Forums
NautiqueParts.comNautiqueSkins.com - Correct Craft Upholstery and Part
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - I need new heads for 351W
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

I need new heads for 351W

 Post Reply Post Reply Page   12>
Author
rover View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: January-14-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 17
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rover Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: I need new heads for 351W
    Posted: January-23-2006 at 6:13pm
I am looking for the best(new)heads for our family '81 SN. Rebuilding engine stock ,maybe mild cam. Who likes what and why??? Considering GT40s cast iron..Roush 180s. Valve size? combustion chamber size?
Thank for your intrest
David Wilkins
262.719.5522
2canucks@core.com
Back to Top
Jim_In_Houston View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member


Joined: September-06-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1120
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jim_In_Houston Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-23-2006 at 7:54pm
Rover, I could be wrong but I have the understanding that GT-40 heads are designed for the 302 engine. I also understand the the 351W heads are pretty good in stock form. What is wrong with the heads on your 351? Also, consider that heads with smaller valves will force higher velocity fuel mixture at lower engine speeds resulting in better performance during the low speed operation. Going to larger valves with larger ports may only help in high RPM operation which you may never see anyway. Large valves may reduce low RPM performance. I think you should re-think spending money on heads for a boat engine. Go for high torque at low RPMs and a prop with a big pitch - my 2 cents.
Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang
Back to Top
64 Skier View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: February-08-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 415
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 64 Skier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-23-2006 at 11:21pm
See this site for more information:

http://www.allfordmustangs.com/Detailed/630.shtml
64 Skier
66" HO VTX and 67" HO Triumph
71CC
Back to Top
64 Skier View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: February-08-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 415
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 64 Skier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-24-2006 at 5:01am
One more article you should read:
http://www.mustangandfords.com/techarticles/5288/index.html scroll down to the subarticles also for some good reads.

JIH is dead on and you can get dissapointed with premium heads depending on what you plan to do with the boat. Big Valves are great above 4500 RPM which is where our boats top out so again, Jim's giving you some good advice. Increased chamber size (will reduce compression) and the larger valves will both hurt low end torque. For semi-displacement hulls IMHO it's all about low end torque. Think water tractor.

A friend of mine bought a used set of GT-40's and was bragging about pulling my boat around the lake. He barely got off plane. Like a couple knuckleheads we thought we checked everything...

We mainly slalom ski and wakeboard and rebuilt a 289 using my old heads with larger valves punched in, but increased the compression and she pulls great. I spent the extra dollars on forged pistons, mild porting, new intake, electronic ignition and carb. I even kept the old solid cam for the reasons Jim stated so I could play with the lash to get the most of the low end torque.

Good Luck!
64 Skier
66" HO VTX and 67" HO Triumph
71CC
Back to Top
AWhite70 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: March-05-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 242
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AWhite70 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-24-2006 at 5:20am
When I rebuilt the engine for my '79 I reused the stock D80E (casting number) heads. I had them machined for slightly bigger valves and gave them a mild port job. I increased the compression ratio slightly with the pistons. I couldn't be happier with the results, she pulls hard.

Be careful that you don't get too much head for your applications. As has been said already boats don't get much above 4500rpm and probably run mostly in the 2500-3500 range. A lot of high end heads are probably mean to flow a lot of air in the 5-7k range.
Back to Top
David F View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member


Joined: June-11-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1770
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote David F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-24-2006 at 11:13am
I think the GT40 heads can be used on the 351W by simply drilling out the bolt holes to accept the larger diameter head bolts used on the 351W vs 302. Remember, I said "think".

