Iron Heads on the QMP Turbo Formula
04-02-2004, 02:39 PM
#21
Originally Posted by Reckless
How about iron 6.0L ported heads on a bored 6.0L block? Now we are getting somewhere 
Rob, Are the Iron 6.0L heads less??? If this does work does TEA plan on machining Iron 6.0L heads for the rest of us........
Dont Big FI Mustang guys run Iron heads and get away with running 25-30 psi of boost??? But then again they also have more bolts per cylinder.....
Kyle
04-02-2004, 03:06 PM
#23
Restricted User
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
Posts: 7,603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kyle, didnt the 5liter Mustangs use 4 per cyl like we do?
Iron on alum? This is just upside down from yester-year where we put alum heads on a iron block.
Iron on alum? This is just upside down from yester-year where we put alum heads on a iron block.
04-02-2004, 03:49 PM
#26
TECH Resident
iTrader: (48)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Michigan, the land of cold
Posts: 927
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gator's 99TA
does anyone think it sounds like a bandaid till we get a good head design with thich deck and more perimeter bolts to hold the heads on theblock? aka the 220 cc AFR heads that will come out sometime?
I wouldn't call it a bandaid, more like an alternative.
Welding the heads down to the block would be a bandaid.
04-02-2004, 05:18 PM
#28
Adkoonerstrator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Deep in the seedy underworld of Koonerville
Posts: 21,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by PacerX
Welp...
TOLD YA SO.
Steel (cast iron) is THREE TIMES stiffer than aluminum.
TOLD YA SO.
Steel (cast iron) is THREE TIMES stiffer than aluminum.
Hopefully with the AFRs we'll have the best of both worlds. Strength and lightweight.
04-02-2004, 08:18 PM
#30
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Charlestown, Indiana
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay...short and sweet. Just got off the dyno. Made 780rwhp/890rwtq. Then made another pull and pressurized the radiator. 
AF was super safe, 10.8:1, and timing was only at 17*, with 8.25:1 compression ratio.
I'm still going to try and run it at the track tomorrow anyway. Overflow is in the back spare tire well, so shouldn't be any coolant up front. Plus, it only seems to pressurize after the car gets over about 190 degrees. Might be alright for a cold pass off the trailer???
Guess there's still no market for cast iron heads. HURRY UP AFR!!!!!!!
Going to bed....
AF was super safe, 10.8:1, and timing was only at 17*, with 8.25:1 compression ratio.I'm still going to try and run it at the track tomorrow anyway. Overflow is in the back spare tire well, so shouldn't be any coolant up front. Plus, it only seems to pressurize after the car gets over about 190 degrees. Might be alright for a cold pass off the trailer???
Guess there's still no market for cast iron heads. HURRY UP AFR!!!!!!!
Going to bed....
04-02-2004, 09:22 PM
#32
Originally Posted by Rob Raymer
Okay...short and sweet. Just got off the dyno. Made 780rwhp/890rwtq. Then made another pull and pressurized the radiator. AF was super safe, 10.8:1, and timing was only at 17*, with 8.25:1 compression ratio.
I'm still going to try and run it at the track tomorrow anyway. Overflow is in the back spare tire well, so shouldn't be any coolant up front. Plus, it only seems to pressurize after the car gets over about 190 degrees. Might be alright for a cold pass off the trailer???
Guess there's still no market for cast iron heads. HURRY UP AFR!!!!!!!
Going to bed....
AF was super safe, 10.8:1, and timing was only at 17*, with 8.25:1 compression ratio.I'm still going to try and run it at the track tomorrow anyway. Overflow is in the back spare tire well, so shouldn't be any coolant up front. Plus, it only seems to pressurize after the car gets over about 190 degrees. Might be alright for a cold pass off the trailer???
Guess there's still no market for cast iron heads. HURRY UP AFR!!!!!!!
Going to bed....
Kyle
04-03-2004, 05:05 AM
#33
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for trying, Rob. I doubt anyone else would have been as willing to try something so unconventional. I suppose if the LS1 is to make greater power levels than 750rwhp, we'll have to fork over the $2800 for overpriced AFRs.
