Heads on a N/A engine...

[94tbird]

All modifications are "not worth it" on a lot of cars simply because everyone has assumed the factory pieces are competent enough and no one has had the money or the courage to try something different and push the envelope a little. While there are trends that show that the stock heads and cams can support a lot of power on F/I setups, there is no data out there at least that we can find that would suggest that there are not worthwhile improvements to be had in an N/A setup concerning the head and cam package.

That sounds like the guy who buys a Honda because of the gas mileage, not the mustang owner looking for power.

As for the N/A heads part you stated, there are quite a few people who have changed jsut heads or just cams N/A and seen 12hp. Does the cost of the cams or heads plus labor justify 12hp? i think youd be hard pressed to find someone who will say yes unless they have unlimited money to spend

Im not arguing that heads and cams are a bad idea. I am using Livernois stage 3 heads and BBRStage 2 cams on my new motor, but i also did them because the lower CR ration combined with the Supercharger will net me gains much larger than if it were N/A. If i had stayed with the stock block, i doubt i would have done either at all because of the cost/hp gain ration is too high

 

[Boss281]

As for the N/A heads part you stated, there are quite a few people who have changed jsut heads or just cams N/A and seen 12hp. Does the cost of the cams or heads plus labor justify 12hp? i think youd be hard pressed to find someone who will say yes unless they have unlimited money to spend

Just a note to jot down for later: I gained 23hp and lost 9ftlbs torque with Comp stage III cams...there is a tuner in Florida claiming that the Comp stage IIs of all things actually generate better numbers. I think I put the link in the FI vs NA thread...

We're they worth the $1000 install? Ehhhh, well, it certainly hurt the pocketbook, but I fucking love the rush above 4800 rpm. I'm happy enough with it. I KNOW where you are coming from: I certainly can't see why folks spend thousands on putting billet replacement pieces on every removable piece of plastic under the hood and in the cabin, but those folks love car shows and it gives them great sense of satisfaction. Whatever works, right? I almost bought chrome valve covers, but I figured the $300 wasn't making the '05 any faster so I put into my son's carrier in his 2004 Mustang.

I don't have "unlimited" money, but I do come up with fair amounts of pocket change now and then. Yet, I don't have any real interest in any power add for the '05 due to my casual racing style--I'm not looking for 10s, but I am looking for 11s and they are very much within reach without a turbo or supercharger or nitrous. My son even asked me "then what are you going to do?". I really had to think about it, but probably just enjoy it more since I won't have it apart because I'm installing or adjusting something, and maybe start dumping money into my daily driver '97, and maybe dump a supercharger onto that 200hp street demon. I want to womp those folks driving into work..., and with my plain jane vert, they'll never see it coming. Then again, a S/C on the 97 GMC Sierra would be even better!

John

 

[Mick]

Why Junior, I am shocked, every time I see that car it is parked. I did not know it even had a motor in it. And to think that you would beat up on us old and non traction making s/c cars. Good luck in Florida. And where did Chris come from? Welcome Chris, we will be meeting sooner or later, good luck to you.

 

[95PGTech]

Why Junior, I am shocked, every time I see that car it is parked. I did not know it even had a motor in it. And to think that you would beat up on us old and non traction making s/c cars. Good luck in Florida. And where did Chris come from? Welcome Chris, we will be meeting sooner or later, good luck to you.

I hear a lot of stories associated with a lot of names around here, I can't wait to start putting faces to those stories, cars, and people.

 

[ChevyKiller]

Well we're not talking a 500 cubic inch Chevrolet power plant, the motor is only a 298CI at 11:1 static c/r and is run on the street every day.

If you think in terms of percentages, that's six percent more displacement than stock - it's a mild street/strip build, nothing radical. I'd like to think that the breathing modifications and the cylinder head/valvetrain modifications account for more than the bump in compression and displacement.

As 94tbird mentioned, the stock heads and cams are great pieces, but that doesn't mean there isn't always room for improvement. Selecting the correct pieces to work together as an entire assembly is the key to building a powerful engine with a large, usable, driveable powerband, you can't just throw any which bunch of parts at it and hope for the best.

Jim's car picked up 48 dyno-verified rear wheel horsepower from the shortblock and the ported heads, read into it what you wish about what of that is the heads and what of that is the shortblock.

298ci and 11:1 are a more than a 'slight' difference over a stock n/a motor...