New Trick Flow FE cylinder heads & Intake

[scott foxwell]

Sounds like we need an aftermarket cylinder head comparo.  Stock out of the box with no mods or porting.  Put them all on the same dyno mule.  I know a guy who has a lot of experience with that comparo stuff. He even wrote a great book with all results...Just sayin...

The problem with this is every head's flow curve would require a different cam profile to get the most out of it. So now you;re looking at testing different head/cam combo's to make the test "fair".

[CaptCobrajet]

I don't think the posted results are impossible, based on what I found when I flowed the head and looked at the intake port design.  I think if the engine makes that kind of power, give or take 50 hp, it must be a pretty good piece.  I just finished a Hilborn injected 429 cube FE with my Street Pro Ports that made 716 hp with a .525 lift cam, so this 482 is not unheard-of power........and before anyone cries foul about Morgan's dyno, I tested the engine on Tony Bischoff's Superflow 902.

I have a pair of those heads going on a 390 that I plan to sell, using my .525 baby roller.  I am not sure yet if I am going to fix a few things about the ports, or run them as-is.  I'll post it in the dyno section when it happens.

I don't know andyf, or the person who did the 482, and I am not about to say it is not a real number.  With that said, as I have said before.....we race on racetracks, not dynos.  This is apparently a street 482, and I'd safely say that it will make the owner happy.  I say if all involved, and most importantly the guy who laid down his coins are happy, then all is well!

[fekbmax]

.....we race on racetracks, not dynos.
[/quote]

 

[wowens]

Aren't no inserts at exhaust bolts a problem ?

[Katz427]

I thank Andy for sharing this engine build. One thing I was wondering about was the BBM tunnel wedge intake. The large ports did not seem to hurt. I know it is not like driving to see how throttle response is, but the manifold seems to work at least for a combination like this 482.

[andyf]

I thank Andy for sharing this engine build. One thing I was wondering about was the BBM tunnel wedge intake. The large ports did not seem to hurt. I know it is not like driving to see how throttle response is, but the manifold seems to work at least for a combination like this 482.

We won't know throttle response until in the car but we did run blip tests on the dyno to check AFR against TPS rate of change. All of that looked good and the engine responds very quickly. In a heavy Galaxie with highway gears it could be an issue. I wouldn't be surprised if we have to drop the camshaft size one step to make the car really responsive. We won't know that for several months.

I do think the intake manifold is absolutely key to these power numbers. I was blown away with the 1 kPa delta between baro and MAP. On my single carb engines we would kill for 1 kPa delta. Usually it is 4 or 5 kPa with a 2000 cfm throttle body. Also, the intake port alignment was perfect between the intake manifold and the cylinder heads. It took a fair amount of work to get that perfect alignment but I think it is important enough to work on it until it is correct. A little bit of mismatch there can cost 10 or 15 hp on an engine like this.

[blykins]

I just ordered a pair of them to look at. Got a 390 build coming up that I can use them on.

[turbohunter]

Also, the intake port alignment was perfect between the intake manifold and the cylinder heads. It took a fair amount of work to get that perfect alignment but I think it is important enough to work on it until it is correct. A little bit of mismatch there can cost 10 or 15 hp on an engine like this.

That's an interesting statement. Intuitively it makes sense. However Jay did some testing that showed a mismatch (probably to a point) doesn't matter. Which in my little pea brain makes no sense. I would figure a perfect match would always work better. But you cant argue with data gathered off of the same manifold.
Not poopooing just trying to understand.
Look at the end of post#83 here, after all the EFI stuff.
http://fepower.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=4760.75

[blykins]

Andy, did you flow/pour those heads before you installed them?

[scott foxwell]

Also, the intake port alignment was perfect between the intake manifold and the cylinder heads. It took a fair amount of work to get that perfect alignment but I think it is important enough to work on it until it is correct. A little bit of mismatch there can cost 10 or 15 hp on an engine like this.

That's an interesting statement. Intuitively it makes sense. However Jay did some testing that showed a mismatch (probably to a point) doesn't matter. Which in my little pea brain makes no sense. I would figure a perfect match would always work better. But you cant argue with data gathered off of the same manifold.
Not poopooing just trying to understand.
Look at the end of post#83 here, after all the EFI stuff.
http://fepower.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=4760.75

You'd be surprised at how many really high end engines have an intentional port mismatch between intake and head. Of course this comes from a lot of testing both dyno and track, but none the less. I learned a long time ago that intuition will get you in trouble when it cones to induction.

[jayb]

Not to mention factory engines.  The 428 Cobra Jet had medium riser ports in the intake manifold, and low riser head ports.  There's about a 3/8" step down from the floor of the intake to the floor of the cylinder head.

[KMcCullah]

Did anybody happen to catch the port misalignment on the Y block that Kaase won EMC with a few years ago? One of the pics in the linked article below show it. It wasn't pretty but didn't seem to hurt much.

http://www.hotrod.com/articles/you-wont-believe-this-engine-is-60-years-old/

[andyf]

Andy, did you flow/pour those heads before you installed them?

Nope. Changed valve springs, checked guide clearance, shaved the intake side a little bit, cleaned them up and bolted them on. Zero port work. I have to run them "out of the box".

[blykins]

How come?  Was this build part of an advertisement?

[scott foxwell]

I'd be rally interested in getting some cross sectional information on these heads. The valve size, depending on throat dia. is almost dead on for Andy's combination at his rpm for peak power. IMO that's critical. A lot of these FE builds I see with smaller or similar displacement and "pro ported" heads have way more intake valve than they need. That's a sure way to kill power in most combinations. Ports that are "too big" in cross sectional area are going to be lazy and will respond much better to a smaller cam than larger. On my C6 heads I measure the minimum cross section to be right at the short turn @ ~ 2.3 sq in. which is way bigger than my 395 needs @ 6500. It needs closer to 2.09 sq in. and about 2.4 sq in. of valve (throat) area. I was conservative with the 2.05 valve and only went with that for the better valve job. With it's 90% throat it's right at 2.58 sq in. This won't help the power for my 390, but it can be addressed with the cam. These heads can easily feed a 427 (with a 4.25 bore) to >6000rpm. Start porting on some of these, put great big valves in them and then on top of that, throw a 270-280 degree cam in them and you have a recipe for poor results. I'm guessing these TF heads don't have near the cross sectional area that the others do and I can say that right off the bat with that vein in the floor. Good flow, small(er), fast ports and a reasonable cam. There's your recipe for good power especially in the rpm range he ran it.
I did a 509 pump gas BB Chev years ago that would have done very well in the EM competition. Didn;t know it till later of course, but it had a set of AFR heads with small 3 sq in. cross section intake ports which were WAY big for the combination and a 2.25" intake valve sized right for the combination. The engine was pump gas, 11:1, hyd roller and made 764hp @ 6200 nad 732 lbs/ft @ 4900 with a 4150 carb. It made over 700 lbs/ft from 4100 through 5500 and was still making 600 lbs/ft @ 6500. The heads flowed in the 380 range. Here's the rub; the cam was 244/248 @ .05, .649/.629 on a 107. This combination pushed a 3550# all steel 67 Chevelle to 9.4x's at over 140 mph. I don't wan to hear "Chevy heads better than Ford", "this is an FE not a BB Chev" blah blah blah. When it comes to the physics and airflow dynamics between the two, there aint enough difference to cry foul, especially where cams are concerned. The 250-260 duration range for Andy's cam seems about spot on for his combination.