HI-PORT HEADS

[Administrator]

i49.tinypic.com/


By:
Big Chief!

High Port head

I have been doing some work with my KRE HP head. The head has the standard pushrod location. The max flow right now is 404cfm and the port volume is 313cc. Port size at the pushrod pinch is 2.800" x 1.150". The velocity at the pushrod pinch was around 290FPS and velocity over the short was around 310FPS. Just thought I would share


05-06-06, 05:20 PM #4
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

Yeah, and I have bridge for sale too.
__________________
G.O.A.T


05-06-06, 05:25 PM #5
EC
Big Chief!

I hope that was sarcasm Gach Either way you can believe what you want.


05-06-06, 06:06 PM #7
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator


No... I'm just wondering, KRE said 370 is possible with out moving the push rod location, but you manage to get 404 cfm with the push rod in the standard location. I was told just this morning by another person they got 400cfm, with the push rod moved. I guess their trying to impress me or some thing. Same person who says flow numbers aren't that important..LOL Maybe they should hire you to teach them how it's done. So you can see why I'm having trouble believing all this. It's becoming a calamity of who to believe an pretty obviously becoming a numbers game hype, just like their D-port head. I'm just wondering what the truth is. I really don't care, But I hate seeing people being lead down the dream world path.
__________________
G.O.A.T


05-06-06, 06:27 PM #8
EC
Big Chief!


Believe who ever you want Gach. There are atleast 3 set of HP heads flowing 420+cfm that I know of. Also KRE as far as I know only raises their ports to 2.40" Im .450" taller than that at the gasket (.200" taller than the Tiger head). Also just how much flow do think the head will gain just by moving the pushrod? Trust me there isnt huge flow gains in moving the pushrod 20 to 30 cfm max (from what I have seen). The main advantage to moving the pushrod is a much straighter port and a larger port to feed the engine. A port with the pushrod moved that flows the same as a port with the pushrod in the stock location will make more power due to the port being straighter and having more consistent cross sectional area but you also have to buy for that offset. So it comes down to what you want and what you are looking to do with the engine. Since this engine is a street engine I dont need that last bet of power or the added expense.

Pontiacman70 that flow was at .800lift.

05-06-06, 06:43 PM #9
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

I was just wondering how long it was going to be before some claim 400 cfm
with the push rod in stock location.

Look the point is this, what's that head go for bare, obviously that's how you bought it. How many hours do you have in that head ? and is it completely done, or does it need more hours, if so how many ? What will be the total cost, when your done, what's the cost for your guy doing the port work or did you do it all yourself. Seeing you rised the intake port opening that much, what are you going to use for and intake, surely not the Victor intake.

My other question, what's this head flowing for low lift numbers, obviously
404 cfm at .800 lift on the street isn't of much use unless we know what the whole flow range is.
__________________
G.O.A.T

05-06-06, 08:05 PM #10
EC
Big Chief!

I will have about 2700 to 2800 complete (depending on the parts I use it might be more if I go with titanium parts) for the heads once done. The valve job is not done yet. So the low lift flow isnt that good right now but it should be around 225 to 230cfm at .300lift once done, high lift flow might go down alittle once done. In my opinion they are a far better value than the e-heads and they flow more and are cheaper than the wide port e-heads. I had to raise the intake that high in order to get the cross section I was wanting of 3.15". The intake will be a Gutsram intake and yes it well require welding so it can be port matched to my heads. How much do you have in your 340cfm e-heads? How much would that extra 60cfm and 70cc be worth to you Gach? I never said in my post that this intake port was for everyone I was posting my results. I dont see any reason why 380 or alittle more cant be reach with this head and still have the intake port short enough to bolt most intakes to it. A port height of 2.45 or 2.5 with the rest of the port correct could give you 3.80+cfm. Like I said believe what you want. I was only sharing my results to this point.


05-06-06, 08:51 PM #12
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

Quote:
Originally Posted by EC
I will have about 2700 to 2800 complete (depending on the parts I use it might be more if I go with titanium parts) for the heads once done. The valve job is not done yet. So the low lift flow isnt that good right now but it should be around 225 to 230cfm at .300lift once done, high lift flow might go down alittle once done. In my opinion they are a far better value than the e-heads and they flow more and are cheaper than the wide port e-heads. I had to raise the intake that high in order to get the cross section I was wanting of 3.15". The intake will be a Gutsram intake and yes it well require welding so it can be port matched to my heads. How much do you have in your 340cfm e-heads? How much would that extra 60cfm and 70cc be worth to you Gach? I never said in my post that this intake port was for everyone I was posting my results. I dont see any reason why 380 or alittle more cant be reach with this head and still have the intake port short enough to bolt most intakes to it. A port height of 2.45 or 2.5 with the rest of the port correct could give you 3.80+cfm. Like I said believe what you want. I was only sharing my results to this point.

I'm just questioning how much work you had to do, if you did the work or paid some one to get that 404 cfm, no question an E-head heavily modify won't flow those numbers, but the set that Andy's doing, to me, has as much work and time involved as your HP. Already they flow 360 cfm, my guess is it's possible they'll got to 370 cfm, maybe, and I mean maybe 380 cfm. He needs to do what he has to to make 800 hp with those heads, and from what I've seen that won't be a problem.

I bought my E-heads Bare for $936.00 that's about $700.00 cheaper then the HP heads bare, it cost me another $1450.00 for the port work and completing the heads, add the valves $320.00 to that price also, cuz I bought the Mainly SD valves. Didn't want the junk Ferra valves that weight a ton. Total price $2700.00. Knowing what I know now I'd be making a deal with Andy.

Here's the thing, Andy and I have talked about me getting a bare set of HP heads, but I don't want to deal with quality issues. I've talk with people who have gotten sets, and they say they need a lot of work to flow those numbers, I just don't want to spend a ton of money on heads then have a cracking problem down the road, I'd rather settle for a little less cfm, and have a known quality casting.

Besides, 370 cfm vs 404 doesn't mean that 400 cfm head will make more power, sure on paper it will. Besides your talking needing a tunnal ram intake to use that power. 30 cfm more but were, if these E-head kill the low lift flow numbers on that HP head, then that 30 cfm is use less, I'm not saying that's the case.
__________________
G.O.A.T

05-06-06, 08:57 PM #13
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

I think Andy needs a Punisher for those e-head he's doing...wink A carbin Fiber for a single Dominator. How long would it take you to have one done. Carbin Fiber AWESOME! super light, help make up some that 55 lbs for that IA ll block's weight gain.
__________________
G.O.A.T

05-06-06, 10:06 PM #14
E
Registered User

Hmmm....which engine project is Andy working the E-heads over for? Is it a project that he has posted details of on the Pontiaczone website? Andy has a few projects going I know so I'm not certain which it is?

