Let's Build a 416 with Cast Iron Heads and Manifolds

-
Status
Not open for further replies.
12many said:
If I had a rebuildable 360 core with a good cast crank I’d build me a 360 up to a certain horsepower level. If I needed a crank for it though, I’m not buying a cast 3.58” replacement or a even forged version. I’m going stroked, a forged 4” and building it to whatever level I was after. Simple. And going stroker doesn’t automatically mean, make it mandatory it has to be high CR, big valves, heads, mombo solid cams, drain pipe headers, yadda yadda yadda. Sure it’s a great option. By all means. You build it the way you see fit. Others don’t agree? They’ll get over it.
Click to expand...
If the crank is damaged beyond a grind, a stroker crank of equivalent construction is likely pretty much the same cost. Then there is pistons and possibly con rods costs.
 
Dale Davies said:
And you be the jackass bellyaching about making stoopid posts. Are you having a PMS day or suffering through mentalpause?
Click to expand...
If you're going to get bent out of shape for acting like an asshole and getting called out for it, maybe you should stop acting like an asshole.

Show me where I told the op to use the heads I said looked interesting. Oh wait you can't...
 
PRH said:
Yup........ another one off the rails
Click to expand...

I'll openly apologize to the op for my response to the gatekeeper jackass who can't read.

I'm not going to sit back and take some bullshit from some self absorbed inconsistent gatekeeper.
 
Now with W2 heads on a 416-435 seems like a pretty straightforward build, cam is gonna be the most tricky part to work with the exhaust manifold restriction and lack of collector.
 
Dale Davies said:
Manifolds are part of the exhaust, so restrictive ports or manifolds equate to about the same. To overcome that a bit the exhaust seats can be cut to 40° which aids the low lift flow. This aids blowdown to get the scavenge cycle going strong.
Click to expand...
Talking to the choir?
273 said:
Now with W2 heads on a 416-435 seems like a pretty straightforward build, cam is gonna be the most tricky part to work with the exhaust manifold restriction and lack of collector.
Click to expand...
I disagree. How far you science out the cam is your call.
 
C603B929-09CE-45B0-AE4D-3695AF391F35.jpeg



489DCCD3-2C16-4CA6-990A-B83A269DB577.gif
 
I remember in the early 2000s people would have been disinterested based on the heads. Since then it's become more widely known the potential of the iron heads. When you hang around long enough you see tides change.
There were arguments about airflow being enough or not and then it went to port size and RPMs. A lot of examples were, again, lifeless after 5200 rpm..but iirr the cams were 240's @.050. The better AM iron heads still only averaging around 495-520 hp according to x dynos testing at the time. That's just the stock push rod location stuff now.. I don't mention the others because it's not really relevant to what we're doing and it would also take it off the rails , again.
So in the right hands 500 hp isn't unreasonable at all. In the average garage mechanics hands.. 420-440hp is what the few examples have shown us.. with 240'[email protected] 110 lsa camshafts and around or a tinge above .495-.510 lift.

Look at some combinations, 4-in Stroker with box stock edelbrocks and remember they flow w/2.02 in the 240s cfm @171 cc's..x2=480hp and will probably RPM a little more with the exhaust Port working better if testing with the same camshaft and combination of parts with only the head swap.
Stock head are around 160cc flowing w/1.88 around 212-216 cfm x2 good for 420hp .
So what's the goal?
Max efficiency to squeeze every bit of horsepower out of less effort... or Max effort for big power by pushing the casting to its limits...
You can work 250 CFM with a 1.94 valve with substantially less effort than using a 2.02 to get to 250 and less shrouding. And even larger valve would get you more power of course with more work. Depending on what intake manifold you're using...it can be insurance to push a little further than the goal for any lacking in the intake, though there shouldn't be if you use an m1 or vic340 intake.
 
MOPAROFFICIAL said:
I remember in the early 2000s people would have been disinterested based on the heads. Since then it's become more widely known the potential of the iron heads. When you hang around long enough you see tides change.
There were arguments about airflow being enough or not and then it went to port size and RPMs. A lot of examples were, again, lifeless after 5200 rpm..but iirr the cams were 240's @.050. The better AM iron heads still only averaging around 495-520 hp according to x dynos testing at the time. That's just the stock push rod location stuff now.. I don't mention the others because it's not really relevant to what we're doing and it would also take it off the rails , again.
So in the right hands 500 hp isn't unreasonable at all. In the average garage mechanics hands.. 420-440hp is what the few examples have shown us.. with 240'[email protected] 110 lsa camshafts and around or a tinge above .495-.510 lift.

