A question about heads... - Pontiac GTO Forum
User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 13 (permalink) Old 08-06-2013, 06:41 AM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
A question about heads...

A local shop is advertising 2 sets of heads on Craigslist. Both sets are listed as rebuildable. Both are the same price.

The first are 1967 670's, the second are 1969 YS 62.

I have not seen them so lets assume both are bare and in need of rebuilding.

Since I am not doing a numbers matching restore, which set would be better for a medium performance build?
HaloPlayer is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 13 (permalink) Old 08-06-2013, 01:15 PM
Super Moderator
 
BearGFR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Springtown, TX
Posts: 5,742
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Garage
The 62's. They have open chambers and don't need as much timing to make decent power.

Be careful though, both have relatively small chambers and on an otherwise "stock" 400 build will result in a compression ratio that's too high for pump gas.

Tell us more about what you're planning to do?

Bear

BearGFR
Springtown, TEXAS
BearGFR is offline  
post #3 of 13 (permalink) Old 08-06-2013, 06:25 PM
64-67 Expert
 
geeteeohguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fresno, California
Posts: 8,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
X2. The 670's would work better if it was 1967 and you could buy 100 octane fuel for 30 cents a gallon. They need super high octane and a lot of timing, but they worked very well back then. Now, you need open chamber heads of about 85-90cc or dished pistons to run on today's poor fuels.
geeteeohguy is offline  
 
post #4 of 13 (permalink) Old 08-06-2013, 09:46 PM
Former Moderator
 
68greengoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern Wisconsin
Posts: 3,523
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Yeah, both those heads are 72cc and wont like pump gas very well.........



SOLD.....
462ci, 4spd
Performer Intake, Mild Cam
Pertronix Ignitor III
Accel Super Coil, Accel 8.8mm Wires
68greengoat is offline  
post #5 of 13 (permalink) Old 08-06-2013, 11:32 PM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BearGFR View Post
The 62's. They have open chambers and don't need as much timing to make decent power.

Be careful though, both have relatively small chambers and on an otherwise "stock" 400 build will result in a compression ratio that's too high for pump gas.

Tell us more about what you're planning to do?

Bear
I'm not sure if you followed the other threads, but I have a '75 400 in need of a rebuild (557 block casting). Factory specs are either 170 or 185 hp; I have not pulled any more numbers off the block yet to see what it came out of. I know I can NOT do a high performance build on this block due to thin web castings but everything I read says you can go up to 400 hp.

So, my plans....

No stroker for this one; just a standard crank.

A mild cam and a bigger exhaust (2 1/2" with x-pipe).

I was thinking these heads would help it breathe better but it appears the'll just raise compression. The current heads should have 101 cc chambers but still have big valves. Dished pistons would allow me to use the 62' but would there be any benefit? Save my money and just buy domed pistons to increase compression on the existing heads? There is 0.11" difference in size on the intake valve between my heads and the 62's. Will it make that much of a difference?

I've made no decision yet about an intake. Thoughts?

MSD distributor, electronic ignition. Anyone have opinions on mechanical advance vs vacuum advance?

Muncie 4 speed (m-20 or 21).

Dark blue paint, blue interior.

Power steering, power brakes, a/c (factory a/c car, a necessary evil living in Florida).
HaloPlayer is offline  
post #6 of 13 (permalink) Old 08-07-2013, 09:38 AM
64-67 Expert
 
geeteeohguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fresno, California
Posts: 8,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Domed pistons are a no-no. They tend to increase detonation and are poor in the quench area. If your current heads are 101cc, you can have them milled to about 90cc and you'll be right where you need to be. You'll need to do the math, but I think about an .060" cut will do it. The intake may need a shave to fit the heads, but this is all cost effective and will work just fine. I ended up spending $1400 for some 87cc iron heads to lower the compression on my '67 GTO. They work fine, but had I known the hidden costs of re-habbing old heads (they needed EVERYTHING), I would have just bought a pair of KRE or Edelbrock aluminum heads.
geeteeohguy is offline  
post #7 of 13 (permalink) Old 08-07-2013, 09:52 AM
Super Moderator
 
BearGFR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Springtown, TX
Posts: 5,742
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Garage
As far as port flow, in general, D-ports are D-ports are D-ports. There's not a whole lot of difference between them as long as you go with the "performance" (i.e. 2.11 intake valve, 1.96 exhaust valve) heads.

For the level of power you're talking about, there's no reason to be afraid of the 557 block as long as it's sound now. Building a stroker making over 500 HP night be cause for concern, but not with what you're planning.

If we assume it needs a slight bore to clean it up, say +0.030, and also assume everything else is "nominal", then I'd still go with the 62's to get the bigger valves (yeah, it matters) and the screw-in rocker studs. Add a set of dished pistons with 12 to 13 cc's total dish volume and you'll have a 406 and be in the neighborhood of 9.3-9.5 to 1 static compression - right where you want to be for 93 octane.

Running a manual transmission frees you from having to worry about the effects of "too much cam" with an automatic and a stock converter. That leaves the power brakes as the main limiting factor on how rowdy you'll be able to get with the cam. I'd recommend not pushing it any lower than 15" idle vacuum, unless you're also willing to add either a vacuum assist pump or convert to hyrdoboost braking.

