I'm looking at building a fairly mild 400 with iron heads. I've narrowed it down to three choices:

1) Vortecs
2) Dart Iron Eagle 200cc
3) Pro Lightning 200cc

The vortecs are probably the cheapest of the the three. The iron Eagles and Pro Lightning heads are about $10 apart. The Pro Lightning heads have slightly better flow than the Darts, and both of which flow significantly more than the vortecs.

Anyone have any opinions? Please don't tell me to go get AFRs or something, I simply don't want to spend that much money on this motor. If you have an iron head that's similar in price and performance though, feel free to suggest it as an alternative.

 

I've enver seen a set of the Pro Action ones...

I have a set of Dart iron 200s in my garage right now waiting to go on my 400; they look pretty good to the eye. Mine have had a fair amount of port cleanup work done to them though.

Like you say, the Vortecs are cheap. And they also don't cost very much.

How much power are you looking for out of this motor? What kind of budget?

 

Eh, I'd like 400hp, but it's probably not going to quite get there. I want at least 400ft-lbs from it though. Both at the flywheel of course. Low RPM power will be more important to me than hp at 6000rpm. If it only makes 370hp that's fine, especially if it makes 425 ft-lbs from 1500-4000 or something like that.

As far as budget, I'm trying to keep the motor reasonably cheap. I don't have a hard and fast budget but keeping the remaining expenses under $3k would be nice.

I currently have the block and crank. I'm going to reuse the stock crank. Piston choice seems to be quite a bit better for the 5.7" rods so I'm likely to use that. D-dished hypereutectic pistons look like the most likely at this point.

I'm planning on about 10:1 compression, hopefully I can get it to run good on pump premium. It's going to be carbed and will sit in front of a reasonably built TH-350.

I don't want a fender shaking cam, and I'd like it to idle in gear at 800rpm or less. Lopey is acceptable, but it has to be driveable around town--the car will only see the strip occasionally. Highway driveability is important. I'm also hoping to get mileage similar to the motor that's in there (13mpg city/highway) or better. I would think I could get 15mpg without too much trouble. More than that would just be gravy.

I'm not convinced that the Vortecs can do that, personally. I think they may just be too small for the 400.

 

Any of those heads will do that. In one incarnation of mine, it made 284 RW HP and 373 RW ft lbs with set of double-humps, a XE274 cam, a Performer not RPM intake, Edelbrock TES, and the stock L69 air cleaner. That's about 360 HP and 450 ft-lbs at the crank.

If that's all you want, don't bother with aftermarket heads; just do the Vortec/XE268/RPM thing.

 

It's not a matter of whether that's all I want, actually.

If you came to me and said, look, the Vortecs will give you 350hp, the darts will give you 360 and the pro actions will give you 370, then I might as well get the pro actions.

My ultimate goal would be 400 at the flywheel. If I can't get that with the parts choices I've constrained myself to, then I want as close as I can get.

To continue the previous example, if you had said "but, AFR 195's would get you 400hp", I would probably still buy the pro actions simply for the difference in price.

If you'd told me, "you'll be lucky to get 300hp with any of those heads", I'd probably have to stop and rethink. If you'd said "All of those heads can support up to 450hp", then I'd just by the cheapest.

My original goal is a 400 (flywheel) hp street motor with any one of those three heads. If none of them will support that much power within the other constraints, then I want the best one of the three.

I'm not sure if I can come up with any better way to put it. I know, I'm being confusing...

 

I've built several 400 based engines, and there are some trade offs involved.

I highly prefer roller cams, for a couple of good reasons:

- I've NEVER wiped a lobe on a roller cam
- You can get more lift and duration and still have a streetable engine and actually have some engine vacuum at idle
- And did I mention you'll never wipe a lobe from a roller cam?

The use of the 400 block keeps you from using the '87 later style roller cams, which are much cheaper than retrofit style cams and the high $$$$ lifters that they need.


So first off, you're more likely to hit your power goals with a 350 1 piece RMS seal based 383 motor.

SIMPLE recipe for a roller 383 -

-1 piece RMS block, normal machine work done
- 5.7 " rods, ARP bolts
- Hyper or forged pistons
- Good bearings and rings
- Vortec heads with a spring upgrade
- ZZ4 cam
- 750 cfm carb ( I prefer Q-Jet's or Edelbrock if not the Rochester, but that's just me )
- 1 5/8" primary tube headers
- Good free flowing exhaust system


You should have no problem putting the motor listed above together for less than $3000, not counting the cash you have from selling the 400

A 383 identical to the above with 9.8 to 1 compression ( 87 octane pump gas works great with the Vortec heads ) in a '85 Monte Carlo ( heavier than most F-Body's ) with 3.42 gears ran LOW LOW 13's after normal tuning, and was / is a everyday driver.

