, intake adapter, and rocker arm assembly, has to be purchased.

I hope that clears up the questions without sounding too much like an advertisement.  I'm getting pretty close now to being ready for dyno testing with these heads, so with luck I'll have dyno data and be ready for production by the FE Reunion at the end of April.  We will see...

[Cyclone03]

Jay do you think these will be the key to a 1000hp,FE?

[jayb]

I hope so, that is one of the design objectives.

[Joe-JDC]

I recently flowed a set of the BBM CNC'd heads, and was disappointed.  Less than 340 cfm at .750"  Many of the Edelbrocks have CNC programs that flow 338-340 cfm at .750".  Many hand ported Edelbrocks flow that number over the years, also.  360-370 cfm seems to be the upper limit of all the aluminum heads available on the market at this time.  The BT HR will go higher, but unless the latest version of the HR heads has improved, the ones I have flowed/and or ported still are in the 330-370 cfm range unless you start going to .800" or above.  Jay's head will no doubt go 440-450 cfm with some finesse and a good valve job.  Joe-JDC

[Gaugster]

A more basic question. Does the raised valve cover rail give more room on a shock tower car assuming a stock style cover? Working room around the plug and wires. Probably with a spacer to raise and clear a big lift cam operation.

What are the cc of the intake and exhaust ports? I read a lot in this thread as well as the vendor are but didn't recall seeing it.

Many Thanks!

[jayb]

The raised valve cover rail will give LESS room in a shock tower car, and it won't surprise me if the valve covers would have to be removed in a shock tower car to change the plugs.  Valve cover spacers should not be required, even with a very big cam.

I don't have the port volumes, but if you are looking to compare the port volume to a stock type head, you can't.  The port is significantly longer in the FE Power heads, because it has been raised so much.  Even the exhaust port on the SE head is longer than a stock port, because it bends around more like a header tube, rather than a sharp angle like stock.

[wcbrowning]

Will the RE version of the heads work in a 1964 Galaxie with stock front suspension (assume custom built headers)?  Putting aside the tunnel ram intake, will either, or both, of the other two intake options fit under the flat hood, and if not, will they fit under the tear drop bubble hood?

Does the slaughter level of performance apply to both the SE and RE versions of your heads, or only to the RE version?  Will the SE & RE versions blow away the BBM CNC ported heads across the lift range, or mainly at maximum lift?

The "slaughter level of performance" LOL!  Cracks me up

I don't want this to sound like an advertisement, but here is the deal with my heads.  They have an unfair performance advantage over all the other heads that are currently out there.  The whole idea behind the head package is similar to the idea behind a Yates style 351C head package, where the ports are raised so high that a special intake manifold is required. 

On the FE Power heads the intake port is raised nearly 1-1/2" over a factory medium riser port.  It is higher than a high riser.  The valve cover rail is also raised proportionately.  This allows a very generous, smooth short turn on the port.

In addition, the port is straightened out.  Stock FE intake ports, except cammer and tunnel port ports, all hook towards the center of the engine and aim the intake charge at the cylinder wall.  My heads straighten the intake port so that the cylinder wall is less of an obstruction to flow.

Also, the valves in my heads are moved from the stock location.  This again gives room for a better chamber, and better flow into the cylinder.

The net result is a head which flows 60% more than an Edelbrock head, with the same port cross-sectional area.  The flow is dramatically improved at all lifts over 0.200".  For example, stock Edelbrock intake lift at 0.300" is 182 cfm, FE Power head at 0.300" is 233 cfm.  At 0.400" lift, stock Edelbrock intake flow is 214 cfm, FE Power intake flow at 0.400" is 294 cfm.  At the .100" and .200" valve lifts, the numbers are close to the same, although the Edelbrock head is slightly better at 0.100" lift (89 cfm vs 77 cfm), and at 0.200" lift the FE Power head is slightly better (160 cfm vs. 156 cfm).  Flow numbers at 0.700" lift for the stock Edelbrock intake port are 260 cfm, and for the FE Power intake port the flow numbers at 0.700" lift are 403 cfm.  Again, this is with the same cross sectional area for the port opening.  It is a huge, huge improvement.

I don't have flow data for BBM CNC ports, so I can't compare to those.  However, I assume that to make good flow numbers, those ports have to be enlarged.  This means port velocity will be reduced due to a larger cross sectional area of the port.  This will reduce the port's ability to flow as the intake valve is closing.  It's not just about flow, after all, flow and port velocity, and of course the valve job, are all very important.

I think that the RE (Raised Exhaust) version of the FE Power heads will make more power than the SE (Stock Exhaust) version, just because they flow a little better, and also a better header design can be fabricated without the shock towers in the way.  But the SE exhaust port still flows way, way more than a stock exhaust port, so despite being down 20 cfm from the RE exhaust port, it is still capable of supporting a big power level.  In fact, the SE exhaust port flows 248 cfm at 0.700" lift, which is almost as much as a stock intake port flows!  Imagine that...

So, here's the downside of the FE Power heads:  No stock FE intake will fit, and stock FE rocker arm assemblies will not fit.  One of my special intake adapters, with raised ports and a raised valve cover rail, will be required with these heads.  Also, either a custom fabbed intake, or one of my three intake versions, will have to be used on the intake adapter.  And, in order to miss the port with the pushrod, a large offset is required on the intake rocker.  Here are two CAD drawings of what the pushrod configuration looks like:





As a result of this, the whole package, including heads, intake adapter, and rocker arm assembly, has to be purchased.

I hope that clears up the questions without sounding too much like an advertisement.  I'm getting pretty close now to being ready for dyno testing with these heads, so with luck I'll have dyno data and be ready for production by the FE Reunion at the end of April.  We will see...

[jayb]

Without test fitting I can't be 100% sure, but I'm about 95% sure (based on measurements of my 64 Gal) that the RE heads will fit and allow a good set of headers on a 64 Galaxie.  Some trimming of the inner fenders may be required, again I don't know without actually bolting in an engine with the heads and mocking up some header tubes.

As far as fitting under a flat hood, the crossram intake setup will definitely fit, and the other intake setups definitely won't.  If you went with a teardrop hood, I think it would be close, and I would say that if you went with the 4V or 8V setup and EFI it should fit no problem, because some of the available EFI throttle bodies are less than half the height of a normal carburetor.