|
Author
|
Topic: edelbrock head question
|
trashline
Gearhead Posts: 2025
From: Levittown, Pa
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted 01-25-2006 05:23 PM
   
looking at heads for my 289 rebuild. most seem to like edelbrock for there heads and intake. anyway I cant find a difference between the edelbrock performer and the performer rpm heads. i noticed some have a large intake valve compared to the 1.90 " to the 2.02" inch. I believe i read on here that the 2.02 valve cant be used with a stock bottom end do to clearance issues this correct? Also is there any pluses or minuses to pruchasing the assemblied to bare head? is it worth the extra money to get it assemblied? Also with the assemblied head can I install roller rockers? or do they need different studs? ------------------
88 thunderbird TC 2.3L
Gillis at 18 psi, walbro 255 lph fuel pump, Kirban at 39 psi, 3.73 8.8" rear, rebuilt head, brand new IHI 66 mustang 200ci 3 speed
Holley weber two barrel, msd 6A, 3.5 gears, 3.03 v8 three speed trans. 68 Fairlane 289 w/ auto
rusting away motor is going in the mustang 79 f150 300 3 onda tree
awaiting a new transmission
IP: Logged |
Tom G
Gearhead Posts: 793
From: Bethlehem, Pa USA
Registered: Nov 2001
|
posted 01-25-2006 07:47 PM
I would go with assembled head unless you are going to do some port work prior to install. The 190 heads should be plenty for a mild to hot 289 street engine. Just look at their max recommended valve lift for the performer heads and springs versus the rpm rates.------------------
67 Mustang F/B 302 GT-40X FMS engine RPM Air Gap 650 Holley DP Crane 1.7 roller rockers, Edelbrock Performer Nitrous, Dynomax ceramic headers WCZ rated-T5, cable clutch Flows X Pipe 3.89 9". Clearwater Aqua GT Clone Vintage wheel works 40 series 16X8 225 front 255/50 rear drag radials 308 RWHP@5800rpm 300 tq NA 385rwhp 380 w 75 shot 13.11 @111mph
92 VERT triple black 5 speed, 88 GT (FiveOfastback's ride)GT 40 X Track Heat, BBK headers X pipe 5 spd Red and Silver
IP: Logged |
Dubz
Gearhead Posts: 1935
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 01-25-2006 07:56 PM
I belive they are the same other than the performer is a street legal smog compliant head, where as the performer rpm are not
IP: Logged |
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 796
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-25-2006 07:59 PM
The AFR 165's are worth a look too. B
IP: Logged |
trashline
Gearhead Posts: 2025
From: Levittown, Pa
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted 01-25-2006 08:23 PM
im not worried about emmissions. this will only be driven as a weekend warrior. i was just going to go with the performers. price is right there. with the performer dual plane intake. I was worried about the bottom end but from searching it appears they can take the beating of 400 hp. i doubt this setup will go that high. No i dont plan todo any head work, nor any milling. avioding detonation is a goal as well. even though my compression wont be that high. ------------------
88 thunderbird TC 2.3L
Gillis at 18 psi, walbro 255 lph fuel pump, Kirban at 39 psi, 3.73 8.8" rear, rebuilt head, brand new IHI 66 mustang 200ci 3 speed
Holley weber two barrel, msd 6A, 3.5 gears, 3.03 v8 three speed trans. 68 Fairlane 289 w/ auto
rusting away motor is going in the mustang 79 f150 300 3 onda tree
awaiting a new transmission
IP: Logged |
trashline
Gearhead Posts: 2025
From: Levittown, Pa
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted 01-25-2006 08:25 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Bloose:
The AFR 165's are worth a look too. B
not in the budget.
