Captainkirk
Old School Mopar Warrior
Is there a difference in flow between 340 X heads and the later 2.02 J heads? If not, what are the differences between the two?
I do.As cast X heads flow better than as cast 2.02 J heads. Not enough to change heads, but if you had both...
It would be interesting to find out what the engineers at Mopar did to create the casting differences. Next time I see Radar (Roger Luctenberg) I will ask him if he did any porting for the OEM. I know he was on the B1 team and when he worked at Gary Ostrich's shop they did experimental work for Chrysler Corp.On my current bench, and my previous bench...... in equal condition...... X heads outflow J heads.
And with equal amounts of porting, the
X heads still outflow the J heads.
The X heads have a superior intake floor and SSR.
They are not “the same” heads.
Taking one of each in ootb form, by running my finger down over the intake SSR from the bowl side, I could easily tell which was which while blindfolded.
On my current bench, and my previous bench...... in equal condition...... X heads outflow J heads.
And with equal amounts of porting, the
X heads still outflow the J heads.
The X heads have a superior intake floor and SSR.
They are not “the same” heads.
Taking one of each in ootb form, by running my finger down over the intake SSR from the bowl side, I could easily tell which was which....... while blindfolded.
I've said it for years. I just stated the port floor differences in another thread yesterday or so.I almost called you out and Justin, but figured you'd chime in.
I have no reason to believe this statement is not totally accurate. And goes along with what I've read over the years. But stock to stock I don't think you could tell the difference by the seat of your pantsI've said it for years. I just stated the port floor differences in another thread yesterday or so.
X head has a flatter ssr peak. You can about wipe the turn flat before you hit water too in an x head. But the real deal is if you know how to port a j head...it flows better than an x head .100-.450 the turn doesn't need to be laid down as much. To each his own.
I can only speak from my experience.
Pretty much.I have no reason to believe this statement is not totally accurate. And goes along with what I've read over the years. But stock to stock I don't think you could tell the difference by the seat of your pants
It would be interesting to find out what the engineers at Mopar did to create the casting differences. Next time I see Radar (Roger Luctenberg) I will ask him if he did any porting for the OEM. I know he was on the B1 team and when he worked at Gary Ostrich's shop they did experimental work for Chrysler Corp.
So cool!I have ~’73 to ‘79 Small block development correspondence between Tom Hoover and paid consultants “experimental work”.
For small block heads, it mostly X head, street T/A, race T/A, W-2/2.5/3. There is a 360 head in there in ‘75 or ‘76.
I believe the effort/development was focused on what classes Chrysler (Hoover) wanted to focus on.
894 is an X-head BTW. Note tested by Mullen in late 1970. Attached for reference.
View attachment 1715670729
View attachment 1715670731
View attachment 1715670732
View attachment 1715670733
Yes, that is some cool stuff!
Wow treasures for sure!that doesn’t even scratch the surface !
I have all Bob Tarozzi’s notes from start to finish developing 1968 Super Stock A-bodies. Also notebooks on 66 trans am, Keith Black hemi and block development, early 70’s nascar, can am, etc, etc.
Carlton, SVI, Mullen, KB, Tarozzi, and some others were all contract Chrysler race development.
Wow treasures for sure!
So cool!
Funny you mention that. I thought 73 was awfully early for W2's.notice they are talking about W-2’s in May of 1973.
I see W-2’s for sale in the 1976 DC catalog but not the 1975 DC catalog.
Funny you mention that. I thought 73 was awfully early for W2's.