how accurate is Hughes cfm charts?

i have been looking at the BPE 205 CNC head and also the Hughes Engines CNC RPM head. when i go onto the Hughes site and look at the flow #'s, the are way better then BPE. this is what i took off Hughes site,

RPM CNC (not bigmouth)

lift INT EXT
300 221 156
400 266 185
500 296 206
600 303 218

BPE 205cc CNC

lift INT EXT
300 197 186
400 249 208
500 275 215
600 291 222

is the RPM head the better choice?

I never assume flow numbers gleaned from different benches can be compared as truly "apples to apples".

Same for dyno results from different dynos.

Just my opinion, but I would be Rod's head will make significantly more power, probably more than the bigmouth as well.

Go to forabodys only and look up big mouth heads you will be shocked when you see the real numbers off of 2 other benches not even close to what hughes web site says like 20 cfm lower then what they say they flow

All I'll add is a local guy built an engine with Hugh's ported Edelbrocks (not big mouths) and it didn't perform as expected so he called me to flow test his heads. I was busy at the time so another local Friend flow tested them for him. He was not happy at all especially after my Friend said he couldn't even correct the issues. He bought a set of BPE heads and I didn't hear the results but I expect to hear much better news.

i have heard that Hughes #'s are a bit off. it looks very good on paper but if other people have tested them on there benches and got different results, it's no use getting them.

with the exhaust flow higher, does that mean more efficient? i'm no engine builder but want to learn.

I have no idea which version of the Hughes CNC program this was.... It was from about 3 years ago.
2.08 intake valve, fully CNC ported, did not need offset intake rockers.
The thing I remember most about it was how low the intake short turn was.
I didn't think you could take that much out without hitting water.


4.00" bore, no tube on exhaust, radius plate on intake.
Intake flowed 281 @.700, exhaust 203.

Eddy CNC from MCH done back in 2010

Edelbrock heads STOCK max out at 243 average on my bench. I can get them up to an honest 315 with a 2.08 valve and without moving the pushrod (tubing them and touching the tube) it takes LOTS of work and I flow every single port (and test air-speed) on the head multiple times to get it there. I bought a set of Harlan Sharp .350 off-set rockers but so far the little bit of tinkiering I've done the results have been disappointing. I will make it pay-off with testing sooner or later. The nice thing about the later style Speedmaster and ProMaxx heads is you can play with the floor more as there is more meat and less water passages.

When I ported my RPM heads I just keep one runner of intake, exhaust, chamber and valve job untouchable to have comparison of my porting in the same flow bench.

As John said, best flow that I found as cast on intake was 244@.600".

Some pictures:

Intake: Ported vs Cast



Chamber: Ported vs Cast



Exhaust:



On Flow Bench



Flow Chart:

See how your flow number dropped from 300@.600 to 292@700? I'm betting if you check air-speed at the short-turn its over 410 FPS. If you widen the port there and slow the speed it will flow more. Its skipping the short turn some right now I'm betting.

Will let you know in next week or so having a set cnc and then taking them to Dwayne to see what they flow

Fully ported Magnums by Hughes. Their #'s fall right in there with what has been posted on this thread. Haven't seen any ET improvement over the fully "home" ported cast iron Magnums I was running. The push rod tubes could cause more turbulence than they are worth?

I would buy Rods heads over the Hughes heads ive seen them both up close and Rods heads are very nice

If the BPE heads flow anywhere close to 290cfm unported, they should work well.

Working with a semi-clean sheet of paper, as they did....... I don't think it would be that hard to improve on the rpm head.

BPE heads are CNC ported as delivered. Brett was involved in the port design. Bischoff( BES racing engines)does the CNC porting and valve job. Both those guys know how to make proven power. Extremely nice work. Looked at the heads last summer at Norwalk.
I think they will capably support 650 horsepower with right combination.

here is the thread. it's really long. i'm posting a link that takes you to the post with the pics of the BPE heads.
i don't think the BPE heads got flowed but the motor was supposed to be dyno'd this past monday, the guy hasn't posted any results though...
http://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/threads/missed-on-this-combo.374177/page-14#post-1971634567

long story short, the torque was soft at lower rpm's. the guy figured out his Hughes rockers arms weren't actually 1.6 ratio. he found out the hughes heads weren't flowing as much as he expected and RAMM said his experience with some similar Hughes heads was the short side was weird.

will be interesting to see if the motor makes more power with true rockers ratios and the BPE heads...

