C460 head engine build

Suggestions on a c460 head build I now have a new set of c460 heads!  Bare with just guides and seats installed and matching intake that has been worked a little to align the ports for runner alignment with small amount of epoxy in the upper corners.

Goal 4.90's in a 2500 lb 7.50 cert (full funny car cage)72 ford maverick door car naturally aspirated with Ron's injected Alky terminator system.
 
Car now weighs 2450 with me in it with a 532 stock block bushed lifter bores forged eagle 4.300 stroke 6.8 h beam rod TFS street head injected alky terminator system.  
So when we change to the aftermarket block c460 head and intake deal how much weight should I plan for in adding to the car?
How much power is needed to plan for to hit this E.T goal?  1000-1100HP?

I have always ran 4.300 forged eagle stuff and I currently have 3 of these cranks. One new in the box.  
So the obvious question is could one get this accomplished with a 572 (4.600 bore 4.3 stroke)?
If so what should one set the heads up to flow at for this power goal?  If not what would be the suggestions on the build?

The reason I am thinking this way is one could start with the 572 (4.3 stroke 6.8 rod) use the crank that I have and then if needed more power during a winter freshen up change to a 4.5 stroke crank and change to the 6.7 rod and use the same pistons correct and then be a 598?

I know I would want to run a 4.600 bore because of the c460 heads so that is kinda dictating the CI I would assume.

Also block questions the A460 is recommended to be 4.600 bore max and the eliminator is 4.700.  I know I have seen engine builds go over these numbers on builds but if you were buying a new block with the goals I have in mind what would the best option?

Thanks for the suggestions in advance (Lets have some fun and build something to spank some chebby guys and possibly chase some dragsters lol)

Adrian Way

"The reason I am thinking this way is one could start with the 572 (4.3 stroke 6.8 rod) use the crank that I have and then if needed more power during a winter freshen up change to a 4.5 stroke crank and change to the 6.7 rod and use the same pistons correct and then be a 598?"

Yep.

With 2.450" intake and 1.88" exh. the 4.560 bore will work too.

Why not just do the 598 to start with? Or even a 632? I wouldn't let 1 part dictate the build.

full boogie completion of the bare Heads is not an inexpensive proposition

Heads need to be ported to a good cross section for the combination. Airspeed in the port is way more important than air flow numbers. If the port is done right and properly sized, the flow numbers will be there. You'll need a big intake valve, size depending on the rpm you want to turn and the final displacement you choose. More stroke will demand more induction. When you get the final configuration, ports can be configured but I wouldn't have any work done on the heads till you decide on your combination. Once heads are done, contact Chris Straub for the cam. I'd be very interested in doing the heads and intake for you.

Build the largest displacement that you can afford!! A 632-650" inch motor would be killer in that car, and the Chevy boys will need to step up their game big time to run with it!!

Weak sister 632" C460 deal with sorry ass Lem Evans cam.

Lem,

No offense, but in that particular build you should have stepped up to an Albert Clark Bad Attitude Barbed Wire series camshaft. JMO

That kind of power would sure get it done in your Maverick!

Wow! The potential for this combo is great huh? That would be like adding another 400-500 HP over my current combo! I just ran the numbers through the calculator and 2500 lb and 1271 HP yields 4.70 @ 148.45 MPH!!!! Talk about heads up class potential huh and pretty much be dialing to chase them dragsters bracket racing lol.

D. Sea wrote:Lem,

No offense, but in that particular build you should have stepped up to an Albert Clark Bad Attitude Barbed Wire series camshaft.  JMO  

That kind of power would sure get it done in your Maverick!

Albert forever

away wrote:Wow! The potential for this combo is great huh?  That would be like adding another 400-500 HP over my current combo!  I just ran the numbers through the calculator and 2500 lb and 1271 HP yields 4.70 @ 148.45 MPH!!!!  Talk about heads up class potential huh and pretty much be dialing to chase them dragsters bracket racing lol.  

Personally, in such a light car, I wouldn't get carried away with all that stroke. You can keep the piston speed the same with a little smaller motor and a little more rpm, make as much power and get down the track even quicker.

Scott Foxwell wrote:

away wrote:Wow! The potential for this combo is great huh?  That would be like adding another 400-500 HP over my current combo!  I just ran the numbers through the calculator and 2500 lb and 1271 HP yields 4.70 @ 148.45 MPH!!!!  Talk about heads up class potential huh and pretty much be dialing to chase them dragsters bracket racing lol.  

Personally, in such a light car, I wouldn't get carried away with all that stroke. You can keep the piston speed the same with a little smaller motor and a little more rpm, make as much power and get down the track even quicker.

That was exactly my thinking as well. That's why I was throwing out other stroke combinations as well.

D. Sea wrote:Lem,

No offense, but in that particular build you should have stepped up to an Albert Clark Bad Attitude Barbed Wire series camshaft.  JMO  

That kind of power would sure get it done in your Maverick!

Up your ... Damon, that's a super secret grind that not anyone can use.

Albert Clark wrote:

D. Sea wrote:Lem,

No offense, but in that particular build you should have stepped up to an Albert Clark Bad Attitude Barbed Wire series camshaft.  JMO  

That kind of power would sure get it done in your Maverick!

Up your ... Damon, that's a super secret grind that not anyone can use.

It's ALIVE!!!!!!

D. Sea wrote:

Albert Clark wrote:

D. Sea wrote:Lem,

No offense, but in that particular build you should have stepped up to an Albert Clark Bad Attitude Barbed Wire series camshaft.  JMO  

That kind of power would sure get it done in your Maverick!

Up your ... Damon, that's a super secret grind that not anyone can use.

It's ALIVE!!!!!!

Scott Foxwell wrote:

away wrote:Wow! The potential for this combo is great huh?  That would be like adding another 400-500 HP over my current combo!  I just ran the numbers through the calculator and 2500 lb and 1271 HP yields 4.70 @ 148.45 MPH!!!!  Talk about heads up class potential huh and pretty much be dialing to chase them dragsters bracket racing lol.  

Personally, in such a light car, I wouldn't get carried away with all that stroke. You can keep the piston speed the same with a little smaller motor and a little more rpm, make as much power and get down the track even quicker.

Scott one reason is us Ford guys don't have intakes to get us to the rpm where the shorter stroke would make the same hp.

Single C manifold looks to be done at 7100-7200 rpm regardless.

IDT-572 wrote:

Scott Foxwell wrote:

away wrote:Wow! The potential for this combo is great huh?  That would be like adding another 400-500 HP over my current combo!  I just ran the numbers through the calculator and 2500 lb and 1271 HP yields 4.70 @ 148.45 MPH!!!!  Talk about heads up class potential huh and pretty much be dialing to chase them dragsters bracket racing lol.  

Personally, in such a light car, I wouldn't get carried away with all that stroke. You can keep the piston speed the same with a little smaller motor and a little more rpm, make as much power and get down the track even quicker.

Scott one reason is us Ford guys don't have intakes to get us to the rpm where the shorter stroke would make the same hp.

Single C manifold looks to be done at 7100-7200 rpm regardless.

71-1200 on what motor? ANY motor? I don't buy that.
That only means that the same intake will be even less effective on a bigger engine with more stroke. Stroke eats up induction faster than anything. Running a bigger engine with less rpm doesn't make sense to me as far as the manifold is concerned.

Scott Foxwell wrote:

IDT-572 wrote:

Scott Foxwell wrote:

away wrote:Wow! The potential for this combo is great huh?  That would be like adding another 400-500 HP over my current combo!  I just ran the numbers through the calculator and 2500 lb and 1271 HP yields 4.70 @ 148.45 MPH!!!!  Talk about heads up class potential huh and pretty much be dialing to chase them dragsters bracket racing lol.  

Personally, in such a light car, I wouldn't get carried away with all that stroke. You can keep the piston speed the same with a little smaller motor and a little more rpm, make as much power and get down the track even quicker.

Scott one reason is us Ford guys don't have intakes to get us to the rpm where the shorter stroke would make the same hp.

Single C manifold looks to be done at 7100-7200 rpm regardless.

71-1200 on what motor? ANY motor? I don't buy that.
That only means that the same intake will be even less effective on a bigger engine with more stroke. Stroke eats up induction faster than anything. Running a bigger engine with less rpm doesn't make sense to me as far as the manifold is concerned.

Scott,

I will say I haven't built a C headed engine, but I have seen several good pieces dyno'd and with 4.300 up to 4.750 stroke. What I have seen is the shorter stroke deal might get to 7400 with a good head and the 4.750 be at 7200 and approaching 7400 but not gaining hardly any hp.

This is with an unported C single plane manifold.

I feel like a different manifold will be required for a small inch C head engine to rpm high enough 7800+ to make the same or more power.

Most people don't go through the trouble to modify the intake to get there.

I'll be dynoing a 638" one in a month or so.....

I've seen several "max" effort modified ford manifolds recently

Rob's 632" engine, the one that made 1,271.9 HP, was only pulled to 7,400 RPM and that's where the biggest # was. It may have picked up another one or two at 7,500 but, i.m.o. it was pretty much done. The manifold had not been cut and welded.

Now that photobucket works now...looks like this: