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 11-15-2003, 03:16 PM
909duster's Avatar
909duster 909duster is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: cedar park, texass
Age: 52
Posts: 175
Default Magnum Heads Gee They Do Work

To the non believers of magnum heads refer to CARCRAFT jan. 04. They built a 318 using magnum heads a mild hyd. cam from Comp, the motor made 400 horsepower. Just think what it would of done witha stroker, solid lifter cam, oh I forgot ported heads(they didn't) I guess modern parts do work.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-15-2003, 04:14 PM
rumblefish360's Avatar
rumblefish360 rumblefish360 is offline
Moparchat Bronze member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: C
Age: 57
Posts: 11,120
Default

Yea, seen that. To bad they used a single plain intake. The torque line sucks and probably has poor street manors below that 3500 rpm mark. High gears needed.
I also have a bitch about useing a 750 on a dyno. This is not real world useage. Not that it can't be done. But it's not realistic.
The tti headers also create low torque with the large tubes.
It (The heads) have certain advantages over the older heads starting with better low end flowing ports, slightly larger intake valves. 1.88 (360) vs. the 1.92.
And don't forget the best, when useing Magnum heads on a older Comando block, the 1.6 ratio over the 1.5 standard gives the cam a more intense/radical feel with more lift. (Nice bonus!)
Remember, you can upgrade to 1.7 rockers for the Magnum should your valves clear.

Remember, what looks good on a dyno in a mag doesn't mean it's good for the street.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-15-2003, 04:55 PM
dwc43's Avatar
dwc43 dwc43 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Shelbyville,Tn.
Age: 54
Posts: 23,987
Yeah they are o.k. but if they had used X,J or U 2.02 valves a better intake and carb they could have got much more from this combo. Too bad they wasted there time and money on modifying intakes and such to make it all fit. Cost twice as much and does not out preform the old tech heads or the edel heads either. For the money if your not racing with rules the edels would get you more for less cash.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-15-2003, 05:52 PM
909duster's Avatar
909duster 909duster is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: cedar park, texass
Age: 52
Posts: 175
Default NOT GOOD ENOUGH??

So 400 on the dyno won't be good enough for the steet? 750 carb to big? Your shit bag six pack cars had 1350cfm this "little" engine made more horse power then anyother 340 sixpack pile that came from the factory. Never dropping below 300 lbs of torque isn't good? You must be forgetting this is a SHORT stroke motor on pump gas. Look and read the article this is just a start out the box parts no porting, no intake work stamp steel rockers super basic setup. good for the street what your always asking for. Rumblefish you always asking for street pieces here it is in front of you and you don't even see it. How the hell does a cam cut on a 110 lobe separation have poor street manors below 3500. You'll probably answer with gee let me guess the single plane. High gears needed don't you mean low gears or do you need a class in that.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-15-2003, 05:59 PM
909duster's Avatar
909duster 909duster is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: cedar park, texass
Age: 52
Posts: 175
Default dwc 43

I don't think you can read they bolted on the out of the box manifold.. Lets see what you have post some time slips, so dyno work, your trophys. if it is at all true I kiss your ass until my lips fall off. I will post on every chat you the man, and every body should be getting the engines built by you. Shit I tell David Hakim at Mopar Marketing you need to be buliding our crate motors. So lets see them come post your shit I'm dying to see it.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-15-2003, 06:18 PM
dwc43's Avatar
dwc43 dwc43 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Shelbyville,Tn.
Age: 54
Posts: 23,987
Pics and trophies I can probably do if I can get them small enough for to fit on here. As far as building your crate engines, no thanks. Got too much work to do as it is building for our own people. Thanks anyways. Oh, but heck no, I dont need nor want you kissing my arse either. Unless your blond,female and 36c-26-36 and dang good looking you aint getting near my arse. There's a bullet waiting for the fag that tries too.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-15-2003, 06:28 PM
dwc43's Avatar
dwc43 dwc43 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Shelbyville,Tn.
Age: 54
Posts: 23,987
By the way 1350 for the six pack is not exactly correct. You cant compare 2bbl cfm ratings with 4 bbl cfm rattings since the 2bbls will always flow less than a 4 bbl, but show more since they are neasured differently. An 800 tq would have been a better choice on a dual plane intake too.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-15-2003, 06:36 PM
73calroadrunner's Avatar
73calroadrunner 73calroadrunner is offline
This account disabled due to bad email address!
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bakersfield, California
Age: 41
Posts: 332
Thumbs down Re: NOT GOOD ENOUGH??

