32 valve head found for chevy
Discussion
In searching the net last night I found this site
www.araoengineering.com/
they sell a push rod 4 valve per cylinder head.
For my engine I was considering doing a turbo setup because I wanted good drivability and over 600HP.
If these heads are every thing they say they are then this might be a better way to go then a turbo setup.
I was wondering if a few of you would mind taking a look and letting me know what you think.
My only real problem with them is that they are over $6,000 but that would cheaper or equal to a twin turbo setup.
www.araoengineering.com/
they sell a push rod 4 valve per cylinder head.
For my engine I was considering doing a turbo setup because I wanted good drivability and over 600HP.
If these heads are every thing they say they are then this might be a better way to go then a turbo setup.
I was wondering if a few of you would mind taking a look and letting me know what you think.
My only real problem with them is that they are over $6,000 but that would cheaper or equal to a twin turbo setup.
I think there was a question over durability of these heads... and at that price it'd be reasonable to expect them to last forever.
I'm yet to be convinced turbo's in an Ultima would be a good idea due to the extra heat.
There are a few people doing it though, and the single turbo blue one looks very tasty.
I'm yet to be convinced turbo's in an Ultima would be a good idea due to the extra heat.
There are a few people doing it though, and the single turbo blue one looks very tasty.
I think this looks kind of interesting.
www.barrygrant.com/pages/news.aspx?articleid=demonproducts05
www.barrygrant.com/pages/news.aspx?articleid=demonproducts05
The multi valve may have its uses but not in an Ultima.
The 4 valve dyno sheet only goes to 6000rpm and looking at the mass (mess) of valve gear on the 3 valve setup I doubt it will reach that.
G MAN got where he is by having 7000 rev to use and rather well at that.
Show me a multi valve, 2 cams per head design and it will take my interest.
Steve
The 4 valve dyno sheet only goes to 6000rpm and looking at the mass (mess) of valve gear on the 3 valve setup I doubt it will reach that.
G MAN got where he is by having 7000 rev to use and rather well at that.
Show me a multi valve, 2 cams per head design and it will take my interest.
Steve
steve_D said:
The multi valve may have its uses but not in an Ultima.
The 4 valve dyno sheet only goes to 6000rpm and looking at the mass (mess) of valve gear on the 3 valve setup I doubt it will reach that.
G MAN got where he is by having 7000 rev to use and rather well at that.
Show me a multi valve, 2 cams per head design and it will take my interest.
Steve
Yes Steve but Areo have said they can run there heads unto 8500, and because of the flow etc the cams needed to do that are of a less aggressive, lower overlap and better Ideal. That’s Fessa territory..
but as said before how long will they last...
There's a link to an engine on a dyno some where I'll try and find it later.
there has been alot of talk on the US sites (corvettforum and LS1tech) about these. alot of the guys over there say they are a fad, but i have to disarge. i think the 4 valver looks great, but i dont know if they would work in an ultima due to the size of the heads and i have yet to find any dimensions for them. still be nice to see and maybe GMAN could do some back to back testing with them on his curent setup
thanks CHris.
thanks CHris.
Come on guys. Why would you want to rev the engine to 8000 rpm or more? I suspect either a lack of engineering knowledge or too much pub talk here.
First of all, the characteristics of the engine is governed by the camshaft profile. There is no camshaft availble for a smallblock V8 that will idle smoothly at 800 rpm and produce 90% of its torque from 1500 to 9000 rpm. You have one or the other. Reving the engine higer will not make more power. Look at dyno sheets for any engine and you will see this.
A twin cam head was made for the smallblock Chevrolet engine back in the late 70's by a company called Moser. Its a belt driven affair and allowed the all important valve angles.
Im sure the Arao 32V heads work fine. And if they had to rev to 8000 rpm the valve train would be quite happy there as the weight of smaller in/ex valves wouldnt promote float. Once again though, why the hell do you need to rev the engine to rediculous levels?
First of all, the characteristics of the engine is governed by the camshaft profile. There is no camshaft availble for a smallblock V8 that will idle smoothly at 800 rpm and produce 90% of its torque from 1500 to 9000 rpm. You have one or the other. Reving the engine higer will not make more power. Look at dyno sheets for any engine and you will see this.
A twin cam head was made for the smallblock Chevrolet engine back in the late 70's by a company called Moser. Its a belt driven affair and allowed the all important valve angles.
Im sure the Arao 32V heads work fine. And if they had to rev to 8000 rpm the valve train would be quite happy there as the weight of smaller in/ex valves wouldnt promote float. Once again though, why the hell do you need to rev the engine to rediculous levels?
andygtt said:
because Ultima's are very light and so for Ultimate acceleration BHP is viewed more important than the torque.... hopefully I don't need to expain why that means more RPM.
Get a longer stroke engine and lower your final drive ratio if you want to accelerate faster.
I see the McLaren F1 doesnt rev past 7500 and with a 2.9 fd seems to accelerate quite well. Although in saying that, some 1/4 mile racers do rather well with 5.3:1
lawrence1 said:
Get a longer stroke engine and lower your final drive ratio if you want to accelerate faster.
I see the McLaren F1 doesnt rev past 7500 and with a 2.9 fd seems to accelerate quite well. Although in saying that, some 1/4 mile racers do rather well with 5.3:1
If G Man had a longer stroke engine he would have had to use 3 gears in his 0-100-0 proof of acceleration. His ability to take that record comes from the 7000 revs he has on hand.
Steve
lawrence1 said:
Get a longer stroke engine and lower your final drive ratio if you want to accelerate faster.
I see the McLaren F1 doesnt rev past 7500 and with a 2.9 fd seems to accelerate quite well. Although in saying that, some 1/4 mile racers do rather well with 5.3:1
I went the opposite way, Ultima being very light, hugh torque was not required, also I had a concern of the torque rating of the G50 gearboxes.
The key was pickup/acceleration of the crank which means large bores and small crank ie over bore a 350 to a 377.
The acceleration between 5000-7500 just blows the mind and has to be used with caution on the public roads
G Man
lawrence1 said:
First of all, the characteristics of the engine is governed by the camshaft profile.
( Very True )
There is no camshaft availble for a smallblock V8 that will idle smoothly at 800 rpm and produce 90% of its torque from 1500 to 9000 rpm.
( Why would you want the torque that low ? See Andys and Gmans replie )
You have one or the other. Reving the engine higer will not make more power.
( At this point you lose us all ? so your saying the F1 Boys should limit there Rev's ????? )
Once again though, why the hell do you need to rev the engine to rediculous levels?
We want more BHP Simple realy.......
Gassing Station | Ultima | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff