Tarrbabe,(and others) cylinder heads?

[dave571]

Hey Tarrbabe

I've heard you talk about the early heads you run. I saw a set at a swap meet yesterday, and wonder if they're the same.

The guy said they were for a 62 or 63 hp 383/413.

Closed chamber, aluminum pedalstalls for the rocker shafts. 2.08 / 1.74 valve combo, 4 bolt valve cover.

He wrote down the casting as 2206324(I didn't actually have time to look, I was trying to flog some of my own stuff)

In any case he wanted 200 canadian($135 us dollars) for the pair.

Are these the same as the heads you run?

If they are, or even if they aren't, are they worth that much?

Feedback from anyone welcome.

[dave571]

I looked in the direct connection engine book(the old one with Shelby on the back) and it says that this casting was used on 60,61,62 361,383,413 engines.

It didn't really seem to have any other info than that. Not even valve size info.

Anybody with the new engine book handy to check?

[dave571]

Let me revise the question.

Does anyone know anything about these heads? Valve sizes?, applications? popular modifications, or reasons not use them?

I know they're "early" heads, which are generally dissmissed as not being good performers.

Any specifics, or experience, that ANYONE has would be greatly appreciated

[dirty dan]

Those heads were last used in 62.
Check the exhaust valve size .
Unless some one has changed them they are smaller then the 1.740.
These heads are not anything special.
In fact I would not use them with any large lift cams or heavy
valve springs.
They were the first in b and rb heads but not the best.
Save your money

[dave571]

The valve size thing was throwing me as well.

516's, which are a fair bit newer, only had 1.60 exhaust. Even 915's only had 1.60 exhaust in non 440 applications.

It seems like these were run of the mill production heads, so the larger valve seems really odd.

[dirty dan]

Originally posted by dave571
The valve size thing was throwing me as well.

516's, which are a fair bit newer, only had 1.60 exhaust. Even 915's only had 1.60 exhaust in non 440 applications.

It seems like these were run of the mill production heads, so the larger valve seems really odd.

regaurdless of valve size the aluminum rocker stands are the weak link.
That is the reason for the change in 63 to the cast iorn pedistals.
As they have a higher mounting point then the older ones.
This reduces the leverage and stress on the rocker shaft bolts.
Aside from this get the casting # and some one could be more accurate as to what the aplication was.

[mr_340]

According to my book by Galen Govier, the 324 head is supposed to have 2.08/1.74 valves. This may be an error though. I think only the 300 "J" head was supposed to have the large exhaust valve. The book says that casting number is 2402557.

[quietdad]

My book has the 2206 324 available 61-67 361/383/413 and the 2402 557 in the 63 300K and early K. Both had 2.08/1.74 intake/ exhaust.

[ehostler]

2206324 - 1960 - 1962 361-383-413

MOPAR ENGINES 8th Edition

The early B engine (up to 1961) used a head with 1.95" intake valves and 1.60" exhaust valves. B engine heads (up to 1963) had only 4 valve cover attaching bolts and used aluminum rocker shaft attaching brackets. The standard 1962 head had a 2.08" intake valve, but retained the 1.60 exhaust valve. Several early B engine High Performance heads, like the 300J heads, used the 2.08" intake valve and the 1.74" exhaust valve.

I would go with a pair of 516 heads, before I thought about the 324 head. From what I've been seeing, you'd be lucky to get more than $75 US for a pair of clean (not worked) closed chamber heads.