FE Power Tunnel Port Cylinder Heads

[jayb]

I've been thinking about this project for a long time, 10+ years.  In that time, no one has come out with them, so this past summer I decided that I was going to do it.  The back story on these tunnel port heads revolves around my cylinder head project. Last Spring, FINALLY, I started getting cylinder head and intake adapter castings from the foundry.  From March to June I received about 50 intake adapter castings and 50 cylinder head castings, both the SE and the RE versions.  Starting in late March I had the CNC machine running constantly, to try to get through machining all these castings, and by the end of June most of the heads that my customers had pre-ordered were at my local shop, waiting for seats and guides.  Unfortunately this is their busy time of the year, so only some of those have been finished at this point; nevertheless it's been a big step forward compared to the last two years.

The other good news was that the tooling for the intake manifolds for my heads was done, and they were scheduled to be poured at the foundry in mid-August. This left me with a little free time, and a schedule target to hit in order to sneak some heads in with the intake manifolds.  So with some encouragement from a couple good customers I decided to pursue the tunnel port project.

My SE and RE heads are set up with the same port location as a tunnel port, which gave me a huge advantage in designing my version.  Because of this I was able to use the cope and drag tooling for my heads to also do a tunnel port version, and only had to change the 3D printed sand core.  This saved a whole bunch of time and money, and accelerated the path to a completed head.  From July into early August I spent a lot of time on the computer completing the design, guided by a tunnel port head that I had here. I have tried to make my version as faithful as possible to the original Ford part, while making some improvements to provide a better overall cylinder head.

Pictures of the prototype head are below (Note:  behind the tunnel port head in a couple pictures are a bunch of raw castings for my SE and RE heads, which I just received a few weeks ago and which have not been machined yet; those are either going to people who have contacted me about getting some from the second production batch, or else going into inventory here).  The tunnel port prototypes are bare heads; I have not yet had a valve job done or gotten flow numbers, but I would expect that they will flow very similarly to the factory cast iron tunnel port heads.

Here are the changes I made to my version of the tunnel port heads.  Note that these heads would use the stock tunnel port intake manifold and rocker system, not a specialized system like my heads:

   - The floor of the intake port has been filled in, to reduce the port volume and also improve the short turn to the valve.  There is enough material in the casting to open the intake ports up to the stock size, if that is desired.

   - Modern combustion chambers are machined into the head.

   - The plug has been changed from an 18mm taper seat plug to a 14mm, gasketed 3/4" reach plug.  The plug location has also been moved.  Hopefully this will eliminate the cracking issue between the plug hole and the intake seat that the factory heads suffered.

   - The guides have been changed from 3/8" stem to 11/32" stem.

   - The exhaust bolt pattern has been changed to the Cobra Jet style.

   - Accessory mounting holes have been put on both ends of the heads, not just one end.

   - Large inserts have been put into the rocker stand bolt holes, to withstand more spring pressure.

   - The intake face of the casting has been thickened, to avoid the cracking on this face down near the deck that is often seen on the original heads.

   - One other modification that I may make, if some customers are interested, is to replace the exhaust port design (which is basically like most other FE exhaust ports), with the one from my SE head design.  This will make the casting around the exhaust ports look different than a stock tunnel port head, because of the shape of the port itself.  However, it would result in flow of around 250 cfm, rather than the sub-200 cfm flow of a standard FE exhaust port.

I will be displaying the prototype tunnel port head at the FE Race and Reunion September 7-9.   I am also planning to take advantage of the foundry's recent performance, and order a small production batch of tunnel port heads at the beginning of October.  The raw casting design needs a couple of tweaks, but I expect based on the prototype castings that they will come out looking good.  See the link below if you are interested in getting a set.  And as always, questions and comments are welcome - Jay

https://fepower.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=11822.0

[70tp]

I, personally, would rather to have a set with better exhaust flow and give up some factory appearance as long as traditional exhaust will bolt up.   Most people don’t know exactly what the exhaust side of the head would look like and in a shock tower car the exhaust side doesn’t really stand out.  Can’t see much of that side once in the car.  And thank you for doing these.

[428kidd]

Awsome job Jay!

