Jay Allen Cylinder Heads???????
02-01-2004, 10:20 AM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kingwood, Tx
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jay Allen Cylinder Heads??????? Does anyone have any experience with heads ported by Jay Allen Camshaft Innovations? I can't seem to find any info via search.
02-01-2004, 10:26 AM
#2
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bronx ny
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you cant find or know of someone with experience with cyl heads, dont be a ginnie pig. Look at one of the sponsors that we know from this board. TEA, Absolute speed, Lingenfelter, MTi. Cant go wrong with them
02-01-2004, 10:30 AM
#3
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kingwood, Tx
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You right...
I am looking at a car that has these heads already installed. The dyno numbers seem a bit low for the setup this car has. The flow numbers I was provided were very high, just trying to find a reason.
I am looking at a car that has these heads already installed. The dyno numbers seem a bit low for the setup this car has. The flow numbers I was provided were very high, just trying to find a reason.
02-01-2004, 03:01 PM
#4
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does the guy mainly mess with Mustangs? There used to be a Jay Allen that had a high 8 sec NA 347 Mustang a few years back. Used to work for Canfield. Seemed to really know his stuff. Depending on price, might be worth it.
02-01-2004, 05:03 PM
#7
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kingwood, Tx
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intake Before After
0.100 70.90 73.90
0.200 148.50 152.90
0.300 196.00 203.40
0.400 237.60 252.40
0.500 270.40 303.90
0.550 274.90 317.80
0.600 261.40 321.80
0.620 257.00 326.80
2.055 Inake Valve
> > > >
Exhaust Before After
0.100 51.0 58.9
0.200 100.1 110.5
0.300 132.7 142.3
0.400 166.4 184.0
0.500 182.4 206.4
0.550 187.2 214.4
0.600 190.4 219.2
0.620 192.0 227.2
Exhaust flowed without a pipe
1.55 Exhaust Valve
The numbers are impressive. Guess I'm wondering if this may show a bit of 'over porting' (i.e. loss of veolicty) due to the ports being too big. Maybe on a big inch motor they would do well, but possibly too much for 348ci.????
0.100 70.90 73.90
0.200 148.50 152.90
0.300 196.00 203.40
0.400 237.60 252.40
0.500 270.40 303.90
0.550 274.90 317.80
0.600 261.40 321.80
0.620 257.00 326.80
2.055 Inake Valve
> > > >
Exhaust Before After
0.100 51.0 58.9
0.200 100.1 110.5
0.300 132.7 142.3
0.400 166.4 184.0
0.500 182.4 206.4
0.550 187.2 214.4
0.600 190.4 219.2
0.620 192.0 227.2
Exhaust flowed without a pipe
1.55 Exhaust Valve
The numbers are impressive. Guess I'm wondering if this may show a bit of 'over porting' (i.e. loss of veolicty) due to the ports being too big. Maybe on a big inch motor they would do well, but possibly too much for 348ci.????
Trending Topics
02-01-2004, 06:09 PM
#8
FormerVendor
Thanks Scott,
Those numbers look like a good LS6 head should with that valve size in it so I would think the car should be decent. MAybe the cam is off or something.
Those numbers look like a good LS6 head should with that valve size in it so I would think the car should be decent. MAybe the cam is off or something.
02-01-2004, 07:22 PM
#10
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kingwood, Tx
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The car dyno'ed at 401/369. I was expecting something closer to 420's with heads like this. The car has 1 7/8" headers/3" Y/Borla exhaust. You may be right on the cam, it's a custom grind (don't know the #'s). I've kinda had 'cam change' in the back of my mind from when I started looking into the car seriously.
Thanks for your opinion on the flow numbers. I've been away from the LS1 for a couple of years and didn't know what the new stuff was flowing.
Thanks for your opinion on the flow numbers. I've been away from the LS1 for a couple of years and didn't know what the new stuff was flowing.
