Warhawk 6 bolt heads?
04-12-2007, 10:11 AM
#21
TECH Regular
iTrader: (33)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dublin Ga
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i personally love your heads and have a set of sportmans II head son my old truck. what i am saying as that i dont see why i cant i use a 6 bolt head of yours with a gm block. i know i can use it just i dont get full effect. i would love to run a warhawk block in my car just sadly its not made of the right stuff. i want iron because of strenght not weight. i know what you are saying and i can understand your point but it looks like GM might be making this alot more common and one day down the road you might want your heads to fit with all 6 bolts on the new GM style block.
04-12-2007, 11:18 AM
#22
Collections Removal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SLOW,
I appreciate your sentiment about our stuff and well-meaning advice to increase our sales.
It should be noted that our 7X heads are intended for very big cams and probably need sheetmetal intakes to maximize their effect. Not intended for the general street use unless street racing.
As for your preference for "strength"-are you building north of 1000HP? If so you can do so at nearly 100lbs LESS with Warhawk than iron. Cary and Eric saw 860 without breaking a sweat with their Warhawk build. We believe Warhawk will live comfortably between 1200 and 1800HP. Time and testing will tell.
In fact- later today I'll post a new thread to show exactly why we feel this way.
I appreciate your sentiment about our stuff and well-meaning advice to increase our sales.
It should be noted that our 7X heads are intended for very big cams and probably need sheetmetal intakes to maximize their effect. Not intended for the general street use unless street racing.
As for your preference for "strength"-are you building north of 1000HP? If so you can do so at nearly 100lbs LESS with Warhawk than iron. Cary and Eric saw 860 without breaking a sweat with their Warhawk build. We believe Warhawk will live comfortably between 1200 and 1800HP. Time and testing will tell.
In fact- later today I'll post a new thread to show exactly why we feel this way.
04-12-2007, 11:24 AM
#23
Originally Posted by MerlinPro
SLOW,
I appreciate your sentiment about our stuff and well-meaning advice to increase our sales.
It should be noted that our 7X heads are intended for very big cams and probably need sheetmetal intakes to maximize their effect. Not intended for the general street use unless street racing.
As for your preference for "strength"-are you building north of 1000HP? If so you can do so at nearly 100lbs LESS with Warhawk than iron. Cary and Eric saw 860 without breaking a sweat with their Warhawk build. We believe Warhawk will live comfortably between 1200 and 1800HP. Time and testing will tell.
In fact- later today I'll post a new thread to show exactly why we feel this way.
I appreciate your sentiment about our stuff and well-meaning advice to increase our sales.
It should be noted that our 7X heads are intended for very big cams and probably need sheetmetal intakes to maximize their effect. Not intended for the general street use unless street racing.
As for your preference for "strength"-are you building north of 1000HP? If so you can do so at nearly 100lbs LESS with Warhawk than iron. Cary and Eric saw 860 without breaking a sweat with their Warhawk build. We believe Warhawk will live comfortably between 1200 and 1800HP. Time and testing will tell.
In fact- later today I'll post a new thread to show exactly why we feel this way.
Why do you tease us like this???
04-12-2007, 03:16 PM
#24
Teching In
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some real facts to chew on
Originally Posted by MerlinPro
slow
To set you straight on the facts:We originated the six-bolt concept and GM sent WJ over to our SEMA booth in 2005to evaluate them. It was an intentional design move on their part to NOT use our bolt pattern due to their water jacketing and bolt-depth, which are superior and unique in our block.
Be advised-no one "changes their designs fast" due to enormous time and cost factors. We don't build these things on our kitchen table.
There are those who will build the GM components and those that will build ours. GM chose to not make them compatable after WJ gave them our entire design brief.
The fact remains that their parts aren't here yet and ours are shipping now.
To set you straight on the facts:We originated the six-bolt concept and GM sent WJ over to our SEMA booth in 2005to evaluate them. It was an intentional design move on their part to NOT use our bolt pattern due to their water jacketing and bolt-depth, which are superior and unique in our block.
Be advised-no one "changes their designs fast" due to enormous time and cost factors. We don't build these things on our kitchen table.
There are those who will build the GM components and those that will build ours. GM chose to not make them compatable after WJ gave them our entire design brief.
The fact remains that their parts aren't here yet and ours are shipping now.
Originally Posted by MerlinPro
Why hasn't it occured to you that GM didn't and doesn't want to "work with us"?
Instead of giving a sweet deal to WJ to investigate our design, they could have picked up the phone and discussed the design directly with Bill much as Chrysler did with our new hemi and wedge blocks..
Instead of giving a sweet deal to WJ to investigate our design, they could have picked up the phone and discussed the design directly with Bill much as Chrysler did with our new hemi and wedge blocks..
Merlin,
It's sad to see you sink to this level in an attempt to discredit GM Performance Parts, and make yourself look good. I see you wish to try and state facts, here's some you may try to, but will be hard pressed to prove false.