[jayb]

Something that I forgot to mention in my original post is the intake manifold situation.  I already make an intake adapter for the tunnel port, see the link below:

https://www.fepower.net/Products/feiatp.html

I plan to make a special version of that adapter with the ports machined to line up with the ports in my tunnel port heads.  Also (and again fortunately for me), I can build a 2X4 tunnel wedge style manifold that fits on the intake adapter, and use the existing foundry tooling I have for the intake manifolds for my SE and RE heads.  I plan to pursue that over the next few months.

Finally, a friend of mine recently acquired the Ford tooling for at least part of the 2X4 tunnel wedge intake for the tunnel port heads.  I don't know how much of it he has, and I don't know if it is usable, but there is some chance that I could offer a factory style 2X4 tunnel port intake.  This is probably a ways down the road though, and no guarantee that it would happen...

[GerryP]

Finally!  I am a buyer once the heads are flowed.  I look forward to the finishing details.

[Gregwill16]

What cc is the chambers?

[Katz427]

Sounds good Jay. I have a pair of iron on the shelf with 11/32 guides, new valves, new springs for a roller. Can I use them with your heads? Also what cc are the chambers ? I am interested, the improved SE port would be nice, the RE port would be nice for some headers in the 56 fairlane. 

[WConley]

Glad to see good castings off that first pour.  Quite an accomplishment! 

[jayb]

What cc is the chambers?

I'm targeting 68cc for the chambers.  Won't know for sure until I get the valve job done and get valves in the heads so I can measure - Jay

[jayb]

Sounds good Jay. I have a pair of iron on the shelf with 11/32 guides, new valves, new springs for a roller. Can I use them with your heads? Also what cc are the chambers ? I am interested, the improved SE port would be nice, the RE port would be nice for some headers in the 56 fairlane.

No reason all your stuff won't work, if they fit a factory head they should fit my head - Jay

[frnkeore]

Thank you, Jay. I'd love to have a set of these!!!

Are you using the MR valve spacing and location?

[jayb]

Pretty sure that the factory valve spacing and location is the same for an MR head and a tunnel port head.  I am using the factory dimensions from the tunnel port head, spacing of 2.100", 13 degree valve angle, etc.

[70tp]

I like the casting number prefix also

[e philpott]

Sweet! I could see the SE option as a big bonus for the shock tower guys like myself

[machoneman]

Something that I forgot to mention in my original post is the intake manifold situation.  I already make an intake adapter for the tunnel port, see the link below:

https://www.fepower.net/Products/feiatp.html

I plan to make a special version of that adapter with the ports machined to line up with the ports in my tunnel port heads.  Also (and again fortunately for me), I can build a 2X4 tunnel wedge style manifold that fits on the intake adapter, and use the existing foundry tooling I have for the intake manifolds for my SE and RE heads.  I plan to pursue that over the next few months.



Finally, a friend of mine recently acquired the Ford tooling for at least part of the 2X4 tunnel wedge intake for the tunnel port heads.  I don't know how much of it he has, and I don't know if it is usable, but there is some chance that I could offer a factory style 2X4 tunnel port intake.  This is probably a ways down the road though, and no guarantee that it would happen...

His tooling looks pretty good.

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=7548449198515349&set=pcb.6255935664518133

[482supersnake]

I remember a few years ago someone talked to Buddy Barr and they said that they still had a bunch of the tunnel port molds. It would be nice if they cold do a run of manifolds.

There was another guy on here who had said that they were close to a finished tunnel port head, I'm not sure what happened to his project.

Very cool that you are doing this for people Jay. I know if I was in the market for heads I would be putting a deposit down.

[c-reed]

If someone has a pair of used trick flows they want to sale to upgrade to these I'd be interested. Jay's heads are awesome but out of reach for me right now.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Hi Jay

Some Questions:

What valve sizes will be used ?

With the SE exh port, you mentioned about a 250 cfm flow rate, Question: Is that as cast or will they need to be ported ? And if that flow rate is as cast, about how much more if ported ?

Also, with the SE exh port design, what if any decrease in shock tower clearance would there be in say a Mustang or Cougar, not that there's that much to begin with.


And I read where you said the Tunnel Port valve spacing will be used, thinking out loud, bore dia min would be 4.230". Also, the wider rocker stands will be required.

[frnkeore]

A little food for thought:

At the MR spacing, the valves could be 1.75 x 2.35, with a 4.16 bore and 1.75 x 2.40, with the 4.23 bore, leaving .025 - .050 between valves.

