Indy/RHS Heads

-
Status
Not open for further replies.
74Burntorange said:
Im going to get the Iron rams with 2.02 because they flow better than the RHS with no work done. And are cheaper with springs and valves.
Click to expand...

I like pepsi, Ribeye and filet steak and cheeseburgers...

Back to the thread, no more jacking please! :-D
 
fishy68 said:
I bought the Iron Rams for my 408 project about a year ago before I ever heard of the ones you have. Don't know how much diff is between them but I did notice what Bobby said about how there is a pretty big ridge in there where they opened them up to 2.02 valves. Did Hughes have anything to say about the diff between the 2 heads or did you even ask? I bet the girdles will greatly improve the strength. Even though I'm not going real big on the cam I'm gonna run girdles just for peace of mind. I'm at a stand still on my project due to money. Wish I had the money to send mine down to Bobby but I'll probably just do what I can myself and have my local guy flow them to make sure I did ok.
Click to expand...

he mentioned Iron rams also... so move on
 
74Burntorange said:
Im going to get the Iron rams with 2.02 because they flow better than the RHS with no work done. And are cheaper with springs and valves.
Click to expand...

To each their own, the stock Iron Ram heads would not work for my application unless I built a smaller motor. The INDY/RHS X Heads will fit my build just fine. They are thicker, better cooling etc than the Iron Rams and have a larger Stud pedestal than the Iron Rams for bigger studs etc.......
Bobby took down some 2.02 valves to 1.94 to get the flow numbers you seen. There is still enough material in the head to go even more KRAZY if you wanted to and then you could still stuff a 2.02 in it if needed.......Bigger Valves are not always better...........
 
ya I understand and I know the RHS heads are great but if you were to just bolt either on without doing work the Iron rams with 2.02 valves flow better
 
But i cant wait to see your monster run... All these heads cheaper than Eddys are making me excited and now i might want a bigger cam with my better heads...
 
I dont know about your statement that they flow better than the Indy heads.
Check out the numbers again and remember the Indy heads were flowed with the smaller valves.
 
Indy
eads tested on Hughes Engines bench with no work & Corrected @ 28"
Lift Intake Average CFM Exhaust Average CFM
.100 66
.200 116 91
.300 177 138
.350 202 155
.400 224 167
.450 239 171
.500 252 174
.550 262 176
.600 263 177
.650 263 179
.700 246 179


Iron ram
INTAKE EXHAUST
0.100" na
0.200" 119.0 114.1
0.300" 177.0 155.3
0.400" 224.0 180.0
0.500" 247.0 187.3
0.600" 240.0 188.7
 
Please don't ever become a defense attorney... that info helps your case how?

Yeah they flow better on the side that doesn't matter nearly as much!

74Burntorange said:
Indy
eads tested on Hughes Engines bench with no work & Corrected @ 28"
Lift Intake Average CFM Exhaust Average CFM
.100 66
.200 116 91
.300 177 138
.350 202 155
.400 224 167
.450 239 171
.500 252 174
.550 262 176
.600 263 177
.650 263 179
.700 246 179


Iron ram
INTAKE EXHAUST
0.100" na
0.200" 119.0 114.1
0.300" 177.0 155.3
0.400" 224.0 180.0
0.500" 247.0 187.3
0.600" 240.0 188.7
Click to expand...
 
sorry for this non sense ill walk away instead of starting it.. ahem
 
74Burntorange said:
Indy
eads tested on Hughes Engines bench with no work & Corrected @ 28"
Lift Intake Average CFM Exhaust Average CFM
.100 66
.200 116 91
.300 177 138
.350 202 155
.400 224 167
.450 239 171
.500 252 174
.550 262 176
.600 263 177
.650 263 179
.700 246 179


Iron ram
INTAKE EXHAUST
0.100" na
0.200" 119.0 114.1
0.300" 177.0 155.3
0.400" 224.0 180.0
0.500" 247.0 187.3
0.600" 240.0 188.7
Click to expand...


Sorry, but I still do not see what you are saying.

Anyway, It is all good..........I am here to learn and I hope your project turns out the way you want it to. I waited a very long time to purchase the heads for mine and I was going to go with the Iron Rams also and just decided on these after further investigation of HUGHES bad mouthing them. They basically took everything negative back that they said about them and changed their TECH article to state that they actually liked them.

Any Performance head that you can purchase for around 1k, fully loaded ready to bolt on and is capable of 450+ HP a GREAT buy in my opinion.
 
The ones that they tested must have been the 2.02 versions, because the 1.92 versions didn't come close to that flow on my bench. But then as in the past Indy's bench seems a bit high and IMO is a sales tool. In the past there advertised flows were about 20-30 cfm's high.
 
Everyone needs to consider this...


Was the intake side flowed with a radiused plate instead of finger dimpled clay? that will increase the #'s a bit.

Was the exhaust side flowed with a head pipe/flow pipe? that will help the flow as well.

Then there is weather, just like it's affects on tune, and operator as in do they kick up dial & pull the plugs at the same lift points?

Just a reference point and are most accurate when testing before during, and after the port work to find &/or compare the % flow increase.

His bench flowed this and his that but whats the flow increase and at what lifts compared to as is 'stock' or from the 1st test.

those hughes guys are down on everything that they are not selling.
 
1wild&crazyguy said:
Everyone needs to consider this...


Was the intake side flowed with a radiused plate instead of finger dimpled clay? that will increase the #'s a bit.

Was the exhaust side flowed with a head pipe/flow pipe? that will help the flow as well.