I tend to agree with the other statements. Our boats NEED lots of low end torque. The footers may need some high(er) end HP as well.
Back to Top
JoeinNY View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: October-19-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5693
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JoeinNY Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-24-2006 at 6:34pm
The gt40 heads are available with the holes already drilled out for a 351w, and were used by pcm with great success on Ski Nautiques from the 90's until the ford marine blocks dried up in about 2002. Combined with a good marine/rv grind cam they will give you more horsepower, going with anything larger than the valve size on the GT-40 would probably start to have an effect on your low end. I have put junkyard GT-40s off a 1996 explorer 302 on a friends 351w in a full size bronco mud bogger it was a huge improvement (we drilled out the holes for the headbolts and had to change the push rods because it was a seventies bronco but other than that it bolted up) You might need updated PCM manifolds if you went with the GT-40s. Compression will of course have a huge impact on engine performance so make sure your piston/head combination gives you the compression you are looking for, or the best heads on the planet won't save you.
-Joe.
1983 Ski Nautique 2001
1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy"
Holeshot Video
Back to Top
Jim_In_Houston View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member


Joined: September-06-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1120
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jim_In_Houston Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-24-2006 at 9:34pm
As I mentioned in other threads I installed a nice set of GT-40P heads on my 289. I lost a little compression and I may have lost some performance but I am happy with the overall performance of the little 289. My reason for installing the heads was purly perverted in that I could not stand the thought of running heads with Ford's stock pressed-in rocker studs. The thought just makes me crazy. The GT-40Ps have threaded rocker studs which is how all studs should be made (IMHO). The pistons are stock original because I did not want to take time playing with clay.

If anyone can recommend pistons that will boost my compression without any risk of hitting a valve I would certainly like to give them a try. I wouldn't mind a little more compression and I am not into head shaving.

Also, I am ready to play with some clay during my next rebuild.

Thanks... Jim

PS: I am now thinking "water tractor". You have to love it.
Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang
Back to Top
GottaSki View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah


Joined: April-21-2005
Location: NE CT
Status: Offline
Points: 3327
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GottaSki Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-25-2006 at 5:12am
Jim, with closed-chamber heads, it might be better to zero-deck the block to boost the CR, you would gain not only better cr but better squish.. (less trapped HC in the areas of the chamber that the flame front can't reach, swirl and burn well...)

A 327 stroker shortblock would boost the CR as well..

Changing CR as well as head airflow increases the density of the A/f mix at wot, increasing the speed of the flame, thus requiring less advance.

So with a reworked engine, the stock ignition timing one used for stock heads could either be set too advanced at wot, or if reset for wot, would be too retarded at low rpms, giving one the sensation that the heads 'killed' the low-end.

Spending quality time with the timing gun, some graph paper and a fully-adjustable distributor is required to see best overall results after changing CR, cam, heads, etc.
"There is nothing, absolutely nothing, half so much worthwhile as messing around with boats...simply messing."

River Rat to Mole
Back to Top
Jim_In_Houston View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member


Joined: September-06-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1120
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jim_In_Houston Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-25-2006 at 7:47am
Thanks GottaSki. How do you zero-deck a block? What is involved?
Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang
Back to Top
JoeinNY View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: October-19-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5693
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JoeinNY Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-25-2006 at 9:56am
Jim,
    What kind of Exhaust logs are you running with those GT-40Ps, have you had any spark plug angle issues. Additionally, you would have had to change the push rods to make this happen correct? Disclaimer..I am making some assumptions here, most of this applys to autos and I am assuming marine as well..   Early 289 heads had a combustion chamber of 54.5 ccs and the resulting compression was about 9.3 to 1. The gt-40p has a combustion chamber of 59-61 ccs dropping your compression to about 8.7 to 1, but they are much better flowing heads with a more efficient plug location than stock I would say a net gain in most set ups. To get that compression back you could deck the head or cylinder a combination of about .030 to .040. Or per your preference change the pistons, a piston that would have been called "10 to 1" with your stock heads would yield you about 9.4. I think it would be pretty easy to find the correct pistons, if your serious we can talk actual measurements and compute out what you would need. Enough of this talk and I will be thinking of replacing the heads on an engine I swore I wouldn't mess with again for at least 2 years...
-Joe.
1983 Ski Nautique 2001
1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy"
Holeshot Video
Back to Top
79nautique View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: January-27-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7872
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 79nautique Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-25-2006 at 10:16am
I beleive what gottaski is refering to is machining down the blocks decks, (surface heads mount to) so that they are flush with the top of the pistion (flat top or dished pistons). This would require no change in parts with the exception of the push rods maybe, depending how much material was removed off of the decks. If you didn't change the length of the push rods then you would be creating more lift on the valves and could posiablely(sp) hit the piston if you did not checked for clearance ahead of time.
Back to Top
Jim_In_Houston View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member


Joined: September-06-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1120
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jim_In_Houston Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-25-2006 at 5:29pm
Whoa... good point 79. I hadn't considered the need for shorter push rods although it makes perfect sense...

I still don't like the idea of shaving anything. In my mind that's a fix that can't be undone. I will look into pistons though. No hurry here - just thinkin. I gotta get my '66 in the water before I pull down the '68. That's why we have a "back-up" boat right?

Joe, the GT-40Ps were a direct bolt-in on the 289. Very easy. I am running stock Interceptor aluminum manifolds. Absolutly no problem with the spark plug angle.

The only problem I had was selecting the spark plugs. When you walk into Autozone, or anywhere else, the fisrt thing they ask is what type of car you have. I ended up ordering up plugs for a 1998 Explorer, which is what I was told the heads came off. I am not at home right now so before anyone runs off and orders 1998 Explorer plugs for their GT-40Ps check with me first so I can go to my records. Maybe it was a 1996 but who cares right now.

Make no doubt, even with the lower compression the engine is much stronger than prior to the head change. Maybe it was the cam or the carb or the heads - I don't know - it just worked.

I installed a mildly warm SpeedPro marine cam which has a little more lift than stock and a little more duration on the intake but not much.

Pushrods are stock and original. I did not replace them. (I did replace the lifters however.)

At this point, so I can check prices, if you can recommend some possible pistons I would appreciate it. Don't spend time on this. Before I order we can go thru the exercises. This could easily be a next winter project. The boats runs pretty strong as it is. It throws you back in the seat and holds you there when you hit it.
Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang
Back to Top
rover View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: January-14-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 17
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rover Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-25-2006 at 9:19pm
Thanks for the great responses....
My heads have many cracks between valves due to over heating.
Everyone has been very helpful here, glad I found it. This is one of a few SN we plan to restore in the near future.
Thanks again
david
Back to Top
JoeinNY View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: October-19-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5693
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JoeinNY Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-25-2006 at 9:30pm
1998 Explorer sounds about right, asking for a 1996 would muddy the waters a little as they started that year with GT40s and then changed to GT40Ps very early 1997. The spark plugs interfere with most automotive headers on the GT40P, glad to hear not so with the interceptor logs. What pistons have you got in the motor now?
-Joe.
1983 Ski Nautique 2001
1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy"
Holeshot Video
Back to Top
79nautique View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: January-27-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7872
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 79nautique Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-26-2006 at 5:41am
Rover
I believe there are a set of DOOE heads on ebay right now and they would be perfect for a 351W most hot roders use these heads over gt-40 if you can get them.
Back to Top
79nautique View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: January-27-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7872
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 79nautique Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-26-2006 at 5:44am
Here they are the auction ends today!!

http://cgi.ebay.com/1970-FORD-DOOE-351W-HEADS_W0QQitemZ8031858865QQcategoryZ33617QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Back to Top
Jim_In_Houston View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member


Joined: September-06-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1120
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jim_In_Houston Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-26-2006 at 7:20am
Joe, the pistons are 289 original flat top.
Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang
Back to Top
JoeinNY View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: October-19-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5693
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JoeinNY Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-27-2006 at 2:39pm
Jim,
    I will pull out the catalogs over the weekend and check on options for pistons. I think I have irrevocably convinced myself to install some GT40p's on my 302, between them and the new floor, interior/seats, windshield, gauges, perfect pass, flitepipe, swim platform, and the large pile of stereo equipment all waiting for installation spring better get here soon if I am to finish before wetsuit season.
1983 Ski Nautique 2001
1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy"
Holeshot Video
Back to Top
Jim_In_Houston View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member


