Suggestions for new design Aluminum Mopar SB clean slate (kind of) cylinder heads

-
Cuda416 said:
I am literally laughing my *** off at how triggered you got about me agreeing with the use of stud mounted rockers for this new head design.

If you actually read anything from the get go... ahh, maybe you don't read so fast, I'll type slower.... This head was designed with a budget in mind. I'll say it again and t y p e r e a l l y s l o w, if you need, I can include a bouncing ball so you can sing along.

This head was designed to provide an increased measure of performance, while allowing for some lower cost options regarding the rockers. If that was still too fast for you, just say so and I'll go over it again.


I am shocked someone would not give you the time of day... Actually I'm not, go figure.



Wow, this just speaks volumes.... LOL. I make a comment about agreeing the rocker choice was a good one to get people into MoPars in a more budget friendly way and you extrapolate things that don't exist. Speaking of that, you might take some time our of your keyboard warrior time and go re-read my original response to you. Read it several times and you just might notice that it was a direct and not so subtle example of coming up with things that don't exist. I won't hold my breath, reading comprehension seems to be lost on you.

The biggest reason I am literally laughing as I type this though is your willingness to immediately get on your knees and roll over for the person/company responsible for producing these shaft-less (maybe there is where things hit too close to home for you?) heads, right after showing your inner *** hat by jumping all over someone for agreeing with him.

Now, to re-cap, and I'm still typing slow....

Nowhere did I say a stud mounted rocker was superior, or even equivalent to a shaft mount. There is a reason stud mounted systems use girdles (maybe you do too...?) and companies like Jesel sell rocker systems to overcome the limitations after all.

What I did, was agree with a design element and business decision that just might bring the younger crowd in to keep things alive for another 50 years instead of giving way completely to the tuner bolt on bull **** that most of us legitemately loathe. But no, you stay strong in the ways of "weak ***" post policing, though I still think it just went way over your head.

At the end of the day, I'm sure you have something other than stupid responses to posts that had nothing to do with you to attend to, but at this point it doesn't really matter to me. I'm sorry if your mommy or daddy slapped you around with a sack of chevy rockers as a child, but go take it out on someone else. I don't have any more time for your bullshit.

Have a blessed day....
Click to expand...
Wouldn't waste your time, dude only shows up once and a while when I'm guessing he can't find a dog or someone to kick around so he comes here to be an a$$hole. Ignoring him is the best medicine.
 
273 said:
Wouldn't waste your time, dude only shows up once and a while when I'm guessing he can't find a dog or someone to kick around so he comes here to be an a$$hole. Ignoring him is the best medicine.
Click to expand...

Yeah I've already wasted too much time on it. He's shown who and what he is.
 
Cuda416 said:
I am literally laughing my *** off at how triggered you got about me agreeing with the use of stud mounted rockers for this new head design.
Click to expand...
Not triggered.
Cuda416 said:
If you actually read anything from the get go... ahh, maybe you don't read so fast, I'll type slower.... This head was designed with a budget in mind. I'll say it again and t y p e r e a l l y s l o w, if you need, I can include a bouncing ball so you can sing along.

This head was designed to provide an increased measure of performance, while allowing for some lower cost options regarding the rockers. If that was still too fast for you, just say so and I'll go over it again.


I am shocked someone would not give you the time of day... Actually I'm not, go figure.



Wow, this just speaks volumes.... LOL. I make a comment about agreeing the rocker choice was a good one to get people into MoPars in a more budget friendly way and you extrapolate things that don't exist. Speaking of that, you might take some time our of your keyboard warrior time and go re-read my original response to you. Read it several times and you just might notice that it was a direct and not so subtle example of coming up with things that don't exist. I won't hold my breath, reading comprehension seems to be lost on you.

The biggest reason I am literally laughing as I type this though is your willingness to immediately get on your knees and roll over for the person/company responsible for producing these shaft-less (maybe there is where things hit too close to home for you?) heads, right after showing your inner *** hat by jumping all over someone for agreeing with him.

Now, to re-cap, and I'm still typing slow....

Nowhere did I say a stud mounted rocker was superior, or even equivalent to a shaft mount. There is a reason stud mounted systems use girdles (maybe you do too...?) and companies like Jesel sell rocker systems to overcome the limitations after all.

What I did, was agree with a design element and business decision that just might bring the younger crowd in to keep things alive for another 50 years instead of giving way completely to the tuner bolt on bull **** that most of us legitemately loathe. But no, you stay strong in the ways of "weak ***" post policing, though I still think it just went way over your head.

At the end of the day, I'm sure you have something other than stupid responses to posts that had nothing to do with you to attend to, but at this point it doesn't really matter to me. I'm sorry if your mommy or daddy slapped you around with a sack of chevy rockers as a child, but go take it out on someone else. I don't have any more time for your bullshit.

Have a blessed day....
Click to expand...

The rest I didn’t read. Except the last line now that I’m typing.

Blessed day to you as well.
 
@273. I show up once in a while?

ROFLMAO

Try again.

Good day sir
 
I personally love that it's using Chevy rockers. That opens up all kinds of options for very good rocker packages, price points etc. Lots of ratios available from mild to wild, different body materials, bearing packages, on and on.

Shaft rockers are nice, not gonna argue that. But for what these heads are gonna be, the rocker arms are absolutely not going to be the performance bottle neck.

We can make a stud girdle easily enough for guys running solid rollers.
 