Then there is weather, just like it's affects on tune, and operator as in do they kick up dial at the same lift points?
Click to expand...

Good point Justin!!!!
 
ya bobby they have iron rams with 1.92 and 2.02 and what im saying is up 2 .500 both heads are almost the same except that the RHS head flows more
 
BJR Racing said:
OK Guys,
Here we go, this is what I've come up with. Because of the lack of the right length valves in 5/16 or 8mm the heads will have to use .200 long 11/32 valves and .050 raised locks. The reason is the installed will now be 1.780 and with the guides cut down you will now have enough clearence for high lifts of the camshafts. With a seal installed you'll have .650 from the top of the seal and the bottom of the retainer.

The springs that are needed are the comp. cams springs #'s 974, and 942. The valves that are needed are #'s F 6147 and F 6206, 6147's are 1.60 and the 6206's are 2.02's but I'll cut them down for flow. This way std. chrome moly retainers will work and are available in both 7 and 10 * versions, this way I can use the 10* version and get the .050 locks cut for lash caps. This is the cheapest way that I can see and get the strength in parts for high RPM's. Here is what they flowed after the valve mods were done.

lift...........int.........exh.
.100.........81..........77
.200........138.........116
.300........208.........151
.400........249.........196
.500........293.........204
.600........302.........209
.700........307.........201

This is what they flowed out of the box with stock valves and no work in the ports or on the seats.

lift...........int...........exh
.100.........91...........81
.200........143..........126
.300........208..........157
.400........236..........198
.500........249..........204
.600........249..........204
.700........249..........204

The exh. side wasn't touched on either flows except in the bowls on the modified port. You have to keep in mind that the modified one was flowed with a 11/32 valve and the stock one was flowed with a 5/16 valve. The exh.port is so good as cast that no real work is needed. I didn't gasket match it or reshape the guide, doing this will increase the flow greatly but IMO I didn't think that it was needed.

All in all if the cam wasn't so large the stock magnum valves could be used, and there are springs available for the retainers. The only thing that I could see that would need to be done is the guides will have to be cut down for lift clearence and seals. If this is the case then back cutting the OEM valves will give you these flow's.

lift.........int...........exh
.100.......85............87
.200......137..........132
.300......207..........192
.400......241..........201
.500......293..........202
.600......293..........204
.700......289..........204

The installed height would be 1.64 with factory retainers and locks. I'll post some pictures of the work later today.
Click to expand...
BJR are the 11/32 vavles your using .200 longer than the factory 4.900 or so? Or are they .200 longer as in where the valve keeps go? Im just wondering as im eager to send mine out but would like to know what can be used before any mistakes are made.
 
2360,
Yes they are .200 long valves so they will have a P# of F6206+.200 and F6147+.200. You'll have to use the SBC rocker studs also to accomadate the longer valves, and the rocker stud pads will have to be machined .100 more so the studs won't be too tall. This kind of middles the road on the studs and gives more strength. These are Ferrea valves, and there are others out there but these tend to flow the best, because of the design and margin. I'm sure that you can get others from Manley and others but it seems that the other valves go turbulent, where these don't. So there is a difference between manufactures with valves of similar design. Keep in mind that these valves arent cheap but then you get what you pay for. Expect to pay between $20 and $25 ea. depending on where your at.
 
1wild&crazyguy said:
Everyone needs to consider this...

Was the intake side flowed with a radiused plate instead of finger dimpled clay? that will increase the #'s a bit.

Was the exhaust side flowed with a head pipe/flow pipe? that will help the flow as well.

Then there is weather, just like it's affects on tune, and operator as in do they kick up dial & pull the plugs at the same lift points?

Just a reference point and are most accurate when testing before during, and after the port work to find &/or compare the % flow increase.

His bench flowed this and his that but whats the flow increase and at what lifts compared to as is 'stock' or from the 1st test.
Click to expand...

This is a point I've been trying to make for years. Most guys' benches are "happy" when they are supportive of whoever and "stingy" when they are not as driven to make numbers. Business growth seems to be the common denominator when it comes to flowbench results.
 
moper said:
This is a point I've been trying to make for years. Most guys' benches are "happy" when they are supportive of whoever and "stingy" when they are not as driven to make numbers. Business growth seems to be the common denominator when it comes to flowbench results.
Click to expand...

And one guy has been flowing everything, including SB heads, using a 4.250 fixture. Does that make sense?
 
crackedback said:
And one guy has been flowing everything, including SB heads, using a 4.250 fixture. Does that make sense?
Click to expand...

That happened to me the time I had my x heads flow tested, the guy used a bore size closer to a 455 pontiac.

Though if you ask other bench operators they'll tell you it'll only add a few cfm depending on?? chamber shape??
 
Thats why I use a 4" bore for all small block heads as this is what most engines are give or take .060.

Now for my big block engines I use a 4.500 bore fixture as the engines around here are this size, so the flows may be a bit higher for a say a 4.375 engine bore. But like was already stated, it's the change your looking for. Otherwise we would all be racing flow benches, and the biggest one wins.
 
Here are some pictures of the finished product.

Louis Cruz 003.jpg


Louis Cruz 007.jpg


Louis Cruz 009.jpg


Louis Cruz 005.jpg
 
After doing the setting of the installed heights there was .800 between the retainer and the top of the seal so he could literally run a .700 lift cam. The installed height ended up at 1.780 with a coil bind of 1.050. The springs are set at 130 @ 1.78 and 340 open at 1.125.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
-

Back
Top