02-01-2004, 08:17 PM
#11
Jay Allen helped us with our Vortech LT1. i believe he was working at Canfield heads for a while. TOP NOTCH guy and KNOWS motors. it doesnt matter what brand it is. also he stands behind his word as well. i would still ask for product in this area, but he will put together power.
02-01-2004, 08:37 PM
#12
What numbers did he claim they flowed?
02-02-2004, 09:26 AM
#13
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Richardson, TX, USA
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by turbo'd stang
Does the guy mainly mess with Mustangs? There used to be a Jay Allen that had a high 8 sec NA 347 Mustang a few years back. Used to work for Canfield. Seemed to really know his stuff. Depending on price, might be worth it.
That's him...he posts on http://www.hardcore50.com , http://www.funfordevents.com , http://www.nmraracing.com
02-02-2004, 01:43 PM
#15
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Woodlands, TX
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
are these heads on a black TA with a WS6 hood in the round rock area? If so I think I know the car you are talking about. The heads are BAD *** the problem with that car is the guy who designed the cam thought he knew how to make big power because he has a 7 second mustang and so the cam specs are all screwy. With a descent cam those heads will make some serious power.
02-02-2004, 02:06 PM
#16
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kingwood, Tx
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bad Habit Bird
are these heads on a black TA with a WS6 hood in the round rock area? If so I think I know the car you are talking about. The heads are BAD *** the problem with that car is the guy who designed the cam thought he knew how to make big power because he has a 7 second mustang and so the cam specs are all screwy. With a descent cam those heads will make some serious power.
Yup...that's the one. I don't know the cam specs, but I am thinking along the lines of going to a proven cam profile just to see what's up. With the flow numbers the heads have, should make plenty power. Thanks for the input.
02-03-2004, 12:36 AM
#17
FormerVendor
Well heads that are moving that much air are hard to hold down on the LS1 since we know that even with small cams they can make more power than 400 at the wheels. I think Jay has some good ideas and I think he has some crazy ideas. I know what runs pretty well after all the stuff I've personally done and seen with the first 10 and then the first 9 second camaros with LS1s right here in Texas. Something is way wrong with the engine or the heads are way off if Jay even had anything to do with them at all which he might not have for all we know.
He once told me all our stuff at SAM was around 50 cfm off so I wouldn't really believe any numbers he put out whether high or low. We're really out there doing it as all you guys know and the last block I honed broke into the 9.60s up there in Dallas. Those were also SAM ported stock castings that didn't flow anymore than the one's your talking about but went almost 142 mph! When you figure in that according to Jay those heads probably really only flowed 270 since they were 50 cfm down from the 320 or so we thought they flowed at SAM something's really wrong with Jay's setup if it really flows any 326cfm!
I wouldn't give him that much crap except I went on and on with him about 8 pages where he claimed all kinds of crap and then kept deleting his posts when I was right. The funny thing is that he kept saying that flowbenches and dynos were crap and that the track is all that mattered. Well maybe it's a coincidence but we win at the track a whole lot and I still haven't seen any of his engines at the top of any of their (NMRA) classes. We'll be there (NMRA) this season so we'll see but I'm sure we'll at least be in the pack and hopefully up front like we usually are. We've beat a lot of the same engine builders winning there now before in other classes even with our 50 cfm high flow bench!
He once told me all our stuff at SAM was around 50 cfm off so I wouldn't really believe any numbers he put out whether high or low. We're really out there doing it as all you guys know and the last block I honed broke into the 9.60s up there in Dallas. Those were also SAM ported stock castings that didn't flow anymore than the one's your talking about but went almost 142 mph! When you figure in that according to Jay those heads probably really only flowed 270 since they were 50 cfm down from the 320 or so we thought they flowed at SAM something's really wrong with Jay's setup if it really flows any 326cfm!
