Stocker Cylinder Heads....

[Billy Nees]

Originally Posted by James L Miller

I'm looking at building a "killer?" 318 2bbl combo with the 302 swirl port heads. It sounds like I can use a bowl hog and go all the way down to the valve guides as part of the valve job? Or maybe use a Serdi type cutter with a radius at the bottom of the cutter to open up the bowl as long as it's done all the way around?

When did they get rid of the .250" depth cut limitations? I guess I haven't been paying attention to the rules.

I also saw the 308 360 head was legal but needs to have the smaller 318 valves put into it. I guess with the VJ changes that opens up another possibility with new seats and whatever VJ works. It may not make much difference with the tiny BBD 2bbl carb?

You just may find that when dealing with seriously restricted combos(I think that a 2V 318 qualifies even though that carb flows more than what I'm used to) you might want to be looking for the smallest runners. Velocity is your friend not necessarily volume. The manufacturers didn't spend lots of time and money coming up with those swirl port heads just as an engineering exercise.

[Lee Valentine]

Well said Billy.

[James L Miller]

Originally Posted by Billy Nees

You just may find that when dealing with seriously restricted combos(I think that a 2V 318 qualifies even though that carb flows more than what I'm used to) you might want to be looking for the smallest runners. Velocity is your friend not necessarily volume. The manufacturers didn't spend lots of time and money coming up with those swirl port heads just as an engineering exercise.

Thanks for the advice Billy. Sometimes I wonder if the engineers cared about airflow in the 1950s and 1960s on most engines. I guess the emissions and CAFE standards forced the auto makers to make them more efficient in the 1980s and later. I'm thinking the 273 4bbl combo looks more attractive, basically the same 302 head casting. The 308 head isn't legal on the 273 but is on a 318. Sort of odd, but the 340 intake is legal for the 273 4bbl and apparently so is the old Edelbrock LD4B intake. Maybe that got in via the 1966 D/Dart engine? Now I wish I had that LD4B I bought in 1975 and gave to a friend in the 1980s.

[65signet]

Originally Posted by James L Miller

Thanks for the advice Billy. Sometimes I wonder if the engineers cared about airflow in the 1950s and 1960s on most engines. I guess the emissions and CAFE standards forced the auto makers to make them more efficient in the 1980s and later. I'm thinking the 273 4bbl combo looks more attractive, basically the same 302 head casting. The 308 head isn't legal on the 273 but is on a 318. Sort of odd, but the 340 intake is legal for the 273 4bbl and apparently so is the old Edelbrock LD4B intake. Maybe that got in via the 1966 D/Dart engine? Now I wish I had that LD4B I bought in 1975 and gave to a friend in the 1980s.

The 340 intake is not legal, you must use the LD4B with the right part number on it.