CYLINDER HEAD INFO gathered by DJOHAGIN

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intake Manifold Info For C-Heads

Single plane manifold

Has anybody ever flow a single dominator manifold for c-460 heads? I was wondering if it keeps up with the port in the heads or is it a restriction.

The manifold hurts flow 30 cfm @ .800" lift and 8 cfm @ .300" lift.

How much did the heads flow that the manifold was bolted to?

Intakes, average of all 8 ports at 28" H2O on a 4.600" bore are;

.200=157
.300=238
.400=316
.500=384
.600=431
.700=464
.800=478
.850=480.

Just wondering how restrictive the casting was, it looks to me like it would be good.

I don't feel that the intake port sees the manifold runner as much of a restriction, if any, on the "C" package. Getting the air turned into the runner entry may be the real issue. When a 1050 carburetor with bigger throttle bores was installed, the end cylinders really liked it over the stock 1050. If there was enough time, a multitude of spacer types and bigger carbs available (1150/1250) I think the flow #'s would have looked better. All of this is moot unless there is another single plane one carb manifold to compare to. Who knows what is really going on in side a running engine at WOT with the pulsing and the introduction of the heavy fluid (gas) into the mix. With its equal length runners and above the runner venturi position it's easy to see why a tunnel ram does what it does. I just did not want anyone to mistake that speck of flow data that I posted, as wisdom.

Tunnel ram

Has anyone run a tunnel ram to see how much more power can be made over a single dominator?

I talked to kaase about that hp wise. They said you would be looking a 60 to 80 hp over a single four.

What kind of issues am i going to deal with in changing from the single 4bbl manifold to Charlie Evan's adapter and the A460 tunnel ram?

There aren't any "issues" except for the deck height of YOUR block, and that holds true in regards to the proper fitment of any intake manifold. With block deck heights ranging from 10.28" to 10.32" and all points in between, it effects the proper fit of any intake manifold in regards to how high or low it sets and the proper alignment with the port.

The adaptors thick enough to fit a new SVO block with the 10.32" deck height. If your block is very much shorter, then you may need to either mill the intake surface of the heads, or mill the intake surface of your manifold, or thin the adaptor plates by milling them. That's the three options.

Also want to issue a caution that not all distributors will clear. Some will and some won't. The stock 429-460 Ford Duraspark with small cap clears just fine. Other than that, you are on your own.

Charles Hamiton is a BB Ford racer in Baltimore MD that is using a set of A-460 to C-460 adaptors. His engine builder Mark McKeown and him made a 1070 Hp with his engine and the TFS A-460 tunnel ram on C-460 heads. Mark used an MSD crank trigger and the low profile "big cap" distributor and he did have to do a good bit of machining on the thermo housing of the TFS manifold in order for the MSD low profile distributor to clear.

C-Heads on Smaller bore

Foreword

This information is mostly for individuals seeking to install C-Heads on a 4.44” bore.

Fitment of C-Heads

First and foremost, these are not a bolt on and go cylinder head. You have to deal with the some issues.

Mocking up the heads on an empty block and looking up the cylinder from underneath, the chamber is slightly larger on the front and rear sides of the cylinder. It is best to run a 4.670 cosmetic head gasket to get the head to seal to the block properly. The Felpro 1018 with the 4.500 bore leaves the stainless compression ring inside the chamber at the places mentioned above.

Ford advises that the heads be used on 4.550" bores in their paperwork, and you can see why they have to do that from their position. They have to assume most guys are just going to slap them on the engine, and not take the time to mock-up and deal with the head gasket issues and chamber overhang.

On a 4.440 bore, the exhaust valve is very close to the cylinder wall with an .800 lift camshaft and a 1.80 exhaust valve. The side clearance is only .028"! An offset dowel may help, as there is plenty of intake valve to cylinder wall clearance. The exhaust valve placement is the limiting factor on the 4.44 bore.

It is best to limit an 1.80 exhaust valve maximum on a 4.44 bore, and limit the exhaust lift to .775".

Special note: Earlier versions of the C-460 had the valves spread .030. These would not be a good choice on a 4.44 bore unless you use a 1.75 exhaust valve diameter.

Valve Angles

The valves in a C-460 head do not have any cant angle, like the factory stock heads from Ford did. Notching the cylinder wall at the top does not work. As the C-460 exhaust valve opens and makes it's way towards full lift, the valve doesn't move away from the cylinder wall. If you notched the cylinder wall, it would have to extend down the wall, the full lift of the cam.

Additional machining required

Spark plug holes have to be chased with a tap.

The 7/16" rocker arm subplate bolt holes all need to be tapped deeper. The holes are drilled deep enough, but they aren't tapped deep enough. They need a bottoming tap used on them.

The push rods rub the head. Charlie Evans has a pushrod program in order to grind intake pushrod clearance with his cnc porting service as an option because of that particular problem.

Another thing is that valve lengths can be all over the map due to core shift and machining shift. If you're shooting for a 2.100" installed height, generally 6.425" to 6.450" works for the intakes and 6.325 to 6.350" works for the exhausts. With W.W. Engineering rockers this will result in pushrod length being right around 10.100" + or - a little.

If you use all 18 bolts of the 18 head bolt pattern, call Charlie @ (270)685-4654 for the extra eight 7/16" bolts/studs. Make sure to use anti-seize on the inner four bolts/studs that screw into the alum. head in the lifter valley or they will lock up.

If you need thicker head gaskets and want Cometics or copper Hussey head gaskets, just e-mail Lem at:

lem.evans@bfevansford.com

or call the guys in the parts department (270)278-2376 and they'll get them on the way.

Clearance of bore and exhaust, their effect on exhaust flow

Running a C-Head on a 4.440" bore, doesn’t that effect the exhaust flow in a negative way being that close too the cylinder wall?? Seems to me you would not get optimum flow out of it??

I guess it would but, my car goes 9.63 @ 141, weighing in at 3895lbs. The motor is 557 cubic inches and have not worked the bugs out of it yet.

The exhaust flow would suffer some. The real question though, is how much exhaust flow is "good enough" in order to get the job done? He has answered by giving his E.T. and mph and they are good, so obviously he believes the 1.800" valve is getting the job done. I think Kaase or somebody actually said you want the exhaust valve as close as possible to the cylinder wall, especially if it means you can move the intake valve further away from the wall.

