Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide!



Go Back   Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide! > Technical Forums > Performance Talk

Click here to search for Mopar cars and parts for sale.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-07-2003, 12:23 PM
gordonhill gordonhill is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 29
Default A 273 cylinder head question.

I was thinking about going with a 1.94/1.72 valve combination. I am building a 10.1:1 .030 over 318 with a 228 deg @ .050 .488/.488. 108deg CL Mopar Cam. Also, I would like to mill out a set of 273 heads to do this (I want to keep the closed chamber for compression and I have read that with some work to the runners, the 273 head does wonders). How much metal can I take off of the head, in all places. Whare and what should I watch for. How should I port them out also. I have noticed that in the April copy of Hot Rod, they milled out, shaved, and ported a set of '302' - 318 heads, like mad, to accomodate a 2.02/1.88 combo. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-07-2003, 01:44 PM
Dartcustom Dartcustom is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Napa, CA. (a "grape" place to live)
Posts: 450
Default

You need to talk to "cuda66273", he is using 273 heads on his bracket barracuda w/318.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-07-2003, 01:48 PM
gordonhill gordonhill is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 29
Default

Yeah, hopefully he will run across this post. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-07-2003, 02:18 PM
rumblefish360's Avatar
rumblefish360 rumblefish360 is offline
Moparchat Bronze member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: C
Age: 57
Posts: 11,120
Default

I'm not familar with that write up. Those exhaust valve sizes look like big block sizes.
The 318 cam stock with 1.50 and the 340-360 with 1.6. These sizes are good to support big HP gains. There is also a problem with fitting these extreme size valves in the head. Theres not enuff room.
The first 2 years of the 273 have small and off angle bolts for the heads to intake. An angle off the head itself is also not like the standard. You'll need to find a very special intake for these heads. Edelbrock did make such intakes for the 2 year run 273.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-07-2003, 02:44 PM
gordonhill gordonhill is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by rumblefish360
I'm not familar with that write up. Those exhaust valve sizes look like big block sizes.
The 318 cam stock with 1.50 and the 340-360 with 1.6. These sizes are good to support big HP gains. There is also a problem with fitting these extreme size valves in the head. Theres not enuff room.
The first 2 years of the 273 have small and off angle bolts for the heads to intake. An angle off the head itself is also not like the standard. You'll need to find a very special intake for these heads. Edelbrock did make such intakes for the 2 year run 273.
Yeah, I do have that special intake and I also have the original 4 barrel intake that came off of a D-Dart 273 275hp. I am playing around with desktop dyno, in order to come up with this combo. I have a 3500 stall. At 3500, the torque starts to peak. At 4500, it peaks out. Peak HP hits at 6500. The Barracuda also has a 3.91 Suregrip. I am looking to launch better than the average 318 car. If I go smaller with the exhaust valve it seems that I would eat up around 20 horsepower and save the torque. I would like to save both. I know this combo seems strange. I wonder if anyone has ran such a valve combo.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-07-2003, 04:49 PM
Billydelrio Billydelrio is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Del Rio, Texas, USA
Posts: 919
Default

Gordonhill
There has to be a mix up on the valve size. 2.02 intake valve with 1.88 exhaust valves will require a valve guide spacing of 1.97" and push the exhaust valve way off center of the stock 273 port. A 1.625 exhaust valve could work with some work, but things will get tight. When the block is decked and the head is milled, any big cam will require some serious notches in the pistons.

The problem with the 273 head is the port gets small at the entry to the bowl where the air needs to slow and turn down. The port restriction at this location increases the air velocity and does not allow the air to follow the floor of the port. To help slow the air down, the port needs to be raised and widened in the area on the port side of the valve guide. The guide can be contoured for better flow as well as 11/32 valve stems used. The pushrod pinch is not as big a problem as the port pinch deeper in hte port.

Billy
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-07-2003, 05:27 PM
gordonhill gordonhill is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Billydelrio
Gordonhill
There has to be a mix up on the valve size. 2.02 intake valve with 1.88 exhaust valves will require a valve guide spacing of 1.97" and push the exhaust valve way off center of the stock 273 port. A 1.625 exhaust valve could work with some work, but things will get tight. When the block is decked and the head is milled, any big cam will require some serious notches in the pistons.

The problem with the 273 head is the port gets small at the entry to the bowl where the air needs to slow and turn down. The port restriction at this location increases the air velocity and does not allow the air to follow the floor of the port. To help slow the air down, the port needs to be raised and widened in the area on the port side of the valve guide. The guide can be contoured for better flow as well as 11/32 valve stems used. The pushrod pinch is not as big a problem as the port pinch deeper in hte port.

Billy
It is a strange valve combination that is from a Chrysler Power magazine Nov. 1991. They take a set of '587' heads and attempt different variations. Check it out! I actually got the data from the article at a website...... http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/4451/sbhead.html
I guess not many has ever used the 1.92/1.74 combo.

2.02 just seems like too much and then there is shrouding. Remember that I am also running an advertised 268 duration cam and I am also running flatops. I would'nt think that valve clearance would be a problem.

Anyway, how much meat do we want to take out of the port, bowl side? Also, I have noticed that Hot Rod magazine opened up the valve throat quite a bit on those '302' heads, which are similar to the old '315' castings. Do you think we could do the same? I do have two sets of 273 heads. Actually three including the ones on my Barracuda. I do have some room for a catastrophic porting error. Thanks for the info Billydelrio!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cylinder Head Question bronco9588 Restoring your MoPar (Tricks & techniques) 12 10-28-2008 06:09 PM
360 Cylinder Head Question wallyghs Performance Talk 22 10-08-2002 09:32 PM
440 Cylinder Head Question scott313 Performance Talk 9 04-10-2002 09:05 PM
Cylinder head Question Mikehemi Ram Truck Chat 6 11-13-2001 02:29 AM
Cylinder Head CC Question 6t5mopar Performance Talk 3 08-28-2001 12:25 AM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
. . . . .