Re: Improved IRON replacement CJ head...?

Lem Evans February 20th 2013, 8:40 pm

dfree383 wrote:an Iron P-51 head would be cool for the puller guys.

The chevy guys will soon find out about the valve angles and they wil get outlawed.

dfree383 February 20th 2013, 10:49 pm

HorsinAround wrote:
dfree383 wrote:an Iron P-51 head would be cool for the puller guys.

Sorry, but With Kasse himself telling me that the P-51's would max out in the mid 800s hp range on a 470 motor, that tells me that if a new head is going to be designed, then it needs to be closer in capability to the a460.

[rant on] IMHO, the iron head rule needs to disappear in pulling. It started as a way to have an affordable entry level class, but has evolved so far beyond that now it is more cost effective to go with aluminum and there are so many more choices out there. The insistance on staying with iron is simply stupid. [rant off]

What do you think a typical A460 head will do on a 470?

Bret Powell February 20th 2013, 11:06 pm

dfree383 wrote:
HorsinAround wrote:
dfree383 wrote:an Iron P-51 head would be cool for the puller guys.

Sorry, but With Kasse himself telling me that the P-51's would max out in the mid 800s hp range on a 470 motor, that tells me that if a new head is going to be designed, then it needs to be closer in capability to the a460.

[rant on] IMHO, the iron head rule needs to disappear in pulling. It started as a way to have an affordable entry level class, but has evolved so far beyond that now it is more cost effective to go with aluminum and there are so many more choices out there. The insistance on staying with iron is simply stupid. [rant off]

What do you think a typical A460 head will do on a 470?

I think an all out effort A head deal could make a 1000 horse on a 470 using a single carb without a tunnel ram, it would not be cheap and might take a bit of dyno experimentation. It could be done. Is Kaase saying that the P-51s are that short of the D0OE-R head's capabilities?

Bret Powell February 20th 2013, 11:11 pm

rmcomprandy wrote:

I know exactly where you are coming from Bret.
This has to be a replacement CJ head to please MOST everybody, (manufacturers want as large a base market area as they can have for sales), so a bunch of compromises are necessary.
The prototype head is an A429 aluminum head as modification is much easier than a cast iron head core.

1. The exhaust port is slightly smaller but in the same location. The flange bolt pattern is raised only .125" to allow both a regular header flange and a CJ header flange to fit.

2. The spark plug is angled differently and moved in the chamber toward the exhaust side to allow a more complete burn and less timing needed to accomplish power.

3. The chamber shape is pretty much the same as it was to allow the head to replace a CJ in street type and other stock restoration type applications.

4. The intake valve is the same angle as an A460 valve, (13 x 5), however, the "pierce point" is about .050" toward the exhaust side so a big block Chevy notch location is correct. This allows an A460 intake valve location piston to be used as well.

5. The exhaust valve is in the same location in the chamber as before however, the "pierce point" is move slightly because the angles are now 14 x 2 degrees. It also allows considerable more space between the valves on the seat and will not become a problem with "valve to valve" clearance with large camshafts.

6. The intake valve itself is a .250" long big block Chevy with an 11/32" stem. The intake spring seat is moved higher to allow for extra ROOF porting.

7. ALL the flanges and port locations at the flanges are in the stock OEM location.

One cylinder in the head is done and the head is "out" getting the other 3 cylinders to match.

Randy, just don't make the exhaust port an inch wide and two inches tall (practically) like the stock CJ ex. port.

Bret

HorsinAround February 21st 2013, 12:22 am

Bret Powell wrote:
dfree383 wrote:
HorsinAround wrote:
dfree383 wrote:an Iron P-51 head would be cool for the puller guys.

Sorry, but With Kasse himself telling me that the P-51's would max out in the mid 800s hp range on a 470 motor, that tells me that if a new head is going to be designed, then it needs to be closer in capability to the a460.

[rant on] IMHO, the iron head rule needs to disappear in pulling. It started as a way to have an affordable entry level class, but has evolved so far beyond that now it is more cost effective to go with aluminum and there are so many more choices out there. The insistance on staying with iron is simply stupid. [rant off]

What do you think a typical A460 head will do on a 470?

