|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: gmachinedart1]
#451686
08/27/09 11:57 AM
08/27/09 11:57 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,595
On the south side of Nowhere
S/ST 3040
master
|
master
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,595
On the south side of Nowhere
|
Pros: 1. Edelbrocks are lighter (handling) 2. Edelbrocks have less CSA (important for accellerating from the corners) 3. Requires fewer specialty component (intake, headers) 4. Easier to fix after head damage Cons: 1. Have to use INDY's rocker arms 2. 
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: S/ST 3040]
#451689
08/27/09 01:30 PM
08/27/09 01:30 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,484
SoCal
Brian Hafliger
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,484
SoCal
|
Do you plan on running a solid roller cam, or FT?
I like the edelbrock heads for road race because as mentioned there are alot of pro's, plus the valvetrain is less likely to be a problem over the highly offset W2 stuff.
How much power do you want/need? What are the rpm ranges you'll run (lowest and highest)?
How heavy is this car? I've seen short stroke engines kill bigger stroke stuff if done right.
Brian Hafliger
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: S/ST 3040]
#451690
08/27/09 02:08 PM
08/27/09 02:08 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,123
Grand Haven, MI
patrick
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,123
Grand Haven, MI
|
most pro porters only see 10-15 CFM of additional peak flow with the indybrocks, IIRC. personally, I'd go max ported standard eddies, or maybe mag eddies for the smaller chamber and cheaper rocker alternatives.
if I were looking for a relocated pushrod aluminum head, I think I'd go large port commandos. fully ported they're about as good as W2's, and have a small 53cc or so chamber.
1976 Spinnaker White Plymouth Duster, /6 A833OD
1986 Silver/Twilight Blue Chrysler 5th Ave HotRod **SOLD!***
2011 Toxic Orange Dodge Charger R/T
2017 Grand Cherokee Overland
2014 Jeep Cherokee Latitude (holy crap, my daughter is driving)
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: patrick]
#451691
08/27/09 02:54 PM
08/27/09 02:54 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 11,711
Portage,michigan
B3422W5
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 11,711
Portage,michigan
|
Quote:
most pro porters only see 10-15 CFM of additional peak flow with the indybrocks, IIRC. personally, I'd go max ported standard eddies, or maybe mag eddies for the smaller chamber and cheaper rocker alternatives.
if I were looking for a relocated pushrod aluminum head, I think I'd go large port commandos. fully ported they're about as good as W2's, and have a small 53cc or so chamber.
Good info...but, the last thing i would do is go with the large port commando's, they are expensive, need guide work,(3/8) and from what i have seen arent even"about as good" as a W2. I would say a w2 is "about as good" as a w5 though.The large port commando's seem only marginally better than an edddie, at way more cost.
For what this guy seems to want to do, cost, availability, etc, standard eddies seem the way to go. 
69 Dart GTS A4 Silver All steel, flat factory hood, 3360race weight
418 BPE factory replacement headed stroker, 565 lift solid cam
Best so far, 10.40 @127 1/4
1.41 best 60 foot
6.60 at 103.90 1/8
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: RyanJ]
#451693
08/27/09 03:03 PM
08/27/09 03:03 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,484
SoCal
Brian Hafliger
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,484
SoCal
|
There isn't much extra flow available removing the pushrod pinch, but there is power available by doing this!
You help reduce the smallest area in the entire intake tract, and thereby you help keep inertia up during the intake cycle.
It helps topend HP and HP past HP peak, but I've also seen it add TQ below and above TQ peak!
For a true 7200rpm, I would use the Indybrock's hands down.
Brian Hafliger
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: S/ST 3040]
#451695
08/27/09 05:40 PM
08/27/09 05:40 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,021
Oregon
AndyF
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,021
Oregon
|
Quote:
Pros:
1. Edelbrocks are lighter (handling)
2. Edelbrocks have less CSA (important for accellerating from the corners)
3. Requires fewer specialty component (intake, headers)
4. Easier to fix after head damage
Cons:
1. Have to use INDY's rocker arms
I believe you can use any big block rocker arm set with the Indybrock heads. At least that is the way I understood it. If so then that means the rocker arms are very easy to find since anything from Crane nodulars to Harlands to RAS rockers should bolt on there. Maybe someone on here knows for sure?