I was under the impression that the smaller version were "as cast".

You're saying both versions are CNC ported?(I'm asking...... I don't know if they are or aren't)

Both are cnc ported but the bigger cc ones require offset rockers

It wouldn't have a 195 cc intake if it was as cast. Aren't the edelbrock type castings 170 something as cast?

I checked out the thread in the link....... Some pics there.
Heads look real nice.

I see all kinds of flow numbers. Pictures of pretty ports. My heads are an old set hand ported -1's by Jeff at MCH long long ago. I touched the valves myself at my buddy's shop. No flow numbers. The runner walls look a little wobbly. I do know that the 572 with 2 eddy carbs on a cross ram it's been 9.04@149 at 3350lbs. How much do they flow? how much power? I can only guess. But I'm happy with the results. You never know until it hits the track.
Doug

I read through that whole thread on FABO....... It's interesting how the opinions on how to "fix" that guys motor vary so widely.

Supposedly, the motor should have been back on the dyno with the BPE heads this week....... No results yet.

i have read the thread on FABO too. waiting very patiently for the results to be posted.

I looked through some old dyno sheets I had.

I did some SB RPM heads for a guy about 15 years ago.
He was having some troubles getting the car to run what it "should" with the ported heads and new cam.
He fought with it one season, the car didn't seem to respond to anything. He was looking for solid 10's and it was stuck in the 11-teens.

The motor had never been dynoed........ so I told him, before you spend more $$$$ on the motor, pull it out and get it dynoed.
The combo he had "should" have made 575hp, and if it did, the car should be solidly in the 10's.
He couldn't seem to find anyone in his area that was set up to test Mopars, so he ended up shipping it to me.
He sent his headers, carb, timing light, etc.

I put it on the dyno, warmed it up, set the timing where he said he was running it......... and on the first pull it made 576hp.
The reason the car wouldn't run the number was not a problem with the motor.

He had sent a new carb to tune, and after playing with that a bit it ended up making 587hp.

He swapped out a few suspect parts in the car, got a new converter, had the trans done.......and iirc, it was running 10.60's first time out the next season.

Anyway, that was 2003 when I tested it(heads were done in 2001 or 2002).
280cfm RPM heads, 419ci, Victor intake, 1050 carb, 1-7/8x3.5 headers, 264/268-108 roller, 1.5 rockers......... 544tq @4900, 587hp @6400.

I see there are some results from the dyno test of the BPE heads over on Fabo.

For me......with what has been posted over there so far.......I have more questions than answers.

^ ha, yeah. I wish he would've flowed them before installing them.

That thread is too long to go back and check for sure, but i think his only changes were the heads and the hughes rockers that he had replaced because the first ones weren't giving him a true 1.6 rocker ratio. he bought the bpe heads bare and installed the hardware from his edelbrock heads that hughes cnc'd. he sent the cam back to bullit but i think he got in touch with them soon enough to actually not have them regrind the thing.

i had a suspicion when he didn't post for days that something weird might've happened.

interestingly, his peaks with the BPE heads were almost exactly the same as the 586hp combo you spoke of in your post up there ^^^

He called me and said he was going to take them over to Toms to get them flow tested after getting bitten before. Maybe Tom was busy too.

I just find it really odd that it made, as he put it, "waaay less" than it did with the RPM heads.

A few years ago(4-5) I built a very basic bracket 416 for a friend on mine.
Bowl blended RPM's, super victor, old school 850, easy-on-parts flat tappet cam, ductile 1.5 rockers.........even that thing made just over 560hp.

It's like ....... 560hp from that combo is(should be) a slam dunk........and now it's making less with the new heads??

