Hi, I'm thinking about getting a set of 289 heads built by valley head service like they used to do in 1965 for the first cars. I found Out shelby had the steam holes welded in the heads. Why did he do this?! With all the talk about matching the steam holes with aftermarket aluminum heads to your block or it could potentially cause overheating issues, i don't understand why shelby would do this on his race cars. Enlightenen me please! ;D
Thank you!
It was done to strengthen the cylinder head in that area. With the compression ratios that were being used at that time the cylinder head would flex in that area causing the combustion chamber gasses to enter the cooling system.
Ok! That makes sense... Would it cause overheating issues from airpockets that could get trapped?
Or filling the coolant with the car at an angle to make sure air wasn't left in the system is something they would do to prevent that? Some people who installed aftermarket aluminum heads without matching the steam holes to their blocks don't have overheating problems... and using a quick compression calculator the GT350Rs seemed to have a compression ratio of around 10.77:1 to 11:1 which doesn't seem too high comparing with engines today. I guess from what you said, the water port welding was done to enhance gasket reliability during races, in other words, probably not worth a thing for a street driven car
My Valley Head Service hipo heads have the welded in banana ports, I do not having any overheating or other related issues.
Oh, that is good to hear! Thank you so much for your input :D
Little Fords don't have the benefit of 5 head bolts per hole like the SBC. With only 4 bolts it can allow the heads to flex a little and under severe conditions the combustion gases may be forced around the gasket and into the water jacket and cause overheating. Mustangs aren't Panteras so you don't need to do any acrobatics to get the engine and radiator full.
You can see how the SBC benefits from more bolts around each cylinder - of course Ford did save a lot of money with 1/2 as many head bolts per engine.
(https://i.imgur.com/AyCT5hDl.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/loOE9cvl.jpg)
I did not know that! Totally makes sense now. My previous car, 1969 mustang 351w 4v, forced me into a complete rebuild because of head gasket failing in the steam hole. If i can eliminate that possibility on my next project, i would be better off!
I am constantly amazed at the comments from "experts" out there that have never run these heads. Nor do they have any background on why this was done , just guesses. "Some" of you have and that is refreshing. The "banana" shaped water ports "were" a weak point in the head and with ''antique" McCord ( stock) head gaskets the head would flex in that area and cause a gasket leak. SAI went even further on it's "race" blocks and put a pipe plug in the small round hole in the block further preventing a possible leak. Neither Valley nor Mondello did the welding themselves. The work was done by Hydro head ind. here in So Cal for SAI and after it was done , the heads were sent to various porters for rework including surfacing to smooth the welded surface. Contrary to the opinions of those who have not run them this does NOT cause an overheating issue , if it did , SAI would have stopped the procedure instantly.
Randy ( another owner/user of MANY these heads)
This is why i come to SAAC forum Randy! ;D Good to know the blocks get blocked there as well. I have contacted Larry at Valley head service, maybe they didn't weld them in 1965, but he said he can do the welding on the banana water ports.
Quote from: gt350hr on March 28, 2022, 02:25:10 PM
I am constantly amazed at the comments from "experts" out there that have never run these heads. Nor do they have any background on why this was done , just guesses."
Ok, I omitted the plugging of the hole in the block but what exactly did I guess at? You said the same as I did. We might as well inform the original poster that these heads were typically considered full race cylinder heads and they typically didn't use street head gaskets, SAI used steel shim head gaskets on their competition specification engines.
I too have a set of HP 289 race heads with welded Banana Ports with HU head porter stamps/marking. According to Randy HU stands for Heads by Unser, yet another porter for SAI aside from the more numerous Valley Head and Mondello sets.
1.94 intakes, 1.6 exhausts 47cc chambers. Beautiful port work on both intake & exhaust.
Cheers,
~Earl J
Earl ,
As I mentioned SAI used EVERY local porter "in the day" to see who has the best power. Slover , Lockerman, Unser, Fudge, etc. The two most used were Mondello and Valley.