It reminds me of the early 90s, when the only real player in the Mustang scene was TFS Street Heats. My fully-ported, Ferea-valved, double/dampner-spring, chromoly-retainer set went for $2700. OUCH!
Let us know when you get a set.
SC-
It reminds me of the early 90s, when the only real player in the Mustang scene was TFS Street Heats. My fully-ported, Ferea-valved, double/dampner-spring, chromoly-retainer set went for $2700. OUCH!
Let us know when you get a set.
SC-
Last edited by SS00Blue; 04-03-2004 at 07:29 AM.
04-03-2004, 06:42 AM
#34
2.5 psi on the step is ok but at what rpm? If you increase the rpm, you will get more boost. I promise you that even with only 2.5psi, you will have a much harder launch than without the 2-step.
Rob, thanks again for the info. You had me looking on ebay for iron heads.....and now I'm not It's great to see people doing stuff out of the norm.
Rob, thanks again for the info. You had me looking on ebay for iron heads.....and now I'm not
It's great to see people doing stuff out of the norm.
04-03-2004, 09:48 AM
#35
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rob,
Those are some impressive numbers! I bet you kinda wish GM would have stuck with 5 bolts per cylinder at this time. It will be interesting to see the results with the AFR heads, but I'm not convinced it will solve your problem now. Even with the added deck material, the bolts still won't be able to spread out the torque as well as the iron head, IMO. Any timeline on the AFR's at this time?
Todd
Those are some impressive numbers! I bet you kinda wish GM would have stuck with 5 bolts per cylinder at this time. It will be interesting to see the results with the AFR heads, but I'm not convinced it will solve your problem now. Even with the added deck material, the bolts still won't be able to spread out the torque as well as the iron head, IMO. Any timeline on the AFR's at this time?
Todd
04-03-2004, 03:17 PM
#38
Restricted User
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
Posts: 7,603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Levi, not possible since the blocks layout is 4 bolts evenly spaced. No more room. Too bad though.
How are others making big numbers, like dark dragons vette that cr133r posted on, over 1k rwhp there? Ronnie Duke is using a C5R engine, do they have 5 bolts per cyl?
Wasnt there a way to bore oversized studs down thru the block then use washer and nut on the bottom to place it, this allowing for more clamping force? Though this was popular on some builds from back in the day.
Charlie
How are others making big numbers, like dark dragons vette that cr133r posted on, over 1k rwhp there? Ronnie Duke is using a C5R engine, do they have 5 bolts per cyl?
Wasnt there a way to bore oversized studs down thru the block then use washer and nut on the bottom to place it, this allowing for more clamping force? Though this was popular on some builds from back in the day.
Charlie
04-03-2004, 03:51 PM
#39
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by CAT3
How are others making big numbers, like dark dragons vette that cr133r posted on, over 1k rwhp there? Ronnie Duke is using a C5R engine, do they have 5 bolts per cyl?
Wasnt there a way to bore oversized studs down thru the block then use washer and nut on the bottom to place it, this allowing for more clamping force? Though this was popular on some builds from back in the day.
Charlie
Wasnt there a way to bore oversized studs down thru the block then use washer and nut on the bottom to place it, this allowing for more clamping force? Though this was popular on some builds from back in the day.
Charlie
As for 1000RWHP, it could be true, I've never actually seen it, but at a guess, I suggest that those figures might require the C5R heads, as they do have adequate deck material. If there are LS1/6 or LQ heads holding down that sort of cylinder pressure, I'd wonder how long they produced those numbers???
SC-
04-03-2004, 04:23 PM
#40
Restricted User
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
Posts: 7,603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SS00Blue, incase you missed the reading,
https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...1&page=2&pp=20
is the thread that has the info, there are also some ppl that have seen this car and seen it running on the dyno and track, and he says MTI Heads, not C5R, but then again who knows right?
https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...1&page=2&pp=20
is the thread that has the info, there are also some ppl that have seen this car and seen it running on the dyno and track, and he says MTI Heads, not C5R, but then again who knows right?