I guess one thing in particular about the BPE heads that surprises me is, it doesn't appear they did any testing of those heads on the dyno vs the other stuff they are competing with.
If they did, it doesn't seem like it's common knowledge.

Since I know both Rod and Vic are "small block guys" I just assumed they would have been all over some back to back dyno testing.

Like I said........ more questions than answers.

I will say this....... it wouldn't surprise me if it turns out there was some other "issue" that was contributing to the disappointing outcome.........and that some similar head swap test in the future ends up yielding different results.

WOW i'm surprised.

I have no hard facts as to whether they did or didn't........just the feeling I got based on what was posted over there.

Wonder if the results have something to do with just..... ' using the hardware from the Hughes heads".
From what I understand, Brett developed the port, digitized it, Bischoff cnc'ed the heads and put his valve job on them.
That's extremely elite couple of guys.
I suspect more to this than has thus far met the eye.

Prior to the head swap, there was a lot of talk about retarding the cam.

I wonder if that plan got implemented with the new head install.

I wish he would just post the sheet over there. Hard to analyze it really without seeing a few of the numbers, curves, etc.
His words "waaay less"........ How much less is that? 5hp?10hp?25hp?

When it was apparent that the numbers werent going to come around....... Was any type of troubleshooting done while it was on the dyno?
Play with the lash, cranking compression, try a dominator on it, etc

We did a street/strip 408 last year. Pretty mild pump gas deal...... Owner wanted "500hp+".

10.5cr, .600 roller, bowl blended RPM's, std victor, QFT 850.
Made 540hp.

So, the question in my mind is....... On a mild build like that...... If you just swapped out the heads for the BPE 205's....... Would it pick up?
Or, does it need to be "more" of a motor to make them work?

Anyone know what the intake runner volume is for the Hughes full CNC non-big mouth?
The guy who did the head swap had the Hughes heads flowed and they made it to 300cfm.
If the BPE's flow similarly, but have a larger cross section and runner volume, might be a situation where they're "too big" for the application.
Although I doubt this is really the case. A 205cc head is still pretty small on a 400+ cube build.
I'm just "thinking out loud".

Tho owner says same cam, same ICL.

He kinda says "everything" is the same, but never specifically says the cam is installed at the same c/l.

Plus, no cranking pressure test for either set of heads.

It's a pretty long thread over there, lots of info to go through.....
I know it's a Bullet cam...... And I thought I saw it was an UltraDyne grind.
If it's the old UD .4176 lobes...... Those aren't really "tight lash" lobes, and I see on the dyno sheet from the original post they had the lash at .016/.018.
When I ran those cams, I used .026/.026.
Might have helped perk up that missing low end TQ.

When I ran those cams, I used .026/.026.
Might have helped perk up that missing low end TQ.


WOW!!!!!! You ran that much cold with aluminum heads???

I always set the lash hot.

I checked my old UD lobe profile sheet....... Those .4176 lobes are listed as .026 lash with a 1.5 RR.
If you were trying to have the 0 lash point be the same going from the 1.5 to 1.6, then the lash would need to grow almost another .002.

If I had seen the TQ was so soft at under 4500rpm, I definitely would have tried loosening the lash from the .016/.018 they were running.

The basic bracket motor I did a few years ago was making about 100ft/lbs more at 4000, with the same intake and a flat tappet cam with a little more duration than the roller he's using.

A little more "Monday morning armchair quarterbacking".....

The owner of that engine says he was only looking for 575hp, and with a spacer under the carb it was at 567hp with the Hughes heads(560hp without).

I really think with some more testing of intakes, carbs, headers, that 575hp mark could have been exceeded without resorting to a head swap.
Granted, I wasnt there, and don't know how extensively they pursued it....... But as close as they were, I think it could have been done.

One example....... The owner said they couldn't fit any spacer on that SV manifold in the car.
But what they tried was 7hp.
Perhaps a std Victor with a nice port job and a spacer might have been a little better?

When you're building a new combo and it doesn't do what you want, sometimes you have to hunt for the missing power.

Like I said....... Just more speculating on my part.

