1CAMWNDR

iTrader: (21)

Flow numbers do not tell the whole story. As stated earlier, worse flowing heads have won these dyno contests.

ramairws6

iTrader: (33)

Actually there has been some comparisons done and its been proven the Fast 102 Rectangular port seems to work better then the cathedral version. I know Tony Mamo has done ported both and maybe he can chime in on this?

Beaflag VonRathburg

iTrader: (176)

I picked the magazine up on Wednesday morning. It is a good read and most of everyones comments are addressed in the article.

I too would be interested in knowing the price of the sleeves + machine work for the block.

1slow01Z71

iTrader: (36)

I need to pick this issue up or actually finally subscribe

chriswtx

iTrader: (5)

+1..Texas Speed should have been in there....

87silverbullet

iTrader: (11)

There's your answer.

crossbreed383

iTrader: (1)

I've yet to see anyone mention the fact that, the mast single plane intake which was used with there mast heads, was im sure, matched perfectly to those runners in height,width,entry angle ,taper,etc
I know that when i was looking at some rec port heads last year, i had spoken to Cary,and he had told me that his intake wasnt going to fit every head out there correctly, due to runner variations between each individual head porters program
Not saying mast doesnt build a nice product,but i think theres alot more to a fair/accurate test than just throwing some parts together and running a couple of dyno pulls

LPE 403

iTrader: (6)

Like where your head's at (no pun intended)! I've been saving lunch money for a little while and went all in with a 460 that will be topped off with a set of Cary's C5R masterpieces

Lol, chiropractor...

Brent

Fryguy302

iTrader: (3)

That article was very interesting to me, I didn't realize how easy it was to make 700hp with one of these. Apparently all you need to do is build a really big engine and use one of Cary's intake manifolds. I'm going to have to try this.

bozzhawg

There is no replacement for displacement..........period..... well unless you use a power adder.....

equal playing field same quality of heads... but change displacement from your avg 364-376 to 454-468....... Its a no brainer......

Bozz

Old SStroker

The max power figures quoted in this comparo represented BMEP numbers from approximately 175 to 200 psi at power peak rpm. Those are not anything super special. A number of LS engine builders regularly reach/exceed these BMEP numbers. Some do it on street driven cars with relatively mild cams. The highest would not have won an Engine Masters Challenge competition.

Interestingly the stock LS3/L92 heads equalled or exceeded some of the other heads in BMEP @ power peak rpm.

FWIW, it seems a little strange to me to test these heads on a 468 when the vast majority are probably going on 364-427 engines in the real world. Few of them have 4.185 bores.

My $.02


Jon

gtotoocool1

iTrader: (6)

i was thinking that as well.i would have liked to seen a 400-413ci test motor.

Jimbo1367

That's what I said. When Hot Rod did the cathedral head testing, they used a common engine configuration. (408) Then they drop the ball on the rectangle port head testing. WTF I never seen anyone run a 4.250 stroke LSx before. I never seen anyone run a 4.250 stroke LSx before.

I was anxious to see that article too. Big let down IMHO

Brian Tooley Racing

iTrader: (13)

I know Richard was impressed when he dyno'd my 454 as it was the first LS engine they'd ever had at Westech to make over 700 hp, so maybe that's why. What's wrong with 4.25" storke

On a smaller engine the results would have simply been closer. You could probably take the percentage difference in power and apply them to a smaller engine, if that makes sense.

Brian Tooley Racing

iTrader: (13)

Wouldn't the stock heads have to make more torque (and hense) peak power in order to have a higher BMEP? Given the same engine parameters, the higher the torque, the higher the BMEP, right?

briancb1

If they tested it on a smaller, normal size engine the power gains from the "aftermarket head" swap would be lessened.

What a awesome magazine article, title reads "ADD 10-15 RWHP WITH A SIMPLE $1500 HEAD SWAP"!!!

Remember the $20 for two years just pays your postage, the magazine makes money from advertising. Not saying there isn't truth to the "checking pushrod length" or "how to assemble xxxxx" but when it comes to advertisors pushing product, they will always look good.

Best one to date was an "oil pan test". They took a full race 496 BBC, threw a stock oil pan on and dynoed, then put on a moroso and picked up 9hp. There you go, an article for a month.... MHO

Old SStroker

BMEP is another way of expressing torque per cubic inch. If you know torque/cube, multiply it by 150.8 to get BMEP (psi).

Comparing BMEP of engines (or components like heads) at power peak rpm should tell you how well the system is turning air/fuel into torque, and when factoring in rpm, power.

From the HRM article by Holdener, the stock LS3 heads made peak hp of 692 @ 6500. That's 559 lb-ft or 559/468 or 1.195 lb-ft per cube on a 468.
1.195 x 150.8 is 180 psi BMEP.

Another head made 718 peak hp at 6900. That's 1.168 lb-ft per cube or 176 psi BMEP. Sure, more HP but at a higher rpm so it made less torque at it's peak power rpm than did the LS3. Actually it was slightly (~1.2%) better at the 6500 power peak rpm of the LS3s, but at it's 6900 power peak it was slightly less efficient. In that case, 14.7% more flowbench flow @ .650 and 17.8% more at .600 didn't result in much gain.

The Mast heads with the increased valve lift due to 1.8 rockers made 198 psi BMEP at power peak rpm. That's very good, and close to the 200-205 psi BMEP from most Engine Masters Challenge winners when looking at BMEP at power peak.

Jon

2bridges

iTrader: (1)

I was happy to read the results. For a typical 402-416 with EFI, I expect the cheapie stock LS3 heads (as cast) will be comparable in performance.

Cost of my next build just went down $1500 - gotta love that!

Jimbo1367

YEah. I was thinking the same thing. Makes you wanna hold off buying ported LS3s for a 416

blackey

iTrader: (1)

From what I can see reading the article the Mast heads were the clear winner, but at a very high price point. With the FAST intake they would still have made more peak HP, and the average torque goes up even more, so although using the Mast intake probably favored the Mast heads a bit, the test with the FAST intake shows they really were the best performing head. How much is the 1.8 Rocker worth? I suspect a bit, but not really sure what the number would be? On a smaller motor I would say 10-15, but not sure that holds true? The second question is what will the new castings from TFS and PRC that are coming out next quarter do at a much lower price point? Will the Mast heads be worth a $1000 premium?

Of the stock castings the WCCH looked to be the best curve, followed by SDPC, and then TEA.