Joined: September-06-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1120
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jim_In_Houston Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-27-2006 at 8:45pm
Joe, I'll be waiting to see how you like the GT-40Ps.
Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang
Back to Top
81nautique View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: September-03-2005
Location: Big Rock, Il
Status: Offline
Points: 5762
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 81nautique Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-28-2006 at 4:53am
Hey Guys,
Skidim sells GT-40 heads and i was talking to Vince about the benefit of adding them to my 351w. Unless I wasn't listening very good it sounded like they were a simple bolt on and would add 35-40 HP and would turn an additional 400 rpm.

I'm not serious about adding them right now but more curious, your posts above seem to differ from the info I got. Any comments?
Thanks
Back to Top
JoeinNY View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: October-19-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5693
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JoeinNY Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-28-2006 at 12:44pm
Jim,
    I think you should check out the Keith Black KB116 pistons, maybe a little extreme but I am guessing you would end up about 10 to 1 with them and your current setup. Summit has them at about 220 a set. They are hypereutectic cast pistions which are IMHO the best way to go for boat engine. They are lighter and cheaper than forged and more thermally stable so they won't expand as much reducing the chance of scuffing. If you dropped them in your block you would probably gain enough clyinder wall clearence with a little honing to drop them in without any such worries. I found a set of GT40p's at a wrecker down the road for 300, autozone has them rebuilt for 350 a piece, I think I will pick up the ones from the wrecker and find some stainless valves and do a rebuild on them...
Alan,
    I would think that you would see improvements with the GT-40 bolt on.. I see no reason to doubt Vince on it...
1983 Ski Nautique 2001
1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy"
Holeshot Video
Back to Top
Jim_In_Houston View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member


Joined: September-06-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1120
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jim_In_Houston Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-28-2006 at 3:44pm
Joe. If I understand what you are saying you are about to spend at least $300 + $700 + new valves.

That seems like a lot.

I bought my pair of heads off ebay from a guy that sells them there from time to time.

I bought both of my heads, either low mileage or reworked (I don't remember but I do remember they looked like new) for around $400 if I recall. (Complete with valves and springs.)

Keep and eye on Ebay and don't get in a hurry to buy them.

Thanks for the tip on the pistons. I turn your info over to the CCFC research department.
Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang
Back to Top
JoeinNY View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: October-19-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5693
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JoeinNY Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-28-2006 at 4:35pm
Jim,
Sorry for the confusion... I can get used ones from the wrecker for 300 for the pair including valves springs etc, they have 35000 miles on them. If I go that route I would probably put on new springs, stainless valves, light machining, and replace the steel plugs with bronze ones. The ones from autozone are 350 each for completely reconditioned heads with all springs and valves included, they are actually 250 but they have a 100 dollar core charge... if I bought those I would just install them and run them as is... I am leaning towards getting the used ones... stainless valves would set me back about 200 incidentals will probably put the whole thing at 600 dollars installed and done right... not too bad. It would cost 695 a side for the GT40's from skidim and the GT40ps flow a little better and have a smaller and more efficient combustion chamber. Sure the boat already runs perfect, tops out about 46, sounds awesome, and has easily pulled big three slalom skiers up at once but it can always run better right?
-Joe.
1983 Ski Nautique 2001
1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy"
Holeshot Video
Back to Top
nuttyskier2002 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member


Joined: September-28-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 669
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nuttyskier2002 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-29-2006 at 5:07am
I read earlier in this thread that the plugs in the GT40p heads would not interfere with the aluminum interceptor exhaust logs, but what about the standard cast iron logs used on most PCM and Indmar engines in the 80's and early 90's.
95 Malibu Echelon w/Mercruiser 350 Magnum Skier

