what 4valve heads are better?

[plated]

what 4 valve heads are better

[Carl]

Romeo heads off the Navigator, Cobra are the best stock heads. I am not sure abot aftermarkets.

[Drivermod]

03-04 Cobra or Mach 1 are the way to go of the commonly available heads. Ford GT heads if money is no object.

[plated]

03-04 Cobra or Mach 1 are the way to go of the commonly available heads. Ford GT heads if money is no object.so if i'm building a 96up cobra motor,the ideal head would be off a mach or 03 cobra? what about intake the lower is there an aftermaket short runner? thanks guys

[cstreu1026]

the mach1, cobra, or lincoln aviator heads will be the easiest to find an intake for. I beleive the heads off the navigator, 00 Cobra R, and Ford GT have different ports. I the aviator intake seems to be pretty popular. There is always the Sullivan intake as as well. I think the stock intakes work pretty well too.

[Drivermod]

Yeah I'd go with 03-04 heads. Lincoln Aviators had the good heads as well. Sullivan makes an aftermarket short runner intake that is affordable(under $1000). The FR 500 intakes are VERY hard to find and VERY expensive $3000+:eek:. I wouldn't go the short runner route unless you plan to spin it past 7500 and/or your running a power adder:cool2:.

[Brandon Alsept]

I wouldn't go the short runner route unless you plan to spin it past 7500 and/or your running a power adder:cool2:.


Poweradder :rolleyes: Works good with no forced in air LOL

You need to find 03+ cobra/mach 1/ aviator heads if you are building a 4V Chris;) Then get a sullivan intake .

[plated]

what about foxlake's version http://www.foxlakeracing.com/index.php?submenu=Cylinder_Heads&src=gendocs&link=Modular%204%20valve%20heads&category=Cylinder%20Heads with a poweradder

[Brandon Alsept]

Those are just 03+ Cobra/Mach 1 heads that are ported. Would be a nice choice, just have to find some core to send them as they have no cores right now.

[plated]

Those are just 03+ Cobra/Mach 1 heads that are ported. Would be a nice choice, just have to find some core to send them as they have no cores right now.

if you don't mind brandon i'll be picking your brain throuout this build;)

[pegasus]

also the later mark viii heads are pi i think
not the best but probly a bit cheaper

[cstreu1026]

Nope Mk8 heads are the b heads found on 96-98 Cobras. They work in power adder applications but they have HUGE intake runners (220 CC's) so they are not really the best choice for a NA engine. They can be bought cheap though.

Pi heads came on 99+ 2v Mustang GT engines, as well as trucks and 2001 panther platform vehicles like the Crown Vic.

[na svt]

Then get a sullivan intake .

...if you are going with longer duraiton cams and have the bottom end to spin to the rpm at which the Sullivan makes peak power.

The red lines are from a n/a 03/04 cobra motor and the blue
lines are from a Mach. They have similar bolt-on mods. Yes, I know the cobra motor has lower compression but I posted this only to give you an idea of the curve the sullivan will provide and how it works with very mild stock cams.

[URL=http://imageshack.us]http://img107.imageshack.us/img107/5600/sullivan03nacobranoheadkm7.jpg[/

[Brandon Alsept]

...if you are going with longer duraiton cams and have the bottom end to spin to the rpm at which the Sullivan makes peak power.

The red lines are from a n/a 03/04 cobra motor and the blue
lines are from a Mach. They have similar bolt-on mods. Yes, I know the cobra motor has lower compression but I posted this only to give you an idea of the curve the sullivan will provide and how it works with very mild stock cams.

[URL=http://imageshack.us]http://img107.imageshack.us/img107/5600/sullivan03nacobranoheadkm7.jpg[/

Apples and Oranges

[na svt]

Apples and Oranges
I'm not quite sure what you meant by "apples and oranges", but my point is this; stock aviator cams and the Sullivan are not a good match. I think the point is made by that dyno graph. The stock Mach/Aviator/Marauder cam combination will peak no higher than what is shown above on the graph so he'll need a forged bottom and at least 96-98 Cobra cams or the GT cams offered by Ford Racing at the least. It doesn't help that the stock cams are set at a wide LSA (114) either. Extremely short runners need over lap to get the cylinders filled. Hence the reason for the FR500s (109LC) work great with short runner intakes and the FR500 intake but with the stock intake. Combined with the stock intake the FR cams would probably make more power if the LSA was widened some.

