Eddy heads. Can I/Should i...?

-
T

TimDart

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2005
Messages
359
Reaction score
31
Location
UK
Guys,
I've been offered new Eddy 360 heads for a good price. Just need to know if my motor can use them.
current spec
360 - 9.0 comp
XE 262 cam-.47 lift
340 manifolds (no headers), FBO sparks, 600vs Holley, Dual plain manifold
2.5" TTI
2,500 stall
3.91 gears (may revert to 3.55s)
Is it worth it?
Appreciate opinions, as ever.
 
I/m waiting for details, but assume that they are 65cc.
I currently have 360 smog heads with a good valve job. all new parts, stock ports, but ported in the valve bowl area.
I'm concerned that I may not be making enough power to use the big valve/ports of the Eddy's
 
360 heads should be the 63 cc chambers #60779.

I'd get them if they are priced right.
 
The vendor bought them for a 340 and has decide they are not right. I have not checked yet,but i thought 340 heads=63cc and 360 (...779) heads 65cc.
My real issue is wil my motor benefit from these heads in its current state of tune?
 
TimDart said:
The vendor bought them for a 340 and has decide they are not right. I have not checked yet,but i thought 340 heads=63cc and 360 (...779) heads 65cc.
My real issue is wil my motor benefit from these heads in its current state of tune?
Click to expand...

the 360 have the 63 cc and the 340 head has a larger chamber.
 
You should see good results. I went from MP 360 Swirl port heads,stock with 188 valves, to eddy 60779's out of the box. I picked up almost 3 tenths at the track and 30 rwhp, have dyno sheets to prove it, with just the heads..
Bottom end is a 9-1 360,40 over 274 comp extreme cam, headers. With an Airgap intake, took off the M1 single plane, 284 MP solid cam,holley 650dp with proform center, I gained another 20 rwhp... not to mention the 50# off the nose..Your current heads are probably 68-70cc chambers, so you should see about 1/2pt more in compression!!!!

Bob
 
I talked to a guy at KCIR a few years ago who had blown up the race engine in his 70 Duster. He took the Eddy's and put them on a 88 truck 318 shortblock, with the accessories from the race engine, and put that back into the car so he could finish the season. It was running 12.30's that way!
Look at it this way, you won't have to buy them later, when they get more expensive! If ya gotta spend money somewhere, put it in the cylinder heads....
Opposing viewpoints cheerfully accepted!
alan627b
 
Thanks Guys, some very opposite views!
BJR do you share the view that i picked up off Hughes engines (and elsewhere)I suspect, that my motor is not built with zero deck and may end up loosing cylinder pressure, not to mention that i dont want to fit headers.
On the other hand, Bob and Alanhave alternative,positive views

If I had the cash lying around I wouldnt hesitate, but same cash could be used on probably more esential items.
Dont you just hate it when bargains turn up, do i, don't I!!?
 
Tim,
What view is that? As for the eddy's on a low compression engine I wouldn't do it, but thats just me. Maybe thats why Alans friend only ran 12.30's with them. The Eddy's don't have the port velocity that they think, so they have a dual quench chamber, but the chambers don't control how the air flow moves through the ports. Even the best chambers cant help sluggish ports. 170 cc port runners and large valves on low compression engines and mild cams to me would be a serious mismatch of parts. A smaller runner head with the same amount of air flow with a smaller intake valve will produce much better results than a pretty set of heads. Eddy's flow 240 or just a bit more stock and a set of 360 heads flow in the 220 range with a bowl cut, but the 360 heads have 1.88 valves and the Eddy's have 2.02 valves and the 360 heads are 150-152 cc's not 170 cc's. So even if the port is smaller and the air flow is less the velocity will be higher and the speed at which the cylinder will be filled will be nearly half again as much, and this helps compression, producing a tighter pack of the air fuel charge, making more HP and Tq..