Randy
Any input is greatly appreciated... while we are talking about heads, what did shelby do about the exhaust cross-over under the intake? Did he leave them alone? Did he block the cross over ports inside the heads? And why? Other forums on the internet seem 50/50 split on the exhaust cross-over dilemma
Quote from: gt350hr on March 28, 2022, 02:25:10 PM
The "banana" shaped water ports "were" a weak point in the head and with ''antique" McCord ( stock) head gaskets the head would flex in that area and cause a gasket leak.
Randy,
Back in the mid to late 80's, Ford Motorsport or more likely Fel-Pro (I forget which one) was recommending to increase the head bolt torque by 10 ft/lbs to prevent head gasket failure. I seem to recall they were pointing to the solid lifter motors causing the head to flex at higher RPMs. I did follow that recommendation with Fel-Pro blue head gaskets, and have never had another head gasket issue.
Does that line up with your findings or was the gasket failure more of a combination of poor gaskets, compression and maybe lifters?
Steve -
Steve ,
I tried all kinds of bolt torques and bolt manufacturers in the '60s. I will say it was "MY" lack of experience that caused my gasket failures. Too much compression , timing , and lack of fuel quality ( even though we had 100 octane leaded gas). As I look back on my approach , I was lifting the head off of the block by detonation that I caused. My "seat of the pants dyno" was out of calibration and I was out of control. The good thing is the early failures showed me the limits and strengths of most of the engine parts. I went as far as 100 ft lbs tq on the heads with no improvement on sealing. I also O ringed the heads which helped some and finally tried solid copper head gaskets as a last resort.
"Now" I use 10 additional ft lbs on the upper row of head bolts as "I" believe the intake manifold torque does play a role against upper head bolt torque. With "modern" head gaskets and 50 years of tuning experience , I no longer lose head gaskets.
Randy
Quote from: gt350hr on March 29, 2022, 11:24:04 AM"Now" I use 10 additional ft lbs on the upper row of head bolts
I used a healthy dose of Copper Coat and and 5 pounds over the max - standard parts store head gaskets (Fel Pro probably). I did order a set of the thinner Ford head gaskets but by the time they arrived I had gotten impatient and put it together with the aftermarket ones.
Quote from: gt350hr on March 29, 2022, 11:24:04 AM
Steve ,
I tried all kinds of bolt torques and bolt manufacturers in the '60s. I will say it was "MY" lack of experience that caused my gasket failures. Too much compression , timing , and lack of fuel quality ( even though we had 100 octane leaded gas). As I look back on my approach , I was lifting the head off of the block by detonation that I caused. My "seat of the pants dyno" was out of calibration and I was out of control. The good thing is the early failures showed me the limits and strengths of most of the engine parts. I went as far as 100 ft lbs tq on the heads with no improvement on sealing. I also O ringed the heads which helped some and finally tried solid copper head gaskets as a last resort.
"Now" I use 10 additional ft lbs on the upper row of head bolts as "I" believe the intake manifold torque does play a role against upper head bolt torque. With "modern" head gaskets and 50 years of tuning experience , I no longer lose head gaskets.
Randy
Now that you mention it, I think the recommendation was for an additional 10 ft/lbs for the upper row. Whatever the root cause was/is, I'm with you that the additional 10 ft/lbs solves the problem.
Quote from: sg66 on March 28, 2022, 10:31:08 PM
Back in the mid to late 80's, ............more likely Fel-Pro was recommending to increase the head bolt torque by 10 ft/lbs to prevent head gasket failure.
Quote from: gt350hr on March 29, 2022, 11:24:04 AM
Now that you mention it, I think the recommendation was for an additional 10 ft/lbs for the upper row. Whatever the root cause was/is, I'm with you that the additional 10 ft/lbs solves the problem.
Though there is a wedging effect in the torquing of the intake manifold on the S.B.F. that does attempt to pry the heads off the block (therefore one should be only tightening the intake retention fasteners as required to hold the intake on, not attempting to hold the engine together! ::) ), the main reasoning for the recommended greater staggered torquing values is due to the greater elasticity presented in the longer fastener on the intake side, this otherwise giving a lesser clamp-load if torquing equally to the shorter. ;)
Generally, and particularly as stated by ARP Fastener, the torque value listed is in a range of approximately 80% of the yield value, so it is permissible to increase this torquing sum, 'some', for greater clamping loads. Just be aware you'll be testing the fastener manufactures consistency of production quality, and of the capability of the structures involved and that they will tolerate such force. :-\
Scott.
