A few question about the E MW victor head

Removed the heads today. Does Edelbrock stamp the MW Victor head with the Max Wedge name any where on the head to clearly distinguish the MW Victor from the Victor? Mine have victor 440 on the end of the head. The piston tops looked a bit dirty and #7 was the worst. #7 intake port is also the cleanest and the chamber looks different from the others as well.

The piston tops look worse in the pics than the naked eye. They do show some air flow patterns at the top, not sure what to look for there.

A few more. Do you see anything that stands out as being a sign of power loss issues?

These will be going to Steve Sanchez at Total Flow for inspection and some machine work. I think they need seals for starters. I'm not sure how far to have them milled yet, But will take atleast .045" for a 12.5:1 compression. I may take more, just depends.

7793 is MW casting; 7791 is standard port

There is a lot of buildup on your intake valve stems, IMO, but not sure from what.

That's what I told Dwayne. He thought it was not unusual. Ports look like they could be cleaned up as well. Doesn't look like a full port job with that slag in there. Why would the port with the biggest oil issue be the cleanest port except for the valve stem? first pic side by side. Thanks Brad

Is that daylight shining between the intake valves and seats, or some sort of reflection?

I’m sure Steve at Total Flow would be happy to do some additional porting on them.

Well, at least _I_ think it's funny...

They’re going to be at his shop anyway....... sooooo

I don't think that is day light. I will double check all of them. I really don't think I need the ports any bigger, Just better flowing and would cost a bunch. I think it would require filling in the floor of the ports and maybe taking some off the roof. Not gonna put that kind of money in them. Dwayne, as you said, they are a proven head. I just need to get the combo right and more compression imo is the first step. I posted up the pics to see if anyone could see any issues and you pointed out the possible day light. Thanks, I'll check that out.

Just checked the possible valve seal issue. No day light showing. I did notice all the guide seals on the exhaust pass head are leaking. These heads could use a good checking up.

What is your quench?The int ports can show reversion or rich fuel wash I think.I would think a dome piston is better than milling the heads.jmo.

Maybe a short dome, but I'm not interested in taking a good rotating assembly apart. Much easier to shave heads. The current quench was .049". Gonna tighten it up a bit, .043.

Use a dome if you want to make less power, otherwise do yourself a favour and have them angle milled. 0-.300" is possible with these castings. A dowel shift is a ton of work but pays pretty big dividends. I could go on and on. Depends on how serious you are of course just like anything else it comes down to $$$$$$$. J.Rob

Can anyone explain why all the intake ports have a bronze sheen or stain except #7, the one that leaked the most oil. You can spot it in the first pic as it is the one with the puddle of oil? Reversion, but why not #7?

This may be a stretch, but maybe the excess oil coated the intake not allowing the carbon to stick, except for the hot intake valve which carboned up?

Do you have flow sheets for those heads, they look like they could use more porting.

Thanks for that info JRob, but dont think I want to spend that kind of money on these heads. I will see what this intels thou. I dont know much about doing this.

Yeah, I have flow numbers. The ports were cnc by Hughes Engines. Measure 330cc, but they are long ports. Not sure, but cnc machine only takes metal where its needed I would assume.

With angle milling the heads he would need to re cut the pistons valve pockets.Correct?

Maybe, maybe not. It depends of course
I've had motors with good race pistons that had a hoop of clearances and other motors that didn't, you have to check to make sure
I had one motor that slightly bent some of the exhaust valves due to the valve pockets not being wide enough to clear the outer edge of those valves in those heads
I had checked the piston to valve clearances up and down, it had more than .100 every where but on the sides of thee those valves Clay is your friend when in doubt

Pulled a couple valves to take a peak. You can see the oil tracks here. Don't see many angles here. I thought a comp valve job had 5 angles? Looks like I have 3.

Looks like that valve is using up most of the seat OD.

What’s the valve diameter?

Todd told me they were 2.250, but I measure 2.200.

Cab, I found the clay I used to check v/p clearances and the exhaust has .150" valve notch wall to edge of ex valve. I need to find the piece of clay I used for the intake. Would there be a formula to figure these clearances when angle milling if you have know measures such as the .150"?

Not sure if what I'm seeing w/ you MW heads is Hughes' valve job. Here's a pic of my Gen 1 CNC standard-port Victors that shows their seat work, although at a distance.

I'll have to look at that when I get home. How many angles you seeing? Thanks Brad

Not sure... "at least 3", but it's entirely possible there is at least one under the 3rd (60+?) that's not obvious because it's been blended in w/ the bowl work. I recall seeing a close-up of a SBM that Hughes worked which clearly showed another 70-ish angle under the 3rd angle, so my a$$umption is the bottom angle has been blended it.

Different shops have their own ideas w/ respect to # of angles, width of angles, how far up they blend into the valve job, etc. Some stuff makes sense to me; other things I read about...
-------------------------
EDIT: Including the Hughes work shown above, four different shops, four different valve seat configs... and possibly the only thing they have in common is a 45* seat.

Maybe 3 is fine. I got in touch with Todd about this. Said the customer was fine with the 3 angle. Car still ran strong. I had a set of indy 360-1 done up by Dwayne Velder for my small block. You could see all the angles real easy. The valves also had the back cut. Dwayne did a nice job on those heads and there were at least 5 angles.

After reading stuff on Steve Sanchez's web site (minimalistic, in most aspects), I doubt he'll let the heads back out of his shop w/ the valve seat work they come in with.

I'll be very interested in what he does w/ your Victors when all is said and done.

I agree and he has a hell of a portfolio on cylinder head work. Top fuel, pro stock etc. He's fully capable of making them the best they can be. I just afraid of what it will cost. I do know the inspection is free if he does the repairs, if not, you pay before you take them somewhere else. Ok by me. Everyone should be paid for their time.

3? 4? 5? Over 5 angles??

Is there a magic number of angles that needed?

Those heads went 9.70’s with 3 angles....... they can’t be that bad.

Many times there is a bottom angle that gets blended into the bowl...... and sometimes some of it is still visiable...... sometimes it’s not.