I'll have to check out all of Andy's engine and head specs to determine what kind of runners I would have to design and build. Depending on that and whether or not he is concerned about hood clearance will make a difference in time. My guess right now is early August.

Since it would be considered somewhat of a "prototype" the price will be cost of materials + a bit extra for my time. If he might be serious let me know.

05-06-06, 10:11 PM #15
EC
Big Chief!


Gach I dont need a tunnel ram intake for this head. Im using the Gutsram due to the carb. setup I want to use. Actually a Victor intake would take less effort to get matched up to the head than the Gutsram will.

05-06-06, 10:45 PM #16
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

Quote:
Originally Posted by EC
Gach I dont need a tunnel ram intake for this head. Im using the Gutsram due to the carb. setup I want to use. Actually a Victor intake would take less effort to get matched up to the head than the Gutsram will.

I thought you said because of the port opening that you actually made it taller then the Tiger head, you needed to go to the Gutsram, isn't that a single 4 tunnel ram intake ?
Those heads Andy's doing is for the 535 motor, I believe.
You didn't answer my question, who did the port work on the HP heads.
__________________
G.O.A.T



05-06-06, 11:19 PM #17
J.C. 66
72 TEMPSTER

I believe the HP is the head to buy for a street/strip application. E head is old tech/ based on the original poncho heads with a few improvements. A raised port head like the HP and Tiger will work better in all areas.
EC your avator of Kaase's head shows that the port does not have to be that high to achieve over 400 cfm in a stock pushrod location. The HP head is of similar design as the Tiger head. The old poncho slogan is still true, WIDER IS BETTER! he he........
Gach, why is it so hard to believe that the HP head won't flow these numbers? You must not believe the Tiger head will flow these numbers either then.......?

05-06-06, 11:32 PM #18
EC
Big Chief!

JC Kaase head basically had offset rockers. Those pushrods are not in the stock location. Look how close the port comes to the intake bolt hole. In the PHR issue where they talk about his engine they state that the min. cross section was 3.4 which is alot bigger than what I have at 3.15".
Gach the Gutsram is a tunnel ram that can take different carb tops, single or dual. I will be making a top for it so I can run a tri-power type setup. The Victor would be easier to use because all I would have to do is weld alittle to the tops of the runners. The Gutsram needs to be made narrower and taller.

05-06-06, 11:39 PM #19
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.C. 66
I believe the HP is the head to buy for a street/strip application. E head is old tech/ based on the original poncho heads with a few improvements. A raised port head like the HP and Tiger will work better in all areas.
EC your avator of Kaase's head shows that the port does not have to be that high to achieve over 400 cfm in a stock pushrod location. The HP head is of similar design as the Tiger head. The old poncho slogan is still true, WIDER IS BETTER! he he........
Gach, why is it so hard to believe that the HP head won't flow these numbers? You must not believe the Tiger head will flow these numbers either then.......?
Well it's like this, it's been said once you get to 370 cfm, unless the push rod hole is moved over, it won't flow 400 cfm. I believe that to be true, that's a statement made by the producers of that head. Now do I believe it will flow 400 cfm, sure it's possible, but I also believe it's old tech and marginally better head then the E-head, and needs a lot of work to get it there. TheTiger head on the other hand flows 400 cfm out of the box, but both head aren't really that impressive, compared to what would could have.
__________________
G.O.A.T

05-06-06, 11:45 PM #20
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

EC.. you still never answered my question, who did the port work on your HP heads?
__________________
G.O.A.T



07-02-2007, 02:37 AM
R 70 Judge
Chief Ponti-yacker Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 979

My R.A.C.E. ported highports....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As some of you know, I'm in the process of building a 505ci IA2 based street/strip engine for my '63 Tempest. My choice in cylinder heads has changed a few times throughout the process of gathering parts. I started with a E-head, moved on to a rockershafted Wenzler, and then finally settled on the KRE highport heads. Based on the feedback I received from Steve Coombes and a few other board members, I decided to give the highport head a shot. Based on a recommendation from Jim "Old Man" Taylor, I chose to have Jim Robertson do all of the cylinder head work and intake manifold porting. Judging by the results, I'd say I made the right choice. The mid-lift numbers are incredible!

Keep in mind this is a standard pushrod location head, not a wideport. There's no need for rockershafts and off-set roller lifters. I ordered the heads bare, with the seats installed, but not cut. I also added a set of the Ferrea 1200 series 2.20 intake and 1.70 exhaust valves.

Here's what they flowed on the R.A.C.E. flowbench before and after portwork was done. The only modification to the stock head is the competition valve seat work.

Stock
28" on a 4.21" bore - 2.20" intake/1.7" exhaust valves - No tube
__Intake_______________Exhaust__
.100__75.78_________.100__66.49
.200__137.9_________.200__118.8
.300__197.1_________.300__152.5
.400__258.0_________.400__179.6
.500__299.5_________.500__189.8
.600__311.5_________.600__196.5
.700__325.7_________.700__202.5
.800__326.9_________.800__205.0
.900__330.2_________.900__209.3

R.A.C.E. Ported
28" on a 4.21" bore - 2.20" intake/1.7" exhaust valves - No tube
Intake ports ended up @ 2.55" x 1.35" at the pushrod constriction
Sorry, I don't have all of the exhaust numbers.
__Intake_______________Exhaust__
.100__82.40_________.100__
.200__151.7_________.200__
.300__222.0_________.300__
.400__296.7_________.400__205
.500__349.6_________.500__
.600__367.8_________
.650__374.3_________.650__264
.700__374.5_________.700__
.800__377.9_________.800__
.900__382.4_________.900__
__________________
James
'63 Tempest Street Car - 505ci IA2
www.turbotempest.com/
Highports by www.racev8s.com/
Mystic Blue BMW 530i

[Administrator]

J.C. 66
72 TEMPSTER

Well it's like this, it's been said once you get to 370 cfm, unless the push rod hole is moved over, it won't flow 400 cfm. I believe that to be true, that's a statement made by the producers of that head.
Gach, how could you believe this and no other claims by KRE?
EC, good point. Don't see why between the ports couldn't be thinner, so you could get closer to the 3.4 CA if that is what you want to shoot for......