Fact #1: GM is the originator of the Gen III / IV small block LS engine family
Fact #2: GM has hundreds of thousands if not millions of engineering hours of design and development in the LS small block family of engines
Fact #3: GMPP decided to do the LSX block in Late 2004.
Fact #4: We decided to have a 6-bolt pattern from the very beginning.
Fact #5: We met with Warren concerning the LSX block for the first time during the SEMA show 2005 to see if he had any interest in working and consulting with us on it.
Fact #6: We told WJ the direction we wanted to go, the specific details we wanted, and he offered us race specific knowledge from his many year's racing experience so we would have the best part on the market to fit the needs of all our customers, not just the street crowd, but also the racing community.
Fact #7: He never gave us a "design brief" nor any specific information pertaining to anyone else's design, nor was there any "sweet deal" to investigate the Warhawk design.
Fact #8: Once we were actually aware of the Warhawk 6-bolt pattern, we looked at it with WJ (why reinvent the wheel if you don't need to?) He said "no-way"..... here's a better way to do it. His "better way" is what we used for the basis of our final design.
Fact #9: The 6-bolt pattern we use is specifically designed for better head gasket fire ring sealing in conjunction with ease of machining the lifter holes, and re-machining for large diameter lifter bushings.
Fact #10: The water jacketing in the LSX block is a derivitive of countless hours of water flow and thermal analysis.
Lastly;
Fact #11: We started shipping blocks on 4/2/07.
Many are already at the dealers, and we've been shipping double digit volumes every day since.
04-12-2007, 05:16 PM
#25
Collections Removal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GMPP,
We at World have no intention to “prove false” statements you present as facts. Nor do we wish to discredit GM, rather, state that we think we have produced some significant improvements to an excellent OEM design.
Bill Mitchell would like some points stated on which he feels strongly. He is in full agreement with your first two points and has great respect for those accomplishments. Bill feels that the design is the “greatest possible improvement for the Small Block Chevy” and an outstanding OEM design. In his view, no other pushrod OEM design is superior and he is pleased to be part of the aftermarket which supports such a product.
We cannot dispute your statement of timing and design features. Bill makes the point however that Warhawk appeared at SEMA 2005, which means design was underweigh in late 2004-early 2005. He would like known however that three years prior to that, he brought the first-ever 6 bolt block to market with the Man O’War SBF design, which we produce in volume.
We offer no comment about the Company relationship with Warren. Bill feels strongly that Warren’s solution to the 12 o’clock bolt is different but not superior to ours. We respectfully disagree about the engineering but there are many ways to do the same thing. Warhawk will accommodate an enlarged lifter bore also. Further, if demand supports it, we can modify our heads to mate to the GM block and create a new part number for them. Bill also feels our water solution is more beneficial to the very high power levels of racers where yours is perfect for everyday, high performance and multi-type vehicle use.
There is no dispute that GM will sell thousands more LS-X blocks or engines than we will. We welcome that and feel the aftermarket will pick and choose to suit their needs. We think the market is healthy and will appreciate our contribution to the niche that we are seeking.
We at World have no intention to “prove false” statements you present as facts. Nor do we wish to discredit GM, rather, state that we think we have produced some significant improvements to an excellent OEM design.
Bill Mitchell would like some points stated on which he feels strongly. He is in full agreement with your first two points and has great respect for those accomplishments. Bill feels that the design is the “greatest possible improvement for the Small Block Chevy” and an outstanding OEM design. In his view, no other pushrod OEM design is superior and he is pleased to be part of the aftermarket which supports such a product.
We cannot dispute your statement of timing and design features. Bill makes the point however that Warhawk appeared at SEMA 2005, which means design was underweigh in late 2004-early 2005. He would like known however that three years prior to that, he brought the first-ever 6 bolt block to market with the Man O’War SBF design, which we produce in volume.
We offer no comment about the Company relationship with Warren. Bill feels strongly that Warren’s solution to the 12 o’clock bolt is different but not superior to ours. We respectfully disagree about the engineering but there are many ways to do the same thing. Warhawk will accommodate an enlarged lifter bore also. Further, if demand supports it, we can modify our heads to mate to the GM block and create a new part number for them. Bill also feels our water solution is more beneficial to the very high power levels of racers where yours is perfect for everyday, high performance and multi-type vehicle use.
There is no dispute that GM will sell thousands more LS-X blocks or engines than we will. We welcome that and feel the aftermarket will pick and choose to suit their needs. We think the market is healthy and will appreciate our contribution to the niche that we are seeking.
04-12-2007, 06:38 PM
#27
Originally Posted by cary et performance
At ET Performance, we offer the 6 bolt warhawk pattern as well as the gm 6 bolt pattern in all of our heads. Whether it be our ls7, l92, cathederal port, canted valve, or C5R style heads
04-14-2007, 12:42 PM
#30
Originally Posted by cary et performance
At ET Performance, we offer the 6 bolt warhawk pattern as well as the gm 6 bolt pattern in all of our heads. Whether it be our ls7, l92, cathederal port, canted valve, or C5R style heads
You have a PM.....
Kyle