A good 360 engine doesn't need more than 168 cc's of port volume and for street and mild racing 155-158 cc's. And flow in the 220-240 range, flow of 230 cfm's will make or be capiable of making well over 500 HP. Also too the smaller runners help fuel economy with the ports being more efficient. A engine is a efficeintcy pump, the more efficient it is the better it will operate. Too large of port volume, intake, or cam and efficientcy go's out the window.

It's really up to you as to what you want to do, and you won't be happy unless you do what you want and not what everyone else want's you to do. But IMO there are much better heads out there than the Edelbrocks. You'll pay more for them but you'll have more when your done also.
 
BJR,
Thanks very much for taking the time to fully explain whats involved. My gut instinct is that the heads were not really appropriate unless i did a complete motor rebuild to specific spec which I dont need as the motor is only 3 years built and runs well. I'll stick with what i have and put the cash into areas that i really need. I especially apreciate the theory which you've explained really well.
cheers,
Tim.
 
The wierd thing about the low comp 318 race car, was that the "thrown together" motor wasn't that much slower than the guys 360 race motor had been...I didn't know the guy, just yakked with him at a race, but it was interesting how fast that 318 was. I don't know how scienced out his previous combination was...I remeber it had a lot of gear and a loose converter for the previous engine which probably helped a lot. Sort of how deeper gears are used to help out a low horsepower engine, like a lower classed stock eliminator motor. 5.13-5.38 gears behind a low horse 318-340 are pretty common in Stock class, or at least used to be.
It amazes me how some guys put a combination together that sounds like it really ought to work, but doesn't...there was a guy at my track that had a 70 Duster, 12.5-1 compression 340, W2's, 4500 stall 9" converter, 4.56 gear, slicks etc. It looked like a well set up car, sounded good....and was running about 12.0 et's.....10 seconds worth of parts in a 12 second car! makes you wonder how it went so wrong!
Sorry for rambling, use your money wisely as you see fit!
alan627b
 
alan627b said:
The wierd thing about the low comp 318 race car, was that the "thrown together" motor wasn't that much slower than the guys 360 race motor had been...I didn't know the guy, just yakked with him at a race, but it was interesting how fast that 318 was. I don't know how scienced out his previous combination was...
It amazes me how some guys put a combination together that sounds like it really ought to work, but doesn't...there was a guy at my track that had a 70 Duster, 12.5-1 compression 340, W2's, 4500 stall 9" converter, 4.56 gear, slicks etc. It looked like a well set up car, sonded good....and was running about 12.0 et's.....10 seconds worth of parts in a 12 second car! makes you wonder how it went so wrong!
Sorry for rambling, use your money wisely as you see fit!
alan627b
Click to expand...

Sounds like a case if it's not fast enough, throw more motor at it.

There is SO MUCH free ET in the suspension it will make your head spin. I have a theory = Overchassis and undermotor.

There are some cars that run around here that were 11.70 cars and as they got scienced out, are now running 10.50-10.60's with no internal engine changes. Some vertor swaps, suspension work, etc. Sometimes to get it right isn't cheap.
 
Could also have been a car built from a magazine article, too...although, in the case of the fast 318 car, it seemed somewhat low buck, with 11.5 slicks crammed onto 15X8 cop wheels...and the slow 340 car, looked like it was properly set up in all respects. you just never know?
I agree, I'd rather have a killer suspension first, and sneak up on the power, than the other way around. As long as it's not a 14X32 slick car with a 4 link running 12's witha Top Sportsman picnic table sized wing on the trunk! I've seen that exteme too!
Much more impressed with a car running 9's on 275-60 drag radials and a set of Caltracs, like I saw tons of in Arizona and California.....check out Calvert racings photo section for proof...!http://www.calvertracing.com/gallery/g_page1.htm
275-60 Cuda, huge wheelie...http://www.calvertracing.com/gallery/FullPics/page17pic9.htm
alan627b
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top