Generally, part of what makes the things work is that the exhaust valve is moved toward the cylinder wall to allow better position and size for the intake valves. One can make the valves smaller to fit lesser bores with a loss of flow/performance. Some of which may be a decent trade off in a smaller engine. At some point the ID of the seat will get too big for the small head exhaust valve, requiring seat removal and welding.

The usual exhaust valve diameter is 1.900” when the heads were designed. Ford FRPP & Ferrea has them on the shelf as a catalog item in that size. I generally use a 1.900 or a 1.880 in those heads when I do them. What he has done is run a smaller than normal exhaust valve in the head because he's using a 4.440" bore. No problem. What head porters have learned in the past few years is that we can sacrifice exhaust flow in order to get better intake flow and these engines will still run damn good. This is sort of like the Ford Kaase SCJ heads in that the E/I ratio is not a theoretical ideal 70%, but more like 60%, but the engines still run better than expected, so much for theory.

Do you have any exhaust flow numbers that you would be willing to share?

I can't find my flow sheet, but they were 274 @.700 lift with a 1.75 stainless and 45 deg seats. I know that doesn’t sound too impressive, but this 514 went 8.30 in a door car @ 2650 lbs.seems to be running pretty well. It runs on a 4.440 bore with 2.40” intake valves.

With the 1.75 valve, did you have to install a smaller ID seat to make that work?

No, I used original seats, they just hang on, it isn't awesome visually, but it works very well.

Smaller exhaust and larger intake valves

Have you tried a smaller exh. valve say 1.800 and a bigger intake 2.500 or 2.550 to help the intake side out to get it to the 530 ish cfm range? I know these heads have a strong exh port, 380+ cfm, with the 1.900 valve.

I like the 2.450" intake valve. I think the size can get too big in a hurry given the rpm range the powerglide sportsman engines live in.

In regards to using a 2.500" intake valve in c-460 heads. The seats interlock anyway and the actual 45* seat surface of the intake valve is over on the exhaust seat, so, we'd have to be pulling and welding seats up and cutting new ones. That's a lot of trouble.

Cross-section sizing, port volumes, and flow quality

Is the port cross-section of the C-Head the same size/smaller/larger than CJ heads?

The intake port cross sectional area of a C-460 head is bigger.

Do the cross-section sizes dictate the torque peak and hp rpms?

The C-460 heads have a pretty big port cross sectional area out of the box, but then so does the cast iron Cobra-Jet head. Where do most people measure this cross-section? Some measure it at the port entry, but that's not where the smallest constriction is. Generally speaking it is either at the push-rod pinch or farther down the port at the crest of the floor.

Doesn't the length of the port effect port volume?

Example: The new SCJ exhaust ports are longer than the previous CJ heads. So, if both have the exact same cross-section from the exhaust flange to valve seat, the SCJ will measure more CCs.

The port volume data would be relative to only other heads in the same family. The length enters in to the equation. For example;

Port volume of a CJ style head would be relative to all other CJ heads, with the exception of the SCJ head, because Jon pulled the valve seat up in the cylinder. Likewise the port volume of all 3 of the A-460 heads would be relative only to each other, but not to CJ's or DOVEs because they have a raised port entry and require a different intake manifold completely.

If you were to make the cross-section the same in the intake port of a SCJ head and a C-Head, would both heads show the same flow, even though the C-Head has a better angle to the bowl? And again, if you did this, wouldn't the C-Head show more volume in the intake port because it is longer?

If the minimum cross sectional area of a SCJ head and a C-460 were exactly the same, the C-460 head can be expected to flow more air due to its port being raised. Airflow does NOT like tight/small turn radiuses, therefore the higher port C-460 head will flow better.

According to the Performance Professor Jim McFarland, the better quality is something that we should all strive for and is represented by a finer atomization of the fuel droplets and a more homogenous mixture throughout the chamber. No wet spots or puddling.

If you draw the same volume of air (cfm) through a smaller cross section port the air will be moving faster. Air speed = low end torque.
Generally that would be the case to a large degree, but cam and manifolding plays their part also.

You stated that the intake port cross sectional area of a C-460 head is bigger than any cast iron head, so low and mid-range torque would be hurt a lot on a 460 cubic inch engine. Kind of like the street Boss 429? Is this correct, or does the port shape help to overcome this?

It's possible that the head may be too big for a 460 CID engine, and that the ports may be lazy unless you really twist the engine tight. I don't think it would make a responsive street head. In that respect it would be like the Boss 429 you mentioned. Still, on the other hand, it should do better than the Boss 429 because of the better port design. The port entry is raised much higher than the Boss 429. This entry is generally measured by the height of the port's floor above the deck surface, or relative to the deck surface. The original Boss 429 head's port floor was about 5/8" above the deck surface and the C-460's port floor is about 2" above the deck surface. So you can see it's a raised port. As better heads are developed, you're always going to see the ports being raised higher and higher. Thus the overall height of the head becomes taller and taller.

Flat-Tappet, C-Head, 4.40" Bore Engine

To partially answer your question about lower rpm performance from a C-460 motor, here are the dyno results for our C-460 engine when it had an Ultradyne flat tappet cam, 4.4 bore, 4.2 stroke, 11:1 CR, 1X4bbl, almost no head work. These numbers came with 110 octane and 36 degrees total advance, we were able to run it on 92 with either 32 or 34 degrees (can't remember). Unfortunately, I do not have the data from 92 octane test (this was several years ago). I think all we did was check to see if it was feasible. We typically ran this motor with a 50/50 mix of 92 and 110. Cam specs (same for both intake and exhaust): 0.663" lift with 1.8 rockers, 259 duration @ 0.050, 292 duration @ 0.020, 112 lobe separation.

RPM HP Tq.
4500 580.9 678
4600 593.4 677.5
4700 610.5 682.2
4800 627 686
4900 640.1 686.1
5000 664.6 698.1
5100 676.9 697.1
5200 688.9 695.8
5300 704.6 698.2
5400 714.5 694.9
5500 727.5 694.7
5600 739.7 693.7
5700 753.2 694
5800 754.2 682.9
5900 758.3 675
6000 762 667
6100 766.1 659.6
6200 770.4 652.6
6300 785.3 654.7
6400 796.2 653.4
6500 797.2 644.1
6600 Peak 802.5 638.6

Can you give some more details on that build?

The numbers came from the dyno at Huffaker Engineering. I never raced it with 92 octane, just did a dyno test. It was a stock block and it had cracked cylinders by the end of each year I ran it. We also had symptoms of valve float on the cylinder walls. We probably ran it for too long on a set of valve springs. I was using the engine for road racing. It might have gone for quite a long time in a street/strip application.

I'm not sure how much more detail I can muster. I wish I could remember exactly how big the valves were. It had aluminum rods, I think it was an LA Crank, it had a wet sump, C-460 manifold, and 4-into-1 headers.

Part of the reason for using C heads in the stock block, flat tappet application was upgrade potential. Harold's view was that a relatively unimproved C head was still quite good compared to other alternatives and that while expensive, the valve train would support endurance needs.

Having implemented some of the upgrade potential, such as port optimization, a roller cam, a bit more compression (now 12.6:1), a 4.56" bore (different block) and a 4.25" stroke, the engine now makes over 950hp through the mufflers at a still reasonable/sustainable 6,700 rpm.

What size are the valves in the 4.560" bore?

I believe they are 2.44/1.87

Performance of C-Heads from 2 members

First let me explain my reasoning for using the C heads on the 557. They have pretty decent numbers right out of the box. They take a little work but what doesn't? I was looking more at a head that would work decent but still let me use it on a bigger cubic inch motor at a later date, kind of an investment so to speak. Small chambers and shaft rockers in which also was factored in for future use. It was a little pricy but now I have them.

The heads are bowl blended, short turn worked a little on the intake side, and I matched the entry to the gasket for about 1 1/2" in, catridged rolled the entire port and removed very little casting flash to make them appear symmetrical to the eye. Exhaust side has a bowl blend and cartridge roll finish all the way out.

Heads were put on a flow bench at Kuntz & Co. This is where the valves were installed and the valve job was performed. They did no port work at all with the exception of cc-ing the chamber and blending the seat to the chamber.

Flow numbers as follows;

Intake: 2.400 dia. @ 28" water

.300 - 245.85
.400 - 323.18
.500 - 383.52
.600 - 422.86
.650 - 440.00
.700 - 451.35
.800 - 468.78

Exhaust: 1.800 dia. @ 28" water

.300 - 161.35
.400 - 194.00
.500 - 229.75
.600 - 290.05
.650 - 298.98
.700 - 309.63
.800 - 318.19

If they are flowed by Jim Kuntz, you can be sure the info is accurate. Based on my testing of the C-460 heads and comparing flow numbers, I believe your info is accurate. These are good flow numbers relative to your application on the 557 CID engine. I suspect that the most important thing you did on the intake side was to lay back the short side radius some. Out of the box these heads tend to stall around .600" -.700" lift with just a bowl blend.

They are on a 557 with a single four intake and a 1250 dominator, flat top pistons, light tension rings with a vacuum pump, 6.800 steel rods and a billet 4.500 crank. Roller cam with a 114 lobe separation and 278* / 292* @ .050 with a lift in the upper .700 lift bracket. Home built step headers 33" long, 2" - 2 1/8" - 2 1/4" into a 4" collector with an X pipe and mufflers that are also 4". This is in a 65 Galaxie that weighs 3895lbs with me in it. I run a C-4 with a 10" converter, 4.86 gears, and 31 X 10.5W slicks. Car has gone some 9.63's @ 141 with the 1250 on it. 60's in the 1.35 to 1.36 range off the footbrake.

I don't think he has any more work in putting his C-heads on his 557 then I had putting SCJ heads on my 512 as far as machine work and little nuances. If I had a ‘65 Galaxie with the engine bay he has, I'd have C-heads. Their physical size (both width and height) is large by extra large. I think his results in his heavy car speak volumes on what these heads are capable of on a relatively low-rpm/high torque engine.

Something I think that helps too are these cylinder heads are sufficient as well as efficient. Meaning they are big enough to get the job done but also are a proven power maker on just about anything even without a lot of work done to them.

I have learned a lot from this forum. If I would have gone with the A-head and had them cnc programmed I feel that I would have had a head comparable to what I have now but minus the titanium valves and shaft rocker system. Price wise I actually did better considering I have an upgradeable baseline C head right now. I wanted a car that would turn heads and run a good number yet still retain all its glass and interior. I have done what everyone else still thinks is impossible.

C-Head Flow Numbers

Ford C460 Head

Courtesy of Charlie Evans

45-degree seats
2.45 x 1.90

Out of the box

.200 - 159/111 69%
.300 - 227/150 66%
.400 - 285/183 64%
.500 - 327/201 61%
.600 - 351/214 60%
.700 - 367/221 60%
.750 - 380/224 58%
.800 - 380/225 59%

Bowl blend

.200 - 154/111 72%
.300 - 230/166 72%
.400 - 306/217 70%
.500 - 380/260 68%
.600 - 425/270 63%
.700 - 427/293 68%
.750 - 418/299 71%
.800 - 413/302 73%

Hand ported

.200 - 158/125 79%
.300 - 238/164 68%
.400 - 316/212 67%
.500 - 384/270 70%
.600 - 431/295 68%
.700 - 464/315 67%
.750 - 476/320 67%
.800 - 480/325 67%

CNC program

.200 - 160/130 81%
.300 - 245/170 69%
.400 - 327/210 64%
.500 - 400/280 70%
.600 - 450/315 70%
.700 - 478/340 71%
.750 - 490/347 70%
.800 - 500/355 71%


Pro-Filer Heads

Courtesy of Charlie Evans

Through a "friend of a friend" a set of Profilers recently came across my workbench. These heads had been prepped by Bennett Racing in Alabama. As you know they are high end heads and supposedly one of the advantages of these heads is that they are "cast as ported". Bennett had done a good bowl blend and the valve job. The intakes were 2.400" with a 52* seat and corresponding back cuts & etc. The exhaust were 1.900" with a 55* seat. The heads were flowed at 28" H2O by Bennett. These are their flow numbers. The exhaust were flowed WITHOUT a test pipe.

.200=166/115
.300=243/164
.400=304/210
.500=356/244
.600=410/272
.700=462/289
.800=486/305
.900=504/319

Ford B-460 Pro Stock Bastard Heads

History Of The Bastard Head

Courtesy of Paul Kane

First to clarify, we are not talking about the traditional Ford Motorsport B head.

We are talking about a little known, small production run cylinder head that, as I understand it, was never sold through Ford Motorsport. Yes, it was assigned a Ford Motorsport part number (and put in the B460 part number family) but is not the small port B head that everyone is thinking about.