Quote from: pbf777 on March 29, 2022, 02:50:09 PM
Quote from: sg66 on March 28, 2022, 10:31:08 PM
Back in the mid to late 80's, ............more likely Fel-Pro was recommending to increase the head bolt torque by 10 ft/lbs to prevent head gasket failure.
Quote from: gt350hr on March 29, 2022, 11:24:04 AM
Now that you mention it, I think the recommendation was for an additional 10 ft/lbs for the upper row. Whatever the root cause was/is, I'm with you that the additional 10 ft/lbs solves the problem.
Though there is a wedging effect in the torquing of the intake manifold on the S.B.F. that does attempt to pry the heads off the block (therefore one should be only tightening the intake retention fasteners as required to hold the intake on, not attempting to hold the engine together! ::) ), the main reasoning for the recommended greater staggered torquing values is due to the greater elasticity presented in the longer fastener on the intake side, this otherwise giving a lesser clamp-load if torquing equally to the shorter. ;)
Generally, and particularly as stated by ARP Fastener, the torque value listed is in a range of approximately 80% of the yield value, so it is permissible to increase this torquing sum, 'some', for greater clamping loads. Just be aware you'll be testing the fastener manufactures consistency of production quality, and of the capability of the structures involved and that they will tolerate such force. :-\
Scott.
The AFR heads I just used recommended the 10 # greater on the top bolts as well as recommending ARP bolts. They have the thickest of the decks that I have come across and am sure that helps the situation considerably. 5/8" thick decks I believe.
I had to shave the heads .020 and used a thin head Cometic head gasket to get the chambers to 53cc's.
I wound up going through three sets of intake gaskets on the C6OA intake with a continued water leak at the back near #8. The Fel-pro's couldn't deal with it well and the solution was a Mr.Gasket intake gasket with silicone on the "S's". They are the thickest of the group and the softest compound so they squish up nicely.
That back intake manifold bolt is the outboard one that you need to be careful of not breaking the manifold too.
All is well now. I was coming off of Clevelands which do not have those issues so I had to relearn the SB peculiarities...which they definitely do have.
My 427 aluminum heads were having issues in that exact same corner as well. Leaking water AND OIL from the drain back hole. In that case it was the aluminum squirming around and not enough material on the head gasket itself which also were Felpros. Hum? Coincidence? ::)
On the 427 aluminum head you need to dial down the torque, NOT increase it to keep the head from turning into silly putty. I believe the most I could safely do on the bolts was 92#?
So much "tadue" over nothing. Something that should have NEVER been an issue at all. ;)
Doug ,
Make SURE you re torque the small block intake every week until they don't need it. Non metal core gaskets "settle" more than metal core versions and you will spring a leak if you don't re torque. Guess how I know.
Quote from: gt350hr on March 29, 2022, 04:21:49 PM
Doug ,
Make SURE you re torque the small block intake every week until they don't need it. Non metal core gaskets "settle" more than metal core versions and you will spring a leak if you don't re torque. Guess how I know.
I don't use a torque wrench on the intakes. I took advice from Ollie Morris at Offenhauser almost 50 years ago now, to just use a box wrench and snug the bolts up when necessary. So far that has worked well as a "fused link" and haven't broken anything YET.
The Mr.Gaskets work the best of all. As Bond found out, "sometimes the old ways are the best ways?" 8)
From the SAI catalog. Interesting to note that the "Drag Racing" heads do not have welded in banana ports.....
Quote from: CSX2259 on March 30, 2022, 08:04:48 PM
From the SAI catalog. Interesting to note that the "Drag Racing" heads do not have welded in banana ports.....
They didn't run long enough to present an overheating problem.
Maybe they didn't run long enough but the head would still flex and cause loss of compression into the cooling system.
The FACT is NHRA did NOT ALLOW welding on cylinder heads! It's as simple as that.
No guesswork.
Randy