I dont know about any magic, but when you back cut an intake valve do use see an improvement in flow, a loss in flow or does the back cut intake valve make no difference?

Back cut valves help the low lift flow, & I have seen it hurt OR help high lift flow, as it is said by some members here, IT depends

Over on Speed Talk, back cuts are definitely not universally accepted as being something you want done to your heads.

As for the angles...... not only can the number of angles play a part in the flow....... there’s also the length of the various angles, and how that relates to where you’re looking to make changes to the flow curve.

I know there is quite the science to those angles. I dont know much about it, but I had some fancy angles done to my indy 360-1 heads and it picked up the flow on low lift and mid quite a bit. There was some port work done them as well thou. Didn't gain any above .600 lift.

FWIW here's what pettis did to my valves.

Intakes Margin .060
Seat 45* x .070
BC/BA 32* x .070/12*

Exhaust Margin .080
Seat 45* x .085
BC/BA 36*x .050/15* Not a machinist and not 100% on this stuff so maybe someone can educate us here.....

all valve jobs should have three angles. The norm is 15 degrees from the seat angle. So a 45 degree seat gets a 30 top angle and a 60 degree bottom cut. The main reason for the narrowing angles is to control the width of the seat, and control where the seat contacts the valve face. The valve can only really dissipate heat when it contacts the seat, wider the seat the cooler the valve runs, narrower the seat the hotter. Generally as a rule the narrower you can make the seat and it still live the better the flow. Depending on how deep the valve seat is in the chamber and how the chamber is made, another top cut is done usually around 15 degrees. I even use a 70 degree some times as another bottom cut. And just because it improves flow on the bench does not mean it will make more power on the track. I seldom back cut a performance style replacement valve. On stock type valves the back cut seems to help on the intakes the most. It is just one of those things somebody has to spend the time and money to actually see what works the best. And as a rule the more you grind or cut the seats the less HP they will make, because as you cut the seats they sink into the heads, because you are taking material off. And the more they sink they loose flow, at least that is my experience. The main thing is the valves have to hold compression, if they leak, no matter what the seat flows, it will just not run right. I use a vacuum tester and a leak down tester as I am assembling to make sure they hold air. On a ported aluminum head if you over torque them for example, I have seen it warp the seats and they will leak compression. And I do not know how many times I take a new head ready to go out of the box and the valves leak air.

The use to be standard for the amount of angles on Hi Po valve jobs valve seats use to be 3 on wedges and 5 on Hemiroid heads
Probably not now though

I believe there are a lot more factors taken into account these days for high-end performance valve seats. Valve angle, chamber style, lift requirements, RPM... all these -- and more -- seem to have an influence on the configuration.

Here's something I copied from a Darin Morgan post on SpeedTalk that could be a decade old easily. He's talking competition heads, but it gives a good feel for how much different the config may be than the traditional 30/45/60 3-angle. I put the valve seat angles in bold.

"Yes you can run a 50 degree seat on 14 and 15 degree heads and I have even seen it work on 18 degree heads just so long as someone has not blown the chamber out a ridiculous amount. I use a 40 degree top cut .100 wide, 50 degree seat .045 wide, 62 under cut .080-.090 wide and a 72.5 degree if I plan on blending and a 75 if I want to run sharp angles about .200 wide. I then set my throat diameter proportional to the valve diameter ( 90-91%). I think the real trick or should I say " rule" with steep angle seats is that if you do not have the material in the chamber for a top cut that is 10 degrees less than the seat angle itself and you can not continue that angle for at least .250, don't go there!

A 50 degree seat takes a 40 or 45 degree top cut at least .100 wide. If you have to clean up the chamber with a 35 or a 30 top cut, it wont work, period! You really need to try and not turn the air into the chamber any more than 10 degrees.

A typical low profile chamber on say a 10 degree valve angle ( like Pro Stock) has valve angles like this. 50 degree top cut for at least .300 then rolls back to about a 40 degree at deck surface. The seat is 55 degrees at .045 wide. the under cut is 65 degrees .090 wide and the last cut is a 74.5 .400 wide then an 85 degree .200 wide. This way by the time I am through blending the throat in, it turns into a 75 degree under the 65 degree. I hope that is not confusing.

These are common valve jobs I use. Notice the top angle differs from the seat by only 10 degrees or less, not 15 or 20.

35-45-60-70 Blend 70 up to 60 Good for concave chambers like conventional BBC heads. 18 to 26 degree heads, Dart, Brodix ect ect.

40-45-62-72.5 Blend 72.5 up to 62. Works good for chambers that are concave like 15 degree heads.

40-50-62-72.5 Blend 72.5 up to 62. works well for 12 to 14 degree heads with true convex or strait wall chambers.

45-50-65-72.5-85 Blend 72.5 up to 65. works well for 12 to 14 degree heads with true convex chambers. mainly for high lift, high valve speed, high rev engines that need good seat life.

50-55-65-74.5-85 Blend 74.5 up to 65. for heavily convex shaped chambers. 10-12 degree heads. For ultra high lift, super high valve speed, extreme high rev engines.

55-58-65-75-85 Blend 75 up to 65. Don't even go here! Its hard on seats and very tricky to make work. I hate it but its worth a little power.

58-60-70-75-80-85 Don't blend anything. leave everything sharp even the transition into the bowl. Not worth the valve replacement bill. Worth 4 horsepower above 8800rpm.

I hope this helps."

He also had some comments about his approach to reworking the late-model GM LS7 head, which is a production 12* valve angle raised-port LS-series head, not a dedicated race head:

"The chamber in the LS7 head was designed for low lift flow. The chamber is at 30 degrees off the 45 seat so any steeper seat angle will be a disaster. Some have used 50 degree seats in this head but they had to use very wide back angles cuts on the valve to turn the air and that just adds valve weight. I dont agree with that approach.

I like a 38 or 40 as well and i agree it would be better,,,,,,but,,, the chamber is already 30 and I hate to sink valves so I use a 30. Its the best compromise in my opinion.

Standard 45 degree valve job.

