806 heads anyone?!?!
Then I too was "bent over" here because my requirement for an Air Boat T/T DD engine was told but not understood by MOST here.
So I state, small intake port, low cost, chamber quench design (?) could be YOUR best requirement ?
So I ask, more info ?
Example, larger valves will fit fine.
My method would be the install a 1.6" Exhaust with a Radius Face, very proud.
Then I would "sink" the Intake.
Porting, radius valve pockets, etc.
Trending Topics
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
There must be an exit angle used to recover pressure without stall.
Thus "sink" the intake to recover flow speed, NO Tumble.
The exhaust is opposite, the "entry angle" with a LARGE radius on the valve face will act as a venturi if "proud".
THIS design will STOP "crossover" fuel from entering the exhaust port.
Low lift flow will be great, very important for a shorter required cam duration.
The best effect with this concept is that the P/V will be greater, more Valve Drop distance.
Now with respect to the Piston Crown, the Valve Knotch can be LESS, a greater distance from the top ring.
There must be an exit angle used to recover pressure without stall.
Thus "sink" the intake to recover flow speed, NO Tumble.
The exhaust is opposite, the "entry angle" with a LARGE radius on the valve face will act as a venturi if "proud".
THIS design will STOP "crossover" fuel from entering the exhaust port.
Low lift flow will be great, very important for a shorter required cam duration.
The best effect with this concept is that the P/V will be greater, more Valve Drop distance.
Now with respect to the Piston Crown, the Valve Knotch can be LESS, a greater distance from the top ring.
There must be an exit angle used to recover pressure without stall.
Thus "sink" the intake to recover flow speed, NO Tumble.
The exhaust is opposite, the "entry angle" with a LARGE radius on the valve face will act as a venturi if "proud".
THIS design will STOP "crossover" fuel from entering the exhaust port.
Low lift flow will be great, very important for a shorter required cam duration.
The best effect with this concept is that the P/V will be greater, more Valve Drop distance.
Now with respect to the Piston Crown, the Valve Knotch can be LESS, a greater distance from the top ring.
Most here do not state the application.
No case is absolute.
YES, I offer advice, taught by John Drake, Carl Wegner, Mike Costin, etc.
Warren Brownfield taught me about air flow, he AGREED with me, TOO large a port could "stall" flow.
The ease of predicting the behavior of an Electron or a Quark is easy
The ports in the 243/799 castings are much better than the other cathedral port castings. Most of the difference is in the short turn, where the floor is taller and the radius is more ideal for high airspeeds.
and yet dyno tests readily available comparing back-to-back head testing on the exact same engine with no other changes show the 706's make MORE HP and MORE TORQUE in the average daily driver RPM ranges than both the 799 and 243 heads. Even though flow benches show that the 799/243's outflow the 706's number wise, the dyno shows that the 706's (below 6000 RPM I think??) make more HP and more torque..
I've sold off the 243's I have and am about to remove the 799's I have on my 6.2 in favor of a set of ported and polished 706's.
Last edited by Kawabuggy; Aug 24, 2021 at 12:03 PM.