Quote:
Originally posted by 909duster
So 400 on the dyno won't be good enough for the steet? 750 carb to big? Your shit bag six pack cars had 1350cfm this "little" engine made more horse power then anyother 340 sixpack pile that came from the factory.
Why are you so worked up over this? We all have or difference of opinions, but resorting to name calling and bashing is a little immature. You are also comparing a MODIFIED engine using modern parts, to a STOCK 30 year old tech car. It is no secret performance part manufacturers have made leaps and bounds in that time period but if you put those motors STOCK TO STOCK the 340 car would whip the 318 like Kunta Kinte. So the magnum flows more, that may be a fact, but persuction of others instead of offering an opinion sways no one towards your information. Not meaning to flame but a ignorant man generally curses when he can not make his point loud enough. It is not that I am calling you ignorant or stupid. You make a valid point but it makes you look bad when you trash talk. MY opinion is that I don't like the magnum heads, even if they do make more power. That is all I am going to say, and as such will not respond to any further remarks.
__________________
- "Jonny Small-Tires"
'73 340 Roadrunner
'67 Valiant (not stock)
http://www.mopars.org/images/9907imgl.jpg

Starving college student spending more than he can afford for his obbsession, motorsports!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-15-2003, 06:37 PM
George G. Leverette George G. Leverette is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Lancaster, Ca USA
Posts: 2,061
Default

What a bunch of crap 400 Hp from a 318 mildly built for about $50, Primedia aka Mopar Muscle invited the best engine builders in the country to max out a small block from the major manufcturers, most of the engines were specifically built to meet the challenge and the finals showed a low of 319HP with a high 420.9 which was the winner. Some of the engines failed on the Dyno and did not finish. Most of the engines had Horse Power figures aroung 350 HP which appeared to be the average but the torque figures were reall impressive aroung 400 ft lbs average. These engines were around 365 CI max and the ships were the best in the country with new and exotic engine parts. Another note was the Westec Dyno figures are about 10% above most other Dynos. Real world conditions are the true evaluation, never drove a car on a Dyno under controlled conditions but regularly drive on the street and occasionally on the strip and a lotta 80 MPH sustained freeway travel. If the Engine Masters could not get 400 HP consistently from a small block its dubious a junk yard 318 with a car wash refreshing could pull 400 unless it was torque and horsepower combined.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-15-2003, 10:29 PM
dwc43's Avatar
dwc43 dwc43 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Shelbyville,Tn.
Age: 54
Posts: 23,987
http://www.moparchat.com/forums/show...5&pagenumber=2

Look at the post on the top of page two there. Another race and head porter says the problem with these heads sbm (small block magnum) in general is the ports ARE TOO SMALL. Seems like I'm not the only one that kknows they dont perform well.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-15-2003, 10:51 PM
dave571's Avatar
dave571 dave571 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: carstairs,alberta,canada
Posts: 2,809
Default

I can't find the article. What year are these heads? When did they become available?(I'm not much of a small block guy)

Never know when I'm gonna build a smallblock, and I don't really have any interest in paying out the nose for heads designed 40 years ago, so I'm curious

I might pick a set up.

Modern trends in performance are smaller ports for increased velocity, throttle response, ect.

Performance guys like John Ligenfelter(sp?) talk about it now. Look at some of the GM crate motors. Small valve vortec heads, big power.

All I know for sure, is I have seen magnum engines pushed up to very respectable hp numbers, with chips, and headers, while still running through a cat, with single exhaust.

What size valves is Don running in his 318?(they're not 2.02's) It run's 11's? What's that work out to? About 430 hp or so?

If big ports and big valves were the secret to performance, we'd all be driving 351 clevland fords. You can fit you fist in the ports of those things. What's the complaint of cleveland fords? Great power in the top end(like 4 to 8 k), and not enough torque down low.

I wonder why that is?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-15-2003, 11:11 PM
dwc43's Avatar
dwc43 dwc43 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Shelbyville,Tn.
Age: 54
Posts: 23,987
Like the other post said, the ports are TOO small. The exhaust side is the worst on both heads. A little pocket prot and some exhaust side work or offset ratio rockers with a dual pattern cam really wakes up the X,J, and U 2.02 heads. We make over 400 on a 360 using these very heads for some street use, but mostly our track cars. matter of fact my last dirt egine has a set of slightly moded J's with 2.02 setting on top of it right now with a 800 cfm thermoquad on top of that with some very slight mods. The cost os porting and converting intakes and buyin amc lifters and new push rods and rockers drive up the cost of using the magnums and for no extra gain.

As far as the trucks go loose the cats and fi and you can make even mpore tq and hp with the magnums and even more with retro fitted X,J, or U heads, but there goes the cost to mod them to fit now.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-15-2003, 11:30 PM
LA360Dart's Avatar
LA360Dart LA360Dart is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Long Beach CA
Age: 63
Posts: 484
Default Magnum heads

Hi all;

The article in CarCraft shows what Magnum heads are capable of doing. Their balance and port velocities are far superier to early castings. In the chebie world vortec heads are better than their early castings. The factories in the late 80's into the early 90's needed to improve the efficency to keep V8's around. This efficency makes for a better cylinder head from the start. The factories would not have spent millions to make a junk cylinder head ( the guys designing them knew that they would get hotrodded, wouldn't you have ? ).

There are a few people whom seem to be stuck in the 70's. The early LA heads are fine for stock rebuilds and restoration work. The "X" head along with all that followed J,U,O castings have that same port as the "X" head. The big difference is the hardened exhaust seat. This was done for low lead gasoline. If the "X" head is so great then all the early heads from this would be the head to beat. I know this has not been solved in any direction but I do have flow numbers for as cast magnum and ported magnum heads. The porting done is not so as to cause serious mods as welding or a shortened life span by thining of the casting. As soon as I can find the flow numbers for 340/360 type heads I'll post them for comparision. Then you can judge for yourself.

I built a 365 ci small block with magnum heads search my nick and you find the post with the dyno sheet and hp and tq numbers. If not able to find e-mail me and will send to you. This was done at Westech's chassis dyno. This engine is far from trick, hyd cam P4452761 dual plane 625 cfm demon carb. It has 727 (2400 stall ) 3.55 rear gears 255R60X15 Cooper radials. I wish, I had my times slips from the one trip to the track so that it could be proven, it ran 8.5's at 87 mph (1/8th mile) was spinning tries in low gear 2.2 60 ft.

Peace all
Denny

dwc43, so do you know what the flow of the six pack (for a SB) is in comparision to a 800 cfm TQ. was wondering?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-15-2003, 11:37 PM
dwc43's Avatar
dwc43 dwc43 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Shelbyville,Tn.
Age: 54
Posts: 23,987
Yeah, the six pack is pretty close but it's not 1350 like mentioned in an earlier post. 2 bbl are not flowed at the same rate as 4 bbl so they make them look larger than what they really are.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-15-2003, 11:56 PM
LA360Dart's Avatar
LA360Dart LA360Dart is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Long Beach CA
Age: 63
Posts: 484
Default dwc43 lost in the 70's

dwc43;

The exhaust port on the magnum is a copy of the W2. Your "X" heads can't even compare to the exhaust port on the Magnum. The balance and velocites are better than any LA head, this balance is very important to making HP and TQ. The "X" heads exhaust port looks like a dogs hind leg in comparision. The straighter the shot (no bends) makes better flow. But then you probally still own a beta tape machine. Really once I have the flow numbers for "X J U" heads I'll post them but you'll say the same thing anyway. 2bbls are at 5" of water 4bbls at 14" of water as I remember I'll check for correct info.

dave571

The magnum heads are 92-up V-8 available new from dodge ~ $275 The other costs are rockers ~$75 push rods ~$40 lifters ~$60 AMC type (PAW/Summit). The intake ~$235. head gaskets either type, but Edelbrock now has Performer RPM ( maybe AIRGAP ) available soon for more choices. So if building a new small block its cost effective.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-16-2003, 01:15 AM
W8Dart375 W8Dart375 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 47
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by dwc43
http://www.moparchat.com/forums/show...5&pagenumber=2

