Cheepy Three-Sixty build

MOPAROFFICIAL said
Yes , great for a magnum head, and 'okay' for 2.0 intake valve. The exhaust you can sink a little on those and not hurt it so bad like with an LA exh port. I think in regards to flow and work invested...the 2.0 int hurt you because I'm thinking there isn't enough bowl and ssr work to take advantage of it. A 1.94 would actually do those numbers ...but I'm not scoping them out on the bench in front of me to see exactly where I'd do a little, not more than another hr across both banks, work to get that .300 into the 190's, it would bring the rest up and .500 flow would appear.

I don't think its the bench either, the super1020 usually shows higher numbers than my bench, by 4-7 cfm, ah but screw racing flow benches.lol The cam is small so to me the low lift is very important here with that sub .500 lift cam, .3-.400 lift matters more if the goal is optimistic. Thats my input relative to the heads and valve lift, not the entire build or idea of cheaply done and of course the casting may not be the greatest...but for what you're workin with , you're still doin good.
Im not a believer of magnum heads, did a few sets...but I won't waste my own time or dollar with them....now if that's what the customer wants , its their money...

The 2.00" valve may have hurt but again it was what I had and didn't feel like "more" machining and turning the intake valves down. There is more than enough bowl and S.S. in the Magnum castings--WAY more than any LA casting. I spent 45-50 mins per cylinder and my hands were numb as the proof. Again, could I have really worked and experimented with the valves and angles? Of course! But then the question becomes--Is the climb worth the view?

Lets say this build produces 388 hp but if I spent a week on and off the bench testing and testing and equalizing and it theoretically made 399 hp , would it really have been worth it? Not to me--I'd be half way through another build in a weeks time.

Would love to see a pic of a head on your bench, I don't recall ever seeing one. What kind of bench do you test on? If you haven't flowed a head on your bench and then a SF1020 then I doubt you could make that statement. DART even states it in their catalog, SuperFlow even states the 1020 does not display the flow rates their venerable 600 does. The important thing here is that I know how this bench correlates and have only been fooled a few times by a big reading on this bench and less than expected results on the dyno.

I'm a big believer in Magnum heads and won't waste time or a dollar on LA stuff for myself anyways. Thanks for your thoughts though. Its rare that perspectives line up on matters such as these. J.Rob