We are talking about a head that was so far ahead of it's time (cast back in 1990-ish) that only in recent years can other wedge heads rival its max effort flow numbers. Only a handful were ever produced, as the Smith brothers were playing with the mold and final dimensional variations every few castings. I believe that Ford gave Rick & Mike the go-ahead to R&D their ideas and therefore assigned this "cylinder head R&D project" a part number, but the heads were never formally released/sold through Ford Motorsport. Somebody correct me if I am mistaken anywhere. Good thing, because even though they all have the same number, there are differences in the groups of heads that were created.

The pair that I have are cast with the Pontiac valve covers.

Closest thing to these heads today is the Thor head.

Of special note, the roof of the exhaust ports are higher than the head bolt heads. They have seriously raised ports!

A link a picture of the heads:

http://460ford.com/viewtopic.php?t=17836

Courtesy of Charlie Evans

Here's what I know about the Bastard Pro Stock heads, but Lem knows more than what I do, so he can correct anything I say in error.

Mike and Rick Smith were the founders of TFS and my three pages of notes are directly from Rick Smith.

1. Starting midway. There were 4,000 to 5,000 Ford Motorsports A-460 heads made. They were "detuned" from the original TFS A-460 heads. The Ford Motorsports heads had a reduced bowl volume (10%) and more material under the short side radius. They had intake angles of 13* X 5.2* and exhaust angles of 9.5* X 5.2*. The seat for the intake valve allowed you to go down to a 2.190" intake valve.

2. Next came the B-460 head which was a small intake runner volume head. These heads are sometimes referred to as the "truck head". There was a matching small runner intake manifold. Maybe 500 heads were produced.

3. I'm skipping over the Stage 5 head (10 sets made), the Stage 6 head ( 2 sets made), and the Stage 7 head (10 sets made) and going on to the Stage 8 head, which are the two sets pictured above in this thread.

4. The Stage 8 Bastard Pro Stock heads like what Mustangracer2 (Andy) and Paul Kane have. They are pictured above. Known as the 17* head, they have intake angles of 17* X 6* and exhaust angles of 4* X 3*. They took a Pontiac Pro Stock style valve cover (as did all the rest of the Bastard Pro Stock heads), and had steel sleeves in the head bolts on the intake side. There were about 10 sets made. Lem had them done in the late 80's if my information is correct. He ran them in the Pro Stock class (500 C.I.D.)in drag boat racing and set a national record. Years later in 2002 we ran them again and I flowed them at that time. They had a 2.380" intake valve and a 1.880" exhaust valve.

From April 2002, Intake numbers are;
.200=159, .300=250, .400=335, .500=405, .600=447, .700=473, .800=484, .850=487, .900=490 cfm. These did NOT have the steep valve angles.

Exhausts numbers are;
.200=130, .300=178, .400=226, .500=272, .600=313, .700=338, .800=353, .850=358, .900=363 cfm. That is WITHOUT a test pipe. Again these do not have the steep valve angles.

As you can tell from Paul's picture, they have an 87-88 cc chamber.

5. Stage 9 Bastard Pro Stock heads were the same as the above 17* head, but they added the extra lugs for the 18 bolt pattern. So this was the first introduction of the 18 bolt pattern. They were not drilled however. There were a couple of solid sets made for Keith Dyer in Texas who ran blown alcohol. In total there were about 5 or 6 sets made, the rest having water jackets.

6. Next up, Steve Schmidt in Indy advised that they change the valve angles and try a 14* X 4* intake and a 4* X 3* exhaust, which they did. These heads (Stage 10) still had the long outside head bolt boss, and tall exhaust port. They were more of an oval shaped port, and intake #1 was turned/leaned towards intake #2, likewise intake # 4 was turned/leaned towards intake #3. They were grouping the intake ports for better carb alignment under the two Dominators. I don't know how many sets were made.

7. Stage 11 was the same as above, but they tried a tunnel port version, with the pushrod tube in the intake. One set was made.

8. Stage 12, called the "Sobczak head" by Rick, because Dave Sobczak set NHRA records with this head. This is the head pictured by Lem in the above photos and is the last generation of the TFS Bastard Pro Stock heads. The valve angles were changed again, and they used an intake angle of 11* X - 1.5*, (yes, that's negative 1.5* cant), and the exhaust angle was 3* X 4*. The exhaust face was cut at the outside edge of the valve cover and had the low outside bolts. The bolt boss is 2.5" tall. This design was to improve the manifold alignment and to duplicate the "good" port on the Eicke heads. They made about 6 sets. One set for Bob Glidden which was later on bought back, one for Steve Schmidt, one for your man Tim,,,Ralph Ferra in Mass., one set for Subczak, which later on Bryan Matthews in south Georgia bought that entire engine. As of now Lem has a set and Rick thinks there's still a set at Summit/TFS. The drawings are at TFS also. Remember that all this work was done years ago, and IMO the heads were ahead of their time.

What made the bastard Pro Stock Ford head obsolete?

Back in the late 70's & early 80's, we didn't have much for the BB Ford racers, in the cylinder head department, other than the Ford Boss 429 Hemi head and derivatives of it. That's why I often say that we've never had it so good, in terms of cylinder head choices, as we do now.

Then along in the early 80's came Mike and Rick Smith, who founded Trick Flow Specialities. They bleed Ford Blue period! They developed the A-460 heads and then versions of the A-460 heads evolved into the bastard Pro Stock heads we've been speaking of. We need to be thankful for the Smith brothers efforts. As Lem said, it was in the late 80's and early 90's that the development of the bastard Pro Stock heads took place. In addition to hard work on the Smith brothers part, guys like Louie Sauli, Lem Evans & Steve Schmidt all chipped in and helped out in one fashion or another.

Bob Glidden was Rick's idol and Rick was hopeful that one day Bob would be running a set of his pro stock heads. When the opportunity came Bob got a set, but refused to run them. What can I say, other than politics, ego, money and maybe some other factors might have influenced his decision. If you remember, in the late 80's/early 90's Thunderbird days, there were egos/issues/politics in regards to Bob G. vs. Larry Widmer, parts offerings in the SVO catalog and Hemi heads etc. You can Google search Endyn and "The Old One" for info on that.

One thing I forgot to mention about the bastard Pro Stock heads, is that you have to assemble the spring package after you bolt the heads on the engine. In other words like the Olds pro stock head, and other heads with a lot of cant angle, the intake valve spring leans out and over the top row of head bolts, so the deal is you put the valves in with a small diameter light tension spring, then bolt the heads on, then put air into the cylinders and proceed to install your real valve springs.

