Re: [Amc-list] V8 Cylinder Head Questions - 2nd Follow up ( read

[Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx]

So, what your realy saying here is that greg realy needs to look at what rpm he is operating the jeep in and how he drives it before decidng if the 304 heads need to be messed with.
  I agree that depending on the driver many street driven 4X4's see rpms up to the 6,000 rpm range, but in theses days of gas at $3.25 a gallon for 87 octane, well my 4x4 gets driven gently, so it may well prove that Greg drives his likewise. My 04 with a 4.7 in it that likes to rev nice a cleanly still only sees 4500rpm on a rare occasion. I'd probably not be too bothered by a natural rev limt in the form of small valves. Specially if the torgue was there below that.
  I know I have looked at many dyno runs shown in many mags, [yeah, i know, mags not real life]. I often notice that torque drops off in the lower rpms on many of the mods the mags claim give horsepower improvements. Yeha the numbers go up, but a lot of the time they don't go has high as hey startd off till they are getting up to the 4,000+ rpm, range. 
   How does the AMC V-8 respond to larger valves compard to stock? let alone 304 heads?
I'm realy curious as in that case of the Ford engine when my brother dropped the small valved heads on it. Well, it was VERY torquey, course we did not do any dyno time, so how it would have been with actual 351 heads on it i do not know.

--
Mark Price
Morgantown, WV
1969 AMC Rambler, 4.0L, EFI, T-5
2004 Grand Cherokee Laredo, 4.7L, Quadratrc II
" Chronic Pain Hurts"

 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Nick ALFANO <71amx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Greg,
>  
> There is a lot to chew on here.  I think the best place to start would be 
> exactly what do you want to accomplish with the engine/vehicle.  I get customers 
> that start out like this and all they do is confuse them self and contradict 
> their initial intention which is easy to do.  
>  
> Knowing that your engine was rebuilt by someone unknown and in the .020-.030 
> over range, it is most likely that the compression is not exactly what it was 
> from the factory.  Available pistons at the time, gasket thickness, whether the 
> heads or the block were decked etc all play a factory in the actual compression.  
> A general rule of thumb you can go by for compression increase when only 
> swapping heads and everything else remains the same between the two stock 
> chamber sizes is a 0.7:1 increase from the 51cc to 58cc head or the reverse from 
> the 58-51 head.  
>  
> Valve size increase on an AMC head.  You can comfortably fit a Mopar 2.08 intake 
> and 1.74 exhaust valve in the 360-401 heads.  Unless you have a very healthy 
> cam, I would stay away from increasing the exhaust valves.  A 1.65 valve with 
> the dogleg design works very efficiently at removing the exhaust gas.  In 
> addition, unless you only want a power band under 5000 rpm, I would not put the 
> 304 heads on a 360.  It is really going to choke that engine at wide open 
> throttle.  When you say huge rpm, that is really a subjection statement.  To a 
> rock crawler, huge rpm might be 4500rpms.  To a racer or even performance minded 
> street guy, that is not even close to redline on most stock AMC 360-401 engines.  
> Buzzing a 360 to 5500-6000 is not uncommon when you are at wide open throttle 
> even messing around on the street.  My Dodge Ram will go up almost 6000rpms 
> before it will shift if I have the pedal to the floor.Same goes for a 727 behind 
> a 401.
>  
> Matching your components correctly is the best way to get the kind of power you 
> want.  Too many times a guy will put the wrong cam, carb, intake, gearing and 
> stall speed together just because they think all are interchangeable and each 
> one will increase power on their own.  When in reality, putting a cam that 
> should give you more power in a car with not enough or too much compression will 
> end up with less usable torque and horsepower.  A way you can add a larger 
> duration cam to a lower compression engine is to advance it increasing the 
> cylinder pressure in essence increasing your bottom end.
>  
> I know you are gathering a lot of info that may be confusing so again, I think 
> the best place to start is think of how do I want to use this engine and what 
> kind of performance do you expect when finished.  Then you can work from there.
>  
> Nick
>  
> Alfano Performance
> 4849-76 st.
> Kenosha, WI. 53142
> 262-308-1302
> 262-942-8271 after 6pm central and weekends 
>  
> 
> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 06:35:56 -0800 (PST)
> From: Greg Taylor <amundaza@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [Amc-list] V8 Cylinder Head Questions - 2nd Follow up ( read
>     this    one )
> To: AMC-LIST <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, FSJ-List <FSJ-List@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <874399.52246.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Hi all,
> I am doing some work on my 1989 Grand Wagoneer engine and am considering 
> swapping heads while I am at it. I need some feedback from the experts, please!
> 
> My Jeep has a stock remanned 360, which is probably 0.020 or 0.030 overbore. 
> Reman company is unknown, but it has about 60,000 miles on the reman (11 years 
> old ? done in 1997, 3 owners ago). I'm pulling the front timing cover to fix a 
> coolant leak behind the fuel pump. I'll be installing a new Bull Tear front 
> cover and nickel plated pump cover, double roller timing set, Bull tear matching 
> cam/distributor gears, GM HEI, & a hi-flow water pump for this ?initial? build 
> up. I?ll also be swapping from a 600-cfm 4160 to a 670-cfm 4150 Street Avenger.
> 
> I have been considering pulling the intake and heads while I'm at it and 
> installing some 'built' heads I have. I have the 1979 304 (59 cc) heads I was 
> building up for a 304 stroker turbo motor I was going to use in an AMC race car. 
> I have ported and polished these heads (about 40 hours into them) and they are 
> currently machined for CHEVY Milodon Megaflow 1.94 Int & 1.50 Exh. valves 
> (they're smaller than stock 360, but have smaller stems and undercut stem in the 
> runners). I am considering having them machined for larger Chevy valves, as 
> Milodon makes much larger Megaflow valves.
> 
> How much larger can I go on a 360, with intake and exhaust valve size?
> 
> These 1979 304 heads also have the combustion chambers opened up as detailed in 
> Performance American style, so they are probably about 62 cc's in size now. How 
> much would this drop the stock 360's 8.4:1 compression? If it would drop too 
> much, how much can I mill off the AMC heads, to bring compression back up? IF I 
> could machine 0.100" off the heads, there are 0.100" longer Chevy valves that 
> would make up the difference in valve height so that "theoretically" the pushrod 
> length would not be affected.
> 
> My 1979 304 heads have been machined for 3/8" studs for the Harland Sharp roller 
> rockers I plan to install.
> 
> How much would compression be raised if the 52 CC 70-71 304 heads were 
> installed? Just curious. Stock 360 is 58 CC through 1984, from what I can find.
> 
> Last night I spoke with long time AMC club member (here in MI), Rick Jones, who 
> built the 401 for my ?78 Cherokee Chief. He was telling me that he recalls that 
> the later heads (like on my 1989 GW) were around 65 cc?s. Can anyone confirm 
> this or have casting numbers available (my heads are still on the engine)? From 
> the information I found online, the 360?s were 8.4:1 compression 1971(late)-1984 
> (58 cc heads). However, my 1989 GW has 8.25:1 compression. If this is due to the 
> 65 cc heads (and probably piston combo), then I might be OK in swapping the 
> ported/polished 62-cc 1979 304 heads I have modified. This would raise the 
> 8.25:1 compression a bit (3 cc smaller heads). What do you all think? I would 
> also be able to swap the 1970 304 52-cc heads as well, and raise compression up 
> a lot (13 cc smaller heads).
> 
> Rick also told me that he has these 1970 304 heads on a 304 he built for torque 
> and gas mileage. The engine turned out to be a real screamer with a small carter 
> carb and the same intake I am running (see below). He?s getting 22+ MPG in his 
> Javelin with it mated to an AX4 Jeep 2WD tranny.
> 
> As a side note, I am running the Holley Street Dominator intake. It?s a single 
> plane intake with equal length runners. The intake runners are full size and 
> then taper down to a smaller square port where they mate up to the head ports. 
> It works well on the Jeep for added torque. I also had it on my 401 Rick built 
> for me.
> 
> Lastly, this motor isn?t geared towards turning huge RPM?s. It?s a driver and 
> occasional recreational off road FSJ here in MI (nothing crazy). I am simply 
> wanting to get more power out of it and am building it to get better mileage, 
> supplementing the gasoline with hydrogen-on-demand and water injection.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback, all.
>   
>   Greg :)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> _______________________________________________
> Amc-list mailing list
> Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list

_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list