Are factory 454 chevy heads that much better than 460 heads? - 460 Ford Forum
Chilly's Garage A place for non-460 banter.

User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
post #1 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-05-2010, 08:09 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 408
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Are factory 454 chevy heads that much better than 460 heads?

This is not a stir the pot, I want honest opinions.
I read this article in carcraft;
http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles...ild/index.html
They basically put in good pistons that bring the compression up and a 224/230 comp cam with cheap four barrel intake and made 446hp and 542ftlbs torque?

Are factory basic "swirl port" heads that superior to stock 460 heads? It just seems hard to believe.
Or am I just reading more magazine BS?

Although, this is the same magazine that years ago that claimed 423hp with stock D0VE heads on a rebuilder shortblock with mild cam......I'm finding that hard to believe as well...
http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles...460/index.html
AndyMarkV is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-05-2010, 08:41 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jasper, TN
Posts: 407
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
The weak link for the 460 heads are the exhaust ports imo
Moodyblues is offline  
post #3 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-05-2010, 09:15 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Roseville MI
Posts: 10,854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
 
No ... those heads are not better than the Ford versions.
Untill recently, there was not a cost effective way to use the later Ford F.I. heads on a "performance" build except to adapt the stock F.I. intake manifold for carburetor usage. Now there are readily inexpensive adapters to adapt ANY factory or aftermarket carburetor manifold to an engine using the Ford version of the "peanut" port heads.

Magazine hoopla again ... they are so rhetorical simply because they are so uninformed about the Ford offerings.

www.rmcompetition.com

R.M. Competition - The finest Custom Engine Building for any venue ... !
Selling Parts and Supplies from companies I use ... 1(586)909-1591

CUSTOM ground camshafts
Carburetor modifications for specific applications
CNC porting

Last edited by rmcomprandy; 11-05-2010 at 09:17 AM.
rmcomprandy is offline  
 
post #4 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-05-2010, 12:03 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 408
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Interesting....I didn't realize the later FI 460 heads had any advantage over early heads?

I think some of the reason the Chevy motor ran well is the details were paid attention to. I ran though the numbers on a online compression calculator and to get the compression they quoted it must have a tight quench of around .041. This is not just a normal rebuilder bottom end.

I guess I didn't expect stock GM truck heads to flow enough for 446hp @5000rpm.
The way I've understood it to get that kind of power from a 460, the exhaust ports of any common head need to be ported, if not a little work on the intake side as well.

But I'm sure any data can be manipulated to fit the needs of a story.
AndyMarkV is offline  
post #5 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-05-2010, 02:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
454 BBC power came frome the Pro Comp intake . lol
2slow is offline  
post #6 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-05-2010, 02:24 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Cuba MO
Posts: 5,316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
 
You also have to factor in at least a 5% inflation in the numbers from Westech.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic --Arthur C. Clarke

Dave McLain
McLain's Automotive
DaveMcLain is offline  
post #7 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-05-2010, 02:27 PM
Senior Member
 
fordman59's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Orleans Indiana
Posts: 1,297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyMarkV View Post
Interesting....I didn't realize the later FI 460 heads had any advantage over early heads?

I think some of the reason the Chevy motor ran well is the details were paid attention to. I ran though the numbers on a online compression calculator and to get the compression they quoted it must have a tight quench of around .041. This is not just a normal rebuilder bottom end.

I guess I didn't expect stock GM truck heads to flow enough for 446hp @5000rpm.
The way I've understood it to get that kind of power from a 460, the exhaust ports of any common head need to be ported, if not a little work on the intake side as well.

But I'm sure any data can be manipulated to fit the needs of a story.
Your last statement rings load and clear. Magazine bias of Fords is still with us even with all the new parts and development on our Fords.
We can get that kind of power, from a similar build, with the camshaft. Simply removing the bump in the exhaust port helps a bit. Stock intake port will do it easily. JMO.