In regards to the bore centerline dimensions. The BB Mopar is 4.800", the BB Chevy is 4.840" and the 429/460 BB Ford is 4.900" (Note; Fords had this 4.900" dimension all the way back to the 383/430/462 MEL engines). In the early 90's Mopar figured out they could bigger valves in their wedge headed pro stock engines, if they put the heads on a bigger bore space engine. They also realized a bunch of other advantages that the GM block had over their true Mopar blocks, thus they started borrowing GM's DRCE Gen 1 block and assigned it a part number.

Then GM realized the advantages of the Ford dimension of 4.900" so they cast the DRCE Gen 2 block and used a 4.900" bore centerline spacing along with other things like the +.400" raised cam, Ford roller cam bearings etc. Then NHRA said whoa, we're stopping here at 4.900" because Ford was already 5.000" with Jon Kaase's IHRA engines and they asked NHRA for permission to go to 5.000", which they did not get.

The TFS/Ford Motorsports bastard Pro Stock wedge head was not outdated by GM/Olds/DRCE at this time (mid 90's). IMO the Olds head is related to it. The answer is, more or less that no one continued to develop things. It was a money losing project for Rick and Mike Smith, and it needed the full support of Bob Glidden and also Ford. In the end things just sorted died a slow death.

Ford B-460 Bastard Head Flow Numbers

Courtesy of Charlie Evans

Stage 8, 17* head. Flowed tested in April of 2002.

2.380" intake valve, 1.880" exhaust valve.

.200=159/130
.300=250/178
.400=335/226
.500=405/272
.600=447/313
.700=473/338
.800=484/353
.850=487/358
.900=490/363

Ford E-Heads

General Information

Courtesy of Randy Malik

The "E's" can only be bought bare when new; the seats and guides are in a seperate bag.
They have a completely different chamber and I think the valve angles mimmik the DRCE Olds head.
They also have their own distinct head bolt pattern.

The Blue Thunder "THOR" head is a cross between the "C" and "E" head designs.

Courtesy of Charlie Evans

I have worked with the E-460 heads some. They flow better than the C-460 heads, as they should, because they are the Ford Pro Stock head. Of course part of the reason is because of the steeper valve angles used in these high end, high lift heads.

As Randy said, they have a different and specific bolt pattern, intended for the short deck Pro Stock blocks. I'm sure that a person could redrill either blocks, heads, or both, in order to make everything work on a A-460 block, but to me that seems like a lot of trouble.

If you want to step up from a C-460 head, to a better/bigger wedge design head, and still use a conventional bolt pattern block, then there is two choices. Either the Profiler #205 heads, or the B.T. Thor heads. I've done a few sets of Profiler heads, and I'm really liking them. They have a 420 cc intake port, and the flow numbers I'm getting out of them are better (IMO), than the flow numbers I'm seeing posted for either the 408 cc Thor head, or the 440 cc Thor head. I'd say they are in between the 440 cc Thor head and the 470 cc Thor head, but yet they're still a smaller 420 cc port.

E-460 Exhaust Flange Angle

The exhaust flange is 90 degrees to the deck surface

E-Head Flow Numbers

Courtesy of Charlie Evans

These are intake flow numbers from our flow bench and were flowed back during the late summer of 2007.

Set # 1

2.520" intake valve, on a 4.625" bore

.300=248
.400=340
.500=417
.600=483
.700=521
.800=540
.850=548
.900=550
.950=552
1.00=557

Set # 2

2.520" intake valve, on a 4.625" bore

.300=240
.400=325
.500=408
.600=481
.700=525
.800=555
.850=564
.900=571
.950=573
1.00=571

Hemi Heads

History On The Hemi Heads

Courtesy of Alan Root

Ford produced the original hemi heads in 1969 and 1970.

Alan Root did the orginal A-441 hemi heads between 1983 and 1995. These heads the same exact valve angles as the original Ford Boss head from 1969. There was basically only one version of that.

The originally developed new version of the hemi head incorporated provisions to accomodate an 18 head bolt pattern. Some of the early heads actually had the 18 head bolt pattern, but the part evolved and it was determined they weren't necessary.

Nick Arias and Alan Root were partners for a couple of years in Arias Root Engineering, dba AR Inc. Nick Arias owned a pattern shop that developed his casting tooling for his numerous projects. Tom Roberts was Nick Arias's head pattern maker. Tom Roberts later left Nick Arias and started his own shop.

After Alan Root bought out Nick Arias interest in AR Inc., Nick Arias had Tom Roberts duplicate all of the tooling for the Boss 429 engine.

By 1986 there were two identical sets of tools to cast Boss 429 engines. One was owned by Alan Root and one owned by Nick Arias. Nick Arias later sold his patterns to Chuck Seyler who then sold them to Carroll Carter. Alan Root patterns were sold to Trick Flow in 1995. Alan Root is no longer involved in the manufacture of any of the AR/Arias style hemi heads or blocks.

Ford hasn't carried the B-441 hemi heads for years now nor any of the hemi heads for that matter. Ed Lyons was the last advocate for the hemi heads, and when he left, the program went out the door.

In 1996, Tom Roberts did 3 new versions of the head:

The B-441-A was intended for use in NHRA Pro-Stock. Bob Glidden was actually involved with Tom Roberts in the development of that part.

The B-441-B head was designed to be a 4.900" bore center head for large displacement engines (700 CID and up).

The B-441-C head was the 5.000" bore center part intended for use in IHRA Pro-Stock.

The parts were cast in the greater Los Angeles area and were machined at Alan Root's facility. Tom Roberts sold his patterns to Carroll Carter, dba C & C.

The "street" hemi heads C & C has are based on the orginal AR Inc. parts made in the 80's and 90's. The heads are cast and machined in the Los Angeles area. Alan Root is involved with machining the heads.

The new race heads C & C has had some port changes.

Anything Boss 429 related can be purchased from C & C directly. C & C has the components that used to be available through RDI.

Link history was taken from: http://www.network54.com/Forum/threa...eid=1122351258

High Flow Dynamics Aluminum Pentroof Hemi Heads

Courtesy of Paul Kane

I just wish to clarify that the cylinder head package offered through High Flow Dynamics is not a copy / replica / recreation, etc. of the Boss 429 head or any other hemi head on the market for the Ford. Ours is a unique design unto itself for the 429/460, and has absolutely no parts interchangeability with any of the other Ford hemi head manufactures, whether they be OEM or aftermarket.