[jayb]

Hi Jay

Some Questions:

What valve sizes will be used ?

With the SE exh port, you mentioned about a 250 cfm flow rate, Question: Is that as cast or will they need to be ported ? And if that flow rate is as cast, about how much more if ported ?

Also, with the SE exh port design, what if any decrease in shock tower clearance would there be in say a Mustang or Cougar, not that there's that much to begin with.


And I read where you said the Tunnel Port valve spacing will be used, thinking out loud, bore dia min would be 4.230". Also, the wider rocker stands will be required.

You can use any valve size up to 2.300" on the intake and 1.75" on the exhaust, based on the valve seat sizes that I'm using.    Common valve sizes are 2.25" on the intake and 1.75" on the exhaust.

The SE exhaust port flows 250 cfm with just a good, 5 angle valve job and a cleanup under the bowl.  No porting or enlarging of the port is required.  I haven't ported a set so I don't know what they are capable of, but that is enough flow on the exhaust to support 900 HP, which is quite a bit more than the intake port can support. 

Shock tower clearance would be the same as for any FE head.

Reducing the valve sizes would allow you to go to a smaller bore size than a stock 427, but the chamber is designed for a 4.25" bore so you would have some overhang at the top of the cylinder if you went smaller than that for bore size.

[frnkeore]

Jay, are you saying the valve sizes I suggested won't clear a 4.16 bore?

[blykins]

I don't think I'd worry about how big of a valve you can cram into a 4.160" bore.   A 2.190" intake valve will support almost 675-700 hp on the right head and a 428 block would have split in two before that point.  Shrouding would be an obvious problem as well. 

Valid discussion for a large bore though.

[70tp]

Jay, is this going to be a one run of castings and done, or is this going to be something that you are going to be offering on a somewhat regular basis as demand permits? 

[jayb]

I will only guarantee one run of the castings.  However, if everything works out OK with them (meaning that costs are in line with what I am estimating, and I don't run across any unexpected delivery issues from the foundry), then I would expect to offer them regularly for the foreseeable future.

[Ford428CJ]

That’s Awesome Jay! So nice to see some of this stuff to be made again with more modern updates done to them. As the iron stuff is all beat up. To include intakes. Anyways… Very Nice work Jay!!! As always

[1967 XR7 GT]

Hi Jay

Some Questions:

What valve sizes will be used ?

With the SE exh port, you mentioned about a 250 cfm flow rate, Question: Is that as cast or will they need to be ported ? And if that flow rate is as cast, about how much more if ported ?

Also, with the SE exh port design, what if any decrease in shock tower clearance would there be in say a Mustang or Cougar, not that there's that much to begin with.


And I read where you said the Tunnel Port valve spacing will be used, thinking out loud, bore dia min would be 4.230". Also, the wider rocker stands will be required.

You can use any valve size up to 2.300" on the intake and 1.75" on the exhaust, based on the valve seat sizes that I'm using.    Common valve sizes are 2.25" on the intake and 1.75" on the exhaust.

The SE exhaust port flows 250 cfm with just a good, 5 angle valve job and a cleanup under the bowl.  No porting or enlarging of the port is required.  I haven't ported a set so I don't know what they are capable of, but that is enough flow on the exhaust to support 900 HP, which is quite a bit more than the intake port can support. 

Shock tower clearance would be the same as for any FE head.

Reducing the valve sizes would allow you to go to a smaller bore size than a stock 427, but the chamber is designed for a 4.25" bore so you would have some overhang at the top of the cylinder if you went smaller than that for bore size.

A few more questions:

The SE exh port flows 250 cfm, but at what valve lift and what size valve, are there port flow numbers available ?  Which should help giving those buying heads a reference on choosing valve size. 

Recently, there were a set of cast iron Tunnel Ports up for sale, which showed port flow numbers for a raised floor Tunnel Port, and these were with a 2.250" valve that showed 360cfm @ .600" lift

Ported/Assembled Tunnel Port Heads 

[jayb]

Flow numbers and valve details for the exhaust side of the SE head are shown in the link below:

https://fepower.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=7336.0

Also, no reason that the tunnel ports I'm making wouldn't flow in the 360 cfm range with some porting.  But my info for stock tunnel port heads is that they flow around 330 cfm, and that is what I'd expect mine to do. 

