I like iron...
| Slant Six Forum https://slantsix.org/forum/ |
|
| who's interested in an aluminum head? https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14452 |
Page 3 of 11 |
| Author: | Rust collector [ Thu Sep 22, 2005 2:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I like iron...
|
|
| Author: | james longhurst [ Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
maybe if there is a demand (i.e. cash deposits made) for these, cometic would be a bit more responsive to dan stern's prodding for a MLS gasket. this could be a good thing whether you want an aluminum head or not. -james |
|
| Author: | GTS225 [ Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I would be very interested, too. With improved ports and chamber, and maybe provisions for replaceable valve guides, (for alternative valve choices), it would lend itself very well to stock street, as well as modification for performance work. It would, however have to accept most, if not all, aftermarket goodies that are already in the market. I'd have to scrape pennies for awhile, but yeah....a grand wouldn't be out of line at all. Roger |
|
| Author: | sandy in BC [ Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have $500 US in an iron head with bigger valves, revised combustion chamber and better guides and springs. Im guessing these mods are worth 30 hp on the street. The potential (with other mods) is probably 75 HP. How much extra HP is an alloy head worth over that? Is it worth $1500? I think its a cool idea but much like the guys who in the early 70s spent thousands to furnace braze up Clevland heads for the Ford 300 six, you may find you were better off with what you had. If I can afford a Cox Bros head at $800,,,might I be better off? |
|
| Author: | zedpapa [ Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | head |
this head would use all stock componets and accept all aftermarket parts. one thing being considered is to make the head as thick as possible to help with cooling. these heads will be durable. i will probably be testing them myself. and i drive hard.  zedpapa |
|
| Author: | 440_Magnum [ Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: Actually, I think most racers would agree that head flow is probably the biggest downside to a Slant head. Raising and enlarging the ports would be a biggie. The chamber would be secondary.
Ports might (or might not) be a significant problem for racers, but the chamber is a problem for EVERY slant-6. Raising the ports has already been mentioned, but its not going to do a lot of good without fixing the chamber shortcomings so people can raise compression without using race fuel all the time.
Lou |
|
| Author: | Dart270 [ Fri Sep 23, 2005 2:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't really understand this issue of pinging/detonation. It seems the biggest problem there is that people try to run V8-type timing curves on the 225 and that does not work well at all. 10 or 10.5:1 with pump premium is not a problem with the right timing curve and a decent duration cam, and still have a very streetable package. I have run 10.5:1 on my 64 Dart motor for years on 92 octane and have no detonation problems. The car also gets 23-25mpg hwy on average and runs 14s. With a carb and automatic it got 20-21. I never run more than 30 deg total mech advance, and usually 26-28 works best. 22 deg of vacuum advance gets me the mileage. I would feel completely comfortable running 9-9.5:1 on 87 octane, and have done so before. I'm sure we can do better, but I don't think it's a huge problem now. I did run as high as 11.2:1 on my 68 Dart for 3-4 years on 92 octane, and that was really on the edge for pinging, especially with the MP 0.490" cam (not so large). Still, I never had any durability issues and the car ran well once the dist and carb were dialed in (high 15s with 904 and 2.94 gears and got 20-21mpg hwy). Total mech timing was never more than 28 for best power. Lou |
|
| Author: | Slant Cecil [ Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
If you want to sell heads, they will need to perform. The people that would spend the $1000 to $2000 for them, will want good port flow. Don't design the head for stock length valves. Longer valves will be needed for a taller and/or raised port window. The Ford 289 1.78/1.46 valves are longer and I think the 302 1.78/1.46 are bit longer than the 289. These would be off the shelf parts if cost is a concern, but at $1000 and up, what's a few more $ to get a special valve made to fit the ports design. A raised and/or taller port will also make the overall height of the head taller, which will also put the air cleaner closer to the hood. It will also close up the working 'gap' on the right side of the engine bay making a little harder to get to the ignition, etc, The gap for '67 up A bodies shouldn't be any tighter than a OEM headed 225 RG early A body. It's the early A body owner that will have to deal with the smaller working access. Lou, if the head is designed for a taller valve and spring assembly, like a 1.80" to 1.88 "installed height, there would be no need to run shaft blocks that are taller and offset. Taller spring height will give more choices that the stock 1.68". But if off the shelf parts are required, your idea for large pedistals that can be milled off is good. It is all a compromise for head design to satisfy both the street and race applications. I would prefer one that leaned more towards race (or for me, wanna race!  ).
|
|
| Author: | Ron Parker [ Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Doint take this wrong but a study was done on this subject and one of our sponsers came up with a price quote for a alluminun head and it come up something like do 12 heads and we could sell them for like 3000 dollars. 3000 dollars for 40 pounds ok who is in. Thanks Ron Parker. Hey Has That Thing Got A Bagel Bamboozler In It |
|
| Author: | Slant Cecil [ Fri Sep 23, 2005 7:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
$1000 is more than I paid for my first slant six car, a '66 Dart 170. Now I'd pay that for just a head! 
|
|
| Author: | sick6 [ Fri Sep 23, 2005 7:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I paid a ton for my head work, almost $800 bucks I beleive. 3 angle job, oversized valves, port and polish, shaved .090. to avoid a repeat of pictures, you can see my flow numbers in the slixers gallery under "sick 6's duster". I had a friend of mine named brady stewart, that had his /6 head done in the same shop, somehow got a better price than me, and he actually made much better flow than me. he used to have a site called devil duster (dedicated to his volare) with all of his info up on it, but I have since lost contact with him. what I would really like to see is a set of stock head flow numbers to see exactly what the baseline is, and how much money per cfm gain is actually going to cost. |
|
| Author: | Tim Keith [ Fri Sep 23, 2005 9:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Consider the Chevy LS1 layout, maybe some off the shelf valve train parts can be used. $1,000 is a very optimistic target. I'd put the price tag closer to $4,000. Headers are more expensive to custom build than a sheet metal intake. You might be able to use Jaguar six exhaust headers as it is the only inline six which I have seen which shares the slant six's 4.0" bore center. Jag headers aren't cheap(except at pick-n-pull), cheaper than building your own headers. Keep it pushrods, but maybe look at some Jag exhaust manifolds, I think there are two sets of three, cheap at PNP. A raised intake port is good. I've seen some slant four imports, eg. Volvo which I liked, but those were crossflow. The Mopar K-frame gets in the way of the crossflow when exhaust is on the passenger side, distributor could be relocated to crank trigger, oil filter can be relocated, but the K-frame is not moving. The Nissan 280Z six has raised intake ports and inline valves, it is also non-crossflow. This layout might work well with pushrods. Make the best street motor, it'll also be vastly superior as a base for a racing head. It'll would be tricky to raise the intake ports and retain the existing manifolds. |
|
| Author: | skraecken [ Sat Sep 24, 2005 12:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I dont know if I missed it, but would it be a "cast" head or (I dont know how describe it) "milled" from a lump of aluminum? Quote: Rust collector
I know why, alu wont rust. PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:31 pm Post subject: I like iron... Embarassed 
|
|
| Author: | MJF [ Sat Sep 24, 2005 12:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: aluminum head |
Quote: the head would be cast and then finish machined to use stock slant six manifolds. |
|
| Author: | skraecken [ Sat Sep 24, 2005 1:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Is that the "strongest" way? |
|
| Page 3 of 11 | All times are UTC-08:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|