30 .150
45 .045
60 .090
75 .100
85 .100"

After the blending, those become 3 angle valve jobs.

With the victor, it’s worse than the LS head.
You have to transition from the seat angle to the basically zero degree chamber.
The only way you’re going to be able to gain any length on the top angle is sink to the valves.
And...... the steeper you make the top angle........ the more you need to sink the valve, if you want that length.

Someone good with trigonometry could easily calculate if you had a 45 seat sitting on/in a zero degree chamber...... and you wanted to add a 30* top cut that was .150” wide....... how far you’d have to sink the valve to accomplish that.

The pics of Dave’s seats look like there is very little length to the top cut....... so, they opted for the least amount of valve sinking.
It’s a little tough to clearly see the top angle and transition into the chamber though.
Some carb cleaner and a piece of scotch-brite would clear that up.

The chamber pic of the heads I ported for Brad appear to have a wider top cut.

Yep.


Lucky me...

Thanks for all that info guys. Good to know going into this. Can't wait to get the verdict from Sanchez. I think it will be bitter sweet. Will see.

You know me, always happy to help overcomplicate a pretty cut-n-dry discussion.

Brad....... what head is that with the blended bowl and lapped seat?

The first Victor(s) I sent you to prep for me when they came out originally.

What did it flow like that?

Here's the thread from 2006(!) that's been archived on the "Best of..." forum: https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/32250/some-bb-victor-stuff.html#Post32250

Aaahh yes...... the original Victor........
The really easy 330cfm std port head.

Those days are gone now....... well, those MP stage 7’s Mancini has should be the same....... while they last.

Might be able to get 330 with a TF240 even easier now though..... or at least as easily.

I didn't buy any of the Mancini clearance heads, considering what I have already.

But if I had, we know there's a solid 340+ in the Victor Gen 1 / Procomp clone ==> HERE

And, yes, Trick Flows make them a tough sell, regardless.

EDIT: My apology for derailing the original thread topic...

No apology needed here. I'm learning as I go with these heads.

I bought a set of those heads (not from Mancini) from a member on here 5+yrs ago that where ported all the way to the valve seats, not just at the first 1/2 inch into the intake ports like Edlebrock says they made them originally
I've had problems with the Hughes offset rocker arms( switch to Harland Sharps after that) as well as the pushrods rubbing on my 400 block with Isky Offset intake roller lifters, my message is I'm not real happy with these heads but I will continue to use them after freshening that motor this winter. I changed that motor out last winter and it has been on a engine stand since then, maybe I can fix the pushrod rubbing problem permanently by removing more material from the heads or using a intake rocker arm with more offset on them

Cab - Even though Edelbrock sells their assembled heads with the box stating "Ready to bolt on", I think the BBM Victors should be labeled "Ready to f*ck with"... possibly with the addendum "Some assembly... and disassembly... and assembly.... and more disassembly...and more assembly required. Repeat as necessary."

Gen 1 MW sized Victor, ootb...... tested in late 2008.
This head was cast as a full MW sized port. Not a std port head that was opened to MW size.

Lift——-in/ex
.100—- 67.4/52.7
.200—-141.3/109.2
.300—-212.5/156.7
.400—-259.2/191.8
.500—-289.9/209.4
.600—-318.7/218.4
.700—-336.0/223.1
.800—-348.3/224.3

You are braver than me. I had one of the first sets of those heads from Edelbrock back when I was writing the BB Mopar book. After playing with those heads for a few weeks I sold them to someone who really wanted them. Those heads looked super cool but nothing seemed to fit quite right. I never did try to use a set and we've never seen an engine come into the shop with those heads on them.

The flow numbers I posted from 2008 are from one of Andy’s heads.

Remember, my Victors replaced my Stage VIs, which were pretty far from usable out of the box, too.

Wish list:
- Chapman Stage VI ports
- Victor-style extended intake runner flange that uses "regular" intakes for the respective block height
- Trick Flow chambers

Never gonna happen, so I gotta still "roll my own" for my dumba$$ street/strip junk.

My easy work around for all that is........ more cubes.
Then the bigger heads work just fine.

Those flow numbers are a little bit better than the Indy SR M.W. heads I had and not as good as the ported set of Indy 440-1 heads I got from Al Aquire
I didn't have these Eddy M.W. Victor heads flowed so who know what how good they are, I won't buy another set though

Brad is 100% correct with his statement. These heads are a POS really and after having the opportunity/torture of working with them many times I really have to wonder what Edelbrock was thinking? On the flip side I probably know what makes them tick better than most but working for free is something I cannot do any more. These heads can and will make fantastic power (and more torque than competitors offerings) if thee: valve size,shape,type is changed, valve location is changed, chamber shape is changed, port is raised, rockers stands altered/changed etc... I could go on and on. Most don't have the wherewithal to pursue what I have just stated. J.Rob

p.s. I should market my best port carved into a Procomp knock off--it flows a whopping 370+cfm with a VERY small CSA. I should buy another casting and finish all eight ports on my CNC and test on the dyno. J.Rob

I have been following this thread and find it quite interesting. My 1st generation Victors were done by Roger Lechtenberg. The heads began life as a standard port 77929? Radar took them out to a MW port and port matched the Indy 440-3X to the heads. There was a nice performance gain over the MP 383-440 Stage VI street heads that was on my 512 RB.

You have the perspective of a "normal" person. "Don't worry, be happy!"

Dave, myself, possibly others... we're effing OCD and this stuff keeps us up at night.

Yeah OCD. It's got to be right or it's not right.

My viewpoint is somewhat in contradiction to Jesse’s.

Brads motor made close to 700hp from 452 cubes with std port Victors that didn’t recieve any extraordinary reworking, with a 4150 carb and an ootb intake.
Still had a low tech Hemi pan on it as well....... no vacuum pump, no gas ported rings.
It also had an easy-on-parts cam in it.

I have no doubt that same basic combo could be tweaked to find another 20-30hp without doing any more work to the heads.

The way I look at it....... how bad can they be?
350cfm from a true std port head with normal porting.