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: AndyF]
#451696
08/27/09 06:33 PM
08/27/09 06:33 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,547
State College, PA
RyanJ
moparts member
|
moparts member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,547
State College, PA
|
Quote:
Quote:
Pros:
1. Edelbrocks are lighter (handling)
2. Edelbrocks have less CSA (important for accellerating from the corners)
3. Requires fewer specialty component (intake, headers)
4. Easier to fix after head damage
Cons:
1. Have to use INDY's rocker arms
I believe you can use any big block rocker arm set with the Indybrock heads. At least that is the way I understood it. If so then that means the rocker arms are very easy to find since anything from Crane nodulars to Harlands to RAS rockers should bolt on there. Maybe someone on here knows for sure?
Look 3 posts up from yours LOL. The INDYBrock SB heads just use the INDY SR rocker arms, which are basically stock big block rockers, so yes pretty much any stock offset BB rocker would work. May have to fudge around with spacing & side clearance etc but should'nt be a big deal.
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: S/ST 3040]
#451698
08/27/09 08:02 PM
08/27/09 08:02 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,015
Down South
DaKuda
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,015
Down South
|
The crane Gold rockers work great on the Indybrocks
Here they are with the Indy SR rockers they supply.
Last edited by DaKuda; 08/27/09 08:02 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: DaKuda]
#451699
08/27/09 08:11 PM
08/27/09 08:11 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,616
Kissimmee Fl.
dusturbd340W5
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,616
Kissimmee Fl.
|
my CNC'D Indybrocks flow 302@ .550 and 313@ .700 on Ryan's bench and seem to be making pretty good steam on my 416 considering the baby roller I have in the motor so far they have pushed my ride of 3000 lbs to 6.50 @ 105 in the 1/8 in terrible air of 95deg 90% humidity with rain on the horizon.
70 duster full chassis super pro 416 CNC Indybrock heads 727 w/brake
best so far 1.212 60 6.219 in 1/8 at 110.88 9.768 at 137.81 1/4
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: dusturbd340W5]
#451701
08/28/09 09:42 AM
08/28/09 09:42 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 11,711
Portage,michigan
B3422W5
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 11,711
Portage,michigan
|
Quote:
my CNC'D Indybrocks flow 302@ .550 and 313@ .700 on Ryan's bench and seem to be making pretty good steam on my 416 considering the baby roller I have in the motor so far they have pushed my ride of 3000 lbs to 6.50 @ 105 in the 1/8 in terrible air of 95deg 90% humidity with rain on the horizon.
wow, i think i should get a set of those, they flow better than my w5's do 
69 Dart GTS A4 Silver All steel, flat factory hood, 3360race weight
418 BPE factory replacement headed stroker, 565 lift solid cam
Best so far, 10.40 @127 1/4
1.41 best 60 foot
6.60 at 103.90 1/8
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: B3422W5]
#451702
08/28/09 10:15 AM
08/28/09 10:15 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,595
On the south side of Nowhere
S/ST 3040
master
|
master
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,595
On the south side of Nowhere
|
Quote:
Quote:
my CNC'D Indybrocks flow 302@ .550 and 313@ .700 on Ryan's bench and seem to be making pretty good steam on my 416 considering the baby roller I have in the motor so far they have pushed my ride of 3000 lbs to 6.50 @ 105 in the 1/8 in terrible air of 95deg 90% humidity with rain on the horizon.
wow, i think i should get a set of those, they flow better than my w5's do
Don............the  never gets old, does it? 
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: dusturbd340W5]
#451704
08/28/09 07:20 PM
08/28/09 07:20 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,547
State College, PA
RyanJ
moparts member
|
moparts member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,547
State College, PA
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
my CNC'D Indybrocks flow 302@ .550 and 313@ .700 on Ryan's bench and seem to be making pretty good steam on my 416 considering the baby roller I have in the motor so far they have pushed my ride of 3000 lbs to 6.50 @ 105 in the 1/8 in terrible air of 95deg 90% humidity with rain on the horizon.
wow, i think i should get a set of those, they flow better than my w5's do
Just stating what is written on my flow sheet.I would think a set of GOOD w5's should flow more than 313.
