good deal on the dual springs as a upgrade thanks guys i may holdoff till then

 

331..what is your name if you dont mind, unless you dont mind being typed as 331...

Ed, I am sure you still have my cam profile you ground. All else of the combo is the same, maybe dropping a couple pounds. You can work on a good port to match your cam and the rest of my combo? Let me know, I'd love to do a direct, no other parts swapped comparison (Pushrods due to length, but we can set the same preload for accuracy!).

Charlie

 

well i did my research and bought the dart 225 and i am very pleased with what i got. keep up the good work... :-)

 

I also purchased a set of the 205s, and have them taken apart for some minor cleaning up. And by the way, that is all you can or need to do is a little cleaning up. These heads really look good. I'm by no means an expert, but I have done quite a few sets of BBC and SBC heads over the years, and have never had any that were so close to being "ready to run." You can finish these up in just a few hours.
Like Vettenut, it will be several weeks before I have the time to get these on, but when they are ready, I will do a before and after dyno with no other modifications.

 

Mine are done with the exception of re-assembly, I just basically sanded the ports down smooth. I didn't use any carbide bits or heavy material removing bits. I didn't "hog" out any material in either the ports or chambers. I did smooth the chambers, but this was with small pieces of sand paper by hand and then a final polish with a minature sisal wheel and some tripoli. The original Dart port design, shape and port size have been preserved.

As I sanded you could see the little guides and channels that are cast into the ports. I think it might be ill advised to go into the head and start taking these out in the interest of boosting flow numbers, as I have a feeling grinding them out a lot would actually be detrimental to the head design and it final ability to make power.

 

It would be nice if you published some more comprehensive pictures, flow numbers, some dyno results (maybe including ignition timing).

Does Dart offer custom configuraton (combustion chamber size, bore size, valves, valve springs), or does it rely on aftermarket ports for that service?

P.S.
Even if everyone buys from the same suppliers, doesn't mean they are buying the same pieces.

P.P.S.
Titanium keepers, $180, 2gm.

 

I weighed the keepers (locks) that came with my Dart heads, they were 2 grams. Titanium retainers were 6 grams.

 

i'm glad 331 has revealed what products they use.most of the time the only thing you buy is a name.some parts may have slightly stricter tolerances from company to company but price won't be that much more.dart has made good sbc/bbc heads for a long time so i'm sure there ls1 heads are good and when the cnc versions come out maybe the others will come down to where they should be.

 

It came last time we put the motor together. However we were all over the place with cam, spring and retainer issues. So, left in hold for another season. It was a small savings. And a small cost.

On a $1000 cam/valvetrain, a waste of money.

On a $5000 valvetrain, it doesn't get noticed.

When you are restriced to steel valves and a trying as aggressive a cam as possible, everything counts.

Just answering the 'why' question. From a company that sells tall deck SBC aluminum blocks and 11deg Little Chief heads with Ti valves, etc, I didn't think it would be a question.

 

Well seems like a "deja vu" of another bandwagon.
Everyone jumping on board but not even 1 dyno result or track result for that matter.
331Dart, good write up, but let me point out that shaft rockers are way overkill for street use on our motors (not to mention expensive).
Also the fact that, grinding/machining rocker stands to use stockers, is necessary, should probably be reviewed, since most backyard hillbilly mechanics like most of us, do not like to modify things to make them run; especialy that you can run stock rockers to 7K rpm with no issues.
Also could you please post the specs of the springs you are using.
Also, I'm seing a lot of flow this, flow that but not even a whisper about velocity, hmmmm
Just my 2/ct so far.

 

i think the rocker stand issue needs to be addressed also but other than that i see some more competition which only means good things for us.

 

also won't velocity be hampered if they wet flow their heads so comparing velocity and flow numbers will turn into a pissing contest.

 

Too bad search is broke. Everything you asked for has been covered
previously There are new dyno results on another board (think C5s cough-cough), as well as the dyno results W2W published previously here.

Disclaimer: Yes, I'm on the bandwagon

 

OEM rocker stand issues are a joke. Just cutting off a few of the tabs solves this in minutes. Can also be done by anyone with a hacksaw and a file. IMO NOT an issue at all.