05-07-06, 12:07 AM #22
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

Guys that I have talked to have claimed quality is an issue. I've heard stuff about both heads. Now from what I know, there is no reason why we shouldn't have available to us a head that will flow 400-500 CFM and over 290-300 cfm exhaust, and not need off set lifters or off set shaft rockers. It's also my opinion that we have people with very limited knowledge hence the reason for what we do have. Now reason what so ever why we can't have a head out there with the same quality as Dart, Bordix and AFR, for $2500-$3000.00.
__________________
G.O.A.T

.I feel your frustration.Even though I don't race, I would still like to have cutting edge parts to choose from,just like you.But I feel that there is too much negativity in the pontiac circle.If what you say about Pete is true,then this is exactly what I am trying to focus on,PERCEPTION.If Edelbrock is now "turned off "by the pontiac community,or worse yet, who they think represents us, then the PERCEPTION of other companies that make heads would be that we are closedminded and combative.I ran into this when I wanted to rebuild a 350.Everything I read about it was negative,so I ignored the ignorance and went my own way.Maybe You are right about the 500 h 05-07-06, 12:09 AM #23
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gach
Well it's like this, it's been said once you get to 370 cfm, unless the push rod hole is moved over, it won't flow 400 cfm. I believe that to be true, that's a statement made by the producers of that head.
Gach, how could you believe this and no other claims by KRE?
EC, good point. Don't see why between the ports couldn't be thinner, so you could get closer to the 3.4 CA if that is what you want to shoot for......

G.O.A.T

05-07-06, 09:38 AM #25
Steve C
Registered User

The intake port height on our High-Port heads ended up 2.650" tall.
400-plus cfm at .800 lift on the intake and about 290 cfm on the exhaust.
The pushrod holes have been relocated and I believe the ports are approaching 1.400 wide (need to confirm this).
2.230 intake (titanium) & 1.700 exhaust, both 6.250 length for 2-inch installed height.
T&D shaft system with 1.7 ratio on both intake & exhaust.
No intake runner volume to report at this time.
The port work and valve job is complete on the heads and I'll pick them up after the Victor intake is finished being modified, same guy is doing both. Once I have them we will test them on our flow bench.

05-07-06, 09:52 AM #26
Steve C
Registered User

With pushrod holes NOT relocated- 376 intake and 272 exhaust flow at .700 lift has been accomplished with approximate port dimensions of 1.255 x 2.500 using 2.250 / 1.700 valves. That's not to say more cfm flow cannot be had with similar work, much depends on the time and efforts put into it.... and probably who does the work.

05-07-06, 06:55 PM #27
J.C. 66
72 TEMPEST

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gach
Guys that I have talked to have claimed quality is an issue. Now reason what so ever why we can't have a head out there with the same quality as Dart, Bordix and AFR, for $2500-$3000.00.
Don't care who the manufacturer is, there is always some issues in any product. JUST because the name is Dart, BRODIX, or Afr doesn't meant they sell a perfect product. To lump all KREs heads as defective and have issues sounds like a personal axe to grind to me. Wasn't this drummed in another thread? anyway.......
...........there are two claims of over 370cfm with standard pushrod location by two different people and they are not complaining about quality either...... I have no reason to doubt their claims. Also, i think EC does his own port/test work? and probably Steve C's head porter is probably a chebby guy and has no numbers to pad to look good in pontiyackers eyes.

05-07-06, 07:51 PM #28
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

Another word game. It's obvious you don't get around in the Pontiac circle as well as I do. Talk is cheap...so let's see some real track numbers, you can't race flow bench's. Good luck with both your combinations

G.O.A.T


05-07-06, 08:08 PM #29
J.C. 66
72 TEMPSTER

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gach
Another word game. It's obvious you don't get around in the Pontiac circle as well as I do. Talk is cheap...so let's see some real track numbers, you can't race flow bench's. Good luck with both your combinations
i finally see we agree on something. talk is cheap.
i do have couple of running race cars. how's yours running?
i am interested in the flow numbers of EC's and Steve C. heads and not interested in bashing head manufacturers.
EC or Steve C if you don't mind revealing, what is the depth of the valves in the combustion chambers in relation to the deck surface?

05-07-06, 09:17 PM #30
Steve C
Registered User

J.C.66- I still don't have full or detailed info on our heads, and what I have is getting to me second hand thru John who runs the shop and owns the car. He is dealing direct with the fellow doing the port work/valve job side of the head project. My engine builder will finish assembly and do some flow bench testing when we get them. Sorry at this time I don't have much to offer in the way of specifics, including flow numbers. These are going on a IA2 nitrous combo, .800+ lift.
Hopefully more later.
And your correct, a small block chebby guy who likes sewer-sized ports!
He did some work with Brian Self (old NHRA Pro-Stock Truck stuff).

05-07-06, 09:44 PM #31
jim
Registered User

We don't have Dart,Brodix,AFR quality heads because that is a huge investment in R&D.I said it before ,the perception of the pontiac faithful,is that they don't like to use aftermarket parts.Like it or not it is true.Every time I read an article about pontiacs in Hot Rod or Car Craft or any of the other magazines out there they talk about pontiac people like they are stuck in a time warp.There are several people in this hobby who like to put down anyone who uses non stock pontiac parts or nitrous,etc.Then KRE comes out with some heads and the bashing starts,maybe they do have problems,I wouldn't know I never used them,but I have been to their shop on a few occasions and I know it "aint no" big time operation and I am sure they are doing their best.Everyone can sit around and have their opinions on flow numbers,but the bottom line is it takes years and years of development and testing and track time to come up with good heads.Last time I checked there aren't any roundy-round "traditional" pontiac motors in nascar let alone major drag racing action.We are lucky Edelbrock wanted to make heads for all American muscle cars or we wouldn't even have those.They took the best/highest performance pontiac head made and they made a few changes,matched a cam and intake to it,and I am Sure even though it doesn't seem like it ,they put quite a bit of money in it.

05-08-06, 04:18 PM #33
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

Quote:
We don't have Dart, Brodix, AFR quality heads because that is a huge investment in R&D.
Only part of what you say is ture Jim. The key word here is Knowledge,
Two companys have produce new heads, question is, their back ground in the knowledge department is lacking. Racers don't generally hold degree's in design and development. It would be like GM going to KRE an asking them to design a new head, which neither of the two have the capability.
The problem in the Pontiac Hobby is you have racers who have turn their hobby into a businesses. Now their all trying to make a living in a very small hobby. So when these new products come out, they have no choice but to embrace them or be faced with having to get a real job.

Quote:
I said it before ,the perception of the pontiac faithful,is that they don't like to use aftermarket parts. Like it or not it is true.

Also not ture...maybe 8 years ago, I took a pole on PontiacZone
"What Head Are You Running" almost 4-1 said their running after market heads. Another problem we have in the perception department from the Internet boards. Believe it or not the Internet only accounts for less then 10% of the actual hobby.

Quote:
Every time I read an article about pontiacs in Hot Rod or Car Craft or any of the other magazines out there they talk about pontiac people like they are stuck in a time warp.

This is funny, because it's so true, they got that part RIGHT. It's mostly because certain people in this hobby who influence so many are stuck in warp time themselfs.

Quote:
There are several people in this hobby who like to put down anyone who uses non stock pontiac parts or nitrous,etc.

That's because their stuck back in warp time, read the above statement
Hot Rod and the rest have it right.

Quote:
Then KRE comes out with some heads and the bashing starts,maybe they do have problems,I wouldn't know I never used them,but I have been to their shop on a few occasions and I know it "aint no" big time operation and I am sure they are doing their best.

Back to that key word again "Knowledge" Did you know their on their second casting company, so yes they did have casting problems. I've been racing for a number of years, if I go out and buy a flow bench, does that make me a design Engineer....like I said they got it right.

Quote:
Everyone can sit around and have their opinions on flow numbers,but the bottom line is it takes years and years of development and testing and track time to come up with good heads.

Only partly true, it takes about 500 hours for a good designer to develope
a good head, todays technology is light years ahead of what it was 8 years
ago. SBC and Ford heads capable of producing 800 HP all that's needed is to take that same proving technology and apply it.
When Edelbrock produce that head, what do you think happen, Butler, Pete MaCahty said they were a race head only, now look how wrong they were. I have all those articles. MaCahty own PE magazine and took every opportunity he could to put down Edelbrock heads. Once Edelbrock saw that, they said screw you an never had any interest in ever producing a real race head, so that's what we are left with.
__________________
G.O.A.T

05-08-06, 08:03 PM #34
jim
Registered User

Gach, you just made my point.PERCEPTION.Don't misunderstand me, I know a lot of pontiac guy's use aftermarket parts.Hell,I use them.But I don't think that a lot of guy's outside the hobby,like the one's writing in magazines, do know.Or, if they do, they don't care.I know the guy's at KRE are not engineers,and that was my point,they are doing the best they canours times are changing and things are getting better.But if we let people in this hobby represent us who are closedminded or have an agenda,then no company in their right mind will spend even 5 minutes on R&D, and I think that is why we are, where we are ,right now.Hey man that is just my two cents,..wow, I really am a blowhard

05-08-06, 08:08 PM #35
J.C. 66
72 TEMPSTER

what happened to DCI Tigers post on the other head thread?
someone with experience and expertise in head manufacture and his input is deleted? how can we get new ideas, perspectives, and learn if all are not allowed to participate?

05-08-06, 11:17 PM #37
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.C. 66
what happened to DCI Tigers post on the other head thread?
someone with experience and expertise in head manufacture and his input is deleted? how can we get new ideas, perspectives, and learn if all are not allowed to participate?
__________________
G.O.A.T

Yesterday, 10:40 AM #39
EC
Big Chief!

P-e if you already have a short block together you dont need to buy new pistons unless the heads that you are getting will not work with them. Right now you can get pistons for the Tiger heads that will also work with the 14* stuff so you can plan ahead. But if this new head has different valve angles along with a side cant then yes you need new pistons. So you would be starting all over again on the short block. That new head looks good but with so many people buying the new blocks and cranks I dont think they will be to willing to take it apart for a new set of heads (Im sure some would but I would not). Im sure they will once the combo has ran its course for them but not right off the bat. That is why I said they (who ever is making this new head) needs to get the word out soon so people starting to or will be building a new combo can plan ahead some or just wait.

World's fastest Pontiac tri-power 10.14@129.8 with a hyd. flat tappet cam.

Yesterday, 10:54 AM #40
Gach
Shitologist
Administrator

You won't need new pistons! Sell those high ports.
__________________
G.O.A.T

EC
Big Chief!

The HP heads will get sold if a better head comes out (besides the Tiger head). Until then they will be getting used.
__________________

World's fastest Pontiac tri-power 10.14@129.8 with a hyd. flat tappet cam.



Best head porting Topic ever!
forums.performanceyears.com/forums/showthread.php?t=617498&highlight=head+porting&page=8

[Pontiacman]

New Member

member is offline







Joined: Dec 1969
Posts:
Re: Attn Slick
« Reply #7 on Nov 17th, 2005 at 8:12pm »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HOT INSIGHT ON THE NEW KAUFFMAN HI-PORT HEADS:

10-26-05, 12:38 PM #14
Steve C
Registered User


Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 116
Steve Cs Gallery Hall It is my understanding that the KRE High-Ports flow about 340-350 cfm as cast and I believe they will use the SCE #128103 gasket that is 2.320 tall. They have recieved their first shipment of raw castings and are in the process of machineing them now. At a later date they will develope a CNC program that will flow more, I hear target numbers of 400 cfm thrown around and I believe the CNC version will probably use the SCE #128106 gasket that is 2.350 Tall, but that's just my guess. These are not a "wide port" design per say so they do not require a offset shaft rocker system. And as time permits they will also do a R&D program to see how much larger the combustion chamber can be made for a more pump gas friendly version, my guess is they might end up around 80 cc's or so, but again that's a guess on my part.
But do note.... these other versions aren't going to happen over night as these things take time and they have their hands very full with many other projects, committments and production. Keep in mind they are producing two different cylinder heads and the MR-1 block all in house.

10-27-05, 12:13 PM #19
EC
Registered User


Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 456
ECs Gallery Hall I was told that it would be possible to get a port size close to 2.85"x1.15" at the pushrod area. That is an area of about 3.23 square inches once you factor in the corner radius. That is a pretty large port area that should be achievable without moving the pushrod. That is big enough area to feed a 505cid engine to a peak hp of around 7000 rpms. Now if you move the pushrod over just .250 (Im sure you can go .500 just like the e-heads) you could have a port size of 2.85x1.4 which is 3.94square inches. That would be more than enough to port size to feed a 505 to 8500rpms. All that assumes that there is enough meat in the rest of the port to shape it right. One last thing you could also raise the port up 2.85" and widen it to 1.4 then fill the floor up to get a port height 2.35" to get back to the 3.23square inch of the original port. That means you just raised the floor up about .500 making for an even straight shot to the valve. These heads offer lots of porting options and port configuration (just need to think about what you want and think outside of the box alittle and of course of the money for the R&D). This is just what I have been told by KRE and some of my assumption. I will be looking into this further once I get the heads in my hands. Either way I think between these heads and the Tiger heads the Pontiac future is looking good.