[venomous_svt]

FR500's FTW!!! Sullivan makes great intakes also. I thought JIMSVT use to make some short runner intakes that were killer also...dunno. B heads are known to be very temperamental with power adders...and complete lack of options! C Heads require some modifications to fit the teskid block if my memory serves me correct. Its not a direct bolt on. 96-98 really got passed over as far as aftermarket is concerned. Parts are usually hard to come by or out of this world in price. But the 96-98 teskid block is one of the best blocks you can start with. You will need a forged bottom with any high boost/nitrous application as the rods and pistons are prone to failure.

As for cams you can never go wrong by calling up comp cams and tell them what you are looking for out of the grind. SHM custom grinds cams last I checked...

Just my 2 cents.

[na svt]

C Heads require some modifications to fit the teskid block if my memory serves me correct. Its not a direct bolt on.

C-, 03/04 and FR500s will bolt on any 4v block without any head/block modifications.

[venomous_svt]

thank you for the correction...I didnt think it was direct cause of coolant passages being alittle off.

[Brandon Alsept]

I'm not quite sure what you meant by "apples and oranges", but my point is this; stock aviator cams and the Sullivan are not a good match. I think the point is made by that dyno graph. The stock Mach/Aviator/Marauder cam combination will peak no higher than what is shown above on the graph so he'll need a forged bottom and at least 96-98 Cobra cams or the GT cams offered by Ford Racing at the least. It doesn't help that the stock cams are set at a wide LSA (114) either. Extremely short runners need over lap to get the cylinders filled. Hence the reason for the FR500s (109LC) work great with short runner intakes and the FR500 intake but with the stock intake. Combined with the stock intake the FR cams would probably make more power if the LSA was widened some.

Apple = Turbo 4V Build

Orange = Your poor comparison of the Sullivan on a 8.5:1 engine, and on a Mach1 engine.

He was asking about 4V heads and parts. Even if I had a mach/cobra intake I would go with the Sullivan on a turbo engine if I was into that forced air thing.

[na svt]

Apple = Turbo 4V Build

Orange = Your poor comparison of the Sullivan on a 8.5:1 engine, and on a Mach1 engine.

He was asking about 4V heads and parts. Even if I had a mach/cobra intake I would go with the Sullivan on a turbo engine if I was into that forced air thing.

I missed where he stated that this was turbo build???

The graph I posted was not meant be a comparison, the Mach graph was there for reference only since it's numbers are known by most people. Also, the difference between a n/a 03 cobra motor and a Mach motor is 1.5 points of compression, that's it; same cams, same heads. That 1.5 points makes very little difference.

The Mach intake would probably work as good or better for a "street" turbo motor since it would provide a lot more low end which would get the turbos spooling much faster. Turbo motors with Sullivans have zero low end and when combined with the cams and gearing required for turbos makes for a car that is not as fun to drive on the street. Race only, Sullivan would be the way to go. Why install an intake that makes less power across the usable rpm range, why not begin with the intake that makes the most power. Even Mihovetz recommends the stock intake for Turbo motors.

[na svt]

..and like Brandan said, the 03/04 heads are what you want to get, especially if you are FI.

[Rustanggt98]

That 1.5 points makes very little difference.

:lol: i would kill for another 1.5 of compression if I could get it, it makes a huge difference no matter what kind of engine you are talking about.

[Evil_Capri]

Thought I would pass along some items (heads/cams/etc.) for sale on Mach1registry.com . .

http://mach1registry.org/forums/showthread.php?t=69360

[Brandon Alsept]

I missed where he stated that this was turbo build???

The graph I posted was not meant be a comparison, the Mach graph was there for reference only since it's numbers are known by most people. Also, the difference between a n/a 03 cobra motor and a Mach motor is 1.5 points of compression, that's it; same cams, same heads. That 1.5 points makes very little difference.

LOL well build something and I will take 1.5 points away from ya and see how much it affects it. You usually make decent smart post but that has to be the dumbest statement I have ever read.


The Mach intake would probably work as good or better for a "street" turbo motor since it would provide a lot more low end which would get the turbos spooling much faster. Turbo motors with Sullivans have zero low end and when combined with the cams and gearing required for turbos makes for a car that is not as fun to drive on the street.

Ya know what else spools turbos faster? Our good ol friend compression joins the game again. But thats not important I forgot.