[1967 XR7 GT]

Flow numbers and valve details for the exhaust side of the SE head are shown in the link below:

https://fepower.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=7336.0

Also, no reason that the tunnel ports I'm making wouldn't flow in the 360 cfm range with some porting.  But my info for stock tunnel port heads is that they flow around 330 cfm, and that is what I'd expect mine to do.

I saw where it was said stock Tunnel Ports flow in the  320 to 330 range, and  the ported version in the link I provided in my previous post was ported but had a raised floor to reach the 360 cfm, and I don't think the ports were made larger to achieve that flow.

It showed 360 cfm was reached with a 2,250" valve, I wonder how much more can be achieved with a 2.300" valve, and room restraints may require a 1.675" exh valve, with still 240 cfm @ .600" without porting. I am using the .600" range for my self, I would run a cam around .600 to .650" lift for the street.

[frnkeore]

Stan Weiss, has a site that gives stock and ported flow rates for most engines. This is what it has for ported TP heads.

Int/Exh    Valve Size Int/Exh    Comb. Cham. Vol  .200    ----.300    ----.400    ----.500     --.600    --.700    
Tunnel Port Mild Port Jim Iron   2.25/1.75
-
No Pipe   N/A   -   -------------------------------------177/115---240/153--279/179--306/190--326/197--342/201   
Ford 427 Tunnel Port Ported Iron   N/A   2.25/1.75
-
No Pipe   N/A   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -----------------------------------------------------------------383/256

It also list, DOVE TP heads with 2.25 x 1.73 at 370/230 @.700. It doesn't indicate that they are ported

[blykins]

I have numerous sets of TP heads out there that have been worked that flow 360-380 by making the port opening smaller.   This is done with just a 2.250” valve and by raising the intake floor about 1/4” and working the short turn that is absolutely horrible from the factory.

In stock form, a TP head will flow anywhere from 300-330 cfm. 

[blykins]

Flow numbers and valve details for the exhaust side of the SE head are shown in the link below:

https://fepower.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=7336.0

Also, no reason that the tunnel ports I'm making wouldn't flow in the 360 cfm range with some porting.  But my info for stock tunnel port heads is that they flow around 330 cfm, and that is what I'd expect mine to do.

I saw where it was said stock Tunnel Ports flow in the  320 to 330 range, and  the ported version in the link I provided in my previous post was ported but had a raised floor to reach the 360 cfm, and I don't think the ports were made larger to achieve that flow.

It showed 360 cfm was reached with a 2,250" valve, I wonder how much more can be achieved with a 2.300" valve, and room restraints may require a 1.675" exh valve, with still 240 cfm @ .600" without porting. I am using the .600" range for my self, I would run a cam around .600 to .650" lift for the street.

Going to a bigger valve doesn't always guarantee that you will see benefits.  Sometimes you don't.  The port and throat have to be in line with the valve size and there has to be no issue with valve shrouding, which means that you really need an aftermarket block to take full advantage of a 2.300" valve or bigger.  A 2.250" intake valve will support well over 700 hp. 

[1968galaxie]

One must also remember that the tunnel port has an intake which reduces the actual flow the cylinder sees.
The push rod tube (even when modified) has a significant effect on true flow numbers.
375 cfm without an intake and 330 or less with intake attached.

[blykins]

375 cfm without an intake and 330 or less with intake attached.

Source?

[frnkeore]

The intake tube, is not in the intake port of the head. Test head flow, w/o the intake attached, is the only way to test it.Therefore it becomes a intake porting issue.

If the port in the intake, is widened and contoured, at the tube, much of that problem should be mitigated.

[1968galaxie]

Source?

Seriously?
You haven't flowed a TP intake with a TP head?
At least make a meaningful measurement with a push rod tube in  your radius plate.

[blykins]

Have you?   Or are you quoting someone?

[jayb]

All tunnel port intakes have the port widened at the pushrod tube.  My intake adapters do that also.  Jon Kaase says that the tunnel port is the only head that actually picks up flow with the intake attached.  Haven't flowed one myself, but I respect Kaase's opinion.

[blykins]

I will tell you that I don't build a ton of Tunnel Ports, probably 6-7 total.  They're just not in high demand and a lot of guys want to hang onto the original parts. 

