Heads Help!

Ummm Tom; Seems like? Please dont get your hackles up, but "seems like" is not quantifiable.I use it all the time because its an opinion and its hard to argue with an opinion.So then smart-alecs dont come around and want to start fights with me all the time.If I state an absolute, and theres any chance Im wrong, somebody with nothing better to do will call me to the mat in the blink of an eye. So I use the"seems like" catch all;a lot.
But when it comes to compression, we need quantifiable accurate numbers. Your engine(or any engine)will perform way different at 185psi, than at 120. And if youre only making 120, then a next larger cam will mostly make things worse. But if youre at 185, then you could go a size or two bigger and the top-end charge would pick up faster and harder than the torque loss at the bottom.So knowing the numbers helps in the decision making.Especially with a limited budget.If you have good numbers then the best bang for the buck goes to the cam.But if you have to bring the compression up first, it blows the budget in a hurry.Now, I "seem to" have noticed that youre antsy to either change heads or at least mod yours.But i"feel" that you cant build a house til the foundation is built, and so it is with engines.Throwing parts at it without knowing the specifics is probably the least bang for the buck.
Without taking the heads off and measuring stuff, theres only one way to get an idea of what you foundation looks like. And that would be the accurate compression numbers.
I 'feel", and "it seems like", OldmanRick knows his stuff.
------------
Now lets talk trannies. I would be interested in your thoughts as to the 3.09low.
It "seems like" to me that youre jumping ahead too fast.
Heres why; Lets say its cheaply possible to put 30 or 40 more hp into that engine, and extend the operating range to 6000rpm.Now that could demand a reduction in gearing(smaller number), not an increase(bigger number). So then you might be either going to a different rear gear, or be forced to shift into second. And then with the 3.09 low, a shift into second is waaay back in the basement; your Rs will fall to 62%.That would be a deep hole to try and climb out of.Better it would be to have a closer 1-2 ratio gear set(the 2.66 set), where the Rs fall to 72%. But best it would be to not have to shift at all.So if you have the optimal rear gear, the tranny ratio becomes moot.And the optimal rear gear cannot be selected til the engine pkg has been finalized.
Am I making any sense at all?