SS Lancer
Well-Known Member
The ports are pretty large on mine just a little bigger than the
Edelbrock gaskets shown.
Direct Connection ( Mullen LA ) heads
- Thread starter SS Lancer
- Start date
-
Edelbrock gaskets shown.
SS Lancer
Well-Known Member
Thanks for info
PS used these very nice gaskets intended for my W2 heads to address bolt pattern difference on Rpm intake after 4 inboard holes were welded up.
moparallen
Moparhead
I have a set of Superformance Gaskets for a W5 with 2.45 x 1,250 ports
moparallen
Moparhead
My Gasket
moparallen
Moparhead
moparallen
Moparhead
My home built flow bench said 296 cfm at 10 in of water and .600 lift with a 4 in tube. The difference between .450 and .600 was not a lot but the flow ramped up very fast. How this compares to others I have no idea but that is a ton better than any other head I flowed.
SS Lancer
Well-Known Member
296 is very nice for Oem castings period !
I hope mine are close or equal when done and checked !
The equipment being used is similar to yours and gentleman doing mine said results were conservative.
SS Lancer
Well-Known Member
Nice photos
We share same casting numbers
976 ###
I might buy some of those gaskets u shared if they are stil being produced.
We share same casting numbers
976 ###
I might buy some of those gaskets u shared if they are stil being produced.
Wallace Racing - Convert Cylinder Head Air Flow Depressions Calculator
The Mullen TA heads I posted to the head flow chart threads to show a flow of of 88 @ .700 @ 3.0 inches H20. The Wallace converter shows that to be 268.8 CFM at 28.0 inches H2O. I imagine with the casting revisions and the moved PR location that these heads should be over the 300 cfm mark. But one think we haven't heard yet is what condition the old seats are if they have sunk and need some additional work.
The Mullen TA heads I posted to the head flow chart threads to show a flow of of 88 @ .700 @ 3.0 inches H20. The Wallace converter shows that to be 268.8 CFM at 28.0 inches H2O. I imagine with the casting revisions and the moved PR location that these heads should be over the 300 cfm mark. But one think we haven't heard yet is what condition the old seats are if they have sunk and need some additional work.
Last edited:
SS Lancer
Well-Known Member
They were very tired used up etc !
Check flow numbers out from other gent who recently posted with us those are some stellar figures !
Thats in the lite ported W2 territory
Encouraging indeed.
PRH
Well-Known Member
On this type of head, where high lift flow is almost always hampered by some instability at the short turn, you could easily have a head where the flow curve looked very good when tested at a 3” test pressure....... only to find there are major turbulence/separation issues that show up when the same head is tested at a much higher pressure....... like 28”.
PRH
Well-Known Member
The correction factor to go from 3” to 28” is .327.
93 / .327 = 284cfm.
Which is also the result I got when I tried the Wallace calculator.
SS Lancer
Well-Known Member
replicaracer43
Grumpy Old Man
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,051
- Reaction score
- 7,867
I understand the "historical" aspect, but why not a W2 head instead? Just curious
So you changed it to 83 which converts to 253.8.
Gotcha, Lolol! I got it straightened out there, thanks to your help! What I'm more concerned about is the seats, and how badly they might be sunk. As far as the why not W2, I think that the Mullen heads may be the closest thing to a W2 that can get through tech.
PRH
Well-Known Member
Just so I’m clear on this....... you have documentation from “back in the day” showing the reworked Mullen’s heads flowed 83cfm@3”??
I have to believe that a set of ported X heads flowing in the 280 range would pass tech..... no?
Last edited:
Not the Mullen offset pushrod heads. The Mullen TA heads that were the fore runner of these heads. So not really apples to apples, but something to go by for the sake of comparison. And Dammit! 88 CFM. I'm gonna have to take drinking back up... But Post number 67 here, line #3 on the bottom chart, 2.02/1.60 TA head. Small Block Head Flow Chart
PRH
Well-Known Member
Not to harp on it...... but how would a “TA” head not have the offset pushrod holes?
That’s literally what makes a TA head......a TA head.
So, if they didn’t have the offset pushrod holes...... then it’s not a TA head.
Edit- looked at that post and the old flow charts.
They call it a TA head....... so I assume it’s an actual TA head.
The thing I found the most interesting was that even the “Pro stock” level of work had the flow nosing over at the high lifts.
Here are the converted numbers for 28” at peak flow from that chart:
- stock head = 205
- bowl blend/valve job = 251
- normal full port = 269
- pro stock porting/2.08 valve = 296
One thing I thought was funny....... look how much space that flow bench takes up!!
That massive thing for only a 3” test pressure.
The flow test for the Chevy head seems a little biased though.
The converted flow for the ported Chevy head is 229cfm.
It’s not that hard to get another 10-20 out of them.
Last edited:
replicaracer43
Grumpy Old Man
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,051
- Reaction score
- 7,867
I just went and read the rules for that class...the big block engines only have to weigh 8.5 lbs per cubic inch, ford FE big blocks 8.2 lbs, and your smallblock combo will be 9.5 lbs per cube. I seriously doubt with the heads you have, and those rules, you will have any chance of being competitive. Will be fun probably. But for a mopar, the combo would be a 426 hemi, or a "b" engine, like a 350 "B" and a set of max wedge heads.
Correct, My BAD! It's even listed as a T/A head (DOH 
). The ones indeed known for offset pushrods and rockers for port enlargement. The heads on this thread use a W2 rocker and have a more extreme pushrod relocation than the T/A head. According to the MP manual, the T/A offset rocker does not have as much offset as the W2. But, indeed, damned if that bench doesn't make me think of a mainframe computer the size of a wall mount bookcase that might have the computing power of a T.I. handheld scientific calculator....
). The ones indeed known for offset pushrods and rockers for port enlargement. The heads on this thread use a W2 rocker and have a more extreme pushrod relocation than the T/A head. According to the MP manual, the T/A offset rocker does not have as much offset as the W2. But, indeed, damned if that bench doesn't make me think of a mainframe computer the size of a wall mount bookcase that might have the computing power of a T.I. handheld scientific calculator....
And once you start to calculate what cars weigh in the classes things do get interesting. Right now the fastest car in S/S is a Mercury Cylcone (probably FE for maximum 364 C.I. for 3K pounds). But minimum weight for any combination is 3000 pounds, so that does keep things from getting too "Frankenstein" in super stock. Things get pretty liberal once you move up into B or A gas.
PRH
Well-Known Member
Open a cover on that huge bench, and there’s a mouse running on a wheel inside to power it up.
PRH
Well-Known Member
At 8.5lb/ci, a .030 over 383 with a 3.25” stroke (374”) would work well at 3200lbs.
Use some 915 heads on it.
Use some 915 heads on it.
-
