Author Topic: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM  (Read 45343 times)

nivvy

  • Guest
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #45 on: September 28, 2008 - 05:41:58 AM »
IN terms of usefull airflow, the intake valve can be not larger than 51% if the bore its feeding, before shrouding becomes such an issue that the flow will simply not improve.

we ran 2.25 intakes on a 4.375 bore indy headed 499 motor .690 lift solid roller .... 8.80's  :dunno:




Offline 71chally416

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 3170
    • The Streetwalker
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #46 on: September 28, 2008 - 11:04:24 AM »
Ever see a modern Nascar head? Those engines make 850hp from 358ci, or 2.37 hp per cube (like a N/A 1,042hp 440..) They have Intake valves over 2.17"  :clueless:

   
Once we had Ronald Reagan, Bob Hope & Johnny Cash. Now we have Obama, No Hope and No Cash!

nivvy

  • Guest
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #47 on: September 28, 2008 - 11:10:14 AM »
Its amazing how small block technology is way better than big block stuff ....

Offline 71chally416

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 3170
    • The Streetwalker
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #48 on: September 28, 2008 - 11:28:07 AM »
Mettler's PST Dakota is another with an amazing engine. It makes 985hp from a similar sized 358ci motor (2.75hp per ci) It does 7.30's at over 180. Nothing like making the cover of ND after bagging a Wally in Comp Eliminator with a truck.

 
« Last Edit: September 28, 2008 - 11:33:13 AM by 71chally416 »
Once we had Ronald Reagan, Bob Hope & Johnny Cash. Now we have Obama, No Hope and No Cash!

Offline go-fish

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2391
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #49 on: September 28, 2008 - 12:37:31 PM »
Yes, but those are P series blocks. Not alot in common with those and LA's. Ever priced W-9 heads too? :22yikes: :eek2:

Offline moper

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2368
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #50 on: September 28, 2008 - 07:37:55 PM »
This is a link to a site I've been a member of for a few years now. These guys are the best at what they do. This link includes a post of two from Darin Morgan, for years he was cheif cylinder head guy for a little known shop called Reher Morrison. I think if you plug in bore size numbers for those 358" CUP car engines, or the 358 Mopar sprint car entires, you'll find the valve are sized at 51-53% of bore size. I dont go over 51%. It's all about the bore size. But the truth is, if they ran well, they would run better with smaller intake valves. Period.  :bigsmile:

http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5623&highlight=intake+valve+shrouding

PS, these guys KNOW heads and theory.  :2thumbs:

Offline 71chally416

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 3170
    • The Streetwalker
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #51 on: September 29, 2008 - 03:20:37 AM »
So according to them, a .030" over 340 bore (like mine) with a 4.07 bore would require 2.075" Intake valves to be at 51%, and an .030" over 440 with a 4.35" bore should have 2.218" Intake valves, not the inadequate 2.08's and 2.02's (or 1.88's) they have, and the ports and port volume to go along with it. Thanks for making my point. :bigsmile:

 
Once we had Ronald Reagan, Bob Hope & Johnny Cash. Now we have Obama, No Hope and No Cash!

nivvy

  • Guest
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #52 on: September 29, 2008 - 05:21:52 AM »
Yes, but those are P series blocks. Not alot in common with those and LA's. Ever priced W-9 heads too? :22yikes: :eek2:

its $7500 just for the port work on W8's .... nothing else.....   :scared:

nivvy

  • Guest
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #53 on: September 29, 2008 - 05:25:48 AM »
So according to them, a .030" over 340 bore (like mine) with a 4.07 bore would require 2.075" Intake valves to be at 51%, and an .030" over 440 with a 4.35" bore should have 2.218" Intake valves, not the inadequate 2.08's and 2.02's (or 1.88's) they have, and the ports and port volume to go along with it. Thanks for making my point. :bigsmile:

 

I wa thinking of having a 2.25 put in my new indy heads for the challenger.. 4.375 bore....  :working:

Offline 71chally416

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 3170
    • The Streetwalker
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #54 on: September 29, 2008 - 12:42:34 PM »
Once we had Ronald Reagan, Bob Hope & Johnny Cash. Now we have Obama, No Hope and No Cash!

Offline moper

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 2368
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #55 on: September 29, 2008 - 01:17:59 PM »
I guess then I blew it using big 2.02" valves with my 12 second 109+mph 7.9 to 1 compression 318 that had a .470" lift cam and a stock convertor. I should have used smaller Intake valves. Oh, that's right, I had the stock 1.88 valves in the smogger 340 heads I had on it when it was doing 13.50's with everything else the same...   :clueless:


When were we talking about the 4.07 engine? I thought we were talking about the above quoted deal? 3.94 x 51% = 2.00? 

I'll agree to disagree...This is going nowhere....lol

Offline 71chally416

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 3170
    • The Streetwalker
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #56 on: September 29, 2008 - 05:19:02 PM »
I just used what I had available. They were a set of '70 340 heads with 2.02" valves. I really never lost a second of sleep worrying that they were too big and I was very happy with the .5 ET gain.  :sleeping:
Once we had Ronald Reagan, Bob Hope & Johnny Cash. Now we have Obama, No Hope and No Cash!

Offline Ck[FIN]

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 187
  • Get real - Get Mopar
    • Small car club from Finland
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #57 on: October 15, 2008 - 05:57:17 PM »
Hi all mopar guys. I had to register because i found a lot good topics from this forum.
I bought Edel Heads for my 360 last winter and i checked them. Everything else was okay but the oiling hole wasnt drilled through, glad i noticed it before motor assembly. Could have been dry rockers otherwise.
I built mild blower motor for my 1965 valiant 9:1 comp, probe pistons, edel heads, mp 284 cam, and it produced 520hp/516TQ at very low boost (9psi). It ran 10.6s/ 1/4mile. 
Picture of it.
http://varpunen.sigmatic.fi/~ck/kone.JPG

Now i bought a motor from my friend, he built it 8 years ago and raced it for a year. it has W2 fully ported by Grottis, 2.10intake/1.88exh. 15:1 comp with huge cam. 0.707lift 1.7rockers. It made 750hp/575TQ. Its 350cid. He said those heads can make over 800hp but this is enough for you.  :)
Well, they are very expensive, everything is custom fit for this engine.

BTW: Rockers are made in Finland, Looks like jesel and Harland sharp mix, Looks like in this dark country with very long winter everything can be made.  ;D
Rockers: http://kuvablogi.com/nayta/1509587/

sry for my bad english

-Sauli
Get real - Get Mopar

Offline 71chally416

  • Resident
  • *****
  • Posts: 3170
    • The Streetwalker
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #58 on: October 15, 2008 - 06:17:14 PM »
Cool stuff! Look at the ports in THESE heads!
http://kuvablogi.com/nayta/1509588/
Once we had Ronald Reagan, Bob Hope & Johnny Cash. Now we have Obama, No Hope and No Cash!

Offline Ck[FIN]

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 187
  • Get real - Get Mopar
    • Small car club from Finland
Re: W2's vs. Edelbrock RPM
« Reply #59 on: October 16, 2008 - 05:17:11 AM »
I have more pictures of those heads, but they are not in the internet yet. The intake ports are big and raised alot. Even the surface of the valve cover is raised because of the intake port.

-Sauli
Get real - Get Mopar