to these men..here u go head to yellowbullet.com scroll down to naturaly aspirated-chris uratcko...click on CYLINDER HEAD SHOW AND TELl...page 98 scroll down and wahlah! thank these dudes for makin efforts..and also on rehers bench there at 323cfm...just the begining thanks to all involved.

Very nice. I said it before and I will say it again. These are great days for those of us racing MOPARS. Here's a link to the above post. http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=129971&page=98

Great news for sure!

Quick somebody run out and buy a set. Let us know if they're any good or not.

I just bought a set of 2.08 valves for an Edelbrock head to see exactly how far I can push one and get it to flow but that does sound like a real nice Winter project.

DrJ's started a separate thread for these heads over on Yellowbullet.

Link: http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=505014

Quote:

---

DR J's Performance

New AIRWOLF SBM 220 Fresh off the CNC

New Import casting. It will take std LA hardware. The head is very well made with good quality seats and guides. The seats are ductile iron and the intake seat is 2.15 dia.We are going to be putting 2.08 1.60 valves in the heads. the prototype flowed 213 @ .300 and 323cfm @.700 on Reher's bench

---

Bigger flow is kinda way upstairs 'lift wise', no? At .400- .550 maybe not dramatically better than well ported eddies. 323 is a great advertised number but if you're gonna run that kind of lift aren't there better suited heads?

I think the price on these is very important.

Here is the full flow chart from the post on yellowbullet. Looks pretty darn good.

Curious to see where the price point ends up on these.

Quote:

---

DR J's Performance:
AIRWOLF 220 SBM
2.08 intake 1.60 exhaust 45 ° seats
2.52 CSA @ pinch

Intake Flow numbers @ 28” test @ Reher Morrison
.100 72 cfm
.200 144 cfm
.300 219 cfm
.400 273 cfm
.500 301 cfm
.600 312 cfm
.700 316 cfm
.800 319 cfm
.900 321 cfm
1.00 326 cfm

---

If these come out at a good price I can see Rods stroker cranks flying out the door. They say things happen in 3s. So we have Rods cranks, these heads, and what do you think will be the topper for the SB world?

It says in that post its an imported casting so that should hold the price down some.

was 323 @ .700 now 316 @ .700 and now publishing @.900 lift

RAMM, I agree and understand port stall but for the majority of people (running something like a CompXE 284 at ~.525 of flat tap lift) it's not much better "real world" than a set of ported Eddies. With flat tappets the flow at peak really means less (it's more comparable to a roller measured .050 or .100 less than the FT peak since there's no real 'effective duration" at the peak of a flattie). Like you, I'm sure I always compare/measure/calc the % gain from the previous lift point rather than just look at the peak numbers at face value.

Overall I was more impressed with Brian @ IMM's 305 cfm Eddies that he ran the pushrod tubes through. I think they were even better through the middle (where it does the most good) than these. BTW....I'm also impressed with the work you guys up North of the border are doing too.

Mid lifts (.200-.500) still look good but not Amazing, my point on the high lifts is anyone running a .700+ lift cam is going to want a bigger/better/offset rocker intake head to start with

Oh I totally agree that if you plan to run huge lifts or large cubic inches then yes a standard port window head/no-offset rocker is NOT worth it. That's why I would bet these are aimed at the 4" and larger stroke STREET crowd 'cuz I see no place for them on anything serious.

As for low lift flow numbers--I don't want great flow rates at anything under .400"--even street stuff. I have done some testing with high low lift flow (30* seats) and it sucked--even on a street engine.

For example I was degreeing the cam on my 416 yesterday and measured that the intake valve was open more than .225" with the piston going the WRONG way. You can imagine what happens when you have great low lift flow numbers in that scenario. With all that being said--thanks for the compliment, but I still think it will be a powerful head for 95% of the people who buy them and stick them on 400+ cube small blocks that won't see much over 6000rpm. I do think the chamber is ugly however-but looks aren't everything. J.Rob

p.s. I do think we're trying to say the same thing--It boils down to choosing the best parts for the application. Question is-What application suits these heads best?

With all the other limiting factors of a Mopar... ie bore space and original layouts that most products follow Im just happy to see another manufacturer giving us a choice!

Josh

I think it will be a good in between head. Possibly an upgrade for someone who already has good rockers, intake and headers for the standard SBM layout but wants a little more giddy up.

I have ported eddies currently that flow 280@.600, granted there should be some more on the table with these, but instead of sending them back for more porting, these new heads might be a better bargain. All depends on where the price point ends up.

We all know what a CNC'd Indy top end costs. If they can price them significantly less than that I think they will sell well.

http://www.j-performance.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=50

Here is the comparable SBC head they produce, that should give you some idea on pricing I think.

Ramm, i'll bet you're looking at a pretty big cam to be at .225 of lift BTDC. Yes when you go to 'real race/mad lift and duration numbers you definately want to kill the lower lifts and 'steepen' flow window to favor the top.

What I'm wondering ( as controversial as it sounds) is why can't we adopt the LS architecture? There are already old school SBC's and even Fords that have built LS frankensteins already. Make a sbm casting that incorporates the LS ports and make a new Cam, intake and headers?