Match this 500hp/500lb-ft Combo?

-

JedIEG

Active Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2015
Messages
44
Reaction score
19
Location
Indiana
Blueprint his this stroker SBC for sale that has a really nice torque and power curve and decent idle vacuum to boot. The 408 mopar they have falls short- appearing to be from crappy heads and lower compression. What would you guys suggest for a combo that could match this?
Would a set of TFS on a 400" engine with 10.5:1 do the trick or are w2 type heads needed?

BP3961CTF-dyno-chart_1000x.jpg

BluePrint Engines 396CI Stroker Crate Engine | Small Block GM Style | Dressed Longblock with Carburetor | Aluminum Heads | Roller Cam
 
A mild 440 or a mild low deck 451 with ported iron heads.
 
The first thing I did was check out what cylinder head there using. The intake port is cc’d @ 220. That’s a lot. Then I looked at the flow numbers of the head, they seem low. At 28”;
CFM Port Flow Average @ 28"
.100" - 76
.200" - 137
.300" - 189
.400" - 228
.500" - 254
.600" - 258

While the TF heads flow listing kill it, the port is smaller @190 cc. From here, you have to figure if the 2.08 valve is open for an advertised 230*’s, which head will work better at the displacement?

W2’s aren’t known to be big cfm flowing heads in there OOTB condition. Normal porting is said to bring them into the 280/300 range.

If it were I, price not an issue, in which a W2 isn’t as bad as it used to be, but, it would be a W2 with thinner steamed valves than the older suggested 3/8.

Truly a good question.
 
My Buddy has a Camaro with the BP 427 540 HP and about the same torque. Nice running engine and about $9K. My Duster stroked to 470 Eats his lunch every time. I have about $6500 in it. 440 source kit and TF 240s. Pisses him off to no end as is should.
 
The first thing I did was check out what cylinder head there using.

I was going to mention that too. The heads they list seem odd to me. For something with 220 cc port they don't claim to flow very much on the intake (basically the same as eddy claims for the mopar RPM with a 170cc port), then the exhaust flows WAY more than you typically see.

Whats the thoughts on Cam and head specs?
Cam choice- something in the ~235 @ .050 range
Head flow- At least 260cfm intake.

440 source kit and TF 240s
The 470 is good thought that I have considered, but I'm trying to keep it an LA engine around 400" for a couple reasons (weight, transmission choices, accessories, fuel economy, exhaust system, ect)

So this 396 sbc is one benchmark I am trying to beat, the other is a stock 392 Gen III Hemi. (I do not want to go gen III swap since all my other vehicles have them)
 
A 10-10.5:1 4” crank combo with TF heads, 1-3/4” headers, good carb, RPM or Victor intake will get to over 500tq/500hp ....... as long as the cam isn’t so small it holds the numbers back.
It probably won’t peak at a high enough rpm with a cam in the low-230’s.

We did a 10:1 combo like this a few years ago.
Cleaned up Ede heads(270cfm), Victor, easy on parts solid roller........ made 524tq/538hp.
If you swapped the cam for a suitable HR, it would still exceed 500/500....... and the TF heads should be better than what was on that build.
 
Last edited:
My street/strip Dart ran 6.57 @ 104 and change at 3260# on pump 93, with ported Edelbrocks, 10.8-1, 4.10 gears and a flat solid cam. I don't know how much power it made but I'd say it made 500.

Edelbrock seems to be a nasty word here, but I'll say I've seen a lot more cars that ran hard with them than Trickflows.
 
I was going to mention that too. The heads they list seem odd to me. For something with 220 cc port they don't claim to flow very much on the intake (basically the same as eddy claims for the mopar RPM with a 170cc port), then the exhaust flows WAY more than you typically see.

Whats the thoughts on Cam and head specs?
Cam choice- something in the ~235 @ .050 range
Head flow- At least 260cfm intake.


The 470 is good thought that I have considered, but I'm trying to keep it an LA engine around 400" for a couple reasons (weight, transmission choices, accessories, fuel economy, exhaust system, ect)

So this 396 sbc is one benchmark I am trying to beat, the other is a stock 392 Gen III Hemi. (I do not want to go gen III swap since all my other vehicles have them)


Looking at port volumes of the same heads won’t tell you much. Comparing port volumes of two different brands of heads has even less meaning.

As long as you look at port volume and flow and nothing else you’ll get lost.
 
Edelbrock seems to be a nasty word here, but I'll say I've seen a lot more cars that ran hard with them than Trickflows.

I can't imagine why. They make great heads with huge potential. Mine flow 345 on the intake side, not max wedge port either.
 
My reasoning for recommending the TF heads, in most cases....... is that it’s generally the least expensive way to get to that performance level.

The price difference between a set of untouched RPM’s and a set of TF’s is small enough to where you can’t buy the RPM’s and have them reworked to a “comparable” level for equal money.
It’s just economics for me.
 
My reasoning for recommending the TF heads, in most cases....... is that it’s generally the least expensive way to get to that performance level.

The price difference between a set of untouched RPM’s and a set of TF’s is small enough to where you can’t buy the RPM’s and have them reworked to a “comparable” level for equal money.
It’s just economics for me.

This makes sense, if we are talking OOTB heads, i'd also likely give the nod to TF. . If you are going ported, oversized valves, then it gets muddy
 
Unless the shop you’re using for porting is charging like $15hr, it’s not really very muddy at all.

The TF heads come fully cnc ported.

You can’t by Ede heads and have them ported for the cost of the TF’s....... if you’re paying realistic prices for the porting.

Especially regarding the TF BB heads, which have proven to be 700hp capable ootb.

Current pricing on RPM 60779 - $1850/pr
Current pricing on cnc ported TF190 - $2130/pr

In my mind ........ that’s a no brainer.
 
Last edited:
Unless the shop you’re using for porting is charging like $15hr, it’s not really very muddy at all.

The TF heads come fully cnc ported.

You can’t by Ede heads and have them ported for the cost of the TF’s....... if you’re paying realistic prices for the porting.

Especially regarding the TF BB heads, which have proven to be 700hp capable ootb.

Current pricing on RPM 60779 - $1850/pr
Current pricing on cnc ported TF190 - $2130/pr

In my mind ........ that’s a no brainer.

If you're buying new, I agree.
 
I think if your car is 300 pounds lighter you probably already have it covered without any changes. But if you're really concerned going to a 208 intake and a little more camshaft will cover it with probably no other changes.
 
I was going to mention that too. The heads they list seem odd to me. For something with 220 cc port they don't claim to flow very much on the intake (basically the same as eddy claims for the mopar RPM with a 170cc port), then the exhaust flows WAY more than you typically see.

Whats the thoughts on Cam and head specs?
Cam choice- something in the ~235 @ .050 range
Head flow- At least 260cfm intake.
Like rat bastard said on the heads…. I’m lost with only two specs of the head. My mention of the W2 is to simply take the power level potential from a bat to a baseball and move it to a golf club smashing a golf ball.

For the “EZ button”, & on the quick & cheap, I agree with everyone else that an Edelbrock head can do it but cost effectively smashing it would be Trick Flow heads.

Now as far as cam size goes, BP stuck in a small stick to make this thing produce torque very early and @ a 396 CID, it should be making a lot of it. This is huge street car fun. They (BP) chose a “Street” cam for this purpose. Not a huge lift cam so it can be easy on the springs for longevity and enough duration to make it a good driver with a mild stall converter and appropriate gear selection.

I think the results are good for the intended purpose.
If your asking me, what would I do? Well, LOL, I don’t know at this instant. There are to many cams to look at. But matching or exceeding is nothing more than a general copy cat or there engine. But I’d start with a cam that has a better ramp rate of lift and more valve lift in the same general duration @.050 area.

The Chevrolet engine has the small lifter diameter. Might as well take a little advantage of our larger diameter lifter bore. You don’t have to go nuts on selection either.

I would look at around a good bit from Schneider racing cams, Howard’s cams & on up.

Back to the heads for a second…

The Edelbrock heads will have to be ported. There’s just not enough port window flowing enough air IMO. The trick flows IMO, could do this OOTB, but I’d rather have them touch up just a smidge to enhance the head. I just don’t know for sure what ether head will do for performance or there ceiling is on there OOTB state.

The MoPar offering from BP is an indication of the Edelbrock head on there 408 stroker. In a word, “Limited” comes to mind. Too small is the other.

As I like to say, afford the best head you can to top your engine & the results will be great.
 
The Edelbrock heads will have to be ported. There’s just not enough port window flowing enough air IMO.

Totally agree with that based on what everyone says and writes about them. I'm not shy about getting dirty and porting the heads myself so the edelbrocks could work. (Yes I known I probably wont do as good a job as a professional or CNC ported head but diy is the fun part of this hobby for me.) The expense would be if there is a decent gain going to a 2.08 valve.
The pull for the TF heads is that they flow really well all over OOTB and I have heard the port shape is a little different than stock or RPM with a slightly higher floor and better short turn and might just be more efficient over all.
W2/W5 would be great, but those are rare, valve train is rare and expensive and most of them have been ported to the point they probably wouldnt work well for my target combo with a smaller cam and more low/mid torque than all out RPM HP goals. I think something flowing over 300cfm might be a bit lazy in a street car? (then again gen III Hemi's dont have any issues with +300 cfm heads on the 5.7)

Now as far as cam size goes, BP stuck in a small stick to make this thing produce torque very early and @ a 396 CID, it should be making a lot of it. This is huge street car fun. They (BP) chose a “Street” cam for this purpose. Not a huge lift cam so it can be easy on the springs for longevity and enough duration to make it a good driver with a mild stall converter and appropriate gear selection.

That long, fun street car 2500-5500 torque band is basically what I am going for with this combo. It seems like a lot of the chevy hydraulic rollers have the same similar specs to the .904 lifter lobes for mopars (or at least the ones listed by Comp and Hughes I have looked at), so I could get a flat hydraulic mopar cam with basically the same specs as that one BP has listed. Who has the best Mopar lobe selection?

It probably won’t peak at a high enough rpm with a cam in the low-230’s.

What duration would you suggest compared to the one BP has listed? It peaks around 6000 and torque isnt dropping off a cliff with just 230 intake. Wouldn't a 235 intake bump the hp peak up a few 100 RPM and probably get the hp over 500?
 
Engine Masters did a show on heads just last week you can probably find online. On a 440 they compared the stock cast lightly touched, 440 Source aluminum, Eddy's & Trickflow CNC on the dyno. Really informative. Shows where you get the gains for your $$.
 
The BB TF and SB TF heads don't have an inkling of comparison regarding how they work from what I've seen.

The BB heads are an awesome piece.
 
Engine Masters did a show on heads just last week you can probably find online. On a 440 they compared the stock cast lightly touched, 440 Source aluminum, Eddy's & Trickflow CNC on the dyno. Really informative. Shows where you get the gains for your $$.

IIRC …. He is working with a small block.
 
My Buddy has a Camaro with the BP 427 540 HP and about the same torque. Nice running engine and about $9K. My Duster stroked to 470 Eats his lunch every time. I have about $6500 in it. 440 source kit and TF 240s. Pisses him off to no end as is should.
That's badass and very affordable.
 
Totally agree with that based on what everyone says and writes about them. I'm not shy about getting dirty and porting the heads myself so the edelbrocks could work. (Yes I known I probably wont do as good a job as a professional or CNC ported head but diy is the fun part of this hobby for me.) The expense would be if there is a decent gain going to a 2.08 valve.
I don’t think the expense is needed as a 2.08 valve would be best in a large bore at/around 4.16. That’s not to say there would be a gain. It’s just, like what bug’s bunny said on his sign when falling,
“Is this trip really necessary?”
Being you can port them yourself, it’s just a huge HOMERUN!
W2/W5 would be great, but those are rare, valve train is rare and expensive and most of them have been ported to the point they probably wouldnt work well for my target combo with a smaller cam and more low/mid torque than all out RPM HP goals. I think something flowing over 300cfm might be a bit lazy in a street car? (then again gen III Hemi's dont have any issues with +300 cfm heads on the 5.7)
It’s not the heads big flow that is bad for the street, but the overall size of the port on the selected displacement that can ether be ridiculously awesome or a horror show.

The W2-5 is harder to come by these days. A Harland sharp rocker set up is not to much more money than standard rockers. It’s super hard to find W5’s. There dicey on how well the casting is. Mine gave up the ghost @ 312cfm. The W2’ should be a waiting game for them to show up.

The heads themselves aren’t that expensive but there bare. This is a plus and minus since you now have to get valves & get the work done. I don’t see the lack of valve springs, retainers and keepers as a minus because locks and retainers are cheap but the springs are now order to your spec, not what Edelbrock or TF deliver and hope/wonder if they will fit the cam profile you select.

With the W2, it’s just there weight.
Intakes are easy to find. Just wait. They pop up often. The W5 can use a re drill the standard LA intake. Then home port the port window to fit the heads port. No big deal.

That long, fun street car 2500-5500 torque band is basically what I am going for with this combo. It seems like a lot of the chevy hydraulic rollers have the same similar specs to the .904 lifter lobes for mopars (or at least the ones listed by Comp and Hughes I have looked at), so I could get a flat hydraulic mopar cam with basically the same specs as that one BP has listed. Who has the best Mopar lobe selection?
It’s not how has the best .904 profiles. They all have it. They know what they can push and can not push on a tappet size for the lobe profile. What your after is the cam timing events to compliment the build.

Even though the Chevy and MoPar cam both list the same advertised and @.050 spec, the MoPar cam can still be more aggressive because of the larger tappet.

You said “get a flat hyd cam” A flat tappet Hydraulic?
(SMH….)
Isn’t the BP Chevy engine running a Hyd. roller?


What duration would you suggest compared to the one BP has listed? It peaks around 6000 and torque isnt dropping off a cliff with just 230 intake. Wouldn't a 235 intake bump the hp peak up a few 100 RPM and probably get the hp over 500?
If your looking to exceed the BP engines output on the Chevy engine, you’ll just need to make sure your heads outflow the BP heads. Copy everything else. Except the cam. Use a more aggressive rate of lift on the cams ramp with more lift and take advantage of the better head flow. You can even keep the duration the same. A few more degrees on duration will push the entire curve upwards. A better flowing head extends the curve at the top so it doesn’t fall off. It’ll just hang in there longer.

A better flowing head through out the heads flow curve will produce more power & hang onto it further. All of this with the same cam.

Perhaps a fella here who has run a dyno a few times can tell you better how this will work and operate between a tiny 5 or 8 degrees more or less of a camshaft. Just exactly what a 230 vs a 235 vs a 240 @.050 in a stroker will do more precisely than an educated guess or what was seen from other dyno tests which can often be of much smaller or larger displacements. I really do t want to speculate on this.
 
Last edited:
You said “get a flat hyd cam” A flat tappet Hydraulic?
(SMH….)
Isn’t the BP Chevy engine running a Hyd. roller?

Sorry I wasn't clear there: I meant the Chevy hydraulic roller cams have very similar max lift and duration @ .050 to a .904 hydraulic flat tappet.
For example that roller cam BP is using is very close to flat tappet cams Comp XE275HL or Hughes SEH3236AL-8
 
Sorry I wasn't clear there: I meant the Chevy hydraulic roller cams have very similar max lift and duration @ .050 to a .904 hydraulic flat tappet.
For example that roller cam BP is using is very close to flat tappet cams Comp XE275HL or Hughes SEH3236AL-8
OH! Gotcha!!!
I wish there was more information on the Hughes timing events. There cams have high lifts. Which skyrocket with 1.6 rockers.
 
-
Back
Top