^ agreed, and i think they might find the power with the BPE heads too. any major parts swap is going to require some fiddling.

one of the things the guy was bummed about though, seemed to be he felt the torque was soft in the lower rpm's. i think he was hoping to get to ~575hp and also pick up the torque curve a little too.
With all the dogging on the short side radius on the Hughes heads, I think everyone was confident the BPE heads were going to pick up power through the whole curve, as those heads were quite different in the SSR.

I saved that thread and will try to read it this weekend but if he had that super Victor on it and it was unported they suck. I got one in a package deal and it took a lot of porting work to get it top work for me. I modified an Indy intake to work on my 408 and when I tried it I was sucking oil from the intake valley and didn't have time to address the issue (double gaskets MAY have fixed it) so I had to throw the Super Victor on. My Duster ended up running a 9.73 with my Edelbrock heads and the Super Victor but I'm betting it wouldn't have been in the 9's out of the box. I'll take a regular Victor 340 intake over it any day of the week.

The low end TQ was pretty poor.
I don't think I can point the finger at the SV intake alone for that.
As I said, the bracket 416 I did a few years ago had that same intake on it with only a quicky port match....... And that motor was up 100ft/lbs at 4000rpm.
Peak TQ to peak TQ the motor I did was only up about 10, but the bottom of the curve was much better.

What can you really tell from pictures of ports? But, looking at the BPE head's pedigree and pictures, it seem hard to believe that the lack of power lay in the heads.

We just pulled our BPE 4.125 stroker kit 424/360 off our dyno here in Idaho a few days before the engine with the BPE heads was tested across the country. Ours was running our Indy LAX iron heads (290cfm @ .500", 301cfm @ .550", 303cfm @ 600", 297cfm @ .650"), Chevy 1.5 7/16" stud mounted rockers, Super Victor intake, 950cfm 4150, solid roller 258/260 @ .050, .425/.430 lobe lift, 10.83:1 compression, 165 psi cylinder pressure @ 5,000' elevation, 91 octane pump gas. Best pulls....480 LB-FT @ 3,000 rpm, 572 LB-FT @ 4,800 rpm and 603 HP @ 6,300 rpm.

How could a well set up stroker with the BPE heads not be capable of at least the same results?

Someone is surely wondering about the flow bench accuracy. As a comparison, the very best intake flows I've gotten from the OOTB Edelbrock RPM small block head was 248cfm @ .500" and 250cfm @ .600"

And the dyno? I always wondered. I took a mild big block stroker that was making 598 lb-ft & 585 hp on our dyno, to another dyno the very next day. 150 miles away and 200' elevation lower, with no changes to the engine, it made 615 lb-ft & 600 hp.

You cannot race flow benches or dynos.

I'm telling ya......If I was in the market for set of small block heads, I do believe I would still try the BPE heads.

A few more ramblings.......

Looking at Jim's 424 combo above, the "other" motor wasnt really all that far off as far as peak hp goes, if you look at the hp/ci.
Using Jim's 603hp and 424ci, it's 1.422 hp/ci.
If that 410 made the same per ci it would have been 583hp.
Since they saw 567 out of it with a carb spacer, that's 1.382 hp/ci......so, not "way off"(16hp).

My gut feeling is, whatever is making it so the low end TQ is so far below where it really should be...... You fix that..... It would put up a better number up top.
I see it pretty often........ Start low/end low.

Hi guys! Well, I joined to add to this that I am the guy who started the very long post on the A body forum. I am the first person to ever buy, install, and run the BPE heads on the dyno.

So to clarify things, the BPE heads were run with EXACTLY the same combo as the Hughes Eddy's(560 HP@ 6600(I believe), 439 ft/lb @ 4000).
The only change was the rockers were verified as ALL having a true 1.6 ratio.

I thought this Edelbrock/Hughes combo had a poor low end and honestly felt the HP should have been better.

Hence the chance on BPE heads.
They did look really nice. The intake port opening seemed really big, to me. Had to open up my Super Victor quite a bit more than with the Eddy's.

BPE heads bolted on and to the dyno. First thing we did after warm up was to adjust valves to .020/.022 per Tim at Bullet.

After much trial and this and that the Bloomer heads made only 534 HP at 6300 and torque was pathetic at 391 at 4000 RPM. This was our best pull.

I spoke to Rod who seemed as devastated as me and eventually he had me ship them directly to Brett Miller. He said he would send me a refund along with shipping. Brett got the heads Tuesday. I have heard nothing and got no check yet, but I believe Rod was sincere. He has stopped his head program until they can figure out what the heck is wrong.

I blame myself for being the guinea pig AND I sorta blame Rod for selling an untested product. A very expensive one at that.

My dyno guy has his thoughts as to the problem, but I'm sure they will figure it out.

Rod has been nothing more than sincere and said from the start he will make it right.

I have no check in my hand. Yet.

So right now I have a real nice bottom end, sitting with no idea where or who I can get a pair of heads from.

I'm sure Brett will get those heads figured out he is one of the best out there on small block mopar heads that's why the victor heads had so many delays they would not make the power edelbrock wanted power Brett differently knows how to make big power I would wait and give the heads another try and if they make the power your looking for then pay for the heads

Thanks for the clarification, and welcome to the board.

I'm sure "the check is in the mail", and once you have it you'll be able to figure out what your next move is.

Sure would have loved some cranking pressure numbers though

Welcome aboard

Yeah, me too. Something crazy starts happening and I sort of lost focus, worried about other stuff. I have to figure cranking psi was somewhere in the 185 to 195 range.

I run a vey similar Lunati grind that's 188 PSI.

I find it weird that Rod didn't call to say "we got them" or SOMETHING. This might not be over yet. Hope I'm wrong.

Thanks, John!

Dyno numbers.

I have the heads been on the flow bench.

Nothing I see wrong with heads. (Like to change valve job just to see)

I have not said much about this deal but let's get the facts out

Rods chambers 4 cc larger than other heads almost .5 point of CR

Valve lash was not the same for both heads on the dyno print outs that I have seen.

You opened up the end of the intake (big mistake IMHO)
This changed the taper of intake.

Why 6° timing difference in the Engine's?
Chambers are about the same plug locations the same.

This engine should have been run on pump gas no race fuel mix

I believe loss of compression plus race fuel mix and wrong cam IMO contributed to the increase of timing

Both heads run on pump and race gas mix. Best pull posted
Valve lash was changed on both. Numbers were best pull for each head.
Same for timing. Best pull posted.
.4 points in compression ain't that much on this type engine. So I'm told.

So you're saying that the intake port could be .200 smaller than the head port?

I haven't bad mouthed ANYONE but maybe Hughes in this whole ordeal. Their heads I DID have flowed. I didn't have the BPE heads flowed as I felt I didn't need to.

All that being said, since I don't know much about heads my dyno guy told me this: The venturi is blown out, the approach is all wrong and the ports are way too big. Not to mention the 2.08 intake on these heads is badly shrouded on a 4.040 bore. Not so for the same valve in the Edelbrocks. Somehow, someway the valves are closer together in the Eddy's. I had to re shim my rockers to make up the diff.

He said velocity was probably all wrong causing big time turbulence, and something about "going sonic".

My dyno guy is a proven, well known racer in this part of the woods. I always believe what he tells me because he has proven it so many times.

I did everything a guy could and the heads did not perform as advertised....yet. I'm sure they will get it figured out but right now, they are not ready to sell. I mean come on. Those torque numbers are pathetic.

I don't really want to say anymore at this time. I just want a pair of heads that are ready to make some power.

Well dyno sheet clearly marked pump gas race gas mix.

Yea torque is pathetic but not the heads fault.

Min cross section 2.1" air speed down center of port at .600" lift 310 FPS
Short turn 380- 420 FPS (little fast)


Yea and end of intake can be way smaller than head and still run good or better than blowing the end of it out.

Never said you bad mouthed anyone but you sure don't like to put all the facts out.

But in the end don't matter to me.