These heads are not something to be compared to such as an A460 head, EX514, etc., but are more along the lines of Alan Johnson, Keith Black or Bran Anderson-ish drag racing heads. This is not a water jacketed head (was never intended to be), although we are evaluating the feasibility of adding this feature. At this time, there have been produced only in billet form, although we now have a pattern that we feel is in it's final adjustment and will enable casting production, should we move that direction. These heads don't have the Boss 429 oiling like most of the other Boss-style hemi heads (which make the heads more suitable for the C9AE Boss 429 block only). Instead, they are designed around / meant to fit the 429/460 passenger car blocks as well as the A460 blocks, Eliminator, etc.

Note the following features:
injection nozzles at the intake bowls
the rocker shaft design.
8 plug head
Head is 6061 and the rockers are 7075.
Oiling is through the shafts via the pressure feed at the rear of the block.
Standard oil drainback

Jon Kasse Hemi Heads

Courtesy of Jon Kaase

Well, after the seminar, it's safe to say the word's out. We are indeed making original type Boss 429 heads, manifolds, valve covers and rockers.

This project started in October, but I have a 30 year history with these engines and the street/NASCAR head shortcommings. By the end of my 600 mile trip home from the Enginemasters, I had a solid plan for fixing all the problems with these parts. When I found how much the stock heads were selling for, I was even more determined to go through with this venture.

As of now, we have done all the improvements to the heads as well as dyno testing. The patterns for casting are in the works and at the halfway point. We have a running single plane manifold finished and it will follow the head at the pattern shop. After that, the valve covers.

We are trying to make the heads stronger and more user friendly. The biggest problem with the original boss 429 heads, is the strength and design of the casting. If you were to cut one in half, you wouldn't believe it. The deck is real thin, as is the chamber. We used to race these engines and the heads would stand no abuse at all. A little detonation and it would push the chambers in so bad that there would be light showing through the exhaust seats, and wouldn't even start again.

We are designing a stronger casting that is much thicker. It looks as close to the stock head as we can make it. The stock porting wasn't that bad. It just needed a few tune ups here and there. The exhaust port is a little smaller than a stock port. The intake is about the same voulme. The entry is the stock size, the bowl smaller and the short turn is bigger. I have no way of knowing how much more power these heads make over completely stock. Just guessing, maybe 50 to 75 on a 460-514 engine.
The new heads will fit on a stock 429-460 block with wedge type head gaskets and oil drains. We have designed our own rockers for these heads. They fit under the stock valve covers, and will be much cheaper than any of the aftermarket boss rockers out there.

Here are some of the improvements we've made:

1) The deck is much thicker, typical of a modern race head
2) This head will be able to use a Fel-Pro 1018 stock, unmodified head gasket or similar wedge 460 gasket
3) The head will fit any stock, unmodified 429-460 block. it uses the stock wedge oil drain holes. It oils the rockers through the pushrods.
4) The chambers are filled in for about 79-80 cc's. This will give us 10:1-11:1 with a flat top piston in a 466/521". (stock heads need a dome for any type of compression)
5) The heads look exactly like the stock heads from the outside.
6) The porting is far better than the stock heads.
7) They use .250" long, 11/32", BBC valves.
8 ) We are making rockers that improve the geometry and allow for no block grinding. (For exhaust pushrod clearance)
9) The valve covers look exactly like stock.
10) The header and intake manifold layout and interchange is exactly stock.

This is the street head that I welded up and have been testing with. We polished it up for the seminar last weekend. It is on the engine now and should run tomorrow.

At this point, our 466" ( the one that was on the cover of Enginemasters Magazine with P-51 heads) made 801 HP. this was with 9.8:1 compression, and 256 degree roller cam. We will be running these heads on our 521" motor by Tues. It has 10.9:1 and a little more cam. That engine always makes 800-810HP with the P-51, 750-770HP with Ford's SCJ's. I will be posting dyno results at night.

Kaase/Boss 429 head test #1

I had hoped to run our 521" test motor with the prototype Boss 429 heads today. We had a setback and had to wait for parts. The stock truck rods we've been running since 2000 finally are starting to scare me. I noticed yesterday that the deck clearance looked tilted. A quick check showed .020" tilt from front to rear of the flat top piston. We disassembled it and put the rods on a Sullen alignment gage. They were indeed bent (pin end bent sideways). I guess 7 years of 800HP could do that. I'm trying to find a set of Eagle or Scat 2 1/2" bearing, 6.605" rods in the Atlanta area now. If we can find some in the morning (Summit or BCI) we may have it running tomorrow night. Since the 466 made 801HP with 9.8 compression, I have high hopes for the 521 with 10.9. I plan to try a hydraulic roller in this engine later. I also am making another single plane intake, only lower carb height. We also have a stock street manifold to try.

All the rockers are different than the stock rockers. I looked real hard at making repo rockers and machining the heads just like stock, but the stock stuff really blows and I didn't want to follow the old design. I don't like offsets if at all possible, espically with narrow bushings or rollers.

The intake we will be using is a 1.650" pivot length. Stock is much shorter, which as you know plays havoc with high lift and valve bounce. We used to race the stock NASCAR rockers and the seat wear was unreal. When we went to Jesels, the seat wear went away. Also, the exhaust rockers are longer, to help with getting the ex. pushrod away from the deck and head gasket. That wouldn't be so bad; you could grind notches in the block and gasket for the pushrod, but there are 2 water holes in the deck that come within 1/8" of the finish grind mark. You know there would be trouble with this. So we engineered the exhaust rockers to be more fool proof, and not require any grinding on the block.

Kaase/Boss 429 head test #2

We didn't quite get it running tonight. We did get it together and pushed into the dyno room. We found a set of Eagle rods at BCI in Atlanta. I should add that they were much cheaper than Summit's price, a few miles south. I had to bush them down for .990 pins. I hope to run it a lot tomorrow.

Kaase/Boss 429 head test #3

Link to dyno results: http://www.460ford.com/viewtopic.php?t=20447

On the long test (2500 to 6600), I stopped before peak power. That was an Enginemasters test. After the Enginemasters, I have no fear of choking one down to 2500. You can see it still has pretty good poop down low. If it were a real Enginemasters entry, it would have 15 degrees less cam.