Look at the post on the top of page two there. Another race and head porter says the problem with these heads sbm (small block magnum) in general is the ports ARE TOO SMALL. Seems like I'm not the only one that kknows they dont perform well.
I really can't comment about how they PERFORM power wise on either a dyno or in a car because frankly not enough guys are trying them YET, but I know flow wise a magnum is a superior head to any 1970's Chrysler iron casting, both intake and exhaust flow. I've gotten over 260 cfm out of a 1.92" Magnum Truck head. Highest flowing X/J head ever on my bench was a 2.05" X done by a shop in NY at 271 cfm. Most of the 2.02" J heads I do are in the mid to high 260's. It's all in the BOWL. The Magnum intake bowl is far superior in size and shape to an old iron head with it's water jacket restrictions. I have not had the opportunity to do a 2.02" Magnum head as of yet, but I have no doubts that one could shatter the 271 cfm mark on my bench.

And obviously the exhaust port HAVING a short turn creates better exhaust flow. Also flow #'s are'nt everything in making power/looking for advantages. You have to look at the other things like the chamber, both size (63 cc's as cast) and shape (closed chamber, can you say easy quench motor?)and 8 mm stem valves. 10 bolt valve covers with a MILLED valve cover rail.... no VC leaks there. Whether you like it or not, pushrod oiling is how rockers SHOULD be oiled. The seperate rocker setups ala GM style make life easier when needing to do valvetrain work. Just a fact of life. Ad then things like wet flow and swirl are harder for us "commoners" to measure and are intangeables that the dyno will tell the tale on. The only thing I don't like about the magnum heads is the runner entrance/pushrod pinch area and that God awful obtrusive rocker bolt boss that takes up 1/2 the port. Other than that they are a fine head. Alot of people are "missing the boat" on magnum heads IMO because of either fear of the unknown, or a lack of intake manifold choices. (Which hopefully the new Magnum RPM Air-Gap will take care of) I see no reason why magnum heads can't produce BIG power #'s.....

And if you want to get REALLY out there, Check out some Magnum R/T's sometime. I'm going to go out on a limb and say they are the SECOND best SB head that MP makes, only behind the W9. And when I say they are "the best" I mean this from All phases of design/engineering, to flow, to power, to casting quality, to machining quality. It's the whole overall "package" that is taken into account. The 1.92" R/T's I did for a guy from TX went just over 290 cfm if I recall correctly. 292 cfm. Not bad for a "small valve" The R/T heads are just a W2 that has been tweaked to work on a Magnum setup. And we all know how good a W2 is, well the R/T took a W2 to a new level.

On another note: MP is coming out with a new head, very similar to the R/T. It's going to have cast in pedestals for stock rocker setups, closed chambers, will accept stock intakes, and stock exhaust flange pattern. Will have pressed in hardened ex seats just like the R/T, and have W2 intake and exhaust bowls/short turns. These new heads are going to be KILLER for those who can get past the fact that they are iron.


OH and one more thing........ Magnum ports are small? I must be missing something. I don't have a set here right now otherwise I'd do a Cross section measurement, but I know what the runner volumes are like, and they are no smaller than a J/X head when ported. I don't recall CC'ing one as cast....I'd have to look through my notes. I will have to make sure to measure the next Magnum that comes through here for cross section and compare to a J/X head.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-16-2003, 01:48 AM
rumblefish360's Avatar
rumblefish360 rumblefish360 is offline
Moparchat Bronze member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: C
Age: 57
Posts: 11,120
Default

909duster;

Please re-read the post and/or get glass's that will allow the print to look bigger.

(Sorry to everyone for reprinting AND having to explain myself. I thought it was a no brainer.)
From me,
Quote:
Yea, seen that. To bad they used a single plain intake. The torque line sucks and probably has poor street manors below that 3500 rpm mark. High gears needed.
Quote:
So 400 on the dyno won't be good enough for the steet?
Maybe, maybe not. Here is the trick.
1.)
The 280 cam used in this is (Or I should say, can be) to big or not big enuff. I'm gonna tell you straight out that the 280 comp is to small for the intake. This small cam or is it to big of an intake makes the 318 perform poor.
Go back and look at the listed numbers. At 3500 rpm, it states the engine made 376 lbs. of torque. (NICE, real nice.) But, theres a huge drop 500 rpm below it. 332 lbs. This is the tip off that the torque line is going to be weaker down lower.
How do we avoid this weak torque while in our cars. Higher stall converters and higher axle ratio's.
OK, for the public. How many of us drive our cars equiped with a converter that will ...flash you auto guys call it, at 3000 or 3500 with a combo like this. Are current gears 4.10's or better. This is what I would use to get any car moving. But then again, I'm a 4spd guy.
View next post.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-16-2003, 02:20 AM
rumblefish360's Avatar
rumblefish360 rumblefish360 is offline
Moparchat Bronze member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: C
Age: 57
Posts: 11,120
Default

