340 X Head Valve Options

SheSaid said

I was actually thinking hardened seats on both, just to be safe. So yeah a 2.05 would still fit I would think. I am just really curious if this 30 degree face angle can be done. Supposedly its better than the 45 degree angle at low lift, which I am thinking about topping this thing off with the Eddy Air Gap and want the broadest average torque curve I can get and still build a valve train that can handle 7k rpms.

I have seen some 2.05 nail head valves but none of them are the stock mopar length... a stock chevy is too short, the plus .100 is too long. Would that throw off my rocker geometry? How easy is it to cut the stem to length?

Thanks wild&crazyguy, I was hoping you would chime in on this...

Click to expand...

If you do the hard seats on the int...then u can stay with the 2.02 'if u want'
The concern about that was that if the heads had been recon'd already and more than once with a 2.02.. that another new seat cut for a 2.02 would be sinking the valves, which with these heads and others..'hurts flow'

The +.100 chevy valves are fine, they will need a rocker arm,shaft, and will have to cut stem height down till the wear/sweep pattern is correctly narrow/centered, the problem starts when u need more than 1.80 installed spring height with standard shaft location 'and that usually comes by means of pop up locks/retainers'...at that point 'without machining down spring pads/seats' u end up with the stem at or below the top of the lock..lol
I ended up at 'i think it was' 1.78 installed height max and went with shims to just be at 1.75 and used standard manley retainers and locks. I ran 1.80 with pop ups before, but it takes just the right seat depth for the valve's lock grooves to be just right so that u can use the pop up locks and still get very close to the center/narrow sweep pattern on tip.