Specs:

block--------------stock 460
bore---------------4.390
stroke-------------4.300
crank--------------cast iron Motorsport, 2.500" rods
rods---------------eagle CRS 6605 F3D
pistons-------------Diamond flat top
compression------10.9
head cc------------84
carb----------------BG king Demon 1150
cam----------------Comp Roller 273-280 110* .457 lobe

This is the same old short block we have been testing with since 2000. We even did all the original SCJ prototype head testing with it. The heads are our prototype Boss Hemi that we are going to be making. Pix on other thread. It has the same valve spring that we install on the P-51 roller heads. (Manley 221243 dual, 1.550") Same retainers also (steel Comp) We ran it to 7500 with no problem.

We are changing the cam to a Comp hyd. roller for tomorrow. It's a 246* , 110CL .360 lobe .595 lift.

You can usually figure losing about 10 HP on the 600 vs 300 sweep.

The P-51's made a best of 810, Ford Motorsport SCJ's made 775, and the hemi's made 910. All on the same block with the same cam. The hemi did have different pistons. All were about 10.9 compression.

Kaase/Boss head test #4

Link to dyno results: http://www.460ford.com/viewtopic.php?t=20482

We had a little trouble trying the Hyd. Roller cam. This is the first dyno run. The next was 20 worse. Didn't know why. Then I started it off at 2500. The low numbers were real good, 600 ft lbs by 3100rpm. Upper numbers were 50 worse. A check of the valve train revealed one exhaust rocker that had about .400 lash. The hyd lifter was collapsed all the way and stuck there. It had quite a bit of valve spring pressure, went to 6900 before float. One other thing it could have been. That side has lifter bushings with .025" oil holes. May have been restricted too much. We have seen times when this much spring pressure turned more rpm but hurt the power 20 all the way up. Next time we run this hyd roller, I will use weaker beehive springs and open up the oil holes to the lifters. We changed the cam back to the original roller and I am working on the intake manifold to run tomorrow. The Hyd roller cam was a Comp. 248-254, .360/.345, 110cl. .620"-.595"
.
Kaase/Boss head test #5

Link to dyno results: http://www.460ford.com/viewtopic.php?t=20520

Today the 521 was tested again with the 273-280 cam and intake manifold work. The cam was installed 4* ahead of the first tests. The intake manifold is the prototype that was used in all testing. The difference today was I reduced the exit size of the ports. They were ported to aprox. 2.300" round, like the head port. Last night I epoxied them up and today re-ported them to 2.125" round. The epoxy tapers to 0 about 2" in. The engine had about 10 ft/lbs more TQ, peak power was about the same. I ran it low (2500-6500) and it was a little better than test #3.

Kaase/Boss head test#6

Link to dyno results: http://www.460ford.com/viewtopic.php?t=22965

I have been doing lots of testing with the Boss headed 521". Mostly cam & manifold work. It usually makes 890-905HP @ 7000. This weekend we built up a 429" short block. (I was balancing the crank and honing the block yesterday morning) The chambers were bigger than I remembered, 90cc. So the 521 was really at 10.4 compression, not 10.9. The 429 needed a .080" flat dome to get 10.4.
This engine has a stock 429 cast crank, .010-.010, stock 2-bolt block, a Comp 252-252@ .050 solid roller cam, and our prototype Boss Hemi heads and intake. We used Eagle 6.605 rods and Diamond pistons with 1/16, 1/16, and 3/16 rings.
I have never dyno tested a 429 sized engine. I figured with the 3.59" stroke it would be pretty lame down low.

I don't have the dyno sheets here at home, so this is what I remember.
Peak torque was around 630 Ft/Lbs. It would take a load at 2400 with no problem. I don't think it was ever under 500 Ft/Lbs. Imagine how good it would be with 20 degrees more cam and 2 points of compression.
This is a really fun project to work on. I like the fact that it will make great power with very little camshaft. It has plenty of bottom end, no matter what size stroke is in it. All the testing done to this
point has been with streetable compression. (10.4 Max)
Next week I will be testing different valve sizes. Right now we are at 2.300 and 1.900.

Kaase/Boss head test#7

One of my life's dreams is to be able to come in to work on the weekend and dyno this boss 429, and no one can tell me I can't. No phone, no people, no rules, no set plan. Just try whatever comes to mind.
Most of the testing has been done with either a 521", or just this week, a 429 + .030, or 435". It seems that both sizes respond the same to whatever parts we try on them. The only difference in the two engines is the stroke, 3.59 vs. 4.3.
The best power for the 435 is 780 Hp, the 521 has 900HP. This weekend with the 435, I tried manifolds. We borrowed a NASCAR spyder type, single plane. With the same 4500 carb, it made a best of 700 HP @ 6500. 600 ft/lbs @ 5500. It was a little worse all the way from 2500 than our homemade prototype manifold. It is after all, 38 years old. Then I tried a stock passenger car intake, dual plane. It had to have a 850 carb, 4150 style with no spacer. The intake has 4 holes and no communication between sides. It made a best of 658@ 6500, 577 ft/lbs @ 5000. The numbers below 4000 RPM were better than the NASCAR intake, and mostly better than our intake.
With this combo of parts, the only thing different than a stock Boss 429 street engine, is the cam (252-252, .700"), and the head porting. I've always been told that the street cars didn't perform very well. I don't know what was holding them back, but I believe this one would kick ass!

How do these heads compare with the A-460/ TFS? I think on most size engines, they would be a little better. Our 521 with 10.4 compression makes 900. A 521 with A-460 heads will make 900+, but I'm not sure it would with low compression and a 268/273 cam. We built a 600", TFS ,all new with 14 to 1, 288/300 cam CNC ported heads. All first class parts. It made 1030HP. We will be building a 600" for testing our heads and intake soon. I think it will make 1000 with street compression. We'll see.
One good thing is that the Boss carb height would be lower than the A-460 with the newer Trick Flow manifold. Also, with the newer A-460 manifold, it almost won't take a load down low. You would not be too impressed with any street action at the lower rpm's.

The 429 made 780 on the first hit. That is with the 252-252 roller. 106 lobe center, .430" lobe lift with 1.75 rockers. The same cam in the 521 took it from 900 to 837. Below 6000, it was the same or better. We had been running a 269-273, 107, .457" lobe in the 521. I never ran the bigger cam in the 429. The dual plane intake was from a stock boss 429 street car.