10-27-05, 09:48 PM #21
Gach
Gach Stylin'
Administrator




Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,842
Gachs Gallery Hall That sounds good, now I'm wondering what they would want to make
them flow close to 400 cfm. Reason I'm asking is my E-heads flow
340 cfm intake and 250 cfm exhaust already. So I'm thinking why make
the move if KRE's high ports only flow 340 out of the box. I know..I know
what you going to say, there's a lot of room for improvement down the
road. If the start out with a 265 cc runner, that a lone would make it
worth while.

If you get a chance ask them what would be the total price
( around about price ) to make them flow the 400 cfm. I'm just
wondering if you'll need and off set lifter for these heads.

Had some offer me $2500.00 for my E-heads, and refuse, hell add
a grand to that and that's what I got in them, and they've never
been on a car. I can't believe I'm even thinking about buying either
head Tiger's or KRE's. I'm begaining to feel like that's all I'm doing
buying, amking them the best I can, then losing money by selling
them. Had a block all done, then sold it and went with the IAll.
If I keep this up, I'll be concidered as a Pro parts buyer...LOL
__________________
Curly..Moe...Larry
10-28-05, 09:54 AM #22
EC
Registered User


Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 456
ECs Gallery Hall The first thing Gach port volume means nothing. Since the KRE head is a raised runner design. Comparing the port volume from the e-heads to the HP head is meaningless. The port cross sectional area is what needs to be looked at. The only time volume can be used is when comparing to identical heads.
If I get a chance I will ask them how much it would be for a set that flows close to 400cfm. The other thing is they told me that to get the 400cfm you need to offset the pushrod, which means offset rockers and probable offset lifts also. But you can get in the 380cfm range without moving the pushrods (or atleast that is what they told me).

10-29-05, 12:31 PM #24
pontiacman70
Registered User


Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2
pontiacman70s Gallery Hall High Ports

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These are some pictures that I took of the heads at Norwalk. I talked with them and they said without a offset rocker setup that the flow will probably max out around 370ish at .700 lift with good mid lift flow #'s.

Ed
Attached Thumbnails

www.pontiaczone.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7200&d=1130603260
www.pontiaczone.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7201&d=1130603260
www.pontiaczone.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7202&d=1130603260
www.pontiaczone.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7203&d=1130603260
www.pontiaczone.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7204&d=1130603260

10-29-05, 03:32 PM #26
Dil Brandow
Registered User




Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 11
Dil Brandows Gallery Hall The new High Ports are definitely another great addition to the options on head choices. They have made an out of the box Very Affordable) head that flows what a (hogged out $$$ ) E Head will and you dont need to spend another $1,000 on a shaft rocker set up.

I have been corresponding with Jeff Kauffman and the price is sweet. You can't use your existing 2.11 / 1.77's because the HP uses a 2.20 / 1.70, but you can use your existing studs, springs, retainers, locks. So if you can assemble that stuff yourself, you can get the heads with valves ready for the rest of your parts for $2,000 and change. Sorry I don't remember the exact price but it was under $2,100. He did say that a larger chamber version will be out soon.

I'm working with Nick Anderson (62 Tempest) and I think we're going to pull the #62 D's this winter and get a set of the high ports. I'll get a set as soon as the larger chamber arrives.
__________________
You know it's going to be a good day when you wake up breathing.



REAL WORLD PERFORMANCE!!!

08-14-2006, 09:31 PM
J H Performance
Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 29

KRE Highport Heads



I took the dragster out Sat for the first time with the new heads. They made a big difference. I had not been out all year, we moved and I've been busy. I freshened the motor over the winter, but never changed anything but the heads. The best it had ever ran with the 670 heads was 5.61@117 in late fall 50 deg. weather. With the High Ports It went 5.48@127 in 90 deg. heat. I did'nt get a chance to mess any with the timing or carb jets, it's still jetted the same as the other heads. I'm sure when I can get to test/tune there is more in it. If anyone is considering buying heads the Highport is a good choice.


RA462
Senior Chief Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Woodville,Oh,US
Posts: 462



Same thing here (other than I backed the timming off from 36° to 31° per Jeff K's instructions). Have not changed the jets yet eather. 10.10 @ 131 (better air) before and 9.61 @ 138 last week in 90+ heat at Norwalk. I do need some chassis adj. for my new found power. I had many people ask me how I liked the heads at Norwalk. Nothing but good words to say about them.


RA462
Senior Chief Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Woodville,Oh,US
Posts: 462

First pass with High Ports



I finally go to go to the Milan dragway last night after converting from ported #48’s to High Port heads. All I changed was the heads, headers (2” vs. 1 7/8”), and got new tires (33 x 14.5 radials now vs. 33 x 15 bias). I was going to take it easy on the first pass. Well it ran 9.78 at 134 off the trailer! The engine was braking up at the top a little because the fuel pressure dropped (needed more fuel in the cell). The 1.35 60’ time was about normal for the car with the iron D-ports. After that the throttle cable broke in the pits and took along time to fix. I went up for a 2nd pass at the end of the night a spun the tires bad. I tried to get in it again but the track was gone (the street tire guys must have tore the track up). Maybe once the tires are broke in things will get better. Previous best was 10.10 @ 131 with a 1.34 60' time.

Pictures
motorcitynationals.com/v-web/...lbum165?page=3

Good things to come,

RA462
Senior Chief Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Woodville,Oh,US
Posts: 462


Yes, when I built the shortblock this was the plan. I was told this would be 100 additional HP than what I had. If you can hook at Milan, you can hook anywhere. If Norwalk didn't have so many cars there all the time I would have gone there. I'm right in the middle of the two.

Todd

RA462
Senior Chief Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Woodville,Oh,US
Posts: 462


I bought the standard pushrod location KRE High Port heads complete, gasket matched them to the standard size gaskets that they use, and the victor intake too. I don't know the port cc's. Just did some minor polishing. Some what of a rush job since it's race season and I had to make the headers (again). Cam is the same 270/280 dur. Comp roller .660" lift 108 centerline that I was using on the #48 D-ports. .190" / .160" piston to valve clearance with SRP pistons so there is room for more cam. I know maybe my screen name needs change as now I have a 463 with high port heads vs. 462 and RA III heads. I noticed that after the first pass that the tires had stripes on them and had areas that did not touch the track. Remember this was the first pass on new tires. Could there be 9.50's in the furure?

I did get to see GTOGEORGE's pass from the pits. I knew it was him doing the burnout because of the sound of the blower. Sweeeeeet!

This will be my 15th Tri-Power Nationals. That's right every one. Stop by!