Former boats:
88 Ski Centurion Tru Trac II
59 Chris Craft Capri (woody)
Back to Top
reidp View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: December-06-2003
Location: Mooresville, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 1804
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote reidp Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-29-2006 at 10:00am
Jim, the Keith Black KB116 pistons Joe referenced are the exact ones I've been running for about 5 years now in our 69 blue Mustang 302. They are a domed piston and with the good 60cc D0OE heads which '79 suggested, and which I'm using, they're supposed to yield about a 10.5:1 C.R. according to the Ford Tech Line, with a 302 stroke. Some may feel this to be a bit high, but mine's been bullet proof for some 300 hrs. I'm also using that same cam you mentioned along with the Barr Marine aluminum 3" exhausts, gasket-matched to the ported heads. The holeshot of this boat simple a rush.

These KB116 pistons with the 58cc GT40P heads (I believe Ps are 58 and std GT40s are 60cc, right Joe?) might have you somewhere close to 10.5 with a 289 or 11.0 with a 302 based off the application specs in the PAW parts catalog. It also mentioned that these pistons with the small 54cc 289 factory heads, will need mods done to the piston or head for clearance.

We are putting together a new engine right now with these pistons and World/Roush 180 58cc iron heads which have just been ported, after reading that the factory flow specs were sub-par to the 40s on the intake side, even with bigger 1.94 vs 1.84 valves. I'll let you know how it runs unless it ends up in infinium like so many other of our projects.

As for the GT40 heads on Alan's '81, I believe that to be the best example of where you'll see the largest power gain with the GT40 heads. That vintage 351, if indeed it has the small spark plug (5/8") heads, is basically a 302 head with the smallest valves (1.78" intake) combined with the largest chamber (+/- 69cc). You could pick up in the neighborhood of 2 full points of torque-building compression, whereas you sometimes loose a tad bit as Jim did, as he ended up with a slightly larger chamber than stock. Just make sure it's not too much compression, but Vince I'm sure has seen this combo numerous times.   
ReidP
1973 Mustang

Back to Top
JoeinNY View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: October-19-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5693
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JoeinNY Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-29-2006 at 11:46am
Nominal compression chamber size for the Gt40p is 59cc, listed by ford with tolerance as 59-61cc. The Gt40 is actually significantly higher at 64.5cc nominal. I have been told that marine GT40 heads such as those used by pcm were a unique beast with a slightly larger chamber at 67-68 cc, but I have never seen that in reputable print so we will just call it a rumor...
-Joe.
1983 Ski Nautique 2001
1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy"
Holeshot Video
Back to Top
Jim_In_Houston View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member


Joined: September-06-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1120
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jim_In_Houston Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January-29-2006 at 1:19pm
Thanks ReidP
Happy owner of a '66 and a '68 Mustang
Back to Top
pmt2234 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: June-14-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 46
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pmt2234 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February-09-2006 at 11:19am
I put a set of GT40P heads on my 84 2001. The PCM manifolds cleared the spark plugs without a problem. In fact, I think there's more clearance now than before.

I CC'd everything when I had it apart, and my CR is now about 9.33:1.
Back to Top
JoeinNY View Drop Down
Grand Poobah
Grand Poobah
Avatar

Joined: October-19-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5693
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JoeinNY Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February-09-2006 at 10:03pm
Alright so I found a set of gt40p's with a 5 angle valve job, new springs, new stainless valves (slightly larger than stock) basically all ready to go for 500 so off I go (anyone need a set of 1978 302 heads, they have about half a season on them since being rebuilt and I will sell them very very cheap). Anyway now that I am getting in there again, I am starting to think roller rockers, anyone using anything they would recommend and if so what valve covers are you using. I am a little worried that I would drop the money for the rollers and then not be able to find a valve cover that would clear both them and the exhause logs. The cheapie chrome valve covers I have on now specifically state they will not clear rollers. Any suggestions?
-Joe.
1983 Ski Nautique 2001
1967 Mustang 302 "Decoy"
Holeshot Video
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page   12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Copyright 2024 | Bagley Productions, LLC