Indy/RHS Heads

-
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mad Dart said:
I was going to buy the EQ Iron Rams or the fully ported edelbrocks, but decided on these.........Bobby is going after it for my 410 Stroker. I am using the Jomar Rocker Girdles across the studs. Hughes told me that they can be drilled out to accept a bigger stud. I am hoping the girdles take care of the weakness in this area. I would have Bobby drill them out for bigger studs but I already have the ALL the parts to finish it off with the smaller ones. If I didnt have them then I for sure would have probably went with the LA version and the good old design of the SHAFT MOUNTED ROCKERS.............I will do that set up on the next stroker that I have most of the parts for already in a few months.

GO GETRRRRRR BOBBY!!!!!!!!!!!! I only need 700 horse out of this thing..8)
HAAAAAAAA
Click to expand...

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.
 
BJR.. do you know what valves you are going to use yet? I have a set of Indy RhS heads also and have been waiting to see what can be done about the valve lift situation. Im planning to run either a .600 max lift or so flat tappet or hyd roller.
 
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...

fishy,
I didn't order them they were ordered by Mad Dart and sent to me from them so I didn't talk to anyone there.
 
w2360Duster said:
BJR.. do you know what valves you are going to use yet? I have a set of Indy RhS heads also and have been waiting to see what can be done about the valve lift situation. Im planning to run either a .600 max lift or so flat tappet or hyd roller.
Click to expand...

w2360,
I haven't opened the guides up as of yet but when I do I'll know the exact length at that time. I'm going to check it with a std. length one first and go from there. But I'll let you know what I find as soon as I do.
 
fishy68 said:
Yeah I figured that. I was asking MadDart if Hughes commented on the 2 heads. Sorry for the confusion.
Click to expand...

I seen these head a while ago like everyone else. Hughes at first really bad mouthed them. After further investigation they sort of took their words back. I am pretty, sure and Bobby can tell you the straight facts, that you could still run a pretty big cam by changing the valves to the 11/32 like he is for me. My cam is .624 lift and Bobby is leaving .080 room on my set up for clearance. I think with a taller valve and different locks and retainers you could go over .700 lift with these. Bobby could this be a reality??
I talked to Tim at Hughes along with Kevin and they both believe that this casting will put the hurting on the sale of Edelbrock heads, and that the EQ Iron Rams will be used more as a replacement head. If these Heads FULL out will flow 320-340 CFM in the right persons hands, I could see it happening without a doubt.
 
Sorry lift is .618 intake and .626 exhaust.......256 @50 intake 260 @50 exhaust.
106 degree lobe seperation. This is a Solid Flat Tappet...

I got confused with a Hydraulic Cam On my parts shelf.
 
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...

Fishy,

Remember those number posted are with a 1.92 intake valve and a 1.62 Exhaust...........no 2.02 here
 
Mad Dart said:
I seen these head a while ago like everyone else. Hughes at first really bad mouthed them. After further investigation they sort of took their words back. I am pretty, sure and Bobby can tell you the straight facts, that you could still run a pretty big cam by changing the valves to the 11/32 like he is for me. My cam is .624 lift and Bobby is leaving .080 room on my set up for clearance. I think with a taller valve and different locks and retainers you could go over .700 lift with these. Bobby could this be a reality??
I talked to Tim at Hughes along with Kevin and they both believe that this casting will put the hurting on the sale of Edelbrock heads, and that the EQ Iron Rams will be used more as a replacement head. If these Heads FULL out will flow 320-340 CFM in the right persons hands, I could see it happening without a doubt.
Click to expand...

Louis,
I believe that in time they will hurt the sale of Eddy's, but I don't know if I would use the EQ heads as a replacement head or not, as they'er a good bit larger than the stock castings. I guess if there isn't any other heads available at the time then I would have to use them for that purpose, but for a stock application I would stay as small as possiable for the street.

I think that to get the 320-340 numbers that I mentioned before it would take some serious work and relocating of the pushrods and removing alot of the pushrod pinch. But this would be like Rumble said, if I could get one just to see how far I could go and just do R&D on one. The way that I see it is I could do 4 different things to see how it effects the airflow. Or I could do one port and then fill it back up with putty and reshape it differently and try again.

