[Dick Boneske]

We still haven't decided which heads to put on our 462 (.030" over 455).

Several Pontiac purists have very bad things to say about the original Edlebrock design--claiming you can get more HP with factory cast iron heads.

Has anyone gotten these newest heads yet that could share their experience?

[PAUL K]

I don't think there is anything at all wrong with the E-heads. I would recommend them to a friend. I don't think that makes sense that factory heads would make more power but I would need more details on the subject?

[David Holmberg]

Dick, I have a thread in the race section about the new CNC chamber E-heads with pictures.
They are much improved, I am VERY happy with them.

Jeff Kinsler and Mike Leech have both have gone lower 8's N/A with E-heads (not stock) so there's nothing wrong with them.

http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...d.php?t=755794

P.S. The motor will be back in the car in a week or two, but these heads are an improvement over the old/regular E-heads.

[Mr. P-Body]

There are no factory heads that can approach the level of flow the E-heads are capable of, including Ram Air V. Whoever told you that either has no clue or a specific agenda.

Most recently, we've managed 374 CFM @ .700 lift WITHOUT going "wide". That is, using standard location lifters and rockers. That's enough to support well over 700 HP with gasoline. My understanding is the Butler "wide port" is now around 400.

The chamber "issue" is a non-issue. While more modern chambers will certainly "clean up" the burn and reduce the need for higher total timing, they're not gonna help much making HP. Lower emmissions and a little better fuel economy are the main purpose for HSC.

The D-port from Edelbrock has the "nice" chamber, but no room for "growth" and should be considered only for engines under 420 CID (IMO). The KRE D-port has much more potential.

FWIW

Jim

[Tom Vaught]

Originally Posted by Mr. P-Body

There are no factory heads that can approach the level of flow the E-heads are capable of, including Ram Air V. Whoever told you that either has no clue or a specific agenda. Jim

The Best Ram Air 4 cast iron heads I have tested on a flow bench (UNTOUCHED FROM THE FACTORY WITH THE FACTORY VALVE JOB) WENT IN THE 230 CFM RANGE. Depending on the stock 455 SD head (73 or 74) they might do slightly better than the RA-4 head in flow.

A stock early or late Edelbrock head (not Pro Port) is quite a bit better in flow even with stock valves and a regular valve job. So I agree, there is an agenda there.

Tom V.

I have also seen E-heads that were camouflaged to appear like RA-4 or 455 SD heads with a little creative grinding/machining.

[63gpman]

Do you need to run a little higher compression on the Aluminum heads to get full use of them?

[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

Tom V.

I have also seen E-heads that were camouflaged to appear like RA-4 or 455 SD heads with a little creative grinding/machining.

Do you mean like these?

[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by 63gpman

Do you need to run a little higher compression on the Aluminum heads to get full use of them?

As with any build the compression ratio should be set to work with the rest of the combination and octane rating of the fuel being used for the project.

[David Holmberg]

Originally Posted by 63gpman

Do you need to run a little higher compression on the Aluminum heads to get full use of them?

You can use 1pt of compression more with aluminum heads, and with the new CNC chamber you can probably get away with even more. (Depending on your cam/converter/gear choices.)

[paul s.]

Originally Posted by 63gpman

Do you need to run a little higher compression on the Aluminum heads to get full use of them?

Yes. I like to run at least 10.5:1 compression with the old style chamber.

Like was mentioned before, it needs to work with the rest of the build. Could 10.5:1 be too much? If a guy is going to run his cam advanced and ALL his timing in by 2,000 rpm, even with more compression... well, who knows? With enough compression you don't need the band aids.

Running more compression is worth it if you know how to take advantage of it.



disclaimer; guys on the west coast say their gas is garbage... I defer to those guys for west coasters.

[Don 79 TA]

i haven't seen faster cars with stock heads compared to e-heads
unless you are talking some serious $$ poured into the stock type of heads vs a stock e-head, maybe you have a case
a draw back to e-heads is you have to watch your piston to valve clearance
but i'd gather even with a stock head setup for performance you will have the same issues
weight savings alone on the e-heads are something to consider too
little better cooling, etc
there are pros and cons pending how you look at em

[GOAT WHORE]

Originally Posted by Mr. P-Body

The D-port from Edelbrock has the "nice" chamber, but no room for "growth" and should be considered only for engines under 420 CID (IMO). The KRE D-port has much more potential.

FWIW

Jim

Jim, could you elaborate on this?
I have the Edelbrock D ports on my 461 that flow about 300 cfm at .600 lift, do you think I would do better with the round ports or are you talking about max effort only?

[J.C.you]

I can see buying a set of USED eheads old chambers or new chambers if one is on a budget. But as long as there are HPs and the Kdps available new, it is a no brainer....and I am not in the kre camp.

[Mr. P-Body]

GW, the roof is "done" with the Ram Air IV opening. No place to go "up". For a milder build, I guess they'll do the job. If you want 'more', though, it will call for new heads. Most of our customers want at least 325 from their E-heads for the 461s. We have a solid roller grind that works really well with them. And if one "catches the fever", there's room for a LOT more in the round port OR the KRE D-port.

KRE D-ports, as said earlier, have more potential than the Edelbrock D-port. The KRE Highport, on the other hand, isn't really in the same "class" as the Edelbrock round port. The HP falls in between the E-head and Tiger. An excellent mid-level race head, on a BIG motor, could be good street heads, too. Valve lengths make it a little tough to work with, as only 1 source for "drop-in". We're currently working on a 505 project using them. Wait 'til you see the intake Dave created for it...

Jim

[Garry Sr]

Originally Posted by Mr. P-Body

GW, the roof is "done" with the Ram Air IV opening. No place to go "up". For a milder build, I guess they'll do the job. If you want 'more', though, it will call for new heads. Most of our customers want at least 325 from their E-heads for the 461s. We have a solid roller grind that works really well with them. And if one "catches the fever", there's room for a LOT more in the round port OR the KRE D-port.

KRE D-ports, as said earlier, have more potential than the Edelbrock D-port. The KRE Highport, on the other hand, isn't really in the same "class" as the Edelbrock round port. The HP falls in between the E-head and Tiger. An excellent mid-level race head, on a BIG motor, could be good street heads, too. Valve lengths make it a little tough to work with, as only 1 source for "drop-in". We're currently working on a 505 project using them. Wait 'til you see the intake Dave created for it...

Jim

KRE doesn't give any actual flow numbers for their unported D ports on their website, just a vague guess. Can you tell me how the KRE compares to the Edelbrock D ports out of the box as far as unported flow numbers?

[Garry Sr]

To answer my own question I'm guessing the KRE d-ports can take more porting because they're probably not emissions legal like the e-heads. As far as flow out of the box they're most likely the same with the e-heads claiming 263 at .600 Kauffman doesn't specify lift. The e-head I'm comparing is 61599.

[Garry Sr]

Further observation says Kauffman charges more if you'd like the chambers CNC'd

Price wise apples to apples the e-heads are cheaper than the KRE's at race-mart ringing in at $1005.57 each

[torqjunki]

On SD performance website, I seem to remember Dave stating that Sd's 290 d-ports make same power on same combo as 315 edel round ports FWIW. Flow numbers are just part of the equation.

[shaker455]

Originally Posted by Dick Boneske

We still haven't decided which heads to put on our 462 (.030" over 455).

Several Pontiac purists have very bad things to say about the original Edlebrock design--claiming you can get more HP with factory cast iron heads.

Has anyone gotten these newest heads yet that could share their experience?

E-Heads out preform stock heads period.

The flow is not even in the same ballpark.

It's been 30 plus years since GM made a Pontiac engine & the aftermarket has had plenty of time to improve on stock design.

I built a 461 last year with out of box E-heads D-port with new heart shaped fastburn combustion chambers,

On the dyno made 560 Hp & 600Tq

E-heads are a no brainer....great product with no quality issues

[paul s.]

Edelbrock D-ports can easily be ported to 2.4" height. That is our Stage 2 port, then a comparison of various gaskets, a 2.4", 2.32", and stock. The dyno sheet is of a 488 with a Ported RPM, a Sean Murphy Q-jet, and our Stage 1 head. Stage 1 head uses the 2.32 gasket. Cam was our Stage 4 Hyd. roller. Like Jim said, nice head for mild builds.