Race only, Sullivan would be the way to go. Why install an intake that makes less power across the usable rpm range, why not begin with the intake that makes the most power. Even Mihovetz recommends the stock intake for Turbo motors.

What are you calling usable RPM? I am betting Chris will aim this build more towards a really rowdy street/stripe car and will build it to run big RPM like a 4V likes.

Funny why does Mihovetz run a sheet metal intake then? Since he runs a turbo LOL.

[na svt]

You usually make decent smart post but that has to be the dumbest statement I have ever read.
Everyone is allowed a brain fart every now and then.

Did I say that compression wasn't important???? Nope, it is important and I don't dispute that.

I made that statement based upon the power put down by two cobra longblocks that were installed in n/a mustangs. Both made over 300rwhp with one of them making 312. This statement may have been faulty in that is was quite general becasue it was based upon only two examples. I agree with you in that compression makes power but at a rate of a only few percent for each point increase. If the car is to be run on pump gas the tune (timing) can more than likely make up some of the difference.


What are you calling usable RPM? I am betting Chris will aim this build more towards a really rowdy street/stripe car and will build it to run big RPM like a 4V likes.

Funny why does Mihovetz run a sheet metal intake then? Since he runs a turbo LOL.

I've spoken to John M. about this and he recomemnded a stock manifold for turbo motor that isn't spinning sky high (like your P/S motor, BTW, helluva run you made at Bowling Green:bigthumb). I would say go with the Sullivan if the motor is to see over 7500rpm. Most street turbo motors do not so that is why I said what I did. However, if it's going to see a lot of street use I still believe that a ported stock intake would get more air into the motor under the lower rpms and that increased airflow, which has to exit through the turbo, would make it spool quicker. Peak power could suffer a little but the power band would be much broader than with the Sullivan.

I'll ask for more info before I chime in next time.

[oversquare]

What are you calling usable RPM? I am betting Chris will aim this build more towards a really rowdy street/stripe car and will build it to run big RPM like a 4V likes.


Pushrods like RPM, too. I really haven't seen a big difference in ability of a 4V OHC to really turn more RPM than a pushrod motor. (Keep the IRL and F1 stuff out of this, lol)

I guess what I'm saying is, aren't you 4.6 guys more limited in your turning of RPM by heads that don't flow and an undersquare rotating assembly?

[Brandon Alsept]

Ok tell ya what lets build engines with same compression, and supporting mods and see who turns more RPMs.

I don't seem to remember the 93 cobra turning 7000 rpm in stock form, maybe I missed something.

[na svt]

I guess what I'm saying is, aren't you 4.6 guys more limited in your turning of RPM by heads that don't flow and an undersquare rotating assembly?

Heads that don't flow? I'm not quite sure what heads you are thinking of but 4.6 4v heads aren't exactly a bottleneck to making power...and neither is the valvetrain.

Brandon, did you see the 4.6 intake test in MM&FF?

[oversquare]

I never said the valvetrain was the bottleneck. I said I didn't see a significant gain in using OHC versus a pushrod.

And no, your heads don't flow. 233cfm @ .500 lift isn't terrible (2003 Cobra), but there's no significant gain in airflow from .400-.500. If the head is maxed out and goes turbulent at .450 (which it looks as if it does, or wants to) then turning more RPM isn't the answer. A power adder is (Lo and behold, the Terminator.) Even the Cobra R head, which flows a damn respectable 268 at the same lift, only picks up ten numbers per .100 starting at .400 lift. Now the numbers would definately look better had the test been flowed at 28" water instead of 25", but the end results would look the same.
An LS1 will make 240 at .500, then continues to allow around the 251ish mark at .600. But this is a Mustang site, and I'm not here to fly the bow-tie banner.
I'll say what's on my mind: If someone said to me "Tate, you have to build a Ford motor, it has to be NA, and you have an unlimited budget." then I would take a 351 block, punch it .060, put a 3.000" crank in it, lay the biggest set of heads I could on top of it, and turn it 11,000 RPM. (If the block could handle it.)
I'm here to learn as much as the next guy, and I work on Ford stuff all the time. I'm a closet Ford guy, what can I say?!?! Matter of fact, I'm in the middle of porting a set of B heads right now, and I'm anxious to see how they turn out. :)





(Cliff's notes: OHC stuff scares me because I don't feel comfortable setting valvetrain geometry on it to turn any kind of RPM.)

