Aluminum Head Identification

-
skrews said:
If these were indeed Arington heads they would be used in a high end race engine. Most certainly necessitating high end rockers such as Jesel or T&D, the pushrod holes would have been located to accommodate the rocker offset which would likely have been different than the Mopar rockers.
Click to expand...
B1-BA MC. Reworked exhaust port.
 
This is the pictures Skrewz said to check out.
IMG_0588.JPG
 
After reading that Moparts link, those heads were an early 90s Arrington casting. Probably largely based on a W5 no doubt.
 
rumblefish360 said:
This ^^^^^ you know?
Click to expand...
Lol. I don't know. I have a set of standard B1's. The exterior/interior is the likes of which I have only seen on the Brodix. The B1'solution have a W2'ish exhaust "factory". The intake face looks to have millegal as wel?
 
After comparing the two pictures, the posters and the one Screwz linked to, I think there are indeed Arrinbton heads.
Ryan J popped in on the thread and I.D. them as such.

BIG flow capable
 
Any head that gets even a little serious starts to get pricey. MoPar or Chevy, the price goes up!

Inexpensive rockers are on limited heads like an OE or Edelbrock and the like.

The W2 & 5 heads share rocker gear but, low volume keeps prices up. A 2 or 5 head fully ported will out flow the Edelbrocks and shine when you out them to the test. The performance gap between them and the Edelbrock head is currently to narrow to justify making the move to them for the most part. With the introduction of the Victor head, well, the plug has already been pulled at MoPar for the LA stuff. Nothing more to say there.

Now the 2 & 5 are discontinued. You do them for nostalgia or for a final MoPar flag wave!
The W9 is still an option worth considering for racing.
Or us totally nuts street guys!
 
Last edited:
rumblefish360 said:
Why would anybody do that I don't know? The MoPar heads can get all the exhaust they can use. Valve, port, flow!
Click to expand...


Because I'd rather have the bigger intake. The exhaust will take care of itself. And it's almost impossible to test exhaust ports on the flow bench.

When when the weather warms up I'm going to measure the W-2's I have and see if I can fit a 1.500 exhaust in there and still get a valve job on it. If I can fit it, I will.

These heads have way too much exhaust valve and port area.
 
Yikes!!!!!

Well, you have fun with that and report on back what the flow bench sez.

But yea! More intake the merry for sure.
 
yellow rose said:
Because I'd rather have the bigger intake. The exhaust will take care of itself. And it's almost impossible to test exhaust ports on the flow bench.

When when the weather warms up I'm going to measure the W-2's I have and see if I can fit a 1.500 exhaust in there and still get a valve job on it. If I can fit it, I will.

These heads have way too much exhaust valve and port area.
Click to expand...

Why beat your head against a wall with the tiny exhaust valve? Just cam it properly and let one of the best exhaust tracts ever , help. J.Rob
 
RAMM said:
Why beat your head against a wall with the tiny exhaust valve? Just cam it properly and let one of the best exhaust tracts ever , help. J.Rob
Click to expand...


As I said, IMO the port is already big enough and a 1.5 valve is more than enough area.

Even if I use a 2.05 intake it keeps the seats further apart.

It won't be beating my head against the wall. A big valve on the exhaust hurts power. For years the 1.94 exhaust was standard in BBC stuff. That has been squeezed down to 1.800 on the small side and 1.84 as about standard.

A 1.5 valve a 95-96% bowl is better than a 1.6 valve and a 90-92% bowl and it loses power as the bigger valve and bigger bowl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top