1972 torino 460 c-6
1988 turbo coupe, 1978 f150 460/c6
fordman59 is offline  
post #8 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-05-2010, 03:10 PM
RJP
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
This reminds me of the 454 vs 460 buildup that was featured on Horsepower TV a few months ago. Started with a typical low comp. 460 using D3 heads and the 10.320" deck block. Other than freshing up the engine[s] they were dynoed and the BBC made about 20hp more than the BBF, torque, if memory serves was about the same or very close. What they didn't tell the viewers was the BBF heads were untouched other than a 3 angle valve job and if that engine was a typical 460 it had well under 8 to 1 C/R vs the BBC's 8.5 to 1 C/R. Now I know that all factory iron BBF heads need a little help in the exhaust and cleaning up the port is not exactly in the spirit of the compairison and I also know the Chevy guys would have cried, pissed and moaned if their beloved hunk of pig iron didn't make more HP and Tq. than the lowly Ford. But personally I think they should have done some basic port cleanup because every guy that follows even the most basic 460 buildup and tuning info thats available would have no trouble finding that 20 hp the 460 was missing. Hell...even a drunken monkey with a rat tail file could make improvements on that ex. port. JMO
RJP is offline  
post #9 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-05-2010, 04:39 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Roseville MI
Posts: 10,854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJP View Post
This reminds me of the 454 vs 460 buildup that was featured on Horsepower TV a few months ago. Started with a typical low comp. 460 using D3 heads and the 10.320" deck block. Other than freshing up the engine[s] they were dynoed and the BBC made about 20hp more than the BBF, torque, if memory serves was about the same or very close. What they didn't tell the viewers was the BBF heads were untouched other than a 3 angle valve job and if that engine was a typical 460 it had well under 8 to 1 C/R vs the BBC's 8.5 to 1 C/R. Now I know that all factory iron BBF heads need a little help in the exhaust and cleaning up the port is not exactly in the spirit of the compairison and I also know the Chevy guys would have cried, pissed and moaned if their beloved hunk of pig iron didn't make more HP and Tq. than the lowly Ford. But personally I think they should have done some basic port cleanup because every guy that follows even the most basic 460 buildup and tuning info thats available would have no trouble finding that 20 hp the 460 was missing. Hell...even a drunken monkey with a rat tail file could make improvements on that ex. port. JMO
The camshaft they use never compliments the Ford heads because the "catalogue" cams they use are based upon what a Chevy engine can use effectively. That's just the way it is with most of the aftermarket.
You don't need to clean-up the exhaust ports if you use a camshaft which FITS the application.

www.rmcompetition.com

R.M. Competition - The finest Custom Engine Building for any venue ... !
Selling Parts and Supplies from companies I use ... 1(586)909-1591

CUSTOM ground camshafts
Carburetor modifications for specific applications
CNC porting
rmcomprandy is offline  
post #10 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-06-2010, 08:48 AM
Forum Contributor
 
chilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,204
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveMcLain View Post
You also have to factor in at least a 5% inflation in the numbers from Westech.

Bingo, the numbers that place pulls out of engine combos on a regular basis just are not feasible. Happy dyno.

That said, 450hp only requires in the neighborhood of 230-240cfm as a basic rule of thumb, no reason peanut ports couldnt' do it.
chilly is offline  
post #11 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-06-2010, 10:03 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 408
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chilly View Post
That said, 450hp only requires in the neighborhood of 230-240cfm as a basic rule of thumb, no reason peanut ports couldnt' do it.
But common stock 460 heads can't?
AndyMarkV is offline  
post #12 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-06-2010, 10:41 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Cuba MO
Posts: 5,316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
 
Common 460 heads are easily better than the Chevy "peanut" port heads.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic --Arthur C. Clarke

Dave McLain
McLain's Automotive
DaveMcLain is offline  
post #13 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-06-2010, 11:09 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 408
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveMcLain View Post
Common 460 heads are easily better than the Chevy "peanut" port heads.
So unported 460 heads should support 440hp unported, like the 454 peanut heads do?
That is news to me.

But I guess anything is possible if the motor is just set up for hero dyno pulls?

Last edited by AndyMarkV; 11-06-2010 at 11:47 AM.
AndyMarkV is offline  
post #14 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-06-2010, 11:47 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Cuba MO
Posts: 5,316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
 
440 WESTECH horsepower sure. But remember, Westech horsepower and real world horsepower numbers are not the same.

A year or so ago I did a very mild 460 build for a boat and on my dyno it made 375 horsepower at 5000rpm. That was with totally stock D3VE heads and a Torker ][ intake so with as much cam as they were using and on the Westech dyno I think it would do it very easily.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic --Arthur C. Clarke

Dave McLain
McLain's Automotive
DaveMcLain is offline  
post #15 of 18 (permalink) Old 11-11-2010, 11:52 PM
Senior Member
 
moparman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Carson City, NV
Posts: 1,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Send a message via Yahoo to moparman
Those hp numbers aren't that hard to believe. But attention to detail makes a huge difference. I have a 440 in my truck, flat top pistons that are out about .006", somewhat ported 452 casting heads (junk) that flow in the neighborhood of 265 cfm @ .500". A TQ 50 cam (228/235 duration, .503" lift with 1.6's and 110 ls installed at 106) and a torker II intake. 750 dp carb and dyno headers and it put a corrected 485 and 507 tq down. Now it had a bad rear main leak and I didn't have time to fix it and run it again, but with the experiences I had on that dyno, I could have seen 500 with more carb. This engine was pieced together from things I've had laying around and was given and it runs well for what it is. But the attention to detail is why I think this one runs so well.
Now as for the dyno, I've personally hung the weights on this dyno enough that I understood why it was necessary and what the numbers were supposed to be, so unless there's a discrepancy in the correction software, those numbers are real world. Compression ended up a tad high for the cast iron heads and 4x4 application, but at 5500 feet, I'm running 87 octane and 38 degrees total timing without a rattle (unless I do something stupid like floor it in 4th at 1800 rpm)
Sooo, getting back to the subject (kinda) those hp numbers aren't out of range at all, and no, the chevy heads aren't better than the fords. Keep in mind one other thing, the chevies have two good runners and two bad runners per head. Kinda makes me think an average flow between the two is a better idea than just throwing out the long runner numbers...

Bumblebee tuna...
moparman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the 460 Ford Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome