[tom s]

FYI,the heads have to go out the a CNC shop to do the heads,once done Don can fine tune them to his need.Tom

[Dragncar]

Originally Posted by slowbird

Yes you are. Not everyone runs Butler pistons. Also did you check radial clearance on your pistons? .080 is a noticeable move.
Don did a good thing by moving the valves but he might have created other issues by doing so.

I ran it all by Jeff at KRE so he knew exactly what pistons I was using. I did check piston to valve with a soft spring with the cam when it was a .447 lobe and it was fine. Then I had it re ground to a .431 lobe so the clearance got even larger.

[Dragncar]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

Butler pistons have some of the largest valve pockets in the industry "for a reason".

If the information posted in this thread about valve sizes and relocated valve guides is correct one better be sure to check the piston to valve clearance carefully and in all directions.


A 2.11 intake valve has the potential to flow 350 plus CFM in a standard port Edelbrock head.

A 1.66 exhaust valve will support 900 plus horsepower.

Oh I get it. its cheaper for them to buy and it leaves more room for guys making mistakes.
I bought them a LONG time ago and to tell you the truth I wish I would have bought newer more modern pistons. I swapped out the crank and rods from the original plans anyway.
They are 1/16 rings, back cut with gas slots and those spacers, big pain.
I wish I would have bought pistons with int/ex reliefs and metric rings. Has to be a little more power going that route.
I could have cut my heads a little less to get the CR I was after with new pistons.
But so far so good with the engine.

[blueghoast]

Originally Posted by Dragncar

Oh I get it. its cheaper for them to buy and it leaves more room for guys making mistakes.
I bought them a LONG time ago and to tell you the truth I wish I would have bought newer more modern pistons. I swapped out the crank and rods from the original plans anyway.
They are 1/16 rings, back cut with gas slots and those spacers, big pain.
I wish I would have bought pistons with int/ex reliefs and metric rings. Has to be a little more power going that route.
I could have cut my heads a little less to get the CR I was after with new pistons.
But so far so good with the engine.

What comp are you aiming for?

GT

[jhein]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

Not sure if we know more now than before??

Yep. He said "we'll see". Sounds like his goal is for standard pistons.

[Dragncar]

Originally Posted by blueghoast

What comp are you aiming for?

GT

The engine ended up being 11.5-1
Kinda wish I had left it at 11-1 just for safety reasons but it is what it is now.
Exhaust note has a little pop to it, defiantly more than my old HO heads.
My wife is the one who first noticed the difference in sound. After all, she had to listen to this thing for years in the living room as I am doing my thing in the garage.

[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by jhein

Yep. He said "we'll see". Sounds like his goal is for standard pistons.

Shouldn't be hard to make that work. The blueprint was drafted more than fifty years ago.

[slowbird]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

Shouldn't be hard to make that work. The blueprint was drafted more than fifty years ago.

Or just take a head sit it on a short block and check, lol

It's cool to see all the excitement about these heads but I bet once they're being produced the valves end up in same location as eheads. Too many issues arise by moving them. Plus the max valve size Don stated in video isn't happening. Can't shrink the guide to guide distance by .050 and still be big valves in without them touching.
I'm just basing my comments off of what Don has said, maybe Don has misspoke or mixed up some numbers

[Formulajones]

Is BES doing the CNC program?

[TCSGTO]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

Not sure if we know more now than before??

Maybe next time he can have the people doing the actual design and engineering answer questions?

[slowbird]

Originally Posted by TCSGTO

Maybe next time he can have the people doing the actual design and engineering answer questions?

Isn't that Don?

[Formulajones]

Well the concept and ideas may be Don's, but does he actually have a million dollar CNC machine to do the work?

That's why I posed my question. Tony was and still is heavily involved with the CNC programming and development of the RAV head and does a bunch of Pontiac development behind the scenes that most aren't even aware of. So it seems natural that he would also be involved with the development of this new RAIV head.

I do like the fact that the ends of the heads are already cast like a factory head with a provision for a freeze plug and all the other channels in place. That saves me a ton of time machining Eddy heads to mimic the factory casting.

[PAUL K]

Freeze plugs in the heads are great until they pop out. There's a reason folks replace them with a screw in fitting or welded plug.

[ponjohn]

Originally Posted by adamo

I really hope I can get my hands on a set of the 722’s if they do become available. Does anyone know when we will get more info on these?

Don hopes 6 weeks, subject to change.

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by PAUL K

Freeze plugs in the heads are great until they pop out. There's a reason folks replace them with a screw in fitting or welded plug.

I've never had one pop out lol

If ya want the look that's what ya gotta have.

[PAUL K]

Originally Posted by Formulajones

I've never had one pop out lol

If ya want the look that's what ya gotta have.

Most likely you will have add them to a head first, before they pop out

[jhein]

If I were DCI, I'd machine them to look like plugs but just be blanks.

[Formulajones]

That's what I was going to do with Eddy heads, along with machining all the other features on the end of the head. Either way is fine with me. I'm just glad he went the extra mile on that part, saves me a bunch of time and money.

[PAUL K]

It's not quite as simple as cast the head to look like a factory head. One has to decide how detailed to be with the project. Several different casting differences. Just speaking about round port castings the 96 heads have completely different looking exhaust ports than the IV heads. 722 heads have different ends than 614 heads. 197 casting is completely different from a 7F6 head and the Super Duty castings are by themselves. This doesn't include the differences between the over the counter castings. You have more variations between d-port castings.

So far it's not looking good for the valve sizes and spacings being used current "shelf" pistons and the fonte of some casting numbers seem to vary from the originals. A lot of compromises need to be made to keep costs down and make them appealing to as many buyers as possible.

Some guys will have lower expectations and be happy with a core plug cast in the front, others don't want angled plugs and some are hopeful these will be able to pass inspection for the Pure Stock classes .... I'm just glad we have the option. I thought it was great when the aftermarket "double hump" Chevy heads were made. I've always preferred the stock look unless the engine makes "big power". I guess that's why my fast car has EHTTF for casting numbers

[Formulajones]

I don't think these would fly through tech at the PS drags. That's not my intention with them anyway even though my bird is currently set up for PS racing. I think I'm done trying to go faster with that particular combo and want to go a different path with the car. These new heads, if they come to fruition, is right along the lines of meeting my goals with the car. They'll look close enough for 614's to keep the stock appearance, have modern chambers, flow more and cost less than a real set, plus it's aluminum so it saves weight and more tolerable to today's crap gas.
It checks all the boxes for me. As far as I'm concerned no one is going to make anything even remotely closer to the real thing in my life time