Todd

RA462
Senior Chief Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Woodville,Oh,US
Posts: 462



Went 9.70 @ 137.71 with soft 1.41 60' time and backed it up with a 9.69 @ 138.58 with a 1.35 60's Saturday. Again at Milan. Running 111mph in the 8th mile now vs. 103mph. On both passes the tires spun a rev. or two. I think I need an anti-roll bar in the rear and figure how to set up the rear suspension better. Not bad for being built in an old cow barn. See everyone at Norwalk!
__________________
KAUFFMAN RACING LINK FOR HI-PORT HEADS


Today, 11:05 AM
Goat-Racer
Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006




Quote:
Originally Posted by R 70 Judge
Do you need to run .750 plus lift to get these heads to make good power?
Has there been a direct comparison to a set of ported E-Heads?

Here's my question again -
Has anyone built a street/strip pump gas style 505 with them yet? 4.35 bore x 4.25 stroke, 10.5 C/R, Victor, with a streetable solid roller cam in the 250's - 260's @.050 Results???


I have been looking at this thread for a week now, but didn't have the chance to jump in until thismorning.

I bought a set of bare high ports (less guides) from Jeff not quite a year ago. They were in machine shop jail for quite a few months while they were being worked on by a good friend of mine back in Virginia.
I ran the car with the new heads and Victor intake for the first time in September just before the Drag Week trip.

I still can't answer R 70 Judge's question about the 505 application, but I can tell you that they work great on the 421/427" engine in my Goat. I was a bit scared of the potential loss of low end torque from a larger runner and the Victor intake over the ported 62s and Warrior that I used to run. Especially in a heavy car like mine.
If anything the throttle response and bottom end torque is BETTER than before, and the 60' times are the proof. The car went from a 1.55 short time to a best so far of a 1.44, and ET went from a previous best of 11.45 on motor only to the 10.59 pass that I have in my sig line.
This was with the same shortblock, cam (solid street roller 248/254 - .600"), carb, and exhaust system as before. I did have to change headers to a 1-7/8" round port flange over the 1-3/4" D-ports that I ran previously.
The only other change was the CR. It used to be at 10.2:1 with the iron heads and a .050" deep dish in the pistons. Now the CR is at 11.5:1 with the HPs with the same piston at positive .003" deck height.
After some hand blending of the chaimbers, they came in right at 62cc's, so the CR was not out of sight by any means.
I installed a water/methanol system on the car so I could still race on pump gas, but I found that it wasn't even needed as the car runs fine on 91-93 octane fuel. The good chaimbers and tight quench really did the trick!

Intake manifold- The new Victor was too narrow to line up properly on my block/head combo. We had to make intake spacers and then cut the intake to fit.
My buddy Bryan also did a ton of mods to the intake itself.

Valves- To help cut the weight of the 6.2" valve, we chose to order custom 5/16" stem Ferreas and shortened them to 6.0" overall length. There was plenty of material available, so we just cut the spring pocket down by the same .200" to keep the installed height at 1.985".
My valves are 2.20" and 1.71" with chromed 5/16" stems and we went with a 50* exhaust valve/seat angle to help get the hot stuff out.

Rockers- The T&D rocker shaft stands didn't quite line up with the holes in the heads. I guess we could have ground the stands a little bit, but due to the shorter valves we used, the stands needed to be moved over towards the valve a bit anyhow, so all 16 holes had to be moved and solid inserts were installed so that the stands bolted up without modification.
T&D actually uses an Eedelbrock stand for the HP heads, and that was probably also a little bit of the fit problem.
A .250" offset intake rocker lined up quite well with the existing pushrod location, but we did move the pushrod holes to get the angle a bit closer and then installed brass tubes that now break into the intake port.

Water crossover- I redrilled the heads so I could turn the crossover around and it just looks a bit cleaner. My fan temp switch now resides in the old by pass hole in the crossover, and is now a bit more hidden than it used to be.


The end result is that the heads needed some time spent in some goofy little areas, but I'm totally glad I went this direction. I retained my driveability and fuel mileage (11 on the highway), and changed my ET by over eight tenths and eight MPH.
Attached Thumbnails



__________________
Brian Rock 65' GTO, 421 w/200-4R trans,
10.59 @ 124.5, #3850 on pump gas and no bottle

02-03-2007, 05:10 PM
Steve C.
Ultimate Warrior Join Date: Dec 1999





"Intake manifold- The new Victor was too narrow to line up properly on my block/head combo. We had to make intake spacers and then cut the intake to fit."

On the set I was involved with we ended up using spacers as well. Some don't. Apparantly it makes a differance on how you change the port location and size of the ports themselves.

"My buddy Bryan also did a ton of mods to the intake itself."

We had over $500 to modify the Victor intake to support the airflow.
The spacer plates were about $375.

"Valves- To help cut the weight of the 6.2" valve, we chose to order custom 5/16" stem Ferreas and shortened them to 6.0" overall length."

We used titanium. You can also consider hollow stem valves to help remove weight. Our intake valves were 2.230" diameter and 1.700" on the exhaust, both were 6.250" in length.

"Rockers- The T&D rocker shaft stands didn't quite line up with the holes in the heads. I guess we could have ground the stands a little bit."

We had similar issues with the T&D shaft system.

"A .250" offset intake rocker lined up quite well with the existing pushrod location, but we did move the pushrod holes to get the angle a bit closer and then installed brass tubes that now break into the intake port."

AS CAST the push rod holes already come 0.200" offset.
We purchased bare castings that had the push rod holes relocated 0.500".

Our set ended up at 403 crm at .800" lift on the flow bench at the shop where the port work was done. And 415 cfm at .850" lift on the bench at our engine builders shop. The exhaust ended up at 288 cfm at .800" lift.

These heads are currently being used on the engine installed in John's Fairmont and it produced 920 hp at 7000/7100 rpm.


02-03-2007, 11:01 PM
Goat-Racer
Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006



Never cc'd the intake runners. The number really doesn't compare to a production head or an E head because the port is longer at both ends due to the shallow chaimber and the extra .500" of material added to the intake flange. The old "apples to oranges" thing. Even the intake spacers add to the overall volume if comparing to another HP head.
Minimum cross sectional area would be a valid comparison, but I don't have those numbers either.

What I CAN tell you is that the port opening is 2.350" x 1.300", and we had Cometic make an intake gasket to the size and location that we needed. I actually have my own part number with them (don't I feel special ).
There is a brass sleeve in each slightly re-angled intake pushrod hole and also a thin brass sleve in each of the four head bolt holes that go down between each pair of intake runners. Both tubes just break into each runner to attempt to straighten out the port and eliminate any bumps or bulges.
We used four 9/16" ID head bolt washers (underneath the regular 1/2" washers) to use every bit of surface area available above the sleeved bolt holes on each head to spread out the load out as best we could. So far no problems.
__________________
Brian Rock 65' GTO, 421 w/200-4R trans,
10.59 @ 124.5, #3850 on pump gas and no bottle

Yesterday, 06:49 AM
Steve C.
Ultimate Warrior Join Date: Dec 1999



Although I have not varified the exact intake port length, for computer simulation I'm using 6" on the HP heads.

As cast the intake runner volume is about 277 cc's and the port opening is susposed to be 2.320" x 1.180" according to published specifications. They use the standard SCE 128103 intake gasket.

(also seen it stated the as cast port opening was 1.050"-1.060" x 2.300" at the pushrod pinch point)

Our ports ended up at about 2.611" x 1.400" and I suspect the runner volume, with attached spacer, might be near 360 cc's.

It was reported to me on a HP head approaching 400 cfm the port opening was 2.500" x 1.400".
But thern in another staement they were reported to be only 1.200" wide. So I'm not 100 percent sure.






www.krepower.com/Highport.htm


COULD THERE ACTUALLY BE A CANTED VALVE PONTIAC?


Today, 12:01 AM JAN 7th, 2007
speedshopmike
Ultimate Warrior Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: maryland


new CANTED VALVE poncho heads



holy crap!
www.rolandracing.com/




430 CFM Hi-Port heads


forums.performanceyears.com/forums/showthread.php?t=713274



HPP Aluminum Cylinder Head Comparison article.


www.highperformancepontiac.com/tech/hppp_0802_high_flow_pontiac_cylinder_head_packages/index.html









Today, 02:22 AM
Mo
Chief Ponti-yacker Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Philly burbs



More like a Yates design. Yates intake($466.39)+(spacer $70) and 351 valve covers. RPM range 5-8K RPM.

Not sure where they get $2500 bare but $3000 finshed. I think I would want more than $500 in valve train and valve job to handle that kind of rpm. I think $2000 bare is a better starting place for a bare head. High ports are only $1500, FWIW.

Overall it looks like good design and a product I would consider buying once all the parts that go along are available, not the stop gap stuff. Thanks



Today, 10:53 AM
speedshopmike
Ultimate Warrior Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: maryland



jim tells me prelim flow #'s are 390cfm intake @.800 w/ a 2.25" valve on a 4.18" bore, and 270cfm @ .800" exhaust.
development's still in the works, but hell, yeah, these things look real interesting.
he says midlift flow's still unknown as the test head was plastic and couldn't get a decent valve job into the material.
__________________
Rockville Speed & Custom
301-279-0070


CV-1 Valve & Push Rod recommemdations!


Today, 12:17 PM Feb 23 2008
Bnick166
Senior Member


This is what Jim reccomends as per my conversation w/ him:

Intake valve:

Manley #11878-8 2.30" dia 11/32" stem 5.61" length- 2.07" spring ht.

Exhaust valve:

SI #1600SG 1.73" dia 11/32" stem 5.35" length 2.07"-spring ht.

Pushrods & guideplates:
Hardened, 5/16 or 3/8 dia
Int 9.45"-9.75" length
Exh 9.60"-9.90"
Guideplates: 5/16 or 3/8 pushrods
BBC rockers LESS THAN 1.60" OVERALL WIDTH
STUDS:ARP #135-7101
Rocker shafts: Yella Terra #YT-6317 BBC rockers (16)#YT-6235 bases (16)#YT-6088 bolts






D-PORT STEP HEADER FORMULATION!

Today, 02:46 PM JAN. 9th, 2007
johnta1
Ultimate Warrior
Location: Charleston,Il



--- Single Primary Pipe Specs --- for 464.399 CID engine at 5600 RPM
Diameter= 1.817 to 1.942 Length= 36.3 to 39.0 inches long
--- 2-Step Primary Pipe Specs ---
1st Dia.= 1.817 Length= 18.1 to 19.5
2nd Dia.= 1.942 Length= 18.1 to 19.5
--- 3-Step Primary Pipe Specs ---
1st Dia.= 1.817 Length= 18.1 to 19.5
2nd Dia.= 1.942 Length= 9.1 to 9.8
3rd Dia.= 2.067 Length= 9.1 to 9.8
--- Header Collector Specs (Conventional Straight Tube) ---
Diameter= 3.326 to 3.576 Tuned Lengths= 20.5 best and also 10.3 or 41.0
--- Header Collector Specs (Megaphone or Diffuser Cone Shape) ---
Diameter= 2.826 taper to 3.826 Megaphone/Diffuser Length= 20.5 inches
Best HP/TQ Tuned Lengths= 20.5 , 41.0 , 82.0 , 164.0 inches long
Worst HP/TQ Loss Lengths= 30.8 , 61.5 , 123.0 , 246.0 inches long
Note-> all Pipe Diameters are OD and based-off .0625 inch Pipe thickness
__________________
johnta1
Pontiac Power RULES !!!
www.wallaceracing.com



Today, 04:56 PM
johnta1
Ultimate Warrior Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charleston,Il
Posts: 4,232



Using your HP and Tq readings, that is what your engine headers should be.

It also shows what a 2 and 3 step header tube size is.
Shows what the collecter size should be.
Shows the diameter of tube and how long.

Best HP/TQ Tuned Lengths= 20.5 , 41.0 , 82.0 , 164.0 inches long
Worst HP/TQ Loss Lengths= 30.8 , 61.5 , 123.0 , 246.0 inches long

Best HP/TQ lengths are what you use with the 1st the best length (20.5")
Worst length is 30.8". So don't use those lengths.
__________________
johnta1
Pontiac Power RULES !!!
www.wallaceracing.com


Winner of Top Class at Pontiac Nationals, 2004 Cordova
Winner of Quick 16 At Ames 2004 Pontiac Nat


01-09-2007, 10:36 PM
johnta1
Ultimate Warrior Join Date: Feb 2001





Yep, Pipe Max.
www.maxracesoftware.com/pipemax_win.htm

Best money you'll ever pay.($40?)
I paid $25 though.
__________________
johnta1





IF ROUND PORT, RAM AIR 4 STYLE? GO 2in. PRIMARY INTO 3-1/2 COLLECTOR.



ROBERTSON AUTO CONSULTING & ENGINEERING

www.racev8s.com/


02-15-2007, 01:26 AM
Jim Robertson
Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Abilene Texas
Posts: 212

800HP D Port

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The latest dyno results of my 469 cid engine are in. We were able to make a little over 800 naturally aspirated HP with my self imposed limits of OEM block, OEM crank and OEM D port head. It made 806 HP at 6700 and 695 lbs ft Torque at 5100. Volumetric efficiency peaked at a very nice 127.1%.