I think an all out effort A head deal could make a 1000 horse on a 470 using a single carb without a tunnel ram, it would not be cheap and might take a bit of dyno experimentation. It could be done. Is Kaase saying that the P-51s are that short of the D0OE-R head's capabilities?

Yup, A460 headed max effort deal 1000+. There was one for sale a little while back on here (or Racingjunk) that was an ex514 deal that Kaase built that supposedly made over 1000, so the A460 should be right there or a little more.
this was a couple years ago that I called and talked to Jon, but that was his comment. It was when our club was researching aluminum head capabilities. as we were looking to allow aluminum in but not at the expense of the guys that already spent their wad on iron.

HorsinAround February 21st 2013, 12:24 am

Brett, remember that just a few years ago, most experts was saying that the D0OE-R heads were max'd out in the 820-840 hp range on a 470ci pulling motor. I know you are getting way more than that, but most pullers/racers don't have the luxury of zero labor costs and a full engine machine shop and dyno at our disposal and the time to play. Cool

rmcomprandy February 21st 2013, 11:25 am

Lem Evans wrote:
dfree383 wrote:an Iron P-51 head would be cool for the puller guys.

The chevy guys will soon find out about the valve angles and they wil get outlawed.

Then the Chevy guys will be outlawing their own aftermarket heads as well.
The valve angles on these heads are moved ONLY within the 2 degree rule which most associations have because the CHEVY aftermarket heads have the intake angle changed those 2 degrees.

The rules writers are usually in the Chevy sandbox so, we'll play by their rules.

EDIT: The SCJ's/P-51's are a bunch more than 2 degrees.

Lem Evans February 21st 2013, 12:12 pm

The P51 are moved more than 2*

kjett February 21st 2013, 12:17 pm

dfree383 wrote:
HorsinAround wrote:
dfree383 wrote:an Iron P-51 head would be cool for the puller guys.

Sorry, but With Kasse himself telling me that the P-51's would max out in the mid 800s hp range on a 470 motor, that tells me that if a new head is going to be designed, then it needs to be closer in capability to the a460.

[rant on] IMHO, the iron head rule needs to disappear in pulling. It started as a way to have an affordable entry level class, but has evolved so far beyond that now it is more cost effective to go with aluminum and there are so many more choices out there. The insistance on staying with iron is simply stupid. [rant off]

What do you think a typical A460 head will do on a 470?

Don't know but I will tell you what a TFS 340 A head will do on a 488ci deal pretty soon Wink

rmcomprandy March 3rd 2013, 11:35 am

kjett wrote:
dfree383 wrote:

What do you think a typical A460 head will do on a 470?

Don't know but I will tell you what a TFS 340 A head will do on a 488ci deal pretty soon

I don't think there was ever any question that an "A" head would be more powerful. This is totally about something else.

Gary Blair March 5th 2013, 8:36 pm

Just a few thoughts:

Mary a little A-460, Blue Thunder and XE 429/1st gen A-429.

2.35 int valve capability

Raised valve cover rail +.300 like the BT. Raise the intake port roof .250.

Square up the roof under the valve cover like the XE.

Assume 3.25 area primary choke (valve bowl)

Square up the intake port (XE) to tune push rod choke point ( needs to be larger than primary choke)

If they are giving the Chevy 2° on valve angles, just kick the exhaust around so it won't run into the intake valve

Dual exhaust bolt patterns CJ and C-460. Gives you an option for a wider port or leave it CJ if the rules won't allow.

Diggindeeper March 17th 2013, 8:23 am

I know this was not part of the question, what about an iron BOSS head?

I do think an iron CJ replacement is needed, one with improvements even better.
Not every pulling org. is so competitive that they are needed to compete but if the castings are offered reasonable enough I think they would be well received.

68formalGT March 24th 2013, 1:56 pm

HorsinAround wrote:
dfree383 wrote:an Iron P-51 head would be cool for the puller guys.

Sorry, but With Kasse himself telling me that the P-51's would max out in the mid 800s hp range on a 470 motor, that tells me that if a new head is going to be designed, then it needs to be closer in capability to the a460.

Is there a point where a certain head fits an engine cubic inch size better and is more appropriate to use for the application? If the P51s dont perform as well at 470 cubes when does it begin to shine? If you were limited in cubic inches for different classes is there a head design that could be made in iron to serve all these clases?

Bret Powell March 24th 2013, 2:20 pm

What this says is that the head is not adequate for large lift cams and high RPM. It is a good street head with too many limitations for serious RPM racing.

Bret

IDT-572 March 24th 2013, 2:45 pm

I talked to a company last week that was working with Kasse on a new OEM style cast iron head. Sounded promising.

rmcomprandy March 17th 2014, 12:50 am

rmcomprandy wrote:The distinct thing is that these projected heads will have the valves moved only within the 2 degree limit of production like most cast iron head rules read. They needed to do this so the cast iron Chevrolet aftermarket heads would be legal, (those intake valve angles are tilted from 26 degrees to 24).
Also, by moving the intake valve location slightly the "valve to valve" clearance will no longer present any problem at all to the installation of larger valves if wanted and using larger camshafts.

The heads in "Out of the box" form should perform simply like a normal CJ iron head however, it will be more conducive to being modified.

This prototype head is now completely finished and I will dyno compare it to a CJ head on a 455 cid BBF engine; (an engine size between a 429 and 460).
4.395" bore x 3.740" stroke - 11.25/1 compression ratio - A hydraulic flat tappet Lunati camshaft of 249/256@.050" & .653"/.631" valve lift, 950HP 4150 carb - Ported "Track Heat" TFS manifold - OEM 4x4 rear sump oil pan, (Because those are the spare parts I own and I am not buying anything else).

Runners are CJ and barely modified, only enough to simply match-up with the internal changes made so, it is bowl ported. The comparing CJ head will be bowl ported also and both have the same 45 degree competition valve job
1. 285cc intake port
2. 13.5 x 5 degree intake valve angles in the A460 valve head location.
3. 14 x 2 degree exhaust valve angles in the stock valve head location.
(because of the valve shift, combustion chambers needed to be 80cc and
there will be NO "valve to valve" problems with ANY long duration, .800"+ valve lift camshaft).
5. Intake valve spring seat has been raised .150" to accommodate further porting
6. Stock OEM Cobra Jet head guideplates and the rocker arm studs have been repositioned to still fit
with stock type rocker arms.
7. Exhaust flange BOLT PATTERN has been raised .125" but,
the ports remain in stock location and left small enough so, a NON-CJ header will somewhat fit.
8. Spark plug moved 1/2" toward the exhaust side of the chamber;
5/8" hex, 14mm, 3/4 reach gasketed or tapered seat full thread spark plugs can be used.

EDIT: "Out of the box" this stock appearing head needs to be slightly better than matching the CJ head however, it is MUCH more "modifyable" ... is that even a word?

supervel45 March 17th 2014, 2:16 am

That sounds like a really nice design you have. I like the non CJ header part, and the 80cc chambers alot. What will the compression work out to on a 429 single valve relief flattop, .010" in the hole with a .040" gasket? Looking foward to the Dyno numbers.

rmcomprandy March 24th 2014, 3:46 pm

The dynomometer results are finished, 6 complete runs were made with each type cylinder head. The best & worst run with each were discarded and the remaining 4 were averaged.

1. Ford motorsport A429 head with competition 45 degree valve job & bowl ported, 74cc chamber, (tried for a year and couldn't acquire an unmolested Iron CJ head), made the peak torque @ 4,700 RPM and peak horsepower was @ 5,700 RPM
2. Modified prototype A429 casting with competition 45 degree valve job & bowl ported, 80cc chamber; (there was NOT a cutter or "tootsie roll" of any kind ever in any of the port runners so, they were as the A429 with "out of the box" runners. Peak torque occurred @ 4,900 RPM and the horsepower peak was @6,200 RPM.
The changes were responsible for making the peak differences = 4% more peak torque and 11% more peak horsepower with the modified head. (with a 1/2 point less compression ratio and a SMALLER exhaust valve; 1.710" vs. 1.760"; both head versions had 2.250 intake valves).