Look at some combinations, 4-in Stroker with box stock edelbrocks and remember they flow w/2.02 in the 240s cfm @171 cc's..x2=480hp and will probably RPM a little more with the exhaust Port working better if testing with the same camshaft and combination of parts with only the head swap.
Stock head are around 160cc flowing w/1.88 around 212-216 cfm x2 good for 420hp .
So what's the goal?
Max efficiency to squeeze every bit of horsepower out of less effort... or Max effort for big power by pushing the casting to its limits...
You can work 250 CFM with a 1.94 valve with substantially less effort than using a 2.02 to get to 250 and less shrouding. And even larger valve would get you more power of course with more work. Depending on what intake manifold you're using...it can be insurance to push a little further than the goal for any lacking in the intake, though there shouldn't be if you use an m1 or vic340 intake.
Click to expand...
Well said
 
B3422w5 said:
I think a big reason a typical Mopar small block stroker only picks up roughly 3 or maybe a bit more all things being the same type deal is because the heads used most of the time become a more noticeable liability on the extra inches.
look at even the old IHRA 900 inch mountain motors. They were, if memory serves, about 3 tenths quicker than a 500 non mountain motor deal. I think both shared the same head, didn’t they :realcrazy: crazy….
Click to expand...


This weekend at Mile High in Denver.

A1334275-59E8-4AC1-B399-0AEC13A1F809.jpeg


62086306-969F-4FCF-A26C-4CE2AE210DAB.jpeg
 
The original poster said he might have a deal on w2’s. That’s why they entered the conversation. W2’s to run a fun low 12, high 11’s car? Like Scampin said, extra cost not needed to obtain the goal. Get the w2’s as an investment? Cast iron heads are dying. The pool of people looking for them shrinks everyday and I’m in the pool!
 
I mentioned W2s in post 7 kind of as a joke. Not really I meant it, but knew he didn’t want to use them. Then later on, post 85, he got a deal on W2s from Brian at IMM.
 
My original plan was to build the J heads I have and use them. Brian has a nice used set of W2s complete with Jesel rockers. By the time he puts all new parts in the J heads and I buy decent rockers it’s not going to be that much more for the W2s. With my manifolds in place they will be hard to spot.

Some of us old guys like doing things a little differently. I’ve had a 500 horsepower small block with worked Edelbrock heads. When I was younger I used to drool over the W2 stuff in my Direct Connection catalog. Now I have the means and the opportunity to use them.

Like I said before, if this build is not your cup of tea, just hit the “ignore thread” button.
 
I just noticed this thread Brian. I am following along to see how it all plays out.
 
BrianT said:
My original plan was to build the J heads I have and use them. Brian has a nice used set of W2s complete with Jesel rockers. By the time he puts all new parts in the J heads and I buy decent rockers it’s not going to be that much more for the W2s. With my manifolds in place they will be hard to spot.

Some of us old guys like doing things a little differently. I’ve had a 500 horsepower small block with worked Edelbrock heads. When I was younger I used to drool over the W2 stuff in my Direct Connection catalog. Now I have the means and the opportunity to use them.

Like I said before, if this build is not your cup of tea, just hit the “ignore thread” button.
Click to expand...
I love that you’re using w2s now. And on 430+ inches it will sneeze 530hp. Or at least it better.
 
BrianT said:
When I was younger I used to drool over the W2 stuff in my Direct Connection catalog. Now I have the means and the opportunity to use them.
Click to expand...

I too used to drool over the W2 stuff and have always wanted a W2 headed SB. But, while I am probably considered old, I still don't have the means so I will just live vicariously through you. :)

I plan to do a 318 with a 360 stroke crank and opposed valve alloy heads in my Duster, so maybe it isn't a question of "means" but more "priorities"?

BrianT said:
Like I said before, if this build is not your cup of tea, just hit the “ignore thread” button.
Click to expand...

If there is one issue with the internet, it is that people seem to feel the need to say whatever they want anymore.

I've started asking myself if my post is really adding anything, and if not I don't post it. Been more times than not that I have typed something out, re-read it, thought about what I was adding and deleted it. Did that exact thing here in this thread.
 
If he is using factory 71 exhaust manifolds, I will be surprised if it makes 530hp if he runs a pump gas compression and not a roller cam.
 
Considering he’s only looking for 500……
It maybe a stretch but I say go for it.
The thing about exhaust manifolds is you work around the issue with cam and exhaust.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
-

Back
Top