Just this season it got some much needed drag radials and a 8.5" rear from a GN ( 7.5" and traction does NOT mix ) also with 3.42 gears....it's only run 3 times this year...best time in the HEAT of the day in August with ALOT of humidity was 12.89

He drives it damn near everyday and it was pulling down 15-19 mpg with an overdrive tranny.

If you are set on keeping the 400, if it were me I'd go the same route. Vortec's, Run the Comp Cams XE268 ( will have GOOD street manners in a 400 ) 9-9.8 compression ratio, good exhaust etc. Don't forget to have the Vortec's drilled for the NEEDED steam holes to mount on the 400.

WITH traction you're talking an EASY low 13 second car....more with tuning.

I never saw the point in worrying about actual HP / torque numbers, I always figured it wasn't how much you had, but how you used what you had...


HTH
Chris
85 IROC

 

Chris,

You bring up several good points, none of which I'm going to argue you with you on (even if I don't necessarily agree).

OTOH, no offense, but you didn't do much to answer the question I posed. I think you'll be surprised how cheaply I've been able to build the motor I have by being reasonable in my component selection.

At any rate, I'm not building a roller cammed 383, so it's not a lot of help. Good answers to a question that I didn't ask, though.

Few comments:

I do have a ZZ4 cam, oddly enough it's in a ZZ4 crate motor. My personal opinion is that that is a wimpy cam. Hell, at 900rpm in neutral, I can't hardly tell it's there. It' be way too docile for my taste in a 383, much less in a 400. Hell, I thought the Crane CompuCam 2040 was pretty docile, and I put that in a 305

The rest of the stuff in your recipe is not going to cost me any more money to get done to the 400 than it would to a 350. For the 400 I have to drill steam holes, for the 383 I would have to do some clearancing. Probably a wash.

I am wondering where you get the idea that the 400 is that much more expensive to build up? I suppose it is if you INSIST on a roller cam, but I'm going flat tapped on this motor. Most roller cams cost considerably more than a whole flat tappet kit--the LT4 hot and ZZ4 being notable exceptions. I'm not planning on going over 500 lift, and "streetable idle" is different depending on who you ask... :shrug:

I don't mean to turn this into an argument, as you do have some good points; however I don't see that any of them affect me because of the way I've chosen to build the motor.

Your reasoning behind choosing the vortecs for a 400 would be far more useful to me than your experience building a 383. For a 35[05] they are probably the cat's meow, for a 40[06] they look a tad on the smallish side to me.

 

Well given that approach, then of course I'm going to say go for it!!! At least get the Darts. But realistically, any of those 3 choices will support your stated goal.

I agree, the ZZ4 cam is pretty weenie. Personally I prefer roller cams too, but that's just me; they do cost more though. But unlike the other post said, a "retrofit" roller cam doesn't cost any different from a "factory" roller cam; once you get past the lifters, they cost the same to build. But there are plenty of good flat cams out there, not the least being the XE series. I'd highly recommend the XE274 and 1.6 rockers.

If you plan on using a cam/rocker combo with more than .480" of valve lift, the economic advantage of the Vortecs starts to go away. You'll be into the whole stud / spring pocket / crappy valve set of issues that those heads come with. So that would be another indicator to go with the better heads in the first place.

I would not equate drilling steam holes with clearancing a 350 block for a 383; steam holes take less than 10 minutes for a set of heads (6 3/16" holes in the deck), and clearancing can easily be many hours of work, depending on what rods you use.

 

I prefer roller cams as well. My second 400 I'm building will most likely have more expensive parts, including a roller cam and what have you. This one will not.

0.480" Valve lift is probably close to where I want to be; maybe a little higher, maybe a little lower, not sure. If that's a cutoff point for the vortecs, I may want to stay away from them as they're likely to make cam choice and possibly future mods difficult. If I pick a cam with .480" of lift and it gets me 380hp, I might try for something with a little more to see if I can make it to 400, and that wouldn't be possible with the vortecs. I do NOT want to spend a ton of money and time machining the heads; I'm looking for something that I can clean up and toss some parts on and be good to go. Machining spring pockets and converting to screw in studs are things that I'm trying to avoid.

As far as clearancing, I've heard people who took a die grinder to two spots and are done, and some people who spent hours. I know roughly how hard it is to machine steam holes (trivial). Either way, it's either even-steven or a point in the favor of the 400 no matter how you look at it.

 

Okay, I guess I didn't put it across right...

I never said the 400 was that much more expensive too build....quite the contrary, a small block chevy is a small block chevy. Only diff on a 400 is the siamesed bores ( and thus the needed steam holes ) the shorter rods, the oil pump driveshaft, and of course the flywheel / flexplate and balancer. The main cost point with a 400 is the actual cost of finding a GOOD, crack free core. Make sure to have the machine shop magnaflux the block before you do any other machine work ( besides getting it hot tanked, they won't mag it unless it's clean ). ALOT of the 400's develop small cracks between / on the edges of the cylinder walls.

The old argument of the 2-bolt block being stronger than the 4-bolt is a moot point on a 400 that won't see beyond 6000 RPM on a regular basis, so a good torque producing street / strip 400 shouldn't have this problem.

As for the ZZ4 being a "Weenie" cam...yep, if you mean it doesn't do the "lope-a-dope" at idle, and it produces enough vacuum to keep low speed braking a normal occurence, then yes it is a weenie cam. Problem is, if you go much bigger, you start taking away the main advantage of the 400, and that's low end torque, and a flat torque curve across the board.

Just like people who build BBC's to rev to the moon...why? Use the cubes to make monster low end, that's where the fun is at, and it puts you motor in it's power band more often, especially cruising on the street, and that means better effieciency and in turn ( right foot usage depending of course ) better gas mileage.


You want the cam in a 400 to come on NO higher than 2000-2500 RPM, and the ceiling RPM shouldn't be more than 5000 RPM, 5500 is pushing it IMHO.

I've built 5 400 based engines...all were designed for different purposes, but all but one were built to take advantage of the cubes and make gobs of torque on the lower RPM side.

As for the heads....I agree, if you're going beyond .490 or so lift , then modifying the Vortec's can make a fairly good argument for just buying better heads to begin with, but are you limiting yourself to just new heads?

You can find Vortec heads from junkyards off late model Chevy Trucks etc for anywhere from $250-350 for the pair, at least around here. That leaves about $200 for a good valve job, seals and springs. Comp Cams does sell a set of springs for the Vortecs that don't require any cutting, and are good to just above .500 lift, give their tech line a call...I can't remember the part #.

I guess it all depends on the budget. Once you price everything BUT the cam and heads, that should give you a good base on how much you need / want to spend on heads.

$ for $, the Pro Action heads are pretty darn good out of the box. Buddy of mine got a new set locally for around $1000 out the door, and it put his old Chevelle deep into the 11's. Where as with no other changes, he was running low to mid 12's with a set of ported / worked GM castings. But that's apples to oranges, AFR's or Darts' maybe could have done the same...

If you plan on "cleaning up" the heads anyway, that should broaden your choice a bit.

I'm also a pretty big fan of the AFR heads, as they are alum ( weight savings ) and they let you get away with more compression on pump gas without detonation, and they flow well out of the box.

I'd shop around for used heads as well..check with the local machine shops...around here, it seems they are always getting stuck with heads that a customer had worked, ordered, and never came up with the cash to pick them up...try it...maybe you'll get lucky.

HTH
Chris
85 IROC

 

Hmm, I gotta head out soon, but a few points:

1) I'm not interested in aluminum heads for this motor. Too much money that I'd rather spend elsewhere. Plus I dislike aluminum for several personal reasons, #1 of which is that stripped threads SUCK.

2) The ZZ4 cam: I pull 19" of vacuum with it on a 350. Is it a reasonable cam for a 350? Sure. It's a tad milder than I'd like, though. I plan on going with something more along the lines of an LT4 hot cam in the ZZ4 motor I have. In a 383, it would be too docile for me; that is, I can make more power with a "wilder" cam and still be well under my personal tolerance for lope and shake. In a 400? It's way too small. And personally, I've never understood the massively oversized exhaust lobes compared to the intake--well, that's actually not true, but IMO it's because of the heads the cam was designed to work with.

3) The motor absolutely will not go over 6k. I plan on making the shift point 5k-5.5k, but I would like the motor to be able to hold together at 6k (even if it's way out of its power band) just to give me a margin of safety.

