Author Topic: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..  (Read 49850 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

fastback 427

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #60 on: April 15, 2014, 10:07:33 AM »
I did bring up the pro ports in the tremeck t56 magnum thread, no bites though. Didn't kunts and company make 1100 HP na with pro ports? It would be great if someone could come up with a reasonably priced cnc program for the pro ports. I thought kunts and company pro port was over 420 flow on the intake. That's better than many BBC and BBF aftermarket top shelf heads. Wonder how a small runner high velocity big flow head like that would run on the track and the street?
Jaime
67 fastback 427 center oiler 428 crank Dove aluminum
top end toploader
67 fairlane gta cross bolted 12:1 390 Dove aluminum top end c6 3600 stall
65 falcon straight axle project
67 mustang coupe project
76 f350 dually 390 mirror 105 4bbl 4spd
74 f100 xlt 390 c6 factory ac

fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #61 on: April 15, 2014, 11:18:58 AM »
I did the Survival Stage X before the Felony was available, I am sending the heads off to Barry again for a full race port and polish, heart shaped chambers and milling. I already have them set up for my T&D oil drilled race rockers and through push rod oiling. The valves nearly touch each other and the stems are much smaller for increased flow. From what Barry said it looks like 350 cfm on the intake. That is about all you can do to an Edelbrock without welding I guess. I think the Felony or Blue Thunder has more potential but I had the heads already.

Drew Pojedinec

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2117
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #62 on: April 15, 2014, 11:28:45 AM »
While we've got some guys that work with all this often in this thread (blair/barry/joe/brent/etc)  a question.....

Considering probably 98% of all high powered FE engines have aftermarket rocker systems, has someone not developed a mass marketable FE head with non-stock valve locations? 
I see the 385 series SCJ Kaase/Ford Motorsports heads and they are an incredible value for what they are.  Minor work and they can support a ton of power without loss of velocity.  They have a ton of low lift flow as well.

thanks
dp

fastback 427

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #63 on: April 15, 2014, 11:55:12 AM »
Hey drew, have you seen the billet splayed valve fe heads from ultra pro machining? Huge flow with a price to match. 470 cfm at an inch.
Jaime
67 fastback 427 center oiler 428 crank Dove aluminum
top end toploader
67 fairlane gta cross bolted 12:1 390 Dove aluminum top end c6 3600 stall
65 falcon straight axle project
67 mustang coupe project
76 f350 dually 390 mirror 105 4bbl 4spd
74 f100 xlt 390 c6 factory ac

CaptCobrajet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #64 on: April 15, 2014, 12:02:38 PM »
I did bring up the pro ports in the tremeck t56 magnum thread, no bites though. Didn't kunts and company make 1100 HP na with pro ports? It would be great if someone could come up with a reasonably priced cnc program for the pro ports. I thought kunts and company pro port was over 420 flow on the intake. That's better than many BBC and BBF aftermarket top shelf heads. Wonder how a small runner high velocity big flow head like that would run on the track and the street?

The head I referenced in my post is a budget "street/strip" deal.  I have several forms of all-out race ports, but that particular combo is a stock-location intake port at the flange, which means any MR manifold can bolt right on with no mods IF intake works is not in the plan.  It has my intake port, and one of Jeff Colvert's exhaust ports in it.  These heads are intended for mild cams and street strokers, but we had to laugh when we put them on a 496 with a .700 lift solid roller with a tunnel wedge and made that kind of steam with them.  The next test is a 458 daily driver with a mild hydraulic roller.  We will see how they do on that, with a 3X2 OEM manifold.
Blair Patrick

ScotiaFE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1409
  • Howie
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #65 on: April 15, 2014, 12:33:43 PM »
The only "oops" was he had a thermostat in it and a mechanical water pump and it blew a frost plug out when it went from 2000 rpm to 6000 rpm in about a second.  Blair Patrick

A frost plug blew out?
It had pound in plugs at 496 inch's? 

Drew Pojedinec

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2117
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #66 on: April 15, 2014, 01:40:11 PM »
Hey drew, have you seen the billet splayed valve fe heads from ultra pro machining? Huge flow with a price to match. 470 cfm at an inch.

No I had not, but that isn't really on the level of the SCJ 385 heads in the cost to power ratio.  I understand the valve layout is different between these engine series.... was just asking out of curiousity, sure, it would make an FE less an FE.

CaptCobrajet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #67 on: April 15, 2014, 03:22:42 PM »
The only "oops" was he had a thermostat in it and a mechanical water pump and it blew a frost plug out when it went from 2000 rpm to 6000 rpm in about a second.  Blair Patrick

A frost plug blew out?
It had pound in plugs at 496 inch's?