His heads do flow more than 313 on my bench...... & his 9.80 ET's suggest they make more power than a typical INDYbrock & the timeslip, unlike #'s on a flowbench are all that matters.
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: dusturbd340W5]
#451706
08/28/09 07:38 PM
08/28/09 07:38 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 32,394
Quicktree
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 32,394
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
my CNC'D Indybrocks flow 302@ .550 and 313@ .700 on Ryan's bench and seem to be making pretty good steam on my 416 considering the baby roller I have in the motor so far they have pushed my ride of 3000 lbs to 6.50 @ 105 in the 1/8 in terrible air of 95deg 90% humidity with rain on the horizon.
wow, i think i should get a set of those, they flow better than my w5's do
Just stating what is written on my flow sheet.I would think a set of GOOD w5's should flow more than 313.
His heads do flow more than 313 on my bench...... & his 9.80 ET's suggest they make more power than a typical INDYbrock & the timeslip, unlike #'s on a flowbench are all that matters.
 the timeslip is all that matters so far I am happy with what these heads are doing considering the roller is only 246/254@ 50 and only .592 lift and they have run 6.52 @ 106 in a 3000 lb car in terrible air I think that pretty good for what they are.
and I bet it will go faster after a little more tunning and better air.
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: dartman366]
#451709
08/28/09 10:07 PM
08/28/09 10:07 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,547
State College, PA
RyanJ
moparts member
|
moparts member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,547
State College, PA
|
Quote:
my marginally better than a edelbrock set of Lg Port Commando's
LOL!
To be honest they all SUCK, everyone should have a set of INDY 360 series heads on There, that ought to stir the pot nicely 
You can go fast with anything if the combo is right.... these arguments over which head is better than this one is funny. They all have Pro's & they all have Con's.
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: Brian Hafliger]
#451712
08/29/09 12:56 AM
08/29/09 12:56 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 137
LI, new york
gmachinedart1
OP
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 137
LI, new york
|
Quote:
Do you plan on running a solid roller cam, or FT?
I like the edelbrock heads for road race because as mentioned there are alot of pro's, plus the valvetrain is less likely to be a problem over the highly offset W2 stuff.
How much power do you want/need? What are the rpm ranges you'll run (lowest and highest)?
How heavy is this car? I've seen short stroke engines kill bigger stroke stuff if done right.
I must state that the car(70 dart) is not an all out road race car but really a 3400lb(w/driver)street car that is used for track days and autocrossed.I would like to try a solid roller if it will be reliable,but if its not in budget a solid f/t will do.I guess an honest 500hp on pump gas would suffice.Rpm range would prob be 1200-7200.I dont know if it would be a step backwards(from the current 360)but I might consider doing a 340 with the shorter stroke and rpm potential.
thanx
justin
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: gmachinedart1]
#451713
08/29/09 12:46 PM
08/29/09 12:46 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,484
SoCal
Brian Hafliger
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,484
SoCal
|
The only way to make a short stroke engine work in a road race app. is throw gear at it. Probably not a very good street car that way.
500HP is not too hard, but wanting 7200rpm means you either need to stay with a 360, and use edelbrock heads or Indy's smaller 210cc head, or maybe go to a 340 style block and use a 3.79 crank and Indy's 230cc head.
If you go with a 4" crank, you'll need a 230 Indy head min. to get that rpm range but you'll make way more than 500HP. Not to mention cost will be alot higher with the Indy stuff.
If it were me, I would stick to the 360, and use edelbrock magnum heads with a FT cam and 1.7 rockers to get some lift at the valve.
Those heads need to be ported to make 500HP, but with 10.3:1 and the right carb (950HP) I think 500HP is easily doable.
I would also try to use lightweight stuff like Scat rods, light pistons, and a lightweight crank if you can afford it. The engine will act like it has alot more TQ than it really does helping with a taller gear that's more street friendly.
Brian Hafliger
|
|
|
Re: Indybrocks vs. W2's
[Re: DaKuda]
#451716
08/29/09 07:22 PM
08/29/09 07:22 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,484
SoCal
Brian Hafliger
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,484
SoCal
|
Quote:
hey brian, what ever came of the smallblock roller lifters that didnt need block grinding to install? back to subject now.
Not sure what you mean...? I have them in stock, and more in Mi.
|
|
|
|
|
.JPG){kind=link}