All the facts are over there on the A body forum. A friend told me I better check it out here.

I'm sorry but I know those heads aren't ready yet. I have the same engine combo(almost) in the car now, making 540 HP and gobs of torque. With ported iron heads and a little less cam. Almost IDENTICAL combo. I've done quite a few Super Victors now. I always match the top and sides, leave about .030 high on the bottom. All have run great.

I wish to God these heads would have worked out for me. You have no idea what I've gone through.

i picked up a set of W2's. i have used them in the past and made good power so i'll do it again.

Do you think if you had bolted the Hughes heads onto the iron headed motor that the result would have been a big reduction in low end TQ, and only a 20hp gain?

I thought I would just address a few things to hopefully put all of this into better perspective. First of all, though these heads are very high quality and I know they have the potential to be a real asset to all of us small block Mopar guys, I want to be clear that, in their current state, they did not perform as I expected in this particular application. We have already started looking at possible ways to modify the current program/valve job. It is my goal to offer cylinder heads that exceed expectations and I will do what it takes to achieve that.

With that being said, I do want to touch on a few things that have been said in this and another forum. First of all, I did have multiple conversations with Mike before selling him these heads. He was aware of the issue I had with the dyno while testing and I made it very clear several times that I could not promise that these would make the hp & torque he was after. I did tell him he could flow them, check them out as much as he wanted, show them to his engine builder, etc, and if he did not feel comfortable with using them for any reason, I would take them back and refund his money in full. However, if he bolted them on, they were his. I was trying to be as fair as possible. He decided to purchase a set and then asked me to take a personal check and ship them before it cleared. That is obviously not a wise business decision and not something I normally do but in good faith, I took him at his word and shipped the heads before the check cleared. I do feel somewhat like my character is being questioned because he now has to wait a few days for my check to reach him. I assumed that the "good faith" would work both ways. Brett received the returned heads on Tuesday, May 9th at his work place. He brought them home that night, checked them over for damage, and let me know they were good. I wrote a check and sent it out the next morning, Wednesday, May 10th. I not only covered the cost of the heads, but shipping both ways (and now shipping to send his spring locators back to him as they were left on the heads). I do not know what more I can do to make this right. I believe I have gone above and beyond to do so. Did he ask Hughes for his money back after their heads did not perform to his standards? No he did not because everyone knows, this is not a common practice in our industry (and he would not have received any money back).

I do want to thank Brett for working with me and everything that he has done to help me reach my goals. I do not want this to be any kind of a bad reflection on him. I take full responsibility for this. These are my heads, and my business. So no excuses, I am moving forward and you can expect that when these are fine tuned, I will have a better overall product and will learn from this. "If you think you know everything, you'll never learn anything".

One last thing is that I'd like to thank everyone that has called, texted, emailed, and given me words of encouragement and support. It is VERY much appreciated! You are the reason I continue to do this.

Rod

BPE, it sounds to me like you've gone above and beyond what is the usual good customer service.

It's hard to do any more than you have done.

Thanks for the update.

100% !!!

X3!

I don't know many businesses that would what Rod has done.

He went above and beyond. I knew he was solid the first time I talked to him. I have stated that fact many times.

If more businessmen had the ethics and values that Rod has, things would be a lot better all around.

Personally, I would rather have them found the issue, grind on another pair and just send them to me. I even told Rod I'm more than happy to be their "test mule". I have a solid bottom end just sitting here, and a dyno 20 minutes away. I really wanted to "stay in the loop". I STILL feel that way.

I could be wrong, but I have a gut feeling that big egos get in the way. And it ain't mine or Rod's. Couple posts here made me feel like someone was talking down to me.

Like I said, I could be wrong. Won't be the first time.

Did you ask Dave for a refund on his heads?

I have a lot of respect for Mr. Bloomer bringing these to market. Even more respect for the way this situation was handled.

Was there any flow data published on these after the release? Forgive me if there is, but I haven't seen any.