3) Aluminum heads--there's always the argument over whether aluminum heads ALLOW you to run more compression or if they REQUIRE it. Either way, I do not want aluminum heads on this motor so it is also a moot point.

4) I'm not real wild on the idea of used castings. Maybe that works well for everyone else, but I have a tendency to get burned. Murphy, maybe.

I'll check in later... right now I have to head home.

 

I understand about Mr.Murphy... we were on a first name basis when I humped a ruck for Uncle Sam. Everytime I was in a "warm" situation, I always remembered one of Mr.Murphy's Laws of the Infantry...

" When in a combat situation, always remember that the weapon you are holding was made by the lowest bidder..."

So, per you're last post, used castings, as well as alum castings are out.

With that factored in, my vote would be for the Pro Action heads. I called one of old farts that does alot of machine work on the engines I build, and I bounced some of this conversation of off him....after him bitching for 10 minutes about me interupting him and how busy he was of course......and then in the same breath telling me how bad business was

He recommended the Comp Cams XE284 or something close, as he prefers Lunati cams.....he then went on to say the head choice depends on if they are going to be run "out of the box" or not. IF that's the case, his choice was the Brodix track 1's ( alum ) so I told him they had to be iron, and then after some moaning, he gave the nod to the Pro Action heads. IF......big IF...the heads are going to be "tweaked" a little, he recommended the Dart Iron Eagles, as they are a ( his words ) "meaty" casting, with plenty of room to hog 'em out......

He agreed with me that a motor on this level would REALLY want a single plane intake and a free-flowing exhaust.

He said that your goal of 400 HP is attainable either way, and the torque output would be 400-420 ft / lbs , in that range.

He also added, that $ for $, the Vortec's would hang right with the more expensive heads, up until about 5000 RPM or so.....


Now with this kind of setup, you're going to want to go a bit looser with the converter, and fairly deep gears, but with that kind of low end, your quote of "..broken 10 bolts" will be right on I think.....


HTH
Chris
85 IROC
Hitting test and tune Friday if Murphy stays away......

 

Thanks for the help!

I'm actually going to put this in my '79 vette to replace the 350 that's about had it. It's got a TH350 and 3.55 gears; I'm putting a more built TH350 in it with a looser converter.

I did several simulations with the Pro Action and the Vortec heads and noticed the Vortecs were noticeably down on HP, but not much difference in torque.

I'm going to have to think as to whether the iron eagles or the pro actions would be better.

The simulations I did also showed almost no improvement going past the XE274; I imagine the motor is head limited with the "out of the box" head specs I used.

 

http://www.procylinderheads.com/index.asp

Pro Action or Pro Topline, available from Summit Racing

Here is what I came up with:

406 chevy
Pro Action (Topline) 235 CC 2.08/1.60 #223200035A
10:1
Comp 286 HR 286/286, 560/560
850 Carb
single plane
large tube headers w/mufflers

533 HP @ 6000
517 TQ @ 5000

400+ lb ft from 2500-6500
:hail:

 

Damn, you are using WAY bigger heads than the 200cc intake ones I was looking at!

That motor's a bit radical for my plans, but I might look at stepping up the head size slightly.

Wow. I had no idea the bigger versions flowed that much better.

 

I checked the numbers very quickly and the larger heads aren't much better. In fact, the 235cc intake head only outflows above 0.400 lift; the low lift numbers are better on the 200cc one.

I'm not quite sure why you're getting such high numbers. I will have to play with it when I get home from work.

 

OK-I changed the heads to the 200 CC intake ports w/2.02/1.60 valves. All else =

Drop the cam to a Comp 280 HR/282XR
280/280 I/E...........................
525/525 lift
10:1 comp
850 carb
single plane intake
large tube headers with muffles

Comp 280 HR......Comp 282XR......Comp XR288...Crane278/280HR
522 HP@6000.....519@6000..........521@6000.......509@5500
511 TQ@5000.....511@4500..........502@5000.......521@4500

Where are you getting your figures?

 

The only thing I see massively different is the intake (I used dual plane) and the carb (I used 750cfm).

If you've got time, run through those and see what you get. If not, I'll check when I get home, which won't be till 7pm.

 

Ok, here we go:

Drop the cam to a Comp 280 HR/282XR
280/280 I/E...........................
525/525 lift
10:1 comp
750 carb
dual plane intake
large tube headers with muffles

Comp 280 HR......Comp 282XR......Comp XR288...Crane278/280HR
475 HP@5500.....480@6000..........479@6000.......476@5500
499 TQ@4500.....494@5500..........482@4500.......502@4500

 

Huh. Way higher than what I got.