I wouldn't give him that much crap except I went on and on with him about 8 pages where he claimed all kinds of crap and then kept deleting his posts when I was right. The funny thing is that he kept saying that flowbenches and dynos were crap and that the track is all that mattered. Well maybe it's a coincidence but we win at the track a whole lot and I still haven't seen any of his engines at the top of any of their (NMRA) classes. We'll be there (NMRA) this season so we'll see but I'm sure we'll at least be in the pack and hopefully up front like we usually are. We've beat a lot of the same engine builders winning there now before in other classes even with our 50 cfm high flow bench!
02-03-2004, 10:50 AM
#18
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by racer7088
Well heads that are moving that much air are hard to hold down on the LS1 since we know that even with small cams they can make more power than 400 at the wheels. I think Jay has some good ideas and I think he has some crazy ideas. I know what runs pretty well after all the stuff I've personally done and seen with the first 10 and then the first 9 second camaros with LS1s right here in Texas. Something is way wrong with the engine or the heads are way off if Jay even had anything to do with them at all which he might not have for all we know.
He once told me all our stuff at SAM was around 50 cfm off so I wouldn't really believe any numbers he put out whether high or low. We're really out there doing it as all you guys know and the last block I honed broke into the 9.60s up there in Dallas. Those were also SAM ported stock castings that didn't flow anymore than the one's your talking about but went almost 142 mph! When you figure in that according to Jay those heads probably really only flowed 270 since they were 50 cfm down from the 320 or so we thought they flowed at SAM something's really wrong with Jay's setup if it really flows any 326cfm!
I wouldn't give him that much crap except I went on and on with him about 8 pages where he claimed all kinds of crap and then kept deleting his posts when I was right. The funny thing is that he kept saying that flowbenches and dynos were crap and that the track is all that mattered. Well maybe it's a coincidence but we win at the track a whole lot and I still haven't seen any of his engines at the top of any of their (NMRA) classes. We'll be there (NMRA) this season so we'll see but I'm sure we'll at least be in the pack and hopefully up front like we usually are. We've beat a lot of the same engine builders winning there now before in other classes even with our 50 cfm high flow bench!
He once told me all our stuff at SAM was around 50 cfm off so I wouldn't really believe any numbers he put out whether high or low. We're really out there doing it as all you guys know and the last block I honed broke into the 9.60s up there in Dallas. Those were also SAM ported stock castings that didn't flow anymore than the one's your talking about but went almost 142 mph! When you figure in that according to Jay those heads probably really only flowed 270 since they were 50 cfm down from the 320 or so we thought they flowed at SAM something's really wrong with Jay's setup if it really flows any 326cfm!
I wouldn't give him that much crap except I went on and on with him about 8 pages where he claimed all kinds of crap and then kept deleting his posts when I was right. The funny thing is that he kept saying that flowbenches and dynos were crap and that the track is all that mattered. Well maybe it's a coincidence but we win at the track a whole lot and I still haven't seen any of his engines at the top of any of their (NMRA) classes. We'll be there (NMRA) this season so we'll see but I'm sure we'll at least be in the pack and hopefully up front like we usually are. We've beat a lot of the same engine builders winning there now before in other classes even with our 50 cfm high flow bench!
You guys building a HS car? I heard you were. Should prove if you guys can make power or not...going against Glidden, Bennett and some of the other big name Ford builders. Good luck!
02-04-2004, 12:15 AM
#19
FormerVendor
Well we really don't have to prove anything but we want to be in HS because it is extremely competive. I think it will be really exciting and fun too. We should be right in the middle of things. We've raced against many of these guys before in the NMCA as well.
02-13-2004, 12:20 AM
#20
On The Tree
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Waco, TX
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bad Habit Bird
are these heads on a black TA with a WS6 hood in the round rock area? If so I think I know the car you are talking about. The heads are BAD *** the problem with that car is the guy who designed the cam thought he knew how to make big power because he has a 7 second mustang and so the cam specs are all screwy. With a descent cam those heads will make some serious power.
This statement has already stirred up some crap on a local board. I agree, a cam of his in another car made stock type power. :o