I see alot of hp on the table with a few dyno proven pieces i had on my stock block eddy headed Barton moTor.
9hp Wilson spacer
13hp vacuum pump
And beleive it it made 11hp more on 93 octane fuel then the sunoco race gas.
This was on a 502hp 418 Motor Barton built motor

I will post longer video but internet fighting tonight.

https://youtu.be/6Edxg_vihrA








It's late.

Will try to update what we did on flow bench.

Sorry I had numbers the night I got the heads just forgot to save file and the was first night I had time to put them back on.

Just over 300cfm at a tad under 28".

301.6 @ 27.68" corrects to 305.1 @ 28.00"

Nice numbers.

Actually the numbers are corrected to 28"👍🏻

Looks nice great work as always Brett by the looks of the numbers there is more going on with this motor then whats being posted it looks like those heads have great numbers

Looks nice great work as always Brett by the looks of the numbers there is more going on with this motor then whats being posted

"CCFM"........ Didn't catch that.

Well that flow bench right there was within 2cfm of the flow bench Jeremy and ten speed used for butch Kemps sb2 motor.
The same motor that Dynoed in the area of 1050hp and by the time it was put on a dyno in MI a day later it picked up 50hp.
It might truly be the engine builder here or something he's missing....
Blaming head flow #s against someone that's makes 800 hp sbs like changeing his underwear is Balsy especially when The TOP engine builders praise his work.
Uratchko or BES would've seen this problem without bolting them on i would imagine.

Never I good idea to compare data from different dynos...... But.....

416, 12:1, port matched SV, old school 850 Holley, we have a couple sets of dyno headers for these things, and to the best of my recollection I used the 1 7/8 x 3.5 on this motor.
Flat tappet cam, old school .842 lobes, 265/270-106 in at 102, .375/.375, crane 1.5 ductile rockers, straight c12 gas, timing 36, lash .022/.022.
RPM heads with some mid-level effort porting, around 270cfm.

539 uncorrected hp.
Baro 29.98, .53 vapor pressure, 78deg air temp.
BSFC in the low/mid- 4's until the last 4 lines, where it went up to .48-.49.

2.02 valve, 4.00 bore:
Lift-----flow
.100---65.4
.200--132.9
.300--190.3
.400--234.3
.500--268.3
.550--277.8
.600--269.1
.650--268.3

i'm the one that posted on the FABO thread asking about low torque number with similar combos with a SV manifold.
maybe the SV manifold combined with the cylinder pressure going the wrong way with the BPE heads were two of the reasons he didn't hit closer to his expected numbers right from the start.

would've been nice to see cranking psi numbers...

I just figured I'd post the numbers to show the missing 100ft/lbs at 4000rpm isn't because it can't be done with the SV.

Using small-ish heads and a 4" stroke, things should be well underway by 4000-4200rpm.

With that other motor, it looked pretty soft down low with both sets of heads by the looks of the sheets.

Too me they both had bad valve jobs to be
that weak down low.... JMO

From what is posted, I think the engine underperformed due to a combination of the engine builder/designer. Many of the people commenting here would have simply listened to the goals of the original poster and executed a package that would perform to his expectations using most of the same parts. There are risks you take as a home builder/hobbiest (for the money you may save? the satisfaction of doing it yourself? etc?) that may result in disappointing results unfortunately. But as we see the heads from Rod and Brett are not the reason for this engine not performing to expectations. I too feel Rod has reacted beyond fair and it does not surprise me because he has a legacy of that character. I still feel this post is worthwhile, it serves for all a learning experience on many fronts.

That other motor would have certainly made for an interesting "science experiment".

Swap out a component at a time until you find what's holding it back.

Was there really one thing that was a major contributor, or was it really just a few things that each played a part in the less than expected/desired results?

I will say this, from my perspective....... I don't see anything glaringly wrong with it "on paper", and would have also been looking for better results myself.

This is slightly off topic, but this thread made me think of it again......
I'm really surprised no head company, even someone like Pro Comp has offered up a new aluminum W2 head.
All the support products already exist..... Intakes, rockers, headers.
Just cast the long valve W2's in aluminum. Use 11/32 bronze guides, come up with a more modern closed chamber........ I would think they would sell pretty well.
They're a known quantity........ They work.