Mean416 said:
I personally love that it's using Chevy rockers. That opens up all kinds of options for very good rocker packages, price points etc. Lots of ratios available from mild to wild, different body materials, bearing packages, on and on.

Shaft rockers are nice, not gonna argue that. But for what these heads are gonna be, the rocker arms are absolutely not going to be the performance bottle neck.

We can make a stud girdle easily enough for guys running solid rollers.
Click to expand...
Technically, I look at them all as "aftermarket performance rockers" lol they are die cast stainless, and we use them on fords, sbc, and the mopars. Even have our logo on them. They are pretty nice! And you are correct. Can always girdle them. Thanks!!
 
Mean416 said:
I personally love that it's using Chevy rockers. That opens up all kinds of options for very good rocker packages, price points etc. Lots of ratios available from mild to wild, different body materials, bearing packages, on and on.

Shaft rockers are nice, not gonna argue that. But for what these heads are gonna be, the rocker arms are absolutely not going to be the performance bottle neck.

We can make a stud girdle easily enough for guys running solid rollers.
Click to expand...
Agreed, I just wish the head had more capability in the intake port dept.
 
bigfoot said:
Agreed, I just wish the head had more capability in the intake port dept.
Click to expand...
If it's gonna start off in the 290cfm range, with a 2.08 valve... isn't that pretty capable as a starting point?

Port them from there. An Edelbrock is what in the 250s stock? That's a big jump.

It seems like it could get upwards of 600 HP with a bit of port work. That's pretty dang good for starters.
 
Plus the Chevy rockers will work well with people who have magnum short blocks.
 
I believe it was stated it will start off at 260 cfm. Ported out or cnc'ed 290. It will fit blueprints needs perfectly.
 
bigfoot said:
I believe it was stated it will start off at 260 cfm. Ported out or cnc'ed 290. It will fit blueprints needs perfectly.
Click to expand...
I'm under the assumption they are developing a cylinder head as a replacement for the Trick Flow heads on their crate engines. 290cfm CNC
 
On the BP website, the current offerings with aluminum heads are listed as “BP assembled” Edelbrocks.

For a comparison, their SBC heads aren’t a reinvention of the wheel.
They just wanted something to fill their needs that was produced “in house”.
I expect them to go in the same direction with the SBM heads.

Post #386-
Nothing official until I get some 3d models printed. I'm hoping high 260's ootb. High 290's ported.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Was there a thread about a clean sheet performance head just recently? Regard these Blueprint Engines heads as a street head with stock architecture. It doesn't make sense to make them any other way if you're BP.
If anyone knows the thread I am talking about I would love to continue the 'Offset Pushrod' / 'W-2 replacement' discussion over there but I can't find it. It was just a few months ago.
 
go-fish said:
Was there a thread about a clean sheet performance head just recently? Regard these Blueprint Engines heads as a street head with stock architecture. It doesn't make sense to make them any other way if you're BP.
If anyone knows the thread I am talking about I would love to continue the 'Offset Pushrod' / 'W-2 replacement' discussion over there but I can't find it. It was just a few months ago.
Click to expand...
Isn't it this thread, it started back in April?
 
Mean416 said:
If it's gonna start off in the 290cfm range, with a 2.08 valve... isn't that pretty capable as a starting point?
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Though a 2.08? Not needed IMO.
Mean416 said:
Port them from there. An Edelbrock is what in the 250s stock? That's a big jump.
Click to expand...
IIRC, the BPE is not “That kind of head.” Closer to an Edelbrock.
Mean416 said:
It seems like it could get upwards of 600 HP with a bit of port work. That's pretty dang good for starters.
Click to expand...
That’s the TF head. Not what BPE is doing.
IMO, for the street guys, there isn’t a big hole to fill.
Stock heads for stock and mild cam upgrade
Edelbrock, Speedmaster heads for hotter street engines
Trickflow heads for very hot street engines

Weigh the price of porting each of the heads under a Trickflow and weigh your options. Consider cost in total.

Of course, you want to totally charge forth on a crazy LA engine, there is the Victor head. Flow rates for the Victor head below.

IMG_3466.jpeg
 
273 said:
Isn't it this thread, it started back in April?
Click to expand...
I guess it could be. I haven't been to the beginning of this thread in about that long.
Well, I wish someone with a connection could get a W2 replacement into production. Would the cost of valvetrain go down if there were a sudden influx of performance heads in the pool? T/A .500 offset to take advantage of the plethora of LA choices. OR the same outfit could come out with oval port manifolds. You can still get new production/ shelf headers for W2. Harland Sharp still makes offset rockers. Just need the big chunks of aluminum.
 
go-fish said:
I guess it could be. I haven't been to the beginning of this thread in about that long.
Well, I wish someone with a connection could get a W2 replacement into production. Would the cost of valvetrain go down if there were a sudden influx of performance heads in the pool? T/A .500 offset to take advantage of the plethora of LA choices. OR the same outfit could come out with oval port manifolds. You can still get new production/ shelf headers for W2. Harland Sharp still makes offset rockers. Just need the big chunks of aluminum.
Click to expand...
Isn't the Indy heads a decent replacement for people that want to go that way ? What about the Edelbrock Victor heads ?
 
I'm really mixed up the original OP states 290 CFM.
Didn't Blueprint have a Trick Flow version crate engine at one time.
I think producing another head producing only 260 cfm is an underachieving endeavor. imo but it's not my business or money
 
May as well put some seedblasters on and run their rocker arms. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top