I will also tell you that in all of the FE's I've ever built, including engines with TFS heads, ported TFS heads, CNC ported Edelbrocks, etc., etc.. the engines that have made the most hp/ci were Tunnel Port headed engines. 

This 1x4 TP intake, modified by Joe Craine, averaged 490cfm between all 8 runners.   I'd be willing to listen to some arguments about how the Tunnel Port heads are at a detriment because of the tubes in the intake, but that would be about the extent of my involvement.  I think I even made the same comment years ago, but my outlook has changed.

[1968galaxie]

I NEVER said the TP head was a detrimental head. Of course they made - and still make impressive power.

I don't build engines as a profession. However, all of my personal builds have had the intakes as well as the heads flow tested together. Testing a head alone, as well as testing an intake by itself can be very misleading. The entire intake tract
is important. A intake with a lousy approach angle will not show up on a flow test of the manifold itself - however, with the head attached - yikes!

Even my turbocharged 86 Escort had the head flow tested with and without intake during development.
Same for the FE and same with the 503" 385 series 800hp build.

It does help that my brother does cylinder head work and has a SF600 to test theories.

[Joe-JDC]

That intake manifold also has the floors filled to match the epoxy in the heads and still manages to flow 490 cfm average.   I have been a proponent of porting any intake manifold to flow at least 110% of the head flow, and for performance usage, I try to get the flow up to 120-125% of the head flow.  When bolted together, the heads don't normally drop in flow this way as a result.  I have flowed hundreds of heads with intake manifolds over the last 29 years to verify the process.  I also work very hard at balancing each runner's flow so that each cylinder makes close to the same power and torque.  Makes the carburetion easier to jet, also.  Joe-JDC

[blykins]

Apropos to the discussion about Tunnel Port tubes, the SBF street Tunnel Port heads also do very well for themselves despite having the tubes.  They're in the heads on a SBF though. 



This was on a 312ci SBF with just a 221° @ .050" hydraulic roller camshaft and 9.9:1 compression.  Very respectable!

[Katz427]

In a time ,probably late 70's, I ran some tests on the effects of various size and shape tubes,  on the airflow, and fuel atomization.  Of course, the diameter of the tube, and too some extent, shape, affected CFM. But what got the attention of the engineer, was  how fuel atomization was changed down stream of the tube.  One reason I like Jay's raised  intake port, with no pushrod tube. Of course  this testing was steady state, airflow in a pretty much straight port, and not a true tunnelport head.

[1968galaxie]

One can certainly make decent power with a push rod in the middle of a port.
Ford tried it (reasonably successful in NASCAR) as well as TP302  in trans am.
The Boss 302 head turned out better.
Ford in the late 80's tried a TP 351 head again, limited success.

I love Fords, but some ideas come and go and newer better cylinder heads evolved.
TP type engines are very cool dinosaurs. Wish I could afford one.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Flow numbers and valve details for the exhaust side of the SE head are shown in the link below:

https://fepower.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=7336.0

Also, no reason that the tunnel ports I'm making wouldn't flow in the 360 cfm range with some porting.  But my info for stock tunnel port heads is that they flow around 330 cfm, and that is what I'd expect mine to do.

I saw where it was said stock Tunnel Ports flow in the  320 to 330 range, and  the ported version in the link I provided in my previous post was ported but had a raised floor to reach the 360 cfm, and I don't think the ports were made larger to achieve that flow.

It showed 360 cfm was reached with a 2,250" valve, I wonder how much more can be achieved with a 2.300" valve, and room restraints may require a 1.675" exh valve, with still 240 cfm @ .600" without porting. I am using the .600" range for my self, I would run a cam around .600 to .650" lift for the street.

Going to a bigger valve doesn't always guarantee that you will see benefits.  Sometimes you don't.  The port and throat have to be in line with the valve size and there has to be no issue with valve shrouding, which means that you really need an aftermarket block to take full advantage of a 2.300" valve or bigger.  A 2.250" intake valve will support well over 700 hp.

Hi Brent

I remember one of your Tunnel Port builds, maybe the first one, you talked about your porter made the int port smaller by raising the floor and getting better cfm, so assuming your using the same guy on all the TP builds, since he has experience porting TP's. A question to him, would a 2.300" valve increase cfm ?  A porter would have a sense about such things, like if a larger valve could flow more or not in that port?