From 909;
Quote:
750 carb to big? Your shit bag six pack cars had 1350cfm this "little" engine made more horse power then anyother 340 sixpack pile that came from the factory.
Yea. 750 is damn large for a 318. But then again, I believe I did say this;
Quote:
This is not real world useage. Not that it can't be done. But it's not realistic.
Lets pick this apart. How many people out here use a 750 on a sim. set up?
I see this as a factor in creating a weak torque line. Great for top end HP. No doubt. But crap torque down low. Getting out of the hole if I'm racing or driving out of my driveway is very important to me. Waiting till I get to 3000 rpm for something I can really sink my teeth into is to long.
Once again, the cure is hi stall converters and high axle ratio's.

Heres one I like. Our shit bag six pak cars. Nice, real nice.
Lets see, If I match or come close to the same flow rates as the Magnum head, install same cam, 400 HP is a goal I'll pass.
For me, last set of heads, about $50 bucks. Pocket port them for $400. I think I'm ahead of the game. Score one for the old heads.

Would I purchase Magnum heads. Yep. From your dealership.
Let me think a sec.....
Quote:
Your shit bag six pack cars
Na, I'll pass.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-16-2003, 02:43 AM
rumblefish360's Avatar
rumblefish360 rumblefish360 is offline
Moparchat Bronze member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: C
Age: 57
Posts: 11,120
Default

909 says;
Quote:
Rumblefish you always asking for street pieces here it is in front of you and you don't even see it.
No no no, I see it. I think it was a mismatch of parts. This is a good combo for the track. I'd spray it with a 100hp No2 shot for extra fun.
Track? Isn't that a place where you would want to take advantage of a few things. Like the use of HI-gears and converter. Just the thing for short stroke engines. Duh!
On top of it all, there a little shy on overall bore to further complicate torque output. Wait, They even say that. AAAAAAA , let me see. a .040 overbore fix's this in your eyes? To a point, yes. But I'm not going to get carried away with bore size. They run what they brung and thats it.
Quote:
How the hell does a cam cut on a 110 lobe separation have poor street manors below 3500.
I never said it did. The mag printed it. I don't need to say it. It's in black and white right there. Perhaps YOU need to read it again.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-16-2003, 02:46 AM
dwc43's Avatar
dwc43 dwc43 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Shelbyville,Tn.
Age: 54
Posts: 23,987
Rumble you make some good points there. I guess that's why we tend to agree most of the time on these posts over the years.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-16-2003, 02:58 AM
rumblefish360's Avatar
rumblefish360 rumblefish360 is offline
Moparchat Bronze member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: C
Age: 57
Posts: 11,120
Default

Quote:
High gears needed don't you mean low gears or do you need a class in that.
By the way, your splitting hairs over HI gears/low gears.
Numeric - high. You look stupid splitting hairs over this. Oh, I forgot, despite your claimed time working on MoPars and time in a dealer, your young. Stop acting like a child. Your acting out like a 9 year old with lame insults. Truly poor form. Then again, I can understand that your daddy didn't teach you manors. It shows. Your big whooping age of 31-32 years has me LOL.
You see, your a meat head. I have, sad to say, forgoten more about MoPars than you currently learned.
It isn't me shouting out at you or tryin to make you look dumb, you do an excellent job on your own. Go back and re read the post . You will see that you have an I-d-10-T problem. But thats OK.