Anyway....... That's just a thought from a BB guy.

I wish they would also.. I would be buying a set today
to get the iron ones off.. I sure wouldnt mind a 40#
weight loss

The problem is most guys never wanted to buy the valve train and cried about what it costs. Those guys think they can make power with a stock rocker. Will never happen.

Batten did make a W2 aluminum heads witch I now think we're the start of the Indy heads

I've been thinking of buying these.. but they
are a bit pricey

http://www.hughesengines.com/Index/produ...mp;partid=23692

I am running the Indy 360-2 heads that Brett ported and I am very pleased with them.

Guess it depends on the goals. My stock rocker, stock port location street engine has outran quite a few W-2 street engines. If I had Eddies, I would give Rod's heads a try, but I really don't want to give up 15 cc of port volume compared to my AIRWOLF 220s, and no, I'm not interested in an offset rocker.

The Basic numbers
RPM Torque HP
4200 507 405
4400 524 439
4600 537 470
4800 545 498
4900 547 510
5000 546 520
5200 542 536
5400 540 555
5600 535 570
5800 531 586
6000 525 600
6200 518 611
6300 512 614
6400 504 615
6500 498 616

Most guys can do the same thing my engine did with Eddies and a stout roller cam, mine is a comp flat tappet that is very nice on the street, 269/275 @.050, and 600/601 lift on a 111 lobe separation.


I could ship Iron Mike my AIRWOLF 220's, and I have a feeling he'd come back with disappointing flow numbers and dyno numbers...just think after two sets of heads, maybe the problem lies elsewhere.

I agree Billy,but if his Dyno guy bolts them on...smfh

So got our set of mw victors back from Hughes and I will say their work looks nice and did a very nice job but there advertised 400 cfm was off by a long shot compaired to what Dwayne flowed them on his bench

Musta forgot to put the spark plug in. LOL

Maybe that's where the other 40 cfm went all though low end flow was impressive

Tested on 4.375 bore, 28" test pressure, radius plate on intake:

Lift---------I/E-----w-2" tube
.100---78.6/56.1
.200--165.6/114.6
.300--234.4/164.7
.400--286.8/203.7
.500--304.8/232.4--245.7
.550--319.7/238.8--255.1
.600--334.5/246.4--261.5
.650--345.9/253.3--267.2
.700--346.7/255.1--272.9
.750--347.8/257.8--277.8
.800--350.4/260.8--280.4

Vs there advertised


355cc int port vol
Flow tests below show results from our SAENZ 680 Flow Bench

Lift Stock Intake CFM CNC'd Intake CFM CFM Gained Stock Exhaust CFM CNC'd Exhaust CFM CFM Gained
.100 74.4 79 5 63.7 77.9 14.2
.200 137.0 164 30 115.2 129.5 14.3
.300 191.7 245 43.3 167.4 183.8 16.4
.350 220.1 270 47.9 192.5 208.2 15.7
.400 247.8 300 45.2 212.5 234.7 22.2
.450 273.9 328 43.1 226.6 256.6 30
.500 293.8 351 53.2 234.6 273.8 39.2
.550 309.5 366 45.5 238.3 287.1 48.8
.600 310.7 380 65.3 241.8 296.4 54.6
.650 311.0 391 73.0 243.9 305.4 61.5
.700 316.4 397 79.6 244.9 312.4 67.5
.750 318.6 397 60.4 246.0 317.7 71.7
.800 322.0 406 86 246.7 322.4 75.7

Happy with there work 100% just not where I exspected them to be

Maybe benches that much diffrent I no head guy 🙄

It takes me about 5 minutes to check the calibration of my flowbench and I check it before every set of heads I test. If doing work for a customer I give them before and after numbers. It's not that hard to do BUT high numbers sells and most head porters don't even own a set of calibrated plates

Dwayne did state the version of mw Victor wasn't the best flowing out of the bunch think it was second gen but maybe he will chime in on that, either way I think we will see a huge improvement in hp just on paper seems like big numbers diffrence