I found some numbers for a TP int port and they were 2.2" x 2.31" but don't know if their correct.

And Jay mentioned the chambers were designed for 4.250" bore, so a 2.300  x 1.675 giving .050" larger Int and a .075" smaller exh should fit.

The exh already supports 240 cfm @ .600 lift with a 1.675" valve, without porting.

The chambers are of a modern design but not exactly the same as FE Power Cylinder Heads chambers.

[blykins]

Richard,

I've used two head porters in the past for Tunnel Port builds.  Neither of them have ever suggested using a larger valve.  I think that's because of two reasons:  1.  Not enough room.  2.  A 2.250" valve will support *a lot* of horsepower. 

Here's a picture of a Tunnel Port chamber with a 2.250"/1.750" valve pair. 



The seats are already butted up against each far enough that you don't end up with two true complete circles. 

In addition to all of that, an engine needs a given volume to make a specified horsepower.  We have to watch about making things too big as a big valve/big port can make for a lazy engine if everything below the head is not sized to match it. 

[Tunnelwedge]

When Sammy sold the Red Rocker TP on BJ he said it was too fast for him. He did.
I would bolt them puppy's on my geny no problem. Well other than I don't have the price of admission.
If you want me to test them on the geny I could. 
You need your own block.
Great stuff Jay.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Previously, I had asked, what valve sizes will be used on the TP's ? jayb replied up to 2.300" int & 1.750" exh.  I don't think a 1.750' valve will fit with a 2.300" valve though, as seen with the head on the bottom, a cast iron Tunnel Port head provided by Brent, with 2.250" int & 1.750" exh. 

Head at the top is jayb's Tunnel Port, which has a modern chamber design something like his RESE heads, which is designed for a 4.250" bore. Chamber has already proven to fit a 2.300" int with a 1.675" exh.

Also, jayb says he is shooting for around 68cc's chambers on his TP's and 
I think the cast iron TP's are something like 88cc's.

Here are jayb's flow numbers from his RESE Heads that I thought to
compare to flow #'s of ported cast iron TP heads that Brent provided,
and I know it's apples & oranges, regardless it was an interesting
comparison.

 

These flow numbers are from a set of cast iron Tunnel Port's
that Bret had up for sale for comparison: 
Ported/Assembled Tunnel Port Heads

.100      80.54      58.49
.200     159.49     105.62
.300     238.48     146.24
.400     300.82     189.52
.450     320.87     192.76
.500     341.37     197.62
.550     356.53     199.89
.600     360.98     204.10
.650     368.11     207.34
.700     374.35     215.44

[jayb]

2.300" intake and 1.75" exhaust will fit the tunnel port heads.  Valve spacing on a 427 head, tunnel port or medium or high riser, is 2.100".  I agree with Brent though, I'm not sure it is necessary to go to a 2.300" valve to use the flow capacity of the intake ports.

Valve spacing on my SE and RE heads is smaller than the 427 spacing, at 2.050".  This is so that it is easier to use the heads on a 390 stroker or 428.

The chamber in my SE and RE heads is better for flow than the tunnel port chamber I designed.  The reason is that the valves are moved towards the intake side of the head, making them closer to the center of the bore with my SE and RE heads.  This allows for a more gradual turn to the deck on those heads than is possible with the tunnel port design, or any FE design for that matter with the stock valve location.

Also, keeping the chamber small allows for decent compression with a flat top piston.  So you won't need those extreme domes that are seen with factory tunnel port pistons.

[Tunnelwedge]

I believe I could bolt Jay's TP heads on my engine and it would run excellent using my 4.250" bore engine the way I do.
It's a low compression dish piston tight quench with a 3/4 race cam and runs on anything from a gas pump stump puller.
I could even use all my valve train stuff. Might even get 10 miles to the gallon.
I could not bolt real TP heads on and expect the same performance.