They don’t need to be the best head ever made, or the easiest to use, or the best bang for the buck....... to still be a decent head.

My tendency to be flip & sarcastic doesn't necessarily convey everything accurately. My Victors may not have been "bolt on and go", but the end results do speak for themselves.

If I thought they were such a P O S I wouldn't have bought another pair at a good price that are up at Dwayne's to have some basic prep work done to them before I decide what's next.

Some things don't have to be as complicated as people (especially like myself) can make it. It's very much self-inflicted, and I readily acknowledge this.

And .003"+ excessive piston clearance on a .060" oversize block that couldn't be re-honed w/ a torque plate cuz the bores distorted too much to clean up properly. It just got touched up w/o the torque plate, and I used MLS gaskets to try and reduce some of the distortion that a composition gasket would allow.

If nothing else, the bottom end is "well seasoned".

I remember when I bought mine.Summit had a good deal going on them. I also considered Indy SRs but when I asked Russ at Indy a question,he treated me like crap. I swore that I would never buy from Indy. I got the 440-3X from a Moparts member at a good price.

You know, I like the Indy stuff, the parts seem to make good power, but I was treated the same way by Russ, both on the phone and in person. I do not have a single Indy part on my engine, and it has ran a best of 9.65 @ 140, one of Russ's many remarks was that basically I was too dumb to build an engine that would go in the 9's just buy a complete one from Indy. I explained to Russ or tried to, that building the car to me was more fun than racing it. And I know, my engine could be a little faster with Indy stuff, but who cares, its all index's or dial-in's anyway.

The steps i performed to get my victors ready:

Used +.050 locks and .050 keepers to achieve a 2" installed height.
Sourced correct (longer) studs for rocker shafts
Deburred castings
Corrected rocker geometry by moving shaft .090 up and .090 away from the valves
Grind for pushrod clearance


I don't see anything different going on with the set of -1s that we have either.

With a standard +.100 BBC valve the installed height is not anywhere close to 2". In fact I will most likely use the same Ti locks/retainers and Isky (PSI) RAD springs that we have on the victors. As far as geometry if i were installing longer valves (+.200 BBC valve i.e.) to gain installed height the jesel rocker bar would have to (gasp) move up and back to create an acceptable sweep pattern. Sounds like these two heads have parity if you are trying to run a common 2" valve spring. And yes it seems like heads that have large ish ports will want a +.700 lift roller cam to make power per thier design. I crigne when I see people using flat tappet stuff at that level. When the list of compromises gets long it see,s like the hp and rpm fall off. It all depends on your desired service intervals and intended use.

I finally popped the chain cover off and checked the cam timing. Its installed at 105*. It was 105.5* when I built the engine. So it lost 1/2* in roughly 600miles and many hrs of run time. Those pro gear sets are really nice. So there you have it, the loss of 100hp points back at the heads/compression ratio and maybe the Indy intake. I tried to get the heads down to Detroit today, but turned around in the snow storm. Will get them down there for inspection this Friday provided there is not another snow storm.

I don't have any run time experience with the Victor head but I was able to push the Indy EZ head out past 900 hp using fairly conventional parts. Stock valves and valve locations but the heads were ported and then touched up by some of the best in the business. The trick was the Jesel rocker arms which allowed me to run up to 0.880 lift. I used a cam with 0.481 lobe lift and either 1.70 or 1.85 rocker arms depending on what I was trying to do. I'm not sure if the same trick would work on the Victor head but if I was trying to make big power it is probably something I'd try. There is a limit to the shaft rocker arm system although the limit is probably higher than where this engine is at the moment. I think the limit is somewhere around 800 hp but I'm sure people have pushed the stock type shaft system past that. Even with the Jesel setup it does take some time to figure out how to get close to 0.900 lift. There are only a handful of springs made that will work and they require specific cups, retainers and locks. I had a whole drawer full of that stuff that I would mix and match. I eventually ended up using a spreadsheet just to keep track of the different combinations. I think I was close to a 2.100 installed height using the stock valves that came in my EZ heads from Indy.

This is good info^^^^^^^

FWIW I made 780HP @ 466 cubes with .750" and T&D's single shaft system with 1.6/1.6 rockers. So I guess I would say the same as you. Had I been smarter I would have milled the rocker stands off and machined.....etc...... The single shaft system is what hampers all single shaft systems and had I ditched that could have made my life much easier. J.Rob

Yeah, I see the possibilities. Way more work and money than I want to invest in these heads. This combo is just a powerhouse that I have fun with on the street hitting T&T now and then. My goal while building this 511 was 700hp. Thought it would be close, but I choose the wrong cylinderhead. Had I known I would have bought the 440-1 or atleast a EZ head. Just looking for 700-750hp as a goal for now. I'm willing to invest $1000-$1500 into these, but any more and they go up for sale. Thanks again for the info guys. Its a constant learning curve.

I have a 512, procomp victor copy heads, around 12 to 1 comp, 1.6 rockers, .740 lift cam, Manton pushrods, hand ported in my garage, homemade intake with two AFB's for NSS, 3200 lb car ran best of 9.65 @ 140mph, dyno said 725HP nothing exotic, I think that is about the goal you set in your post. The engine ran for 10 years with one freshing, bearings and rings. Last summer it broke a rod, going back together as a 540. will see how it does in that version soon. My flow numbers on the heads at max wedge port size were close to what was posted in this thread. I bought the cheap procomps, because I did not want to screw up an expensive set porting them myself, I am pretty happy with the results per dollar spent, and reliability. I would guess a good single plane intake with a dominator would make it at least a tenth faster, maybe more.

It's nice to see combos like that with these heads going fast. Not a junk head imo, they just need alot of work to get in 800hp or more range from what I have been told. Once again a combo with high compression to get good numbers with this head. Mine will be at least 12.5:1 once the heads are done. Should run much better numbers this time around.

You've probably said this and I don't remember... going to change the cam along with the CR bump?

No, as of right now. I think 270@50 is plenty of cam for want I'm doing. I'm get the heads worked on then the intake, then maybe a solid roller. I'm thinking the 270@50 cam may really like the added compression.