3. The comparison then was made with completely ported FRPP aluminum SCJ heads with 50 degree intake valve job using 2.200" intake valves & 1.770" exhaust valves, 70cc chambers;
Torque peak number then occurred @4,800 RPM with another 3% increase while the horsepower increased another 13% more @ 6,500 RPM peak.
I wish I got to use untouched SCJ's but, these are what I had.

IDT-572 March 24th 2014, 3:47 pm

I have a set if you would like to dyno them.

rmcomprandy March 24th 2014, 3:54 pm

IDT-572 wrote: I have a set if you would like to dyno them.

I was on the dyno at Mike's, Thursday, Friday and Saturday but, I am not there anymore.

IDT-572 March 24th 2014, 3:55 pm

Well crap

rmcomprandy March 24th 2014, 8:56 pm

rmcomprandy wrote:The dynomometer results are finished, 6 complete runs were made with each type cylinder head. The best & worst run with each were discarded and the remaining 4 were averaged.

1. Ford motorsport A429 head with competition 45 degree valve job & bowl ported, 74cc chamber, (tried for a year and couldn't acquire an unmolested Iron CJ head), made the peak torque @ 4,700 RPM and peak horsepower was @ 5,700 RPM
2. Modified prototype A429 casting with competition 45 degree valve job & bowl ported, 80cc chamber; (there was NOT a cutter or "tootsie roll" of any kind ever in any of the port runners so, they were as the A429 with "out of the box" runners. Peak torque occurred @ 4,900 RPM and the horsepower peak was @6,200 RPM.
The changes were responsible for making the peak differences = 4% more peak torque and 11% more peak horsepower with the modified head. (with a 1/2 point less compression ratio and a SMALLER exhaust valve; 1.710" vs. 1.760"; both head versions had 2.250 intake valves).

3. The comparison then was made with completely ported FRPP aluminum SCJ heads with 50 degree intake valve job using 2.200" intake valves & 1.770" exhaust valves, 70cc chambers;
Torque peak number then occurred @4,800 RPM with another 3% increase while the horsepower increased another 13% more @ 6,500 RPM peak.
I wish I got to use untouched SCJ's but, these are what I had.

This engine was as close to resembling a normal street/strip high performance engine as I could make it with the parts I had available, right down to the 4150 carburetor and hydraulic flat tappet camshaft.

supervel45 March 24th 2014, 10:46 pm

Thanks for the Tests Randy. If I read the Data correctly the A429s picked up power 500rpm to peak, and the ASCJ's 800rpm to peak, from a semiported Cj iron with the same cam, and gained 11% and 13% resectivly over close to factory iron? Are you going to give out the actual HP/TQ numbers for those RPM's the pulls acheived, to satisfy curious minds?

rmcomprandy March 25th 2014, 8:58 am

supervel45 wrote:Thanks for the Tests Randy. If I read the Data correctly the A429s picked up power 500rpm to peak, and the ASCJ's 800rpm to peak, from a semiported Cj iron with the same cam, and gained 11% and 13% resectivly over close to factory iron? Are you going to give out the actual HP/TQ numbers for those RPM's the pulls acheived, to satisfy curious minds?

You are reading it wrong.

The bowl ported A429 was the original head tested and the greatly MODIFIED prototype made from an A429 raw casting, (with the A460 intake valve placement), advanced the power with OEM location ports and without porting the runners AT ALL.

The actual power numbers don't matter as different engines will show different power levels however, the percentages will always be the same.

This particular 455 cubic inch spare parts engine, (at the end of the dyno session with the ported SCJ heads), had a power level of 599 lb/ft of torque and 651 horsepower.

supervel45 March 25th 2014, 6:04 pm

Thanks for sharing the info and clarifing it for me Randy. Any thoughts on the 3.74" stroke Crankshaft. I know it was a spare parts engine, but I found that bore stroke combination interesting. I doubt it changed the powerband more than 100rpm's over a stock 3.86" stock crank? Glad you got some dyno time in.

Sponsored content