[Tunnelwedge]

427 NASCAR Tunnel Port Blueprint Specs

[jayb]

I got a valve job and bowl cleanup done on one chamber in order to get flow numbers, and I was pleasantly surprised by the results.  Especially the exhaust port did better than I thought it would.  I had tweaked the stock design just a little bit, and it seems to have made a significant difference.  Still not as good as my SE heads, but better than a lot of FE exhaust ports that I've seen:



After getting the head back from the shop I checked the chamber volume, and this was also a surprise, it was much lower than I expected at 55 cc!  I will have to make a modification to the chamber machining program to get a little more volume.  The upside there is that it can only help the flow.  Pictures of the chamber and the port cleanup under the valve are below.  Please excuse the yellow grease in the chamber and near the valves; that is left over from cc'ing the chamber:

[Mark Bliss]

That is a pleasant surprise Jay! And judging by the images there is a good bit of improvement available with a little "light massaging." Maybe an easy 15-20 CFM at least on the intake pocket area with no harm, maybe even improvement to velocity.

In the chamber, just by visual judgement, I might suggest considering laying back/smoothing the spark plug opening area mildly.
It just looks shrouded with a little too much room for "spooks and ninny's" to hide.
Not much, just a little "opening and smoothing" of the area.

Just a casual layman's observational view....
I am no engineer; I just play one on TV.

[frnkeore]

How wide is the X axis of the chamber?

[jayb]

How wide is the X axis of the chamber?

It is 4.25" wide, 2.125" radius.  From the center point of the chamber, around the exhaust valve the radius might be just a bit larger than that, because in order to do the 5 angle valve job the cutter had to take a bit off the chamber; you can see the radius created by the cutter in one of the pictures.  Fortunately any FE head gasket for a stock bore will not have a perfectly circular profile anyway, so that little bit will not cause an overhang of the head gasket into the chamber.

[Joe-JDC]

Jay, is it possible to change your CNC program on the combustion chamber to have a more figure 8 around the valves?  Is there enough material in your casting for that?  As I look at your chamber, it appears possible.  Also if there were a vane around the intake guide it might help with stabilizing the valve, and speed up the flow.  Those heads are really tempting for a shock tower build.  Joe-JDC

[jayb]

Sure Joe, I could change the chamber as you suggest, but as it is the chamber is too small.  I will have to look at what's required to enlarge it by 12cc or so before I can think too much about changing the shape...

[TurboChris]

Mmmmmmm subscribed.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Jay, did you have the 5 angle valve job done on the seats ?

And the valves, why not 5/16 stems like on your FE Power Cylinder Heads, instead of the 11/32 ?

   - The guides have been changed from 3/8" stem to 11/32" stem.

I got a valve job and bowl cleanup done on one chamber in order to get flow numbers, and I was pleasantly surprised by the results.  Especially the exhaust port did better than I thought it would.  I had tweaked the stock design just a little bit, and it seems to have made a significant difference.  Still not as good as my SE heads, but better than a lot of FE exhaust ports that I've seen:



After getting the head back from the shop I checked the chamber volume, and this was also a surprise, it was much lower than I expected at 55 cc!  I will have to make a modification to the chamber machining program to get a little more volume.  The upside there is that it can only help the flow.  Pictures of the chamber and the port cleanup under the valve are below.  Please excuse the yellow grease in the chamber and near the valves; that is left over from cc'ing the chamber:

[jayb]

Yes, the 5 angle valve job was done on the seats.  I picked the 11/32" valves because the guides for that size valve that fit the heads were available off the shelf.  No reason a 5/16" guide couldn't be used, if you could find one, or have some custom guides made.

[PLemoine]

If someone has a pair of used trick flows they want to sale to upgrade to these I'd be interested. Jay's heads are awesome but out of reach for me right now.

I’ve got a new set still in the box if interested.

[c-reed]

I’ve got a new set still in the box if interested

How much?

[PLemoine]

$2500 + shipping from Riverside, Ca.

[Katz427]

I myself would like to see a combustion  chamber near 70 cc , as this works with flat top pistons, and a reasonable dish piston. At least then with a surface cut or two, one could get down to, 60 cc, if desired. Race gas is around $25 a gallon, +,
around here in north east. Flat top with iron tunnelport heads ar 86 cc, gives me around 10.2 ratio, with zero deck.

[JERICOGTX]

Kevin should just buy a set of these from you Jay, and just maybe that Cougar would run some day...

