FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: 410bruce on January 01, 2021, 11:09:45 AM
-
Hey Guys! Happy new year.
Just curious if any of you have spent any time porting the short intake port heads. I understand they make good low RPM torque and throttle response and was wondering if one could capitalize on those attributes with port work and adding CJ sized valves.
I'd be happy to be a Guinea pig and send you a set to do up, if it wasn't outrageously expensive or you feel it would be a complete waste of time. :)
-
Can you specify what heads you are talking about? I don't know of any particular FE head that is referred to as a "short port" head...
-
Unclear concept of "low-riser" heads?
-
I'm guessing 410Bruce is referring to C8AE-H and D2TE heads, with the reduced height intake ports.
It seems everybody is as hung over as I am. We're a bit slow on the uptake this morning!
-
Sorry guys, I should have been more clear. WConley is correct. Those style of heads is what I was referring to, specifically a set of C6AE-J or C6AE-U--I have both sets.
-
Did you look in the exhaust ports in those heads? They both have the large smog nose to my recollection.
-
Sorry guys, I should have been more clear. WConley is correct. Those style of heads is what I was referring to, specifically a set of C6AE-J or C6AE-U--I have both sets.
Pretty much any standard FE head after sometime in 1966 falls into that category,of course that doesn't apply to car 427 and 428CJ.1966 is kind of a crap shoot some C6AE heads are tall port some are short port depending on which suffix they are.At stock power levels Ford apparently felt no preference for either since both variations were used on 390 GT's,but guys that raced them in stock classes had a preference for the tall port versions.
-
I sold Bruce my C6AE-R heads that lacked the "snout" and were 14 bolt pattern. They had 1.66-2.09 valves heads and 71CC chambers with a great multi-angle VJ on them. They ran great on engine. I only changed because of the Edelbrock and weight savings.
-
I sold Bruce my C6AE-R heads that lacked the "snout" and were 14 bolt pattern. They had 1.66-2.09 valves heads and 71CC chambers with a great multi-angle VJ on them. They ran great on engine. I only changed because of the Edelbrock and weight savings.
14 bolt C6AE-R's are an example of the coveted tall port GT heads.
-
Les Schmader did a set for me, not C6s, but D2s, I run them on my 461 EFI truck motor. 490 HP with a 230/236 112 LSA cam. They flowed 277 cfm at .550, exhaust was way better than stock but nothing special
I would say if going with any of the more undesirable heads, you should only do so with a reason. In my case I had truck headers and didn't want to reflange or modify.
C6AE-R, much better head, they can do 15 cfm more reasonably and exhaust is much more capable than -J or -U,
-
Thanks Ross. My 428 may still end up in a truck and I have truck headers. I don't have Keiths old R heads anymore and I sold the TFS heads I got from Brent when I decided to go a different route with my Cougar.
I do still have those beat up bare CJ heads. I suppose I could dump a bunch of money into them. :o
-
They were the large R. They were good running heads. They were the taller LR port design. The exhaust port looked much better than the C7AE-A heads I have.
-
They were the large R. They were good running heads. They were the taller LR port design. The exhaust port looked much better than the C7AE-A heads I have.
C6AE-R is a lowriser port, and generally have an exhaust port that can easily be modified to an early/CJ style. That's why they are called Poor Man CJs
C7AE-E is a small port like -U, D2, and C8AE-H and has the crappy low exhaust port
-
They were the large R. They were good running heads. They were the taller LR port design. The exhaust port looked much better than the C7AE-A heads I have.
C6AE-R is a lowriser port, and generally have an exhaust port that can easily be modified to an early/CJ style. That's why they are called Poor Man CJs
C7AE-E is a small port like -U, D2, and C8AE-H and has the crappy low exhaust port
Exactly. They ran very well in my opinion but needed a lot of timing. I stumbled onto a set of KBE ported Edelbrocks. I lost some bottom end with the larger valves but they run very well.
-
I have some heads with the shorter intake ports but have the higher exhaust ports. C6TE-G i think they are. Buried on a shelf or i'd look right now. In 66 i think all combinations of intake and exhaust ports were available. Aren't the -U the ones with the low exhaust port but tall intakes?
-
I have some heads with the shorter intake ports but have the higher exhaust ports. C6TE-G i think they are. Buried on a shelf or i'd look right now. In 66 i think all combinations of intake and exhaust ports were available. Aren't the -U the ones with the low exhaust port but tall intakes?
It's been about 6 months, but I had a set in my hands and they sure looked like a C8AE-H or D2 intake/exhaust, only reason it surprised me enough to remember is that I thought it was odd that -J,-R, -U had a completely different configuration in the middle of the revisions. I am not 100% sure though
I will say though with the emissions/short port, ported to loosely a medium riser but with a CJ valve, you get a nice fast port. If the C6TE-G, or any other, had the better exhaust location, could make a nice street head