I'm sure the current cam will be happier w/ more CR than less...

I bumped your Indy 400-3 intake thread, too, FWIW.

At those cubes and 12.5.1 comp, I'd definitely put a bigger solid roller in there after you test what you have unless it get's yer goat and makes ya happy..........

Eventually it will get the bigger roller cam. I just want to see how far I can go with a flat tappet first.

I just got off the phone with Keith at Wilson's and just as I suspected from the start, I need more velocity. He asked if it was laying down in 3rd gear. Yep, he says with the big ports, the fuel is falling out of suspension and never being used, just going out the pipe . He wants heads and intake to inspect. He says everything can be adjusted in the intake and most dont know this. It will take lengthening the port and making smaller with some welding, $1675. My thinking, a smaller intake cost way less, but I dont think there is another brand 4500 lo deck available. In the end he said compression would be my friend in this situation. Low compression such as mine is allowing fuel to fall out with the big ports in this combo. Looks like I'm on the right track.

Wow, what an idea... whish I'd thought of suggesting you ask Wilson about doing something like that.

The 4500 M1 intake worked pretty well with the 270 heads on my 470. The Wilson prepped Indy 400-3 worked better, but the Wilson prepped M1 4500 with standard ports worked really well. This was on the dyno. Going down the track the std port M1 might have been faster. I never tested in a car but it wouldn't surprise me. You should've bought these intakes from me when I sold them. I sold them for about half of what it will cost you to have Wilson port your intake.

The standard-port M1 fit w/ the MW ports? Are the Trick Flow MW ports smaller than "normal" MW ports, by some chance?

Yes, you obviously did, but I also mentioned way back about buying a smaller intake because I suspected this Indy was designed for a bigger program than mine imo. I think I remember my idea getting poo pooped by a few here. Like you said before, combination and I always agree with that, but compression and velocity matter as well. I probably made this intake worse for my combo with the bigger plenum. I wont spend $1700 on it. I can get a new intake for about $500. Gonna show these heads to sanchez tomorrow. I think I'll take the intake with me.

Yeah, hind sight is always 20/20. I'll look for an m1 or a victor. I'll make something work.

The way I see it is like this.......

There are a lot of options out there when you’re talking about $1675...... plus shipping both ways for the heads and manifold....... and that price doesn’t include reworking the heads any.
By the time you do the intake and shipping, rework the heads, plus a bunch of milling....... it’s easily a $2500 proposition.

For example........ if you sold the whole current top end, and added whatever $$$ you get from it to that $1675+ shipping....... you could buy a new set of heads and manifold.

Oh, and if the heads are getting milled a bunch...... that should be done before the intake gets matched to the heads.
Wilson might be able to perform that operation as well.

And of course....... to put some of that into perspective(confuse the issue?)........ those very heads(as “wrong” as they are)have already gone well into the nines.

Dwayne, Its my understanding he is not reworking the heads, but he does want both heads. He claims he can fix a head with too big of port and low velocity with intake work alone. First I have ever heard this, so it would be intake work alone. He did say to have the heads machine before sending to him. Believe me, I already done the numbers as far as money and the other avenues I could go down by selling these heads and putting $1500 with it for a new set. As you said, these heads already worked on another combo. As I have thought all along, I dont think any ports need to be any bigger. I'll concentrate on the compression and look at some different intakes. I think theres only 3 available. TF, victor and m1 if I can find one. I have learned a bunch from this site. Thanks guys.

I wasn’t referring to Wilson reworking the heads.
I was referring to the $1675+ shipping to have the manifold done....... plus whatever you spend with someone like Total Flow going through your heads.

It’s probably going to be around $250 to ship the heads and manifold from Mi to Fl and back...... so that puts the cost for that operation at $1925. Add $500-600 to have the heads gone through plus a bunch of milling....... you’re at $2500.......or more.

Regardless of the fact that the heads have already gone 9’s, you don’t have any confidence in them.
You’ll never be happy with them.

Flip the top end now before you spend a bunch more money on it, that you’ll wish you’d spent on different heads.

It sure seems that me what you really want is different heads and a 470.
You should just work towards that goal.

Yes, the M1 manifold fit on the 270 heads. There wasn't a lot of extra material around the ports so I'm not so sure I'd try it on a daily driver but it worked fine on the dyno. Here is a link to the magazine article: http://www.hotrod.com/articles/dyno-day-trick-flow-270-mopar-heads/

You have to kind of piece the information together since it wasn't what I was trying to showcase in the article. But I didn't hide the fact either that the Indy intake wasn't very good so we swapped the Wilson ported M1 back on the engine. The engine ran great with the Wilson ported M1 on the 270 heads. It ran better than I thought it would since the standard port intake dumping into MW port heads has a really big step.

Yes, I understood what you said. At this point I dont think they need alot of work. Maybe a v job and some milling. I'm curious to get sanchez opinion on these as well. They did work well on another combo and the 2 things he had that my combo dont is compression and a roller, oh and he used a victor intake. I'm very confident the higher compression will bring the combo together. For what I would get out of these and the intake, I would still have to put in $2000 or more by the time I bought the rockers and pushrod. Then I'm not sure my headers would bolt up. Decisions decisions

Don’t you have Hughes rockers now?
If they didn’t sell with the heads...... you’d only need to buy 8 rockers for the intakes and some spacers.

Of course..... with a little clearancing...... what you have might fit.

Are you say the hughes rockers I have fit the tf270 head? Those intake rockers are $50ea last I looked. I will keep that in mind.

Yeah, you mentioned the small intake idea a ways back.

Sounds like the discussion has continued to move on from what I just read on a couple of threads, so this is probably a good time for me to bow out.

I think there was quite a bit of good info that came out in this thread. I know I learned from it.

These old Team G intakes any good?https://www.ebay.com/itm/MOPAR-383-400-INTAKE-MANIFOLD-WEIAND-TEAM-G-DOMINATOR-FLANGE-SINGLE-PLANE/283506702647?epid=8023121884&hash=item420250f937:g:9LAAAOSw8WJc7gbY

Run away as fast as you can!! Make a plan Dave and stick with it...

ok, team G a nogo. got it.