Boss 429 Replacement Cylinder Head

We (IDT) are a distributor for the Boss 429 cylinder head that was displayed at the Columbus swap meet. Awhile ago, we began developing a relationship with the person who built the cylinder head tooling. At the same time I knew that there were other people in the Detroit area that were working on other Boss 429 hardware including Eric, which many of you know. The group of us sat down and agreed to work together on compatible hardware. The cylinder head has been updated with improvements in casting, machining and hardware. Currently the intake and exhaust ports are similar to the production design. Newer castings will be available with revised intake, exhaust ports and combustion chambers. In the future, the heads will be available with CNC ports and chambers. The current design cylinder heads have a 2.400" intake valve and a 1.900" exhaust valve. The head is machined for rocker shaft oiling which will work with Eric's rocker arm. T&D also offers a roller Boss 429 rocker arm that oils the rocker arm through the center of the push rod. The cylinder head is not machined for "O" rings so a conventional head gasket can be used. The head can ordered machined for "O" rings.

The Boss 429 Replacement Cylinder head stock is stock looking in appearance. The factory production casting issues have been corrected (i.e. combustion chamber, spring seats, and wall thicknesses). Currently cylinder heads are being machined with all factory machining features. This includes the oil hole gun drilling that feeds the rocker arms as the original Boss 429 cylinder head. Eric from Diamond (EFD) in a previous post discussed his rocker arm which will fit these cylinder heads. By mid summer a CNCed port and chamber head will be available. Currently the cylinder head is set up for a 2.400" intake valve; 1.900" exhaust valve. These cylinder heads can be ordered through Eric (EFD), ET Performance and IDT.

The head seen at the 2008 spring Columbus meet is a head that is an exact replica of the original Boss 429 casting, but with many improvements.

1. much thicker decks and chambers, which are reinforced inside casting.
2. No "O" rings - can use modern head gaskets
3. Thicker bolt bosses' in the casting (no cracking when you tq the head bolts)
4. 1pc. bronze 11/32 giudes, that are machined concentric to the valve seats (the factory ones weren't)
5. Larger spring cup/pad o.d. for 1.625" springs
6. Quench style chamber - blended and radiused in casting - no machined chambers
7. Factory oiling of the rockerarms (can use OEM forged pieces if you have them)
8. Uses factory or repro valve cover
9. Oil drainbacks are in factory Boss location - installation on to a wedge or truck block will require extrenal drainbacks, and pressure oil lines from the valley to oil the rockers thru the head. (done it dozens of times)
10. Fully CNC machined - seats & giudes installed

Since the IDT guys have nicely leaked my rocker project to the forum, I'm posting pics of what my new rockers will look like, so that all can see. This has been a real undertaking to get them to this point, but I am really proud of them, and I hope they are well receiced. Would like feedback from all who care to, as I am just about ready to go to the foundry and have the first run made. Any mistakes or huge issues need to be caught now, not after they're made....so I'm listening, and now's your chance to chime in.

As far as the rockers go, I, Eric, just finished an actual mock-up of the sample rockers on a real engine, to plot actual valve lift vs. lobe lift, and verify the rockers' ratios. What I found was pretty amazing.

The ratios come out at 1:75 for both rockers at max lift, (as I planned) but tracking actual valve lift every 10 degrees from zero lobe lift, to max lobe lift showed me that rocker ratios are just an approximation. The ratio, and resulting valve movement from zero to 50 deg. of crank rotation was way over 1:75 to 1, as the actual valve movement during it's initial jerk curve showed a ratio as high as 5 to 1, but quickly came into the 1.9 range by 60 degrees, and then settled into a nice 1.79-1.76 ratio by 100 deg. of rotation, and was pretty constant at 1:75 to full lobe lift at 180 deg. opposite of zero lobe.

Bottom line, for a .400" lobe, I got .700" at the valve on both rockers, which is the important part.

Watching what was happening at the valve during that 1st 50 degrees of crank rotation, when the roller wheel was just taking up the lobe ramp was pretty startling though. Never tracked how quickly the valve actually comes off the seat before today, now I have a new respect for the term "aggressive”.

Features are:

1. Bolt down in factory location - no machine work of head - or any mods required. Will fit all OEM heads and the new (IDT) head

2. Pressure/bushing oiled rockershafts just like the factory rockers - no needle bearings - very reliable

3. Uses modern ball/ball pushrods (now use can use 7/16 dia) - adjuster gets oil from lifters thru pushrods. Body/shaft oils thru rocker stands.

4. Goes under factory or repro valve cover - no modifications

5. Uses factory geometry - factory stand height - 1.75 ratio – both

6. Steel "I" beam construction, roller tip (both)

7. Alum. rockerstand, with 3rd hole to pin stand to head for extra stability. Steel stand optional. Only 6 moving parts.

8. Clears 1.625" dia. springs - no problem - no grinding of the body

More info to follow as the project goes forward, and for updates in the near future, click:

http://www.shotgunhemiparts.com/

Anyone can contact me, Eric, at esimone@comcast.net

Hemi Head Flow Numbers

Stock Hemi Heads

Courtesy of Charlie Evans

2.282 x 1.90

These are unported factory original heads, with the original valves and a 30 degree seat angle on the intakes and a 45 degree seat angle on the exhausts, after a valve job.

.100=87/56
.200=154/110
.300=201/158
.400=252/190
.500=297/212
.600=330/226
.700=348/237
.800=351/246

Courtesy of 747JETMECH

2.36 x 1.960

Ported

.100=122/73
.200=220/159
.300=285/196
.400=360/230
.500=405/257
.600=436/270
.700=433/282
.800=419/291

Thor Head Flow Numbers

Courtesy of Charlie Evans

Gen. 2 Head

Lift Intake/Exhaust: Average of 4 ports, exhaust w/o a test pipe.

.200=161/125
.300=240/176
.400=321/233
.500=399/300
.600=460/335
.700=495/352
.800=519/361
.900=530/368
1.000=540/372

could you give me a good hp and torque number for a 3750 lb truck with a 3.20 gear and a c-6 automatic with a stock torque converter just let me know which engine to build form your chart that you made for 460 engines thanks WR

I just wanted to say thanks for putting all of this info together. I have referred to various sections at least a dozen times.

I am wondering if there is additional data available for the Thor and Profiler heads that could be incorporated here?

Edit

really great read on all the bbf heads, thanks for all the effort that was put in to this, there is a lot of info to a lot of questions

The new AFR 460 heads will move some things around a bit guaranteed!

Jetman wrote:The new AFR 460 heads will move some things around a bit guaranteed!

Hard to guarantee until more folks get their hands on them...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecUDDydl0xs