If you want to go a slightly different route, then go ahead and have the block "zero-decked" and run pistons with at least 16 cc's total dish volume. That'll still have you with the same compression ratio, but you get the added advantage of better quench characteristics in the chambers which both helps combustion efficiency and does a better job of resisting detonation.

101 cc's in the heads is way too much for a 400 and running domed pistons to fix that is no solution. Yeah, you can get compression up that way but what you gain in compression you'll turn right around and forfeit because the domes will destroy combustion efficiency and flame travel.

In either case, I'd run aftermarket forged rods even though you're not pushing "that much" power. They're relatively cheap insurance, especially when you consider that the rods tend to be the weak link in Pontiacs and by the time you pay to have a set of factory rods prepped and reconditioned you'll be very close to what a set of forged rods would cost anyway.

Run the factory intake but make sure you port match it to the heads and clean up the various bumps and rough spots in the runners. For what you're proposing, nothing will make as much power as the factory piece will.

I wouldn't fool with an MSD ignition if you don't already have one. A good HEI, or even the factory points unit will work just fine. There's a lot to be said for the realibility and "side of the road" serviceability of the points system and for what you're planning, even the most expensive MSD box isn't going to make any additional power.

Either route ought to get you a fun and reliable 400 build that will make respectable power.

Bear

BearGFR
Springtown, TEXAS
BearGFR is offline  
post #8 of 13 (permalink) Old 08-12-2013, 10:46 PM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BearGFR View Post
If you want to go a slightly different route, then go ahead and have the block "zero-decked" and run pistons with at least 16 cc's total dish volume. That'll still have you with the same compression ratio, but you get the added advantage of better quench characteristics in the chambers which both helps combustion efficiency and does a better job of resisting detonation.

Run the factory intake but make sure you port match it to the heads and clean up the various bumps and rough spots in the runners. For what you're proposing, nothing will make as much power as the factory piece will.

Either route ought to get you a fun and reliable 400 build that will make respectable power.

Bear
I've read enough about 400 engines the past couple of days to make my head swim (this forum and others). Keep in mind I have built a total of 2 engines in my entire life, and nothing I have 'thought out'.

For the above mentioned reasons it seems zero decking is the way to go.

Couldn't the same results be achieved by a taller piston / connecting rod? Does anyone offer such an item?

Seems to me if you shave the block, the heads will sit lower throwing off the alignment with the intake manifold. So then you have to custom fit the manifold to the newly lowered heads?

Or is the 0.030 to 0.040 shaved off just not enough to make a difference when lining up the intake?
HaloPlayer is offline  
post #9 of 13 (permalink) Old 08-13-2013, 09:32 AM
64-67 Expert
 
geeteeohguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Fresno, California
Posts: 8,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
I've never had a deck shaved to zero (because I only recently learned about the benefits), but my understanding is that it's maybe a .010-.020" cut at the most. Not enough to alter your intake/pushrod fitment. You could have custom pistons made in any configuration, I would imagine.
geeteeohguy is offline  
post #10 of 13 (permalink) Old 08-13-2013, 03:19 PM
Super Moderator
 
BearGFR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Springtown, TX
Posts: 5,742
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by HaloPlayer View Post
I've read enough about 400 engines the past couple of days to make my head swim (this forum and others). Keep in mind I have built a total of 2 engines in my entire life, and nothing I have 'thought out'.

For the above mentioned reasons it seems zero decking is the way to go.

Couldn't the same results be achieved by a taller piston / connecting rod? Does anyone offer such an item?

Seems to me if you shave the block, the heads will sit lower throwing off the alignment with the intake manifold. So then you have to custom fit the manifold to the newly lowered heads?

Or is the 0.030 to 0.040 shaved off just not enough to make a difference when lining up the intake?
"Most" Pontiacs have the pistons located 0.020 "down the hole" from the factory. You're correct, slightly longer rods or pistons with slightly relocated pins could also be used - in theory. However doing either one of those would put you in the realm of having to have them custom made and would be very expensive - much more so than just having the block decks shaved a little.

Having that piston crown "squish" really close to the head creates all sorts of turbulence in the chamber, and that turbulence is very beneficial for promoting combustion, keeping air/fuel nice and mixed, getting good flame travel, and the like. Another benefit is having the pistion top "covering" the sharp edge at the top of the cylinder. Those edges tend to create hot spots in the chamber and hot spots lead to detonation. Detonation-resistance is a good thing, and may even allow you to get away with slightly more compression than you'd otherwise be able to.

Bear

BearGFR
Springtown, TEXAS
BearGFR is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Pontiac GTO Forum > The 1964-1974 Pontiac Tempest, Lemans & GTO > 1964-1974 Tempest, Lemans & GTO Complete Engine Compartment Discussion

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Pontiac GTO Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rookie question: What heads would you recommend? tk421 1964-1974 Tempest, Lemans & GTO Complete Engine Compartment Discussion 17 10-15-2011 03:22 AM
46 Heads question rustorod 1964-1974 Tempest, Lemans & GTO Complete Engine Compartment Discussion 4 08-08-2011 02:13 AM
Question about PTV with my new Cam and Heads SlowGoat Engine Discussions 2 07-31-2011 07:12 PM
Question about 400 Poncho heads Poncho Dan 1964-1974 Tempest, Lemans & GTO Complete Engine Compartment Discussion 3 07-10-2009 08:45 PM
new heads question whytedude422 Engine Discussions 2 06-20-2009 07:17 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome