For the W5 lovers

[Dan the man]

Yes. The “Econo” head was supposed to be cheaper with the ability to use OEM rockers and standard length valves. I have a set of these myself. The dual exhaust bolt pattern came later after the initial introduction. The dual pattern exhaust, It’s also available on the race head.

W2 & W5’s are still floating around.

It’s already been done. You just don’t see it.

The 318 rep should be ignored and built as any other small block.
If anything, consider it a small bore 340. The draw back of a 318 is the weaker main caps which 99% of the people will never tax it and finally the overall bore size is less then optimum, but not a big deal. Getting a high compression ratio requires ether a domed piston and/or a very small chamber cylinder head.

The best thing to do to an318 performance or race wise is bore it out as far as possible to the 4.00 mark, if possible. At .060 over, it displaces 327.79. And you know those old school Chevy guys love the 327.

At .090, a 4.00 bore, it displaces 332.76ci.

This is a pile of BS everyone falls into. Cylinder heads have a job to do and what they were designed for as far as cubic inch displacement goes, leave that thought pattern at the factory door and move on and ignore it. What your looking for in a cylinder head in a high performance or race are a is the ability to move air in and out of the cylinder. This boils down to a few factors. Port window size, valve size, cfm flow and port efficiency.

MP ported a set of 318, 302 heads that out powered a set of stock 360 heads due to a more efficient port. But the problem here is a few things. No one wants to port an iron head and even more so than one that requires a lot of work. Also the fact it’s heavy iron.
Once you move beyond the ability of the 302 head to handle enough air to feed the engine, or just simply where a larger port comes into play better than the smaller 302 delivers, and what is needed, that’s when the 340/360 head comes into play.



We’ll find out later…… The pictured rocker gear sits up top my race W2 heads right now. I want to pick up a better set of TD/Jesel rockers for the W5.

What would give the best throttle response and low to midrange torque, 1.880" intake valve's or 2.020"? And also I've never said that 2.02 would not work on the 318. As far as a cylinder head specifically for the 318's is it the speedmaster? Looks like early next week is leaving for Illinois in the idea of bringing home a ride

 

[Newbomb Turk]

What would give the best throttle response and low to midrange torque, 1.880" intake valve's or 2.020"? And also I've never said that 2.02 would not work on the 318. As far as a cylinder head specifically for the 318's is it the speedmaster? Looks like early next week is leaving for Illinois in the idea of bringing home a ride

I can tell you for a fact that port volume, valve size and throttle response arent related.

Pay attention to newer engines. Hell, look at what other guys are doing. Chrysler guys have been getting screwed because the ports on these heads are too small for almost any performance engine.

You are trying to develop your engine design and building theory based on nonsense, magazine horse crap and internet myths.

BUY THE BEST HEADS YOU CAN AFFORD, PREP THEM CORRECTLY AND BUILD YOUR ENGINE AROUND THEM.

Youll make more power, have better throttle response and it will drive better than if you use a shitty undersized head.

Now Dan, I’m giving you this for free, even though I paid out the nose to learn it. Take its value as what you are paying for it.

If Im standing around, and some throttle blipping clown is telling folks how much “throttle response“ he has free revving it I walk away because like I said, the dude is a clown.

I couldn’t care less how an engine rpm’s without load on it. How it rpm’s under load is what matters. PERIOD.

That is one flaw in water brake dyno testing. That type of dyno can not measure the engine’s ability to rpm and that is what matters.

Of course, the water brake dyno does things a true inertia dyno does not.

Im not saying this to offend you Dan, but you are trying to develop your understanding the wrong way. Are there any dyno shops near you? If so, stop in with pizza and beer and make friends with them. Then see if they will let you sit in and watch some dyno testing. Ask questions but stay out of the way. Take notes.

Then head to the drag strip and/or the local circle track and look at the numbers and see what you see. Of course you need vehicle weight to properly asses if the time slip matches power but that’s part of learning.

You should be learning how to make the engine more fuel efficient, not in MPG but in actual efficiency. How well does it burn the fuel it’s using. There are big power gains in maximizing fuel burning. Air doesn’t burn nor does it make power. Fuel does.

To that end, to burn more fuel (as efficiently as you can) you have to increase the air flow through the engine. And you still have to determine if you are burning the fuel as best you can.

And that goes for drag cars, street cars, circle track cars, virtually any car (I should say engine but you get my drift there) needs to burn fuel as efficiently as you can get it.

What most guys call throttle response is just like masturbation. It’s self gratification and that’s about it.

Now, if you want to head down the rabbit hole of driveablity then you need to get a handle on the above first.

 

[273]

What would give the best throttle response and low to midrange torque, 1.880" intake valve's or 2.020"? And also I've never said that 2.02 would not work on the 318.

Never heard one person say the 1.88 valve 340 head was the way to go for a 340 and see people swap out the X heads for that ground pounding torque of the mighty 1.88 valve.

As far as a cylinder head specifically for the 318's is it the speedmaster? Looks like early next week is leaving for Illinois in the idea of bringing home a ride

To me you can't just look at the head it's the whole combo but especially head and cam being the main two factors. What gonna be more street able 280 gross hp 318, a stock headed 318 with a 218 cam or a stock 5.2l magnum?

 

[J-c-c]

I thought the W5 versions had a history of porosity?

 

[-Boosted-]

@Dan the man ,

In the time I have been on this forum (less than a year), I have searched for, bought, stripped, built, rebuilt, redid a few things, rebuilt again and prepared to race my car. You on the other hand have been window shopping the whole time. I sure hope you make the trip to Illinois and come back with something other than the latest copy of Classic Car Trader from the local Circle K.

 

[pittsburghracer]

A few W5 numbers from Wiese’s website

 

[rumblefish360]

What would give the best throttle response and low to midrange torque, 1.880" intake valve's or 2.020"?

A loaded question. Not answerable.

And also I've never said that 2.02 would not work on the 318. As far as a cylinder head specifically for the 318's is it the speedmaster?

No

Looks like early next week is leaving for Illinois in the idea of bringing home a ride

Best of luck & well wishes on a safe and fruitful journey.

I can tell you for a fact that port volume, valve size and throttle response arent related.

There a working combination. It should fit the desired outcome of the engine plan.

Pay attention to newer engines. Hell, look at what other guys are doing. Chrysler guys have been getting screwed because the ports on these heads are too small for almost any performance engine.

You are trying to develop your engine design and building theory based on nonsense, magazine horse crap and internet myths.

BUY THE BEST HEADS YOU CAN AFFORD, PREP THEM CORRECTLY AND BUILD YOUR ENGINE AROUND THEM.

Youll make more power, have better throttle response and it will drive better than if you use a shitty undersized head.

Now Dan, I’m giving you this for free, even though I paid out the nose to learn it. Take its value as what you are paying for it.

If Im standing around, and some throttle blipping clown is telling folks how much “throttle response“ he has free revving it I walk away because like I said, the dude is a clown.

I couldn’t care less how an engine rpm’s without load on it. How it rpm’s under load is what matters. PERIOD.

That is one flaw in water brake dyno testing. That type of dyno can not measure the engine’s ability to rpm and that is what matters.

Of course, the water brake dyno does things a true inertia dyno does not.

Im not saying this to offend you Dan, but you are trying to develop your understanding the wrong way. Are there any dyno shops near you? If so, stop in with pizza and beer and make friends with them. Then see if they will let you sit in and watch some dyno testing. Ask questions but stay out of the way. Take notes.

Then head to the drag strip and/or the local circle track and look at the numbers and see what you see. Of course you need vehicle weight to properly asses if the time slip matches power but that’s part of learning.

You should be learning how to make the engine more fuel efficient, not in MPG but in actual efficiency. How well does it burn the fuel it’s using. There are big power gains in maximizing fuel burning. Air doesn’t burn nor does it make power. Fuel does.

To that end, to burn more fuel (as efficiently as you can) you have to increase the air flow through the engine. And you still have to determine if you are burning the fuel as best you can.

And that goes for drag cars, street cars, circle track cars, virtually any car (I should say engine but you get my drift there) needs to burn fuel as efficiently as you can get it.

What most guys call throttle response is just like masturbation. It’s self gratification and that’s about it.

Now, if you want to head down the rabbit hole of driveablity then you need to get a handle on the above first.

Well said.

Never heard one person say the 1.88 valve 340 head was the way to go for a 340 and see people swap out the X heads for that ground pounding torque of the mighty 1.88 valve.

Doing that…. Bullshit or it’s a very unbalanced combo.

To me you can't just look at the head it's the whole combo but especially head and cam being the main two factors. What (is) gonna be more street able 280 gross hp 318, a stock headed 318 with a 218 cam or a stock 5.2l magnum?

For me, a true street car is one that runs and drives like grandma’s car. Once the throttle has a weak spot down low because of to much camshaft, the street ability of a true easy driver has left the building.
(But this is subjective & what one is willing to put up with.)
Of course a proper converter will hide this.

If run the engine on the dyno and get a graph where the low end torque is very weak, this is something that could show up as your driving it. (Proper torque converter issue again….)

So for me, once it leaves that as deliver as stock feel, something else needs to be adjusted to compensate.

 

[rumblefish360]

I thought the W5 versions had a history of porosity?

