General consensus of Profiler over C-Heads!?!

I have NO experience with the Ford Profiler heads, I have a little bit of experience with the C heads. For those who have switched from C's to Profilers was it worth it? I know they claim more flow but they have raise ports and they are huge comparatively. From what I see they offer maybe 30 cfm more flow with a port that is over 50 cc bigger than the C heads I'm doing with smaller valves.

Chime in if you have advice good, bad or indifferent. Bret

Bret Powell wrote:I have NO experience with the Ford Profiler heads, I have a little bit of experience with the C heads. For those who have switched from C's to Profilers was it worth it? I know they claim more flow but they have raise ports and they are huge comparatively. From what I see they offer maybe 30 cfm more flow with a port that is over 50 cc bigger than the C heads I'm doing with smaller valves.

Chime in if you have advice good, bad or indifferent. Bret

In what condition...?
To be totally honest; that will probably depend upon the finished "C" heads.

The are big and need a real big engine IMO. I think the regular c460 stuff is more versatile.

Bret Powell wrote:I have NO experience with the Ford Profiler heads, I have a little bit of experience with the C heads. For those who have switched from C's to Profilers was it worth it? I know they claim more flow but they have raise ports and they are huge comparatively. From what I see they offer maybe 30 cfm more flow with a port that is over 50 cc bigger than the C heads I'm doing with smaller valves.

Chime in if you have advice good, bad or indifferent. Bret

If you'd care to say....how 'small' are you talking about for an intake valve?

Not too small, 2.425.

Bret

Bret Powell wrote:Not too small, 2.425.

Bret

 
   Keep working that deal on valve shape & valve job and a lot of that 30 cfm deal will start to melt away.

From my observations comparing the C head stuff to the Profiler 12* Hit Man heads, the C-heads have been way underrated for well... maybe since introduction.

My C-head program will be improving never-the-less!

Bret

My old C castings were about 525 cfm @ .900 lift. These were done a few years ago by Vance. Oakley is doing my new castings and they will be better. IMO the Profilers seem to be the better option if you wish to run moonshine for fuel. There is a guy who that I have raced against a few times with a big inch Profiler deal with a sheet metal intake and twin big boys on alky that runs real hard.

I was referring to Profiler 205's. The Hit Man is a different critter.

There again I hope I'm not confusing anyone as I did compare the BBF C-heads to the BB Chevy Profiler in that last post of mine.

Bret

What are you seeing for numbers out of the Hit Man's?

Bret Powell wrote:There again I hope I'm not confusing anyone as I did compare the BBF C-heads to the BB Chevy Profiler in that last post of mine.

Bret

Bret,

You confused me. My measurements on my CNC ported FRPP C-460 heads are a 385 cc runner. The Pro-Filer 205 Ford heads have a 420 cc runner. Part of that is because the port is +.200" higher, therefore a slightly longer runner due to the larger radius when viewed from the side.

Now the Pro-Filer Hitman heads, simply have a longer runner because they are a Chevy head and the pierce points are different. Again a greater volume if you are comparing the Hitman to the C-460.

But getting back to the CNC ported FRPP C-460 intake ports, compared to the Ford Pro-Filer 205 ported heads, that's 385 to 420, for a 35 cc difference, not the 50 cc difference you mentioned.

Bigger volume is a reflection of additional cross sectional area,,,only if the length of the runner stays the same.

Charlie

My first set I ported... the intakes cc'd less than 365 and flow more than two different sets of BBC Profilers that are here and were ported by a big name shop up to .900, beyond that the 12* heads just barely tweaked past on a few ports at 1.00" lift ... My customer likes these C-heads and the performance and preferred they be left alone. I'm doing another set of heads and motor and will push these a bit farther and see what happens. Unfortunately we are quite intake limited with the C-heads... or any Ford heads actually.

Bret

Bret Powell wrote:My first set I ported... the intakes cc'd less than 365 and flow more than two different sets of BBC Profilers that are here and were ported by a big name shop up to .900, beyond that the 12* heads just barely tweaked past on a few ports at 1.00" lift ...  My customer likes these C-heads and the performance and preferred they be left alone. I'm doing another set of heads and motor and will push these a bit farther and see what happens. Unfortunately we are quite intake limited with the C-heads... or any Ford heads actually.

Bret

So true...................

It's been my experience that the Pro-Filer 205 Ford heads outflow the Pro-Filer Hitman Chevy heads. We've ported and prepared both.

Charlie

Charlie,

How do they compare on the track? Or have you been able to make any comparisons?

Bret

badnotch wrote:
how does the thors compare to the c heads are they that much better ? nice power from a small motor -lol
 
 
I do not have enough info to give you a real good comparison yet but I would guess a lot of it would have to do with application, cui etc. Let me say that the c-heads stuff runs better than the dyno shows. I really think the acceleration rate on the c-head is pretty good. I am excited to see how this engine runs on the track and how tunable it is. Thanks
Oakley Motorsports
BBF VENDOR SPONSOR
 
Phillip's take on the subject.