[jayb]

So a while back I sent my first prototype tunnel port head to Joe Craine, who had generously offered to port it for me to see what he could get out of it.  Joe only worked on the ports in one chamber on the intake, and only finished one chamber on the exhaust, but he was able to come up with some pretty good numbers:

Lift            Intake       Exhaust (no pipe)
.100"          78             58
.200"         155          114
.300"         227          141
.400"         285          192
.500"         330          212
.600"         357          219
.700"         379          222
.800"         390          230  (260 with pipe)

On the exhaust side, Joe flowed most of the lifts with no pipe, and as seen at the .800" lift level, the pipe definitely helps.  My local shop that flowed these heads always uses a pipe on the exhaust, so Joe's numbers are very impressive if that is taken into consideration.  Joe also experimented with adding some epoxy to the floor of the exhaust port, which apparently hurt some at first but flow later came back with some more massaging.

Also I really liked Joe's intake port treatment.  He did not do any significant enlarging of the port, which is great from a velocity standpoint. The improvements he made picked up 40 cfm from the as-cast numbers that I posted previously.  Joe commented that with more work he felt that 400 cfm is easily possible with these heads.

Joe also did some work in the chamber to open up the flow around the valves; it appears from my measurements that he went up to a 4.31 bore size.  This certainly helped the flow as well.  Bigger bores are always better for breathing.

Here are some pics of the intake and exhaust port.  I'm sure if anyone has questions about his work Joe will be happy to chime in and answer - Jay

[frnkeore]

Joe,
If you read this, it looks like some material was added to the valve guild boss or, did you just grind it in to the boss?

[Joe-JDC]

I did not add anything to the intake port.  Jay beefed up the guide and I blended around the guide.  This was a first run casting that Jay is going to update for future production.  The combustion chamber is a whole lot better than the stock Ford.  I could have lowered the exhaust valve seat ~.020", opened up the whole port on both sides and roof, and reshaped the short turn for at least another 20 cfm exhaust flow.  I always prefer to increase flow in stages instead of grinding out something that would be nearly impossible to put back.  Those heads have lots of potential for a very strong FE.  My local machine shop owner's wife passed away last month, and things were hectic to the point I didn't take the head in to cut more seats and hone the guides so I could work another cylinder for Jay.  My Neway cutters are great for touch-up on the seats after they have been cut, but not for cutting new seats.   Joe-JDC

[jayb]

Finally got my first production batch of tunnel port heads; see the picture below.  If you look closely at the two heads in the foreground you can see the difference between the stock type exhaust port and the SE exhaust port.  Both port openings are in the same position, but the SE port flows more.

I will be starting to machine these heads next week.  I am also expecting another production batch in about a month - Jay

[frnkeore]

Jay can I get my set with 5/16 valve guilds?

[jayb]

Frank, if you want 5/16" guides you would have to provide them.  One of my customers is doing that, but I don't have the details handy.  I should know in a couple weeks when he sends them to me.  Your heads are in the second batch of castings, so we have some time on that.  Send me an email in a month or so and we can figure out how to handle it - Jay

[frnkeore]

Thanks, Jay.

How low long do they need to be?

[jayb]

The ones for the 11/32 valve are 2.335" long, 0.502" OD, with a ridged top for valve seal retention.

[Rory428]

Very cool stuff, Jay, curious about the wavy valve cover rail ridge. I assume that this was due to the casting process, but wonder why it seems to"float" above the actual head casting.

[jayb]

Sorry Rory, that's a trade secret 

[1967 XR7 GT]

Frank, if you want 5/16" guides you would have to provide them.  One of my customers is doing that, but I don't have the details handy.  I should know in a couple weeks when he sends them to me.  Your heads are in the second batch of castings, so we have some time on that.  Send me an email in a month or so and we can figure out how to handle it - Jay

Here are the size of the ones I bought: 502-309-235-E-6-B and I bought 16 exh guides. I believe they were $10 each

Jay, sent me one of his 11/32 guides, here's a pic of his & mine. Jay said the slight difference isn't an issue. My guides take a .500" valve stem seals.
But would wait to purchase them until Jay gets mine mounted in the heads to be sure.



I, sourced my 5/16 guides thru https://www.cheprecision.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/che-precision-catalog.pdf

[frnkeore]

Thank you

[1967 XR7 GT]

Also, the valve stem seals, I bought on Amazon Prime: Comp Cams "519-16"
Set of 16 metal Body 5/16" valve stem Viton Valve Seals.
$32.69 including tax with free shipping.
Cheapest I found.