Brad, just to be clear. I did ask Wilsons about smaller ports in the intake to help crutch the head just as you suggested. Thanks for that suggestion. I think you and I were on the same page about that theory in another post a few weeks ago. I'm now going back to those original thoughts of a smaller intake. I have about 4 months to find one used if I can. I will keep an eye out for the elusive 337 as well. I believe that was a lo deck intake?

The 337 is RB only.

The low deck TG has some serious flow restrictions adjacent to the 4 inner mounting holes.

For $1675....... Wilson could probably help it out though.
That would be an interesting experiment.

Ideally, if you sold the heads, the rockers would go with them.

Alright, thanks Dwayne.

Ok, dropped heads off at Total Flow. Talked to steve awhile and he's a great guy, real nice. I could not get a price from him, so my gut tells me I cant afford him. He doesn't want to shave them, wants me to buy new pistons. Not going that route. I have plenty of shops just down the road that will gladly shave them. He looked at the chambers and said, looks like they all burning the same. Didn't see anything wrong with the head but the large intake bowl and the exhaust port. He said he would try 1 exhaust port massage and flow it, if it helps he will do the rest, if not no big deal and leave the rest alone. There was some massaging between were the intake bowl ends and the seat starts that could use some smoothing. My gut tells me what he wants to do will not make any improvements in my ET, but what do I know. He's the pro at this stuff, so I will see what he gets before I spend too much coin there. Waiting for his phone call. I think best bang for buck is to shave them and bolt back on. I told him what Wilson said about adjusting the intake for faults in the head and he agreed. Said Wilsons is very good at what they do. So, i'm not getting a warm fuzzy feeling as right now.

As I said earlier....... you’ll never be happy with them.

Just find them a new owner and move on to something else.

I agree with the notion that messing with the ex ports won’t yield any ET.

No comments on the valve job?

I think your right Dwayne. He didn't make a big deal about the valve job, but he didn't seemed surprised by anything. As soon as he started looking in the ports and wanting to make a small change here and there, I knew we were going down the wrong avenue, but how does a hobbiest guy like me tell a professional cylinder head guy he's wrong? I'm gonna let him clean them up and get a better peak at them first. Just waiting for that phone call. My gut is telling me i'm gonna end up spending all my money on something that does nothing. He is not interested in milling them either and that's all I think they need.

I already told you how to "fix" them and yes it involves milling. When I port them the intake port size falls between MW and Standard 440--its closer to Standard 440 just wider, not whole lot taller. J.Rob

So, what would something like you propose cost, and how much additional power could be expected?

Would other parts require modification and/or replacement to make use of the head mods?

Yeah, I told him what you said about how to fix them and he said it would cost more than $5000 to do all that work. I'm not looking to make 800hp or more, so my thinking was a good valve job and flat mill them .045 and call it a day. Wouldn't be much cost and should push my 511 combo near 700hp. I would be happy with that. He doesn't even want to mill them and to me that's the best bang for the buck.

picking up a LITTLE compression & a different valve job is not going to get you 150hp more,,,Just Sayin

I agree with you 100%, but I do think its a step in the right direction. I think the cam is not bad, but a tad on the large side for my compression and I think it will welcome the higher compression with open arms as well as the large ports in the heads and intake if I run the Indy.

Heads are back and all cleaned up. Here's a few pics of the exhaust port. Think the short turn needs any work?

What ever media he used to clean with looks a bit aggressive as I see a lot of pits in the aluminum. I first thought I may have had some detonation as the chambers are pitted as well.

Can't comment on the exhaust short turn without pictures showing the port without the valve.

Not sure what was used to clean up the chambers, etc., but it looks like it almost sand-blasted the CNC machining marks away.

What work was done to the heads?

Cleaned up, guides checked, springs checked, new seals machined .045" off deck, .054" off intake side, no valve job. $800.

What type of head gasket do you use? The deck surface as it looks in the pics doesn't appear to be smooth enough for MLS now, but I could be mistaken.

MLS. I do have a pair of SCE composites I could use. Gonna get some prep and painting done today and start getting this thing back together tomorrow. I have some cc measuring to do as well.

I managed to get a few things done in the garage today and can start getting it back together tomorrow. Some pics of the exhaust port and the valve job Dwayne asked about.

VJ pics

The machined surface looks quite smooth. almost polished.

Thanks for posting the vj pics.
Doesn’t look like I did it.

I wouldn’t have left the bottom angle quite that long, and it “looks” like the transition from the bottom angle into the bowl is fairly abrupt.
I would have added another angle there.

The way the radius on the ex seat ends also looks like some flow has been left on the table....... not much, but something.

Looking at it closer...... and keep in mind I’m looking at it on my phone...... the bottom angle looks like it might actually be shallower that 60*.

I agree on this , also asking Dwayne's opinion, I see no back cut on the intake valve ? I always like to run one up to the lap line.

I did a fair amount of back cut testing on Brads heads.
They didn’t respond well to a long back cut.

Here is a close look at some of the ones I did for Brad way back when.

4 angles, longer top angle, bottom angle blended into bowl, no pronounced edge where the valve job ends and the bowl starts:

It looks to me as though the CNC lines had been polished out of Dave’s heads before they were put into service.

I’ve never seen where bead blasting the heads would make the lines disappear...... so I have to assume they just weren’t there.

The bottom angle thing is probably just how it looks in the other pics I posted.

In this pic the bottom angle does seem like it’s about 60*

A lot of this stuff is hard to really assess without having it in your hands.

BTW, what did the chamber volume end up at after the milling?

Thanks for looking and assessing. The valve job stays as is and heads are going back on soon. Steve took off .045 from deck and .054 from intake side giving me 67cc in the chamber. If I use a .040 gasket that would give me 12.6:1 and with a .045 gasket would give 12.44:1 compression.

I didn’t think you’d be changing that valve job......i’m just passing on some observations.