They do. Earlier units more so. That’s the gamble. I lost at 312 cfm @ .650 on a head where the port broke through. The porosity issue is also the gamble. Sometimes it can be addressed, sometimes not.

 

[pittsburghracer]

@A body can tell you a lot about W5 heads. Probably the first thing he will tell you is they can’t be welded.

 

[rumblefish360]

A few W5 numbers from Wiese’s website

View attachment 1716187786

There ya go!

My B Miller ported and as cast both flowed by Charlie Servido on a 4.00 bore plate;

 

[Newbomb Turk]

@A body can tell you a lot about W5 heads. Probably the first thing he will tell you is they can’t be welded.

I’ve welded several of them. You can do it, it’s a bit tricky though.

 

[Les Gibson]

I'm running these exact same W5 heads on my 76 Arrow. I had W2 econo heads on my previous 72 Dart. Both ran strong. I don't understand the dislike for the W5 heads. Now I will be the first to admit that I have limited knowledge as to what the previous owner of the Arrow did to these heads. But they work well, this car is capable of hitting high 8s in the 1/4. Also, T&D and Jesel are not the only rocker arm choices for these heads. I run Harland Sharp rockers on these W5s. Perhaps not as sexy as the T&D and Jesel set ups, but a lot less money.

 

[rumblefish360]

The aluminum is crap aluminum.

 

[rumblefish360]

I'm running these exact same W5 heads on my 76 Arrow. I had W2 econo heads on my previous 72 Dart. Both ran strong. I don't understand the dislike for the W5 heads. Now I will be the first to admit that I have limited knowledge as to what the previous owner of the Arrow did to these heads. But they work well, this car is capable of hitting high 8s in the 1/4. Also, T&D and Jesel are not the only rocker arm choices for these heads. I run Harland Sharp rockers on these W5s. Perhaps not as sexy as the T&D and Jesel set ups, but a lot less money.

I forgot about the Harland Sharps and that’s really bad since I recently purchased a set for my race W2’s.

Good catch

 

[Dan the man]

I'm sure that I'll be back with a ride. I've seen a lot of junk over the last several months I even had to explain to someone what the term project car means

@Dan the man ,

In the time I have been on this forum (less than a year), I have searched for, bought, stripped, built, rebuilt, redid a few things, rebuilt again and prepared to race my car. You on the other hand have been window shopping the whole time. I sure hope you make the trip to Illinois and come back with something other than the latest copy of Classic Car Trader from the local Circle K.

 

[rumblefish360]

The term project car is highly subjective.

 

[PRH]

If someone is looking to build a combo that could exploit the attributes of something like a W5 head…….but doesn’t actually own any heads yet……..my feelings about considering purchasing W5’s is……….with all the well documented problems people have had with them……..why would you do that to yourself?

There are def less painful options.

 

[-Boosted-]

I'm sure that I'll be back with a ride. I've seen a lot of junk over the last several months I even had to explain to someone what the term project car means

Right on! I know it’s frustrating as hell looking at car after car. Good luck man, hope it works out.

 

[rumblefish360]

I’d skip the W5 head and go right to the Victor.

 

[PRH]

I’ve only had one set of SB Victors here.
An early set, bought “bare”(no valves or valve job), that were sent to me to have the valves fitted to the guides and the seats cut.
I was pretty impressed with the flow.
Very quiet and steady ports.

The numbers I got are in the SB air flow thread.

Another option……..Indy 360-2 cnc230’s are in the 320cfm range on my bench.

 

[Newbomb Turk]

I’ve only had one set of SB Victors here.
An early set, bought “bare”(no valves or valve job), that were sent to me to have the valves fitted to the guides and the seats cut.
I was pretty impressed with the flow.
Very quiet and steady ports.

The numbers I got are in the SB air flow thread.

Another option……..Indy 360-2 cnc230’s are in the 320cfm range on my bench.

Quiet and steady is as important as flow numbers.

 

[NCmtnDWELLER]

Not mine

View attachment 1716187451

View attachment 1716187452

Beautiful

 

[rumblefish360]

Because mopars just happen to be the most expensive engine to build. I'm sure that there is a lot of R&D in the development of those cylinder heads.

Small block Buick for starters.

 

[junkyardhero]

Small block Buick for starters.

me as a 17 year old line cook with a 455 buick: i think i'm gonna get a cam and intake

PAW: no you're not.

TA performance: sure, we have that. it'll only cost your first born

 

[rumblefish360]

me as a 17 year old line cook with a 455 buick: i think i'm gonna get a cam and intake

PAW: no you're not.

TA performance: sure, we have that. it'll only cost your first born

LMAO!!!

I’ll say this about the big block Buick, that can be “One bad mutha!”