Did you not read this?
Quote:
It (The heads) have certain advantages over the older heads starting with better low end flowing ports, slightly larger intake valves. 1.88 (360) vs. the 1.92.
Does this look like I'm down on the Magnum parts? Or did you just fly off the handle you call reality and start in. How about a change to 1.7 rockers? Or this aint so?
I stand by this till the end or until otherwise provrn wrong.
Quote:
Remember, what looks good on a dyno in a mag doesn't mean it's good for the street.
Tell me O wise one.
Quote:
You'll probably answer with gee let me guess the single plane. High gears needed
How would you set up this car since it's track bound? How about the street?
Your honest, non cursing reply would be good here. Remeber now child thinking boy, act like a man and reply as such. Your an adult right? (31-32 years of age) Lets see what ya got. Not the lack of it.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-16-2003, 03:10 AM
rumblefish360's Avatar
rumblefish360 rumblefish360 is offline
Moparchat Bronze member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: C
Age: 57
Posts: 11,120
Default

dwc43, whatcha doin up this late.
I could write a full page off honest tech points on this.
But it's like religion. Many different ways to worship what many claim is the same God. Then, why are we fighting?
Speed, many different ways to go fast in search of the same thing. Going fast.
Then why do I have a idiot giving me the hot iron and acting gay towards you?
Whats up with this moron?
He works at a dealer, trying to find out racers/performance minded peoples thoughts only to come bacl with "Your shit bag 6-paks" and wheres your trophy proof?
His manor in this thread is so smooth, we should rename him ,
"Ex-Lax"

I'm done! Night.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-16-2003, 12:40 PM
rumblefish360's Avatar
rumblefish360 rumblefish360 is offline
Moparchat Bronze member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: C
Age: 57
Posts: 11,120
Default 73calroadrunner

One reason I believe is he was trying earlier to say Magnum heads are better than the older iron heads all around and hands down.
Some of here don't ethier believe this, want to deal with, or want to make the conversion to Magnum heads.
Having a small pile of "Comando" (old) parts, I can not see justifing the extra expense of this swap right away. The parts I have will perform fine. Remember, I have these parts even befor the Magnum came out. Except the RPM.
I have in stock a factory '78 - 4bbl, Torker II, LD-340 thats heavy in mods, and an Air-gap. The expensive one here being the air-gap. But still cheaper than the mag's Magnum M-1.

The swap from old style to new style could very well be a hot ticket for manypeople here. I have recomended it to a few people that are starting from a scratch stand point.
It could be very good. Now do the math on it. If it's in your $$$ favor or just something YOU want to do, go for it.

The car craft price as writin by them is a whooping $4,221 We can whittle it down by reusing old parts. Then the deal looks better.
But still, for me and a few others maybe, it looks like this;
heads...$570
intake $258
rockers $60
pushrods $137
liftters $79

total = $1104

OR

J-yard heads @ $100 or does your engine allready have them? Deduct $100 or what ever, from the price list. Or add it back in for 2.02's.
$276 from a local shops price list for boil, clean, resurface head for a clean deck & 3 angle valve job.
$285 for bowl porting.
This equals $661. for a savings of $443.
With $443 bucks, I can now purchase a Comp K-kit that will match my intake. (If you don't have an intake, on the cheap would be a swap meet intake. A Torker II isn't a bad intake at all and I have seen the go for about $75. A big savings over a new RPM/Stealth. Don't sell the Torker II short. That would be a mistake to do that. But if you can afford the air-gap/stealth, go for it.

How wants to save the price of bowl porting?
Get busy and practice!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-16-2003, 02:23 PM
dave571's Avatar
dave571 dave571 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: carstairs,alberta,canada
Posts: 2,809
Default

The magnum heads are newer than the 308 and 302 heads right?

Pardon my ignorance here, I'm looking for clarity.

Do the magnum heads have a casting number?

ps: I'm 33. I might be taking offense to some of the age remarks ...LOL
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-16-2003, 10:43 PM
LA360Dart's Avatar
LA360Dart LA360Dart is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Long Beach CA
Age: 63
Posts: 484
Default dave 571

Yes Magnums are 92 up and 302/308 castings are ~87 to 91 4bbl 318/360. The 308 is always on 360 some 318's got them also ( usually police car and truck ).
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-17-2003, 04:11 PM
909duster's Avatar
909duster 909duster is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: cedar park, texass
Age: 52
Posts: 175
Default MY TURN

To Rumblefish,

All compliments taken Thank You
Now to answer your complaints, "your shit bag six pack",
not meaning you or any one else on this site, but a crack on Mopars design. We all know a single four barrel makes more velocity and power on modified motors. In stock form the six pack is a good combo.

To kiss his ass meant to apolize to and not to be gay.

As to you saying you've forgotten more then I know let me answer; Let me see 12 years working for Dodge, countless hours of Chrysler factory training, you don't get that working on the railroad. Spec'd out several engines for my customers with excellent results. My name has been mentioned in Mopar Muscle, Car Craft, and maybe you forgot this one Chrylser Power, for tech info and parts sources. Working on the super stock cars we sponser at Bakersfield Raceway. Giving customers suggestions on have their cams reground to change firing order with cylinders 5 and 7 to balance out EGT's almost 15 to 20 horse gain and in racing thats like 50 on the street.

So when it comes to experience and age I have had many times given good advise to guys 15 years my senior, you know your only 6 years older the me. So age doesn't matter.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-17-2003, 11:15 PM
rumblefish360's Avatar
rumblefish360 rumblefish360 is offline
Moparchat Bronze member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: C
Age: 57
Posts: 11,120
Default

Quote:
As to you saying you've forgotten more then I know
Yea, I retract that. It would be hard to prove since were are just here on the net. I wouldn't even really try. On or off the net. Sorry, my mouth just started shooting.
Sometimes talking sense to someone whom you know is going in the wrong direction is hard. Even worse when they give you shit about it. When they come back and admit there wrong, I just smile. Then ask'em if they wanna try it my way. Sometimes, they just have something up there sleve.
Quote:
you don't get that working on the railroad.
LOL, damn right, but this job is the "Easiest money" i have ever made. Actually, I feel like I'm steeling it due to great people and fun. Everything here (I the shops) is ethier small potato's or crane needed work. Outside work in the feilds (Where I'm at now) is a tech and small repair thing.
Heres the best part, free tools. Well, allmost the best part. It has afforded several engines to date without sweat.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-18-2003, 08:37 AM
fastback340's Avatar
fastback340 fastback340 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Bethel Ct
Age: 46
Posts: 702
Default

The Magnum heads are great street heads and can easly push a a body in to the 11's. They are not race heads. The small ports may limit top end flow and huge numbers put keep volocity up and make torque. Even better then the Magnum heads are the magnum R/T heads.
The 280H isn't that big for a well built 318 with 10:1 comp. The single plane may be a bit much but its the best bolt on intake you can get for the heads right now.
If you read the article they state the Barracuda had low gears. The car should move just fine with that set up.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-18-2003, 06:02 PM
moparmotorman's Avatar
moparmotorman moparmotorman is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: brooklyn, ny
Posts: 225
Default

Railroad??, who mentioned railroad?? I just did 3 trips on the #6 train from Brooklyn Bridge to Pelham Park in da Bronx. Rumblefish is Long Island RR, I'm NYC Subways. IRT division 100 anniversary next year. Choo choo!!!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-19-2003, 12:14 AM
Crank Crank is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mich
Age: 65
Posts: 438
Default

I can not believe what i'm reading i was going to stay out of this with all the name calling and all.FIRST OFF the mith about the smaller ports they are not from the 308/302 design they were from the w-2 desihn and are not smaller than the x-j heads.Second the cost write off the bat you get 1.6 rockers and swirl polished valves ,add that cost to the x-j heads, third you get a closed chamber head with a better quench area to run 10.1 compreasion on pump gas no problem.Then theirs the exhaust port witch is far superior then the x-j heads.So what about flow # i had mine tested and got 210 at 300 lift my x-heads couldn't come close to that and 281@ 600 lift .Yes i would recomend the magnum heads and so doe's guy's like Dick Landy.
'
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
Will this intake work with Magnum heads on an LA Block? Hyper Pak Lover Vintage MOPAR chat 12 04-20-2007 03:26 PM
Magnum 360 heads.. worth the work/$$ if they're free? Clead Performance Talk 36 09-05-2006 09:52 AM
Magnum Heads Gee They Do Work 909duster Durango Chat 2 11-20-2003 06:14 PM
What modifications work on 5.2 magnum rams??? Fury Boy Ram Truck Chat 6 02-13-2003 10:54 PM
Will AMC or other rocker arms work on Magnum heads? HankL Performance Talk 2 10-21-2000 03:58 AM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:18 PM.


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