Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: To port or not to port? [Re: Cab_Burge] #2839016
10/29/20 08:13 PM
10/29/20 08:13 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,776
Melbourne , Australia
LA360 Offline
master
LA360  Offline
master

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,776
Melbourne , Australia
Personally, I think you are overthinking this.

If you really feel like you want more power, sell the Edelbrocks and buy some Trickflow heads, as Dwayne suggested.

If it was me, I'd just run what you've got.


Alan Jones
Re: To port or not to port? [Re: LA360] #2839194
10/30/20 09:00 AM
10/30/20 09:00 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,295
So. Burlington, Vt.
F
fast68plymouth Offline
I Live Here
fast68plymouth  Offline
I Live Here
F

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,295
So. Burlington, Vt.
I don’t know how big the $1643 job from Hughes is, but the MCH cnc job actually makes the heads bigger than the TF heads.
240cc vs 252cc.
At 540+ cubes, the volume could pay off.

If the price was right....... I’d say it’s a good option.


68 Satellite, 383 with stock 906’s, 3550lbs, 11.18@123
Dealer for Comp Cams/Indy Heads
Re: To port or not to port? [Re: feets] #2839229
10/30/20 10:30 AM
10/30/20 10:30 AM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 124
North America
K
kwikblownhemi Offline
member
kwikblownhemi  Offline
member
K

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 124
North America
Do yourself a huge favor. Call Dwayne.

Re: To port or not to port? [Re: fast68plymouth] #2839242
10/30/20 10:58 AM
10/30/20 10:58 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,796
Oregon
A
AndyF Offline
Too Many Posts
AndyF  Offline
Too Many Posts
A

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,796
Oregon
Originally Posted by fast68plymouth
I don’t know how big the $1643 job from Hughes is, but the MCH cnc job actually makes the heads bigger than the TF heads.
240cc vs 252cc.
At 540+ cubes, the volume could pay off.

If the price was right....... I’d say it’s a good option.


Based on the dyno testing I've done I'd say that TF240 heads work better than MCH ported Edelbrock heads. I've dyno tested them both and the TF heads work better. Not a ton better, but they do work better. If it was my engine I'd buy new TF240 heads and sell the Edelbrock heads as is. I think that will be the least money for the best result.

Re: To port or not to port? [Re: AndyF] #2839248
10/30/20 11:17 AM
10/30/20 11:17 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,295
So. Burlington, Vt.
F
fast68plymouth Offline
I Live Here
fast68plymouth  Offline
I Live Here
F

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 13,295
So. Burlington, Vt.
It would make for a good back to back comparo test.
Throw some of the biggest Hughes cnc version into the mix as well(as long as we’re doing some imaginary testing).

Mill the Ede’s down to the same chamber volume as the TF heads to eliminate that variable.

If you’re starting from scratch....... the decision is a lot easier.


68 Satellite, 383 with stock 906’s, 3550lbs, 11.18@123
Dealer for Comp Cams/Indy Heads
Re: To port or not to port? [Re: fast68plymouth] #2839281
10/30/20 12:07 PM
10/30/20 12:07 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,796
Oregon
A
AndyF Offline
Too Many Posts
AndyF  Offline
Too Many Posts
A

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,796
Oregon
I'll do a back to back test early next year when I change my 512 low over to TF240 heads. Right now it has MCH ported Edelbrock heads on it. I'm sure the TF heads will pick up power based on the testing I did with my Coronet engine. I ran both heads on the Coronet engine and the TF heads worked a little better. A little more torque and a little more power. Nothing huge, but roughly 10 to 15 better at the peaks with everything else very close to the same.

Page 2 of 2 1 2






Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1