Is the short block zero deck?

no, its .002 positive. If I keep the heads they will get a JV next time.

There is likely “some” flow to be had by cutting the seats and some blending....... but whether or not that would show up on a time slip is another story.

Maybe I should have a couple ports flowed before I reinstall the heads.

Well...... “flowing” the heads doesn’t actually make them any better....... but at least you’d know what you have.

I looked at my notes again....... when I did my test, it was a 4 angle seat and 2.25 intake valve.
So...... there could still be a 4 angle seat in one hole, but that’s not going to be representative of what the others flow with 3 angles and a smaller valve.

My notes show I tested the number 4 or 5 cylinder.
So if you pull those two intake valves, one of those seats might still have the 4 angles...... although if they recut it, the 4th angle could be mostly gone.

It would be good to just know what I have. I may check that tomorrow.

If you find one seat still has the 4 angles..... what i’m saying is...... flow a different one.

ok, I understand. I will have the one flowed that I just pulled the valves from.

Dave - Can you get any clear close-up pics of the intake valve seat?

FWIW, here's my original Hughes CNC Victor and a Chapman Stage VI. Both pics should be clear enough to zoom in to see more details of their respective valve seat configs.

EDIT: Stupid questions - what size are the intake valves... and are they all same size?

I put the valves back in Brad. I see what pics I have to post.

A few more.

CNC ported ProComp Victor I prepped last year:

If you're brave enough... it wouldn't hurt to run a cutter finish around the bottom to blend the sharp edge.

I think ill leave as is for now.

The throat looks undersized a good amount on the intake. The valve job looks very minimum, almost out of the box.

That was my initial thought as well. My VJ's in the past were always 5 angle comp jobs. This is a 3 and nothing exotic, but most on here didn't see it as a big deal and no real magic in 5 angle jobs so I went along.

Anyway of checking throat dia., or are they back together? Were these flowed? Pretty sure you said they were reassembled, and no flow #. Just making sure. There could be 10-30 cfm before the tipover point where the port takes over.

Back together now. Flow numbers I got were 350@.600 and 356@.700 intake. Exhaust was 250@.600 and 254@.700

Have you jumped in head first into the tunnel ram, or is that still just something you're considering?

And when are you expecting to have it running again?

Right but they could be way off under .500 lift. Something for future consideration.

I did a set of SR's that I couldn't get past 325 up top (with my novice short turn hack job)
They went
311 - .500
278 - .400
227 -.300
162 - 200
88 - .100
but with a .650 flat tappet went 9.70 best. Normally 9.80's/90's in a 511ci.

My main argument in the “pros” column of the discussion about the current valve job was...... they had already run solidly into the 9’s as they are.

After seeing them all cleaned up, my argument in the “cons” column is........ there is likely some flow left on the table as they are.

Hard to say for sure how much, or if it would even show up on a time slip.
But I’m sure the flow bench numbers could be improved some.

Its getting T ram next off season, so the Indy 400-3 goes back on with the Thumper 1100 Dominator. It will have a boost in compression to 12.44 or 12.6:1 depending on the gasket thickness of .040 or .045, not sure I want to roll the dice on the .038" quench yet. Looks like it will have an electric water pump as well now since I cant get the new electric fan kit to fit with the belt off the water pump in the way. So it will be going out next time with more compression, electric fans/water pump and open exhaust. Not a good A/B I know, but i'm looking for a number closer to 10'o. Gonna get the carbs in January and the T ram right after. Not sure what I want to do right now as I have enough to get the Holley 750 xp's and the T ram or do I blow all of it on Thumper carbs. Good quality parts are expensive. Decisions Decisions.

Here's what I have from Todd at CWE.
.100-75.1 97.1
.200-164.7 114
.300-222 163.7
.400-278.6 203.8
.500-324.2 232.3
.600-347.8 249.6
.700-356 254.2

my fault, I don't know why I thought these hadn't gone 9's yet. I misunderstood the post. I agree probably not much left then in the heads.

So, you did or did not have the heads re-tested after getting them back this time?

These are the original numbers I got from Todd.

These went 9's on another gentlemans 511 just under 13:1 compression.

Did you ever get the cam specs for the engine your heads were on previously?

You should have plenty of port speed with your engine that big and .650ish cam

What were the combo differences?

No, Todd never got back with me on that.

Best I could tell he had 12.8:1 compression and a small roller .620. I had 11.26:1 and a solid flat tappet 270@50 with .625 lift.

With your change to the compression I would guess 30-40 hp.

I hope so. With run the same single 1100 Dominator this year. A tunnel ram with twin 750's next and possibly a solid roller after that.

I saw a 30 HP increase going from a single Holley 1050 CFM Dominator carb. on a Indy 440-3 intake to two of the same list # Holley 1050 on a Indy M.W. tunnel ram intake with no other changes
I also tested two different sets of heads on the same short block using the same intake and carb, that was with a set of Indy SR M.W. heads and a set of ported 440-1 heads that flowed right at 30 CFM more on the 440-1 heads. My old pump gas 400 stroker motor made 727 HP with the SR heads and 775 HP with the 440-1 heads with the same compression ratio, both heads had 76.0 CC combustion chambers
Their was a issue with the dyno headers on the 440-1 heads, the exhaust port on the 440-1 heads where slightly bigger on the exhaust port floor than the headers where(1/8 to 3/16 inch step into the headers ), which would make the motors start to have a slight random miss above 5200 RPM

I'm not sold on the roller making it faster justifying the cost. Just maybe a different solid when the time comes.

Let’s add some......

When I flowed one of those heads, it was with a 2.25 valve and a 4 angle seat.
It flowed 356.

With a 2.20 valve on a 3 angle seat....... would it still flow 356?

Maybe

Todd told me these heads had 2.25 valves. That must be where the confusion came in. They do have 2.20 valves.

I'm still confused... ya' don't drop a 2.20 valve on a seat cut for a 2.25 without something looking "wrong".

I'm as confused as you now. My heads have 2.200 valves.

I don’t know how there’s any confusion.