I did this with combustion chambers a few years back and found 50 cfm's in just the chamber shape. When I was finished with the chamber is was something like 45 cc's but it flowed some serious air. IIRC it flowed 375 on the intake and 280 on the exh. and it was a 906 head. What was so shocking was the fact that the exh. valve looked to be very shrouded but thats what the air flow liked. I was going to do a set of heads like that and weld up the chambers and just never got around to doing it. Then I bought a set of S-6 MW heads and did it to them instead. They ended up flowing 390 and 285 int./exh. @ .700 lift. with 2.14/1.81 valves. The B-1 TS chambers are very similar. I also have a set of these that flow 560 @ 1. and 380 on the exh @ .9 lifts. Sorry for getting off track here. When I start thinking about R&D and changing things around I start to ramble on different thoughts and whats been done in the past.
 
.700 lifts can be a reality but the thing here is at what cost is this going to happen. The thing with running a taller valve is the retainer to rocker clearence, or the rocker to VC clearence at full lift. Taller studs like what I'm going to be using will help this out some, so it will be like a high lift cam in a sbc. The main thing here too is the spring diameter, I'm going to see if I can get a good 1.43-1.47 spring, this will allow for more rocker to retainer clearence.
 
Mad Dart said:
I seen these head a while ago like everyone else. Hughes at first really bad mouthed them. After further investigation they sort of took their words back. I am pretty, sure and Bobby can tell you the straight facts, that you could still run a pretty big cam by changing the valves to the 11/32 like he is for me. My cam is .624 lift and Bobby is leaving .080 room on my set up for clearance. I think with a taller valve and different locks and retainers you could go over .700 lift with these. Bobby could this be a reality??
I talked to Tim at Hughes along with Kevin and they both believe that this casting will put the hurting on the sale of Edelbrock heads, and that the EQ Iron Rams will be used more as a replacement head. If these Heads FULL out will flow 320-340 CFM in the right persons hands, I could see it happening without a doubt.
Click to expand...

Thanks for info. I thought I remember seeing them badmouth the RHS heads at first. Funny how things change. LOL

BTW: The EQ heads are 8mm valves already so I believe going to 11/32 would be going backwards. Except in strength. I don't plan on running a cam quite that big. What I have here is .592/.606 lift

Mad Dart said:
Fishy,

Remember those number posted are with a 1.92 intake valve and a 1.62 Exhaust...........no 2.02 here
Click to expand...

Wow that sure puts a different spin on things. I thought they opened them up to 2.02 to get those numbers. I know numbers aren't everything but it's a good indicator when you look at them as a whole.
 
fishy,
Keep in mind that the 11/32 stem valves from Ferrea are 5/16 behind the head of the valve, this is only about .006 different from the 8mm stems. So it may not hurt it as much as you think, but I agree that it may hurt it some but I'll wait and see what happends when I get the guides opened up. I have some of those valves here just for that purpose of testing. I'll know this week. After I get the guides opened up I'm going to narrow and radius the guide and see just how much more air flow I can get.
 
BJR Racing said:
fishy,
Keep in mind that the 11/32 stem valves from Ferrea are 5/16 behind the head of the valve, this is only about .006 different from the 8mm stems. So it may not hurt it as much as you think, but I agree that it may hurt it some but I'll wait and see what happends when I get the guides opened up. I have some of those valves here just for that purpose of testing. I'll know this week. After I get the guides opened up I'm going to narrow and radius the guide and see just how much more air flow I can get.
Click to expand...

Ok, thanks for the clarification Bobby.
 
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.
 
Here are some pictures of the work as ruffed in and flowed.

Louis Cruz 001.jpg


Louis Cruz 002.jpg


Louis Cruz 003.jpg


Louis Cruz 004.jpg


Louis Cruz 005.jpg


Louis Cruz 006.jpg
 
It's amazing how well the exhaust flows on these heads. The truck magnums ex flow was no where near that as cast and were known to be pretty crappy in that respect.
 
As usual, great work Bobby! Thanks for sharing your efforts with us, it sure helps to know and see these things when making the important engine building choices like heads. Hughes sent me a flyer advertising these heads for $1140/pair, not a bad deal.
 
66,
But they are lift limited as cast so keep in mind that some machining will need to be done and this cost will have to be added in. In as cast form they will accept about .500 lift with stock magnum valves, so cam choice is critical as is spring selection for the retainer style.

To me the cam would be too small to get all the potential thats avaiable in the port volume and flow. The same could be achieved by useing a std. LA casting with smaller port runners. Too large of port runner makes for lazy low lift port velocity and flows. And larger valves hurt this even more. IMO
 
Mad Dart wanted me to post the finished pictures, so I'll do it on Wed, or Thur. after the final work is done.
 
Cant wait to see them Bobby......Thanks again for calling and updating me as to the progress, shipment back to me etc......

Excellent customer service!!
 
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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
-

Back
Top