Yep.  It is an early top-oiler Ford block.  We drilled it for pushrod oiling.  Not as thick as the aftermarket, but better than a sideoiler for cylinder wall integrity.  He had blocked the bypass and only had three 1/8 holes in the T-stat.  Left the line at 140 with a 180 T-stat.......that watter had to go somewhere!
Blair Patrick

bn69stang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 541
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #68 on: April 15, 2014, 04:51:05 PM »
So Blair i ll buy those heads , how much for you to set them up and make them work ? , they would be for a street car with attitude .  ::) .. Bud
69 mach 1 , 428 C J  Blue Oval Performance BBM heads -T@D rocker s- Blue thunder intake - Comp hydr roller - MSD ignition - FPA headers- Holley 850 hp double pumper - TKO 600 - 9 inch 3.89 Detroit Locker . ride tech coil over conversion - power rack @ pinoin steering - 13 inch drilled @ slotted 4 wheel disc brakes ..

CaptCobrajet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #69 on: April 15, 2014, 07:39:38 PM »
Bud, my email is captcj at hughes dot net.  Shoot me an email with your info and I'll get back to you.  I should not discuss jobs and money on Jays forum. Thanks, BP.
Blair Patrick

FErocious

  • Guest
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #70 on: April 19, 2014, 11:24:39 AM »
Modifying the standard Ed in my opinion is not the way to get the most for your money.  CNC programs for the standard head that make it bigger and bigger are not the best either, in my opinion.  The Pro Port Ed is absolutely the best platform.  It is a "porter's head".   I rarely see mention of the Pro Ports in forum discussions.  They have a tiny port...........just big enough to get a tool started, and a finished guide hole. They also have a spark plug hole and only enough chamber cast in to make a rough seat hole.   A blank sheet of paper, basically.  The port can be small.........in the stock location for a MR gasket.   It could also be mid 170's on CC's and flow 170 at .200, 280-ish at .400, and 320-sumpn at .600.  It can have an exhaust with a nice raised floor with no welding.  There is alot more to a cylinder head than just the max flow number............especially with streetable cams at .600 lift or less.  All of these fellers sell nice products.  My choice is the Pro Port.  If you buy any of the other heads and spend equal money on prep, I have concluded that the Ed Pro Port with a well-designed CNC program and the right finish work will give the most bang for the buck.  We did a 496 cuber at 12.5 static that made 785 hp and 710 tq with a small Pro Port as described.  The proud owner put it in a street car.  He then decided to go and run a little at the racetrack.  It went 6.20 at 110 with DOT tires.  He had to coast through the 1/4 mile because he only has a 6-point rollbar.  The only "oops" was he had a thermostat in it and a mechanical water pump and it blew a frost plug out when it went from 2000 rpm to 6000 rpm in about a second.  With a little tweaking, this car will go 6.00's and probably 9.40..........and not exceed 7000 rpm except at the finish line.   The car is a '64 Fairlane and weighs 3350 lbs with a driver.  It has a 4.11 Detroit Locker......not even a spool!  Pro Ports..............the timeslip don't lie.  There is a pic of the car on the FE Forum in Don Fottis post.  It really looks like a grocery getter.   Pro Ports..........................

Blair Patrick
[/color]


 Blair , I am in complete agreement on the Pro-Port Ed head. With a relatively "clean sheet" the port can be designed with the airspeeds needed for the desired engine operating conditions. The ports can be moved around and sized to suit . The other thing I like a lot is that a proper combustion chamber can be machined for the desired combination . One thing I am not sure on is whether the valve centerline can be moved on the ProPort, or are the guide locations pre machined to a near- finished state? I would like the option of relocating the intake guide to the OEM location for the 4.05" - 4.13" bores.

  One thing I should point out here is that there is way to much talk (on all forums) of airflow CFM and not airspeed and air quality. I spend two to three times as long on my SF600 with my pitot and flow wands  measuring airspeed and air direction as I do CFM. If I had a port that flowed good numbers but had poor airspeed, I would have to abandon that port configuration and move on or fill in the dead areas and redesign the port. The flowballs help here. Without a good handle on the airspeed and mixture directional control in the port and chamber , the engine will not trap all of the air CFM available to it when the intake valve closes. The engine will drop in VE % .

  Another thing.... valve sizes.  On the Edelbrock FE Performer heads , the intake valve location has been moved to the 427 OEM position. For a small bore engine this is disaster. A 2.20" valve may fit, but the airflow quality and flow efficiency will suffer. A large part of the valve is heavily shrouded in the combustion chamber and bore wall. The efficiency of flow management past the valve seat venturi will diminish. The efficiency of combustion will diminish. I also believe that we are told to stuff in an exhaust valve that is way too large.  A 1.71" valve will not clear the bore unless heavily clearanced for any reasonable amount of valve lift.


fe66comet

  • Guest
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #71 on: April 19, 2014, 03:26:56 PM »
This is all assuming you are going carbureted and with a completely modified intake structure involving movement of pushrods, rockers and shifting of cylinder head placement on the deck. Most of this kind of specialized work is used for maximum HP and competition only engines. My mark is no more than 750 HP and others are quite lower. It becomes a game of bang for buck deal for most. I cannot use any more HP due to it will require race only parts and I would like to not have to trailer it but drive it.

CaptCobrajet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #72 on: April 19, 2014, 09:34:44 PM »
The guides in the Pro Ports are finished.  They send the seats, guides, and heli-coils in a bag, with the castings.  On moving the guides, I have moved them by using a .625 OD guide and offsetting it.  That will get you over .040, and the std valve location is .050 to .055 from the Ed or 427 location, so you almost get it back.  It seems to help from 3 to 5 cfm in most cases to put it back.  Possibly more with large valves on a smallish bore.  I do my "Street Pro Port" only one way.  They are 2.20/1.65 sizes.  They will fit anything 4.05 or larger.  There may be a little bit of intake shrouding on the small bores, but I think the overall gains still hugely offset the minimal loss on that.  The 1.65 exhausts are plenty plenty in the port we use.  A piloted cutter from the bowl side will trim the fat guide away real nice.

On the statement of having to move stuff around........that was the main reason I did the street/strip program.  It uses a stock MR flange location, and requires no offset rockers or lifters.  Any manifold with a MR port location will fit the port location.  I had several good programs for various applications before, but basically all of them needed manifold work or manifold work plus offset rockers to be really effective.  The mission on the street/strip deal was to optimize the head with a small volume, small cross-section, and a stock port location.  They came out better than expected.  I went to our local track with that light blue T-Bolt clone today, and it went 6.26 on 275/60 ET Street tires, spinning a little.  Rolled across the scales at 3480. It will be at Beaver next week.  It is a 496, but that is plenty of head for any 445, and it is especially suited for mild cams with lower lifts.  I am interested in using the head on some mild 390 builds, and I expect it will be a plus on the smaller engines.  A small head will still work on a big engine(sometimes better than a big head), but a big head will KILL a small engine...dead.
Blair Patrick

bluef100fe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #73 on: April 20, 2014, 09:55:57 AM »
Blair.... How do you think a set of your street/strip pro ports would work on a 390-400ish displacement engine? Where does your chamber end up (size wise) after your prep work? What kind of timing requirements does your chamber have?

 I think I want a set to try on my 390 that is currently in my truck... I dynoed it a few years ago with different heads and intake so I would want redyno the combination that's currently in the truck now and then swap to just your heads and possibly a performer rpm intake.. My current Intake is a C6-H 427/428 I believe and the c8-h heads with cj sized valves that were ported by me.

Have any idea what kind of gains I would see? Flat top 390 with a decent solid cam... Peaks around 6300 rpm currently... 50-80 hp maybe? Or is that being too optimistic? I have another project I would like to chat with you about sometime if you have a few minutes to waste... Sorry for the long winded post but I like to learn as much as I can from the best in the business


<a href="https://servimg.com/view/14375057/64" target="_blank" ><img  src="https://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/14/37/50/57/img_2013.jpg" border="0" alt="Image hosted by servimg.com" /></a>

Cody Ladowski
1976 F-100 stepside
390 C6 9 inch
1.56 sixty ft.
7.38 @ 91.5
11.79 @ 111.5

CaptCobrajet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
    • View Profile
Re: Survival heads vs Edelbrock heads modified..
« Reply #74 on: April 20, 2014, 01:10:15 PM »
Cody,  I'm not sure I want to claim "best in the business" but I will claim to be trying hard to turn out the best I can do!  I'd be scared to spew off a claim of "X" improvement without knowing exactly what you have.  I can adjust the valve height in the chamber and affect the cc's a fair amount if I know where you want to be.  I can get them from 73 cc to 69 cc without too much grief.  If I put the valves high in the chamber, and mill about .050, I can get them close to 60 cc if desired.  It really depends on what you would want.  When you get ready, give me a holler.
Blair Patrick