------------------
88 thunderbird TC 2.3L
Gillis at 18 psi, walbro 255 lph fuel pump, Kirban at 39 psi, 3.73 8.8" rear, rebuilt head, brand new IHI 66 mustang 200ci 3 speed
Holley weber two barrel, msd 6A, 3.5 gears, 3.03 v8 three speed trans. 68 Fairlane 289 w/ auto
rusting away motor is going in the mustang 79 f150 300 3 onda tree
awaiting a new transmission
IP: Logged |
planomustang
Journeyman Posts: 44
From: Plano,TX
Registered: Jul 2004
|
posted 01-25-2006 11:18 PM
As Dubz said, I believe the performer and performer rpm are the same, except for the smog compliance. I have not seen anything to dispute that.If you think you will ever re-sell the heads, consider getting the performer. You will have a larger market. Don't ask me how I know  The cost for the new heads is the same. My performer heads put down 400hp/450tq on a chassis dyno (rear wheel numbers), in a 393w stroker. I have the 2.02" intakes. Randy
IP: Logged |
trashline
Gearhead Posts: 2025
From: Levittown, Pa
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted 01-26-2006 01:59 PM
quote:
Originally posted by planomustang:
As Dubz said, I believe the performer and performer rpm are the same, except for the smog compliance. I have not seen anything to dispute that.If you think you will ever re-sell the heads, consider getting the performer. You will have a larger market. Don't ask me how I know The cost for the new heads is the same. My performer heads put down 400hp/450tq on a chassis dyno (rear wheel numbers), in a 393w stroker. I have the 2.02" intakes. Randy
did you have todo anythign different for the bigger intake valves? ------------------
88 thunderbird TC 2.3L
Gillis at 18 psi, walbro 255 lph fuel pump, Kirban at 39 psi, 3.73 8.8" rear, rebuilt head, brand new IHI 66 mustang 200ci 3 speed
Holley weber two barrel, msd 6A, 3.5 gears, 3.03 v8 three speed trans. 68 Fairlane 289 w/ auto
rusting away motor is going in the mustang 79 f150 300 3 onda tree
awaiting a new transmission
IP: Logged |
planomustang
Journeyman Posts: 44
From: Plano,TX
Registered: Jul 2004
|
posted 01-26-2006 11:31 PM
trashline: I used fly-cut pistons when I had the heads on a 351w (cam with .512 max lift). On the 393w stroker(cam with .567 max lift), I am using 14cc dished pistons. Basically, you do have to have pistons that allow clearance for the 2.02" valves.Randy
IP: Logged |
trashline
Gearhead Posts: 2025
From: Levittown, Pa
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted 01-26-2006 11:45 PM
thats what i read just wanted to verify. the heads are going on a stock 289 short block. so im sticking with the 1.90 valves.My main reason for the question on the heads was b/c i wasnt sure if they were setup liek the intakes. the performer has a lower rpm range as the rpm intake so i thought that it might of been the same with the heads. any ideas on carb selection? Id prefer holley b/c they are easy to work on. i was looking at a 600 cfm carb with mech secondarys. the vacuum i believe were more expensive. to small to big? im not to worried on what the amount of power it will make i just want a good healthy setup. edelbrock is a good name alot of people seem to like them, and they are priced in my budget. i dont want it to be over or under cammed and same with the carb. but leave room for advancement if i ever wanted it. ------------------
88 thunderbird TC 2.3L
Gillis at 18 psi, walbro 255 lph fuel pump, Kirban at 39 psi, 3.73 8.8" rear, rebuilt head, brand new IHI 66 mustang 200ci 3 speed
Holley weber two barrel, msd 6A, 3.5 gears, 3.03 v8 three speed trans. 68 Fairlane 289 w/ auto
rusting away motor is going in the mustang 79 f150 300 3 onda tree
awaiting a new transmission [This message has been edited by trashline (edited 01-26-2006).]
IP: Logged |
Bloose
Gearhead Posts: 796
From: Milwaukee, WI
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-27-2006 09:07 AM
quote:
Originally posted by trashline:
not in the budget.
Ya, I here ya. I think the AFR's are worth the extra $$$ for the CNC porting. But Ebrok makes a nice product too. For your app I'm sure the Ebroks will work great. Good luck. BTW, I think a 600 Holley will work fine. B
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
