My 270 heads are in transit and supposed to be delivered today. Once they get here I'll snap some pictures. From what I've seen so far they are MW port size but they are the "small" MW size. That is, they match the Fel Pro gasket size. My Indy EZ heads which were ported by Modern were ported to the "big" MW size which is the Mr Gasket 302 size. The MrG 302 gasket is a fair bit larger than the Fel Pro gasket size. The Indy intake gasket and the Superformance gaskets fall in the middle between the Fel Pro and the MrG size. So depending on which gasket you are using there are at least four different MW port sizes.

Yeah, I bought a few different gaskets when doing mine and they were all different sizes. I ended up using the superformance gasket size.

Here is a first look at the 270 heads on my 470 engine. I bolted on a Superformance MW gasket just to compare. You can see that the port isn't as wide as this gasket. I need to order a set of the FelPro gaskets to see how they look. The MrGasket 302 gaskets are even bigger than the Superformance so probably no reason to try them.

There is a little more pushrod pinch with the 270 heads than on the 240 heads. What I haven't figured out yet is how much of the 30cc is due to the longer intake port. I think roughly half of it is due to the longer port so the port volume might not be much larger than the 240 head. I suppose I should measure both just to be sure of my math.

I'm following the thread.
Trick flow informs to use their same manifold and port match.
Perhaps this is indeed possible as they are using a " small " MW size?
Hmmm, not sure the intake can flow those numbers.

I already looked at that and answered it above. Not enough material in the runners to make them MW size. Besides, it would take hours and hours of grinding to open up intake runners from standard size to MW size.

That you did, my mistake .
Though that is the current report from Trick Flow.
Causes me to wonder what Intake they are using on their dyno runs with 270 heads.

Looks to me like the distance between the two sets of ports is a bit wider than the Superformance gasket is designed to match. Is the 240 the same way?

The 240 heads are a little different. The Superformance paper gasket is a very good match to the 240 head while the FelPro paper gasket doesn't fit very well.

This is just one of those Mopar things. I keep a complete kit of gaskets in my shop to check new parts against. People who design parts usually grab a design to copy but they never tell us what they are using as their reference. Mopar doesn't provide blueprints to the aftermarket so everyone is just making it up to some extent. If you don't keep a complete kit of gaskets you'll never know which ones to use for a particular head or intake. Head gaskets are the same way. Some flat out will not work with some heads but they don't come with warning labels!

Cheers for your research Andy. Just a quick question is the exhaust port standard height ? Im after some head but we have fenderwells set up with SR's so I cant go lower.

It is hard to get a picture that shows the issue but I'll try with this one. If you look close you can see that the OUTSIDE of the runner is smaller than the port opening in the gasket. No idea why Trick Flow thinks you can port the manifold to fit the MW size head. They should be able to look at their blueprints and know that the port size is physically bigger than the runner on the intakes.

This makes it clear that one of only two things can be true:
1. The person I spoke with ( Twice) is either poorly informed or, has misunderstood.
2. Trick Flow office I spoke with hasn't looked at the engineering specs .

I suppose there are multiple other possibilities such as:
1. They are going to release a new casting that's large enough and with enough material to port.
However, this would make no sense to be from a production cost point.

Frustrating to me is I was told they had just fun their 505 on the dyno with the 270 heads , this Intake .
They gave me the dyno numbers and the cam specs for the two cams they ran .
One being their hydraulic roller but with 1.6 rockers.
The other a Mechanical roller.

It's more than apparent that Intake design wasn't part of those dyno pulls- grin.

Simply no way to trust the numbers given not knowing what Intake was actually used.

Another instance of the value of your work imho.

I bet they used their existing intake on the dyno with the 270 heads. In fact I intend to do the same thing when I run my dyno tests. The TF intake will physically bolt to the 270 heads and it looks to me like there is enough material on the flange to get it to seal up. But there is no way that you can PORT the intake to MATCH the heads.

So I'd say it bolts on and works but it has a very large mismatch in the port size. It probably still makes decent power. I think I'll make more than 700 hp using a standard port intake on the 270 heads. I just wouldn't run it that way on race engine since I know that it will suck (or blow) the intake gasket off pretty quickly.

That makes sense of the data they gave me.
Sadly, it tells me the 240 is the head they are focused on and the 270 the odd child of the family.
Leaving us with the very limited intake issues of the MW world as far as I'm aware at this point.
The 240 heads will be fine for the current 512 build , however, I have 3 to do- 72 and 73 Charger and a 68 Roadrunner .
Roadrunner project to be race car so we were really interested in the 270 there.
Several people here wanting to see real world flow numbers on the 270 as they are doubtful of big numbers without the offset used by Indy.

We shall see.

Yep, the FelPro paper gasket doesn't even align properly with their own valley pan; the paper gasket has the port pairs separated a bit too much. You've probably seen that Edelbrock has their own .030" paper gasket that looks almost exactly like FelPro's, except the Edelbrock gasket port spread is "normal".

I don't have many MW gaskets on hand since I don't use them. However, Indy's MW gasket appears to have the opposite situation than FelPro's std port gasket, in that it has the port pairs slightly closer to each other than the "normal" distance. I don't know if Indy's MW ports align with their gasket or not. I know their std port gaskets line up just fine (at least the ports do, but the bolt holes are slightly higher than they should be).

Indy:
- RB 4150
- RB 4500 "-3"
- RB 4500 "-3X"
- B 4150
- B 4500

Edelbrock:
- RB 4500

It's not as if there are NO MW intakes, only whether Trick Flow decides to provide any more options.

EDIT: I left out the MP "337" RB 4150 because I don't know if they're any more available at this point.

Andy, any plans to test the new 270 heads with the Indy single plan intake?

yeah well try to find a standard port dominator intake?????Nothing that I know of.

Yes I broke down and ordered up a Indy 400-3 for my 470 engine. I'll test it as well as the Mopar M1 4500 std port intake. Might even try the TF std port intake depending on time.

Great, I'm looking forward to the results.

thanks