I used the numbers from the pro action site for the flow numbers. Did you realize those are at 28" of water (and desktop dyno defaults to 25")?

I used 10:1, 750 carb, dual plane, small tube headers with mufflers, comp cams XE268, and the 200cc / 72cc heads

I ended up with 400hp and 450ft-lbs.

Large tube headers and mufflers gave approximately 10-15hp and 10-15 ft lbs, I forget exactly. Comp Cams XE274 gave about 5hp over the XE268--less torque.

I'm not seeing why my numbers were so different from yours.

 

:sillylol: Love it!

Use any kind of cam like you're talking about here, and the Vortecs are going to become more expensive. Springs, guide trimming, screw-in studs at a minimum. Don't forget SA rockers or guide plates. Some mag (CHP? PHP? HR? - can't remember, get all three) recently documented what has to be done to Vortecs in order to use a "performance" cam. Most people choose to ignore the fact that these heads simply aren't bolt-ons (at least from a performance perspective).

 

Yeah, I'm already not disposed to the Vortecs. I tossed em in my simulator and they were a good 20hp down on the pro action heads. That doesn't even account on the cash to prep the Vortecs to use the cam etc I picked.

I was originally trying to decide between the Iron Eagles and the Iron Lightning heads. Now I'm also trying to figure out why the other guys numbers are SOOO much higher than mine.

 

Did you select "ROLLER" lifter? The cams I used are all hydraulic rollers.

I used 28" of water

Intake Port Test Data @28" of water
.100** .200** .300** .400** .500** .600** .700
70.74 146.41 203.72 249.84 260.98 268.51 276.41

Exhaust Port Test Data @28" of water
.100** .200** .300** .400** .500** .600** .700
56.90 100.99 156.94 176.85 186.34 190.13 194.87

 

Those numbers look exactly like what I have.

I'm going to have to check my simulation at home and get back with you...

 

I found it-you are using a hydraulic flat tappet lifter and smaller (MUCH) cams specs-here is what you are using:

Comp Cams EX268H

268 I 280 E
.477I .480 E
110/106 lobe center
flat tappet
406
10:1
same 200 CC heads
dual plane & 750

416 HP @5500
467 TQ @3500

 

Hmm. You are correct, I'm using flat-tappet; I don't know why I didn't think to mention it. Probably because it didn't immediately hit me that the cams you showed were roller cams.

Interesting.

I have no problem moving to a roller cam if they're that much better, but I read through the desktop dyno literature, and they specifically said that the "cam type" had more to do with the shape of the lobes than the actual type of lifter in use. In fact, they suggested using the middle type (the name escapes me at the moment) for most "street" roller cams and that the "roller" type was reserved more for hardcore, solid roller racing cams.

 

You have to take it with a grain of salt-this is merely advanced speculation. Hydraulic rollers have a much more aggressive ramp than flat tappets. There are several magazine articles that have built similar combos with similar results. The last car I dynoed was within 1HP and 3 ft lbs. of torque compared to DD results-granted that was only at 4500 RPM, but still better than guessing. I still like the Comp 286 HR-500+ HP/500+ TQ is a hell of a street motor! And on pump gas too.

 

This is one of DeskTop Dyno's biggest flaws...at least in regards to the small block chevy. When you select "hydraulic roller" as the cam / lifter type, it tends to be a bit generous with the HP / TQ figures.

Case in point, I helped a guy screw together a cheap version of the ZZ4 motor, and Desktop Dyno was generous by about 20 HP and 25 ft/lbs of torque ( both at their respective peaks ), when we switched the simulation to use flat tappet lifters, the numbers were REALLY close to actual flywheel HP when he dyno's the actual motor......


HTH

 

Dart Iron Eagles are listed all the time on ebay. Many sell below 750.00, complete. I'm running the xe268 in my 355, right now. I also have the same cam in a 400 Pontiac, in my 77 T/A. In the 400 it has a noticeable lope, but not much. Sounds more like the old ram air GTOs. Also has stock converter, 3.23s out back. I'd think that either a 274 or 282 would be a better choise. I bought a pair of 200cc Dart Iron Eagles tonight off of ebay for 360.00 bare, blems. By the time you buy the vortechs and do the valve up grade + machine work, you could have the eagles.

 

you can always go to a motown head

 

What the hell? Way to raise a really old *** thread!