My 225's cleaned up nicely and with very little effort.

Bottom line is performance, so I vote that we all wait for some MORE out of the box results to judge the REAL value of these heads.

My setup is somewhat experimental (not a heads only swap), so too many factors will influence the final results and I am still a week or so away.

 

We'll be interested in your results as well RJW, we can wait a week.

P.S. the exhaust port volume is 83cc on those heads.

 

This thread had nothing to do with dyno numbers, flow numbers or any other type of BS magazine propaganda. It was to address the questions of parts and things about the heads. You want to debate flow numbers or dyno numbers I believe there was one on here about Dart VS ET VS AFR or something like that. Personally I think dyno numbers, and flow numbers are all relative. If my car makes 500 rwhp in Englishtown NJ when it is 600ft. below sea level and you buy the same stuff but you are in Arizona do you really think you will make 600 rwhp? NO! Thats why people like wheel 2 wheel use SAE standards it always the same nationally. But when you do SAE you guys dont see the big magazine numbers everybody likes.

Shaft rockers overkill??? Are you crazy, then why did GM use them. I'll tell you why to control the valve train better, they flat make better power, have less harmonics, and frankly are damn strong. We arent going to change the tooling to make adjustments for the three little nubs on the factory shaft system stands to clear, it comprimises what all the engine builders want, and that is more strength in that boss. When you start putting big cams in these and turbos and the like you need to oversize the little week 8mm hole.

People talk about velocity and the like, but again you guys are still stuck in the world of dry flow bench numbers. The wet flow bench test at .55 inches not .28 inches. When you add liquid to the air the density of the air changes this is something you would never see on a dry flow bench. SO to talk velocity on a dry flow bench at .28 inches, who cares. its all for not. You dont have any idea what it will do with fuel, as the density of the air changes, and until you flow the head on a higher level like .55 inches instead of .28 inches you dont see the truth anyways. Bret from Bauer's can back that up as he has tried other heads you guys praise at .45inches on a dry bench and has seen how the heads fall off. That tells you in the real world on a motor that the head wont be as good as it looks. Sure it will probably make enough power to keep you happy. But lets say you take a head that flow less at .28 inches but flows better on the wet flow bench or even the dry flow bench at .45 or .55 inches of water, what do you think will happen? The engine will make more power!!!! Thats a FACT, so keep looking at those great numbers everybody post, but until the "industry" standards change people will keep asking for stuff that doesnt really matter, or that they dont really understand why it does what it does!! Heck the guys writing the magazine articles dont know, thats why they write articles!!

 

i would love to use shaft mount rockers but that would defeat the purpose of these heads being a good choice if your on a budget...like most of us.


look at it like this...for the price of your heads + shaft rockers i might as well go and get a cnc afr head or an 11 deg head from et for a lil more and use my stock rockers and be fine

i like your heads alot and i am considering going with them but if they need modification or more high dollar parts then it make the choice for a different head that much easier

not saying wont get your heads but this is the first time that i am hearing that the stock rockers wont work

 

I have tested the Dart head with the stock rockers. They do fit with 5 minutes of file work on the bottom of the bar.


Kurt

 

I think that you are misreading this. No one is saying that you have to go to shaft mounted rockers, just recommending as would probably other head manufacturers if you are looking for the best in rocker solutions. Myself and many others will be running either stock or aftermarket but not necessarily shaft mounted.

IMO, whatever works with other heads will work with these.

Cost wise, the extra cost of jessels or others still has to be added to the base price of the heads whether that is $1200 or $2400, so I don't get the point of your comment?

Take a deep breath and wait for more results. That should be your primary determining factor, I think.

 

Velocity.... it's important but not the way 99% of consumers think about it.

You don't want too high of a velocity in the port. I know for years it has been beat into your heads that high velocity heads are all the rage and that's what makes the best power.... well that's wrong.

If you have too much velocity in the heads you will have issues with air/fuel seperation... which is what the wet bench tells you.

BTW my comments about high depression flows and no turbulence are greatly linked to velocity in the port... it's not high enough that it causes issues.

Bret