As I’ve mentioned several times in this thread....... the heads were bought as the bare heads with blank seats.
I cut one intake and one exhaust seat so I could test them before and after they were cnc ported.
I cut the intake seat to 2.25”.
I remember doing it that way....... and my notes confirm that’s what I did.

I only cut ONE intake seat(#4 or #5 cylinder).
The remaining 7 were done at another shop.
What size valves they used to determine what size to cut the seat I have no idea.
Since they appear to be seating correctly from the pics of the valves, they appear to have been cut for the valves that are in the heads.

If one were to pull the #4 and #5 intake valves out........the remnants of my 4 angle valve seat might still be there.
Of course, since it appears there has been some amount of hand blending after the cnc job, that 4th(bottom) angle I used when I flowed the heads might have also been blended away.

The main point was...... when I flowed them, it had a 2.25 valve and a 4 angle seat.
It now has a 2.20 valve and a 3 angle seat.

I’m thinking those two changes would make some kind of difference in flow.
But...... maybe not.

I have a tool for setting the seat, using the valve. I don't think that a 2.25 would even work on a seat for a 2.20, and if they were re-cut to 2.20 that would have sunk them noticeably.
I'm confused also. So one seat is cut for 2.25 and it has a 2.20 valve on it. Or one valve is 2.25?

I think that next time these get a freshen, I would determine the throat and decide at that point if the 2.20 is ok, or if it needs to go to 2.25 to get them proportionally right, and put a good valve job on them. I don't like that intake seat geometry at all. Just doesn't look touched at all.

I will make note of that. In the past with my small block builds I seen some fancy valve jobs and these look fairly basic to me as well, but the way I understand it, they don't have to be fancy to work well.

Once again....... these heads were bought as bare heads with blank uncut seats.
They are unusable as they come that way.

Someone has to cut the seats to be able to run the heads.

Only because I would have thought the seat cut by you for the 2.25 valve wouldn't have re-cut cleanly for the smaller 2.20 that the heads were finished with, unless that one seat is noticeably lower in the chamber than the others.

Hit the 45 with a stone to widen it up a bit, hit the 30 to bring the outer edge in......probably only sink it .010-.015 or so.

Must be no one believes I know what I did with that head.

i'm with Brad on this. That was my confusion as well.

You guys win.

Forget I mentioned it.

I absolutely believe what you did to that head. What I found confusing is that the heads were finished w/ the smaller valves, despite what I would have thought was obvious that a larger valve had been cut for the one test port.

Too late...

at this point, they work. They flow air and make power. They are getting bolted on this weekend, so really doesn't matter at this point. Next time they come off they get shaved again, VJ with possible larger valve and set up for a possible roller cam or springs for a new SFT cam. Its all good for now. Thanks guys for all the great info here.

Bob at MCH, thought i'd gain no more than 20 hp from 2 points comp on my -1's.
Mick

Did you try it?

What was the result?

If you mean me, no, not yet. I 've been working on other cars and the house, so the engine's on the stand still. The car 's looking a little shabby at the moment, so I'd like to spray it before I put the motor in. Besides milling the heads, i've also bought a 400 indy intake with the dom flange to keep things lower in the engine bay, so I can seal the hood.
Mick

The compression calc tells you that. Its always on the low side. I few guys over on B bodies have done this with great results. Don't have any numbers to prove, but Malex over there says he could feel a 2 pt increase in the seat of the pants using these heads and I still believe this head for whatever reason needs high compression 12.5:1 or higher to run strong. Malex with a 505/12.8:1 compression in a B body at 3450# and these same heads goes in the 9's. The heads get bolted on today after I check the piston/valve clearance.

I believe that there was a head with this done to it. . With a 60* below the 45* and a seat width of .059 to bring the 30* back up to the chamber would make it noticeably wide, like a quarter inch, which would be noticeable even with valve in.

I have Serdi cutters used in a Bridgeport. I have made errors where I have made the seat to great of a diameter, much less than .050 and it takes a considerable cut to reduce the Dia.

I believe and follow your knowledge but for that head to have been brought back to 2.200 I would think would stick out like a sore thumb.

I'm out on this as well.

Can you post a picture of that setup? When I started looking for a mill my first requirement was that it be big enough to bolt a head to. I haven't invested in the hardware to cut seats.

The one intake seat I cut would have had a .040 wide 45, with an OD of about 2.240.

Without a doubt one seat was cut that way.

What was done to facilitate the use of a 2.20 valve on that seat I have no idea.
But after doing this as my job for 30 years, I can tell you it would not require excessive valve sinking to make that work.

A few minutes with a couple of seat wheels and it would be good to go.



I have no doubt that had we seen pictures of all 8 intake seats with the heads all apart after cleaning and media blasting, it would have been no trouble pointing out which seat had at one point been cut for the 2.25 valve.

There are options to get around the sunk valve if it were too objectionable....... one of which is to just replace the seat ring and start over.

You'll need a 42" or 48" inch table...the 48 can tip when pushed to its outer limits though if not secured well to the floor.
2nd pic is some of the tooling

No big deal right now Dwayne. I don't doubt you did the work. I eye balled them before they went back on and didn't see any sunken intake valves. Everything looked uniform as assembled. We will figure this out next time they come off. All bolted up and torqued to spec now. Think I will clean up the ports in the intake and give it a coat of semi gloss black before it goes back on. Thanks for everything guys.

One other thing I failed to mention was that the valley tray rail on the inside of the heads did not require machining after having .045" removed from deck side of heads. I have about .015'-.020" each side of tray. Billet tray fits just fine. What would be best way to seal this edge?

nice bead of ultra black. ultra grey, or the right stuff.

After I had my Indy heads milled I went to local parts store and pick up a roll of gasket paper and a bead of silicone work great.


Then my buddy used a Indy valley tray with his Victor heads and filled in the gaps with just silicone after 3years now it's time to redo his

ok, I used the right stuff on the last tray. Had to saw the right stuff with one of the women's steak knifes to get the tray off. Think i'll use black rtv this time. Thanks guys

I use a Exacto hobby razor knife to cut the silicone