[oversquare]

Ok tell ya what lets build engines with same compression, and supporting mods and see who turns more RPMs.

I don't seem to remember the 93 cobra turning 7000 rpm in stock form, maybe I missed something.

Those heads weren't exactly cream of the crop, though. The mod head is leaps and bounds better, I've got no problem with admitting that. It's a FACT.
If you could put a set of quad cam heads on a 302, would you do it? I would. Spin that b***h to the moon!

[glassman]

Brandon, did you see the 4.6 intake test in MM&FF?[/QUOTE]

I was gonna ask him the same thing but also about the Kar kraft plates that were designed to use any 5.0 intake??

[Rustanggt98]

Pushrods like RPM, too. I really haven't seen a big difference in ability of a 4V OHC to really turn more RPM than a pushrod motor. (Keep the IRL and F1 stuff out of this, lol)

I guess what I'm saying is, aren't you 4.6 guys more limited in your turning of RPM by heads that don't flow and an undersquare rotating assembly?

I'm not sure exactly which type of engine you are talking about when it comes to the rpm limit (race, street, etc). But if you look at pure street in NMRA i'd say 90% of the modulars are turning more rpm than the pushrods (with completely stock components in the heads minus cams and springs, well and valves but that doesn't matter a whole lot), and in street cars, i know JIMSSVT used to spin his stock longblock B-headed cobra to 7500+, you won't see anything close to that with a stock longblock 5.0 and still make usable power.

[Brandon Alsept]

I never said the valvetrain was the bottleneck. I said I didn't see a significant gain in using OHC versus a pushrod.

And no, your heads don't flow. 233cfm @ .500 lift isn't terrible (2003 Cobra), but there's no significant gain in airflow from .400-.500. If the head is maxed out and goes turbulent at .450 (which it looks as if it does, or wants to) then turning more RPM isn't the answer. A power adder is (Lo and behold, the Terminator.) Even the Cobra R head, which flows a damn respectable 268 at the same lift, only picks up ten numbers per .100 starting at .400 lift. Now the numbers would definately look better had the test been flowed at 28" water instead of 25", but the end results would look the same.
An LS1 will make 240 at .500, then continues to allow around the 251ish mark at .600. But this is a Mustang site, and I'm not here to fly the bow-tie banner.
I'll say what's on my mind: If someone said to me "Tate, you have to build a Ford motor, it has to be NA, and you have an unlimited budget." then I would take a 351 block, punch it .060, put a 3.000" crank in it, lay the biggest set of heads I could on top of it, and turn it 11,000 RPM. (If the block could handle it.)
I'm here to learn as much as the next guy, and I work on Ford stuff all the time. I'm a closet Ford guy, what can I say?!?! Matter of fact, I'm in the middle of porting a set of B heads right now, and I'm anxious to see how they turn out. :)





(Cliff's notes: OHC stuff scares me because I don't feel comfortable setting valvetrain geometry on it to turn any kind of RPM.)

Let me guess you got the "Headporting for Dummies book" and are now a internet wizard of airflow.

oh and the geometry I believe that the VT 5.4 Mod motor car turns 11,000 with 40psi on top of it;) Try that on for size.

[oversquare]

I own no head porting books, and do not claim to be a wizard of anything.
And my cliff's notes were misinterpreted. I'm saying that I myself am not familiar enough with OHC valvetrains to set rocker sweep on them.
NMRA Hot Street cars turn 9500+ on pushrods.
NHRA Pro Stockers turn 10,500 on the shifts and 12,000+ in 5th gear through the lights. That's 500 inches of pushrod motor. (I won't go into the fact that Ford no longer fields an NHRA Pro Stocker.) Try THAT on for size...

I'm only saying things I know. If I didn't know about it, I'd sit back and listen. Are OHC head the way of the future? Damn right, and no doubt about it. I'm only saying us old pushrod folks aren't ready to give up our old school ways. :)

[na svt]

And no, your heads don't flow. 233cfm @ .500 lift isn't terrible (2003 Cobra), but there's no significant gain in airflow from .400-.500. If the head is maxed out and goes turbulent at .450 (which it looks as if it does, or wants to) then turning more RPM isn't the answer. A power adder is (Lo and behold, the Terminator.) Even the Cobra R head, which flows a damn respectable 268 at the same lift, only picks up ten numbers per .100 starting at .400 lift. Now the numbers would definately look better had the test been flowed at 28" water instead of 25", but the end results would look the same.
An LS1 will make 240 at .500, then continues to allow around the 251ish mark at .600. But this is a Mustang site, and I'm not here to fly the bow-tie banner.
I'll say what's on my mind: If someone said to me "Tate, you have to build a Ford motor, it has to be NA, and you have an unlimited budget." then I would take a 351 block, punch it .060, put a 3.000" crank in it, lay the biggest set of heads I could on top of it, and turn it 11,000 RPM. (If the block could handle it.)


From your comments I see that you obviously know nothing about valve curtain area and valve diameter/cubic inch ratio or for that matter, what is required to make power with a 4v motor of any type.

Let me explain, an LS1 has 346 cubic inches, 65 more than the 4.6 4v motor. Since it's larger it requires more airflow, after all, all engines have to pump air to make power. With that, the valve curtain area ((intake valve diameter ”) X (3.14) X (lift ")= valve curtain area in sq. in) of the LS1 at .600 lift is 3.78 sq inches. The little 281 cubic inch 4 valve motors have a curtain area of 4.346 at only .475" of lift. Is that right, our 4v motors have more curtain area than the mighty LS1??? Does that mean that it can pump more air per cubic inch that the bowtie motor??? Yup, sure does.

Now you know why 4.6 4v motors don't require valve lifts of .500" or heads that flow above .500" lift to make power.

As for your pro stock comment, there is nothing "Chevy" about the chevy pro stock motors. All those parts are aftermarket or specially built by Chevy for that specific use. There is no money in it so why should Ford get involved.

I like pushrod motors also, but don't come in here and talk crap when you don't know the facts.

[Brandon Alsept]

I own no head porting books, and do not claim to be a wizard of anything.
And my cliff's notes were misinterpreted. I'm saying that I myself am not familiar enough with OHC valvetrains to set rocker sweep on them.
NMRA Hot Street cars turn 9500+ on pushrods.
NHRA Pro Stockers turn 10,500 on the shifts and 12,000+ in 5th gear through the lights. That's 500 inches of pushrod motor. (I won't go into the fact that Ford no longer fields an NHRA Pro Stocker.) Try THAT on for size...

I'm only saying things I know. If I didn't know about it, I'd sit back and listen. Are OHC head the way of the future? Damn right, and no doubt about it. I'm only saying us old pushrod folks aren't ready to give up our old school ways. :)


True NMRA hot street cars run 9500+ RPM and they are fukin bad ass. How much they spend to turn that, you have any idea?

NHRA pro Stokers don't cross at 12K, and they normally shift around 9500-9800 and cross around 10,000 here is a racepack datalog from a pro stock car @ Las Vegas just so you don't try and argue. http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL16/709000/17765002/287203541.jpg

Ford no longer runs because NHRA will not let them run the cyl head that they need to be able to compete.

[oversquare]

From your comments I see that you obviously know nothing about valve curtain area and valve diameter/cubic inch ratio or for that matter, what is required to make power with a 4v motor of any type.

Let me explain, an LS1 has 346 cubic inches, 65 more than the 4.6 4v motor. Since it's larger it requires more airflow, after all, all engines have to pump air to make power. With that, the valve curtain area ((intake valve diameter ”) X (3.14) X (lift ")= valve curtain area in sq. in) of the LS1 at .600 lift is 3.78 sq inches. The little 281 cubic inch 4 valve motors have a curtain area of 4.346 at only .475" of lift. Is that right, our 4v motors have more curtain area than the mighty LS1??? Does that mean that it can pump more air per cubic inch that the bowtie motor??? Yup, sure does.

Now you know why 4.6 4v motors don't require valve lifts of .500" or heads that flow above .500" lift to make power.

As for your pro stock comment, there is nothing "Chevy" about the chevy pro stock motors. All those parts are aftermarket or specially built by Chevy for that specific use. There is no money in it so why should Ford get involved.

I like pushrod motors also, but don't come in here and talk crap when you don't know the facts.

Yep. You can pump more air per cubic inch. But if you can't get it through the port, what good is it? And of course you have more curtain area, you have 2 valves! Your heads don't need lifts of .500 or higher because it wouldn't be an advantage to lift that high.

The DRCE block is actually an Oldsmobile big block variant, a block which did in fact come in a passenger car. And to say there's no money in it? Ok then.

Brandon, I know exactly and I mean EXACTLY what goes into an NMRA Hot Street car, motor, data acquisition, etc. I had my head buried in one all season, and we did fairly well. We build the engines ourselves, as well as chassis setup, wiring, testing, tuning, etc., so that keeps the cost down considerably. I couldn't place a money value on a full season, but it wouldn't surprise me if it closed in on the $80K range, and that's if you already had the car.

I'm surprised you even have access to true racepak info for a Pro Stock car. Teams don't even let anyone look at the intakes at an event. Casey Snyder (You might have heard of him) told me these things, as well as a brief talk with Pat Topolinski.

What team is that racepak data from?

I'll leave the thread alone, I'm obviously on one side of the fence and I really didn't come here to start a battle. Nothing inherently wrong with OHC. One last thing though brandon, if you don't mind. Where is this turbocharged 5.4 that turns 11,000 RPM? That's voodoo shit. :smokin:

[KenB]

Where is this turbocharged 5.4 that turns 11,000 RPM? That's voodoo shit. :smokin:


I'm guessing he's talking about the quickest pass in NMRA history. by a Modular. poke poke


http://www.nmratv.com/index.php?stream=http://www.nmratv.com/video/racecoverage/bowlinggreen07/20071007_NMRA_BG_Intro.flv&playlist=31

[Brandon Alsept]

Yep. You can pump more air per cubic inch. But if you can't get it through the port, what good is it? And of course you have more curtain area, you have 2 valves! Your heads don't need lifts of .500 or higher because it wouldn't be an advantage to lift that high.

The DRCE block is actually an Oldsmobile big block variant, a block which did in fact come in a passenger car. And to say there's no money in it? Ok then.

Brandon, I know exactly and I mean EXACTLY what goes into an NMRA Hot Street car, motor, data acquisition, etc. I had my head buried in one all season, and we did fairly well. We build the engines ourselves, as well as chassis setup, wiring, testing, tuning, etc., so that keeps the cost down considerably. I couldn't place a money value on a full season, but it wouldn't surprise me if it closed in on the $80K range, and that's if you already had the car.

I'm surprised you even have access to true racepak info for a Pro Stock car. Teams don't even let anyone look at the intakes at an event. Casey Snyder (You might have heard of him) told me these things, as well as a brief talk with Pat Topolinski.

What team is that racepak data from?

I'll leave the thread alone, I'm obviously on one side of the fence and I really didn't come here to start a battle. Nothing inherently wrong with OHC. One last thing though brandon, if you don't mind. Where is this turbocharged 5.4 that turns 11,000 RPM? That's voodoo shit. :smokin:

http://www.nmratv.com/index.php?stream=http://www.nmratv.com/video/racecoverage/bowlinggreen07/20071007_NMRA_BG_Intro.flv&playlist=1

[na svt]

Yep. You can pump more air per cubic inch. But if you can't get it through the port, what good is it? And of course you have more curtain area, you have 2 valves! Your heads don't need lifts of .500 or higher because it wouldn't be an advantage to lift that high.
And no, your heads don't flow. 233cfm @ .500 lift isn't terrible (2003 Cobra), but there's no significant gain in airflow from .400-.500. If the head is maxed out and goes turbulent at .450 (which it looks as if it does, or wants to) then turning more RPM isn't the answer. A power adder is (Lo and behold, the Terminator.) Even the Cobra R head, which flows a damn respectable 268 at the same lift, only picks up ten numbers per .100 starting at .400 lift. Now the numbers would definately look better had the test been flowed at 28" water instead of 25", but the end results would look the same.
An LS1 will make 240 at .500, then continues to allow around the 251ish mark at .600.
You brought up the subject of 4v heads not being able to flow at lifts above .500", not I.

Also, 4.6s don't need to flow as much as larger motors, but the heads from Ford do just fine when ported, the power the engines make and the ETs the cars run kinda prove that. Just ask Brandon as he did quite well last time out. When was the last time an n/a pushrod motor with less than 300 cubic inches ran 10.0?


The DRCE block is actually an Oldsmobile big block variant, a block which did in fact come in a passenger car. And to say there's no money in it? Ok then.


If there was money in it, Ford would find a way to be there; the audience is too small so teh advertising money would not be well spent. NASCAR, well that's another story.


One last thing though brandon, if you don't mind. Where is this turbocharged 5.4 that turns 11,000 RPM? That's voodoo shit. :smokin:
Call Jim or Scott at VT.