1969 428 Block; 4.190” bore; Filled to bottom of freeze plugs; 3 center billet caps
9799103 “N” 455 crank stroked to 4.250”; Radiused counterweights to reduce windage
6.782” connecting rod
JE flat top pistons
Child and Albert gapless rings
#48 heads; substantial port work; flowed over 315 cfm with intake and carb; much epoxy
2.110”/1.770” REV custom valves
13:1 compression
Isky Solid roller cam; approx 270/280 at .050”; installed at 105 IC
1.65 Crane gold roller rockers
Manton 9.400” pushrods
Victor intake welded and heavily ported; polished exterior; 1” spacer
1050 Dominator; tweaked
MSD billet distributor; crank trigger
2” Hedman Hustler headers; 30” collector extension
Star Vacuum pump
Custom built oil pan

Best power was made with 32 degrees timing, 10” vacuum pump setting, 88 jets, 145 water temp and 130 oil temp.

Built a sheetmetal intake for this combination but it was down on HP and torque slightly from the Victor, long story but I wanted to run the shaker on my 71 TA so some compromises were made in the initial design. We are still working on making this intake work in the car.

Best of luck to each of you in 2007,
Jim Robertson
Robertson Auto Consulting and Engineering
www.racev8s.com

Cross Sectional Area Explained

04-19-2011, 05:30 PM
NHRASuperStock455SD
Ultimate Warrior Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Indy
Posts: 2,192




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just want to clear up some common misconceptions trying to calculate the size port required for the race engines. This equation we use is CSAmin = bore*bore*stroke*RPMx0.00353/614

*When calculating cross sectional area (CSAmin) we are looking for the minimum that occurs in the port all the way down the port. This is not port volume, intake flange, or just a shot in the dark when you can get to it. The best way is to do a port mold and physically measure down the whole length of the runner.

*The whole point with this calculation is to see where the port is choked. It does not matter if the average is 100% larger. If you look at flow mechanics in tube or pipe, the whole system will only flow as good as the smallest orifice or restriction. Good way to think about it.

Many who do this really are using realistic numbers. It is a good tool. My minimum CSA in my 455SD is 2.613(push rod). The average is 2.82. At the opening is 2.84 CSA at my valve pocket is 2.832.

If I use my average my RPM level at which the port is limiting horsepower due to choke is 6520 RPM. Plug in the proper number and HP being limited due to choke @ 6035 RPM[/b]

How does this all relate to power on the dyno? Well, we know that our last attempt at this had a minimum of 2.35 CSA. choke point was 5433 RPM This engine made about 650HP on BES's dyno. We then went to the intake port for the 2.61 CSA (choke point 6035 ). This did not improve cylinder head flow. This took us to 691HP with pretty much a back to back scenario. This resulted in about two tenths on the track. We gained peak HP from 6500 to 6900 RPM holding good power to 7400. We are now with other improvements to 711HP as per the HPP magazine article.
__________________
Lynn McCarty
dba/McCarty Racing
www.RamAirV.com
[e-mail]





Performanc Years ad for Hi-Port heads from Jim Zeek

forums.performanceyears.com/forums/showthread.php?t=678392

forums.performanceyears.com/forums/showthread.php?t=686518





65NSS4spdGTO aka Calvin Hill
Hill performance
Mchenry, il.
8:30a-6:30p
708 250-7420
High Port KRE CNC packages


forums.performanceyears.com/forums/showthread.php?t=707199&highlight=Calvin+hill&page=2

[Administrator]

Gaby Labiosa
Senior Member

Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 169

As I stated before. EIC Motorsports has NEVER charged any more than $4000-7000 porting labor for a Pontiac induction system capable of 1000+hp.

More importantly, EIC customers are usually people who look for results rather than price as their first priority.

While we may have quotes that end up considerably more than the porting labor itself, it is simply because of a customer's request for added support parts to complement the induction system and/or engine. Such as cylinder head/manifold castings, camshaft, converter, even roller lifters.

These parts, as you well may know cost the same for any platform.

Also, what you may not know. This 1000+ hp Pontiac stuff is NOT commonplace as the internet may make you think. It is EXPENSIVE, and not just an induction package and/or engine will get it done.

If anyone does not think 10-15K top ends (including all new parts) and 25-30K motors (from scratch) are what's required at this level, then they better not even think about getting involved.



As far as a WAR continuing, I didn't know there was one at all. We have not "carved" out this market, simply just produced results and have gone above and beyond expectations. It is simply a cause and effect, you prove it at the track and people call!! That is just how I try to run my business.

Don't you have to be in the game to be in a war??

You can "win" this internet "war". I prefer to always try and kick everyone's butt in real life at the racetrack, and continue to build a good company that's capable of meeting the needs of any professional or high end sportsman racer.

I think EIC has proven that.


P.S. GreatGTO is 100% correct. The high hp Pontiac is not a money making market!!
__________________
Gaby Labiosa
EIC Motorsports Inc.



1320ft=What separates the internet "experts" from the real players..



Titanium Valve Talk

rehermorrison.com/tech-talk-76-the-titanium-solution/
www.delwestengineering.com/parts_titanium_valves.html

[Administrator]

65nss4spdGTO
Ultimate Warrior

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: McHenry, IL
Posts: 2,748
KRE HP CNC Package
I've had this one in the works for a bit and it's just about complete. With all the "new" ports A.P.D. has been working on, I was beginning to feel like I'm a slacker.

The head has a port entry of 1.450" in width, uses the same style radius cathedral style roof of my CNC E-heads. 2.250" intake valve and 1.700" exhaust valve. The valves are in the as cast position, uses the standard KRE T&D offset rocker shaft system, CNC intake, exhaust ports & chamber.

Flow numbers as follows:

Lift IN EX
.100" 80cfm
.200" 155cfm 79cfm
.300" 228cfm 133cfm
.400" 281cfm 175cfm
.500" 338cfm 206cfm
.600" 389cfm 236cfm
.700" 418cfm 255cfm
.800" 421cfm 274cfm

The head was tested on a 4.350" bore with a clay conformed radius entry.

The head complete with Ferrea stainless steel valves, double valve springs good to .800" lift, ti retainers, T&D shaft rocker system, complete and ready to bolt on, $5,895.00.

Calvin Hill
Hill Performance
708-250-7420
Attached Thumbnails


forums.performanceyears.com/forums/showthread.php?t=707199&page=3