dump question about heads & tpi
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
From: va fairfax
Car: 85 camaro z28
Engine: 305
Transmission: auto to manaul
Re: dump question about heads & tpi
im learning. this is another dump question but can you compare non AFR heads to vortech heads? or am i just lost in confusion
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 972
Likes: 11
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba. Canada
Car: 1989 T-Top GTA
Engine: 5.7L TPI> 6.2L
Transmission: 700R-4
Axle/Gears: 3.27
Re: dump question about heads & tpi
Like the other 2 guys have already stated..... The Vortec Head is GM's factory truck head post 1996 but your TPI won't fit without a Vortec manifold base...... In my opinion that in itself makes them a non-issue, because there are so many aluminum heads out there that work with your original manifold without all the other shortcomings of the Vortec.
The vortec's do look great at first glance but there's more to them than meets the eye.....
Quotes from Graham Hansen's "HIGH-PERFORMANCE CHEVY SMALL BLOCK CYLINDER HEADS"
"The Vortec head was first produced for light duty trucks in 1996, and at first no one really gave these new castings much more than a cursory look. But the word soon spread by way of the performance magazines, especially the one story that pitted the venerated BOW TIE performance head against the Vortec with the Vortec coming out on top. Considering that the Vortec came with conservative 1.94/1.50" valves and a mere 170 cc intake port, there were many that were skeptical. After all, the Bow Tie sported a bigger intake port with larger 2.02/1.60" valves. So how could this puny production head be better than the Bowtie? The answer lies hidden in the confines of the port design and with the GM engineers who paid attention to a couple of keys, not the least of which was that intake velocity is a key player in the torque game "
"To this end, despite it's deminutive port deminsions, the Vortec creates outstanding velocity (as measured in CFM flow per square inch of port area) especially in the .300-.400" of valve lift areas. Just the flow #'s by themselves are good, but when you include the velocity #'s, it's true potential begins to take shape."
Unfortunately there's more.....
Quotes from Graham Hansen's "HIGH-PERFORMANCE CHEVY SMALL BLOCK CYLINDER HEADS"
"If serious performance is your aim with these heads, there are other situations that must be addressed as well before you bolt these heads on an engine. Because this head was originally designed as a production piece, the stock Vortec's max valve lift potential is definitely limited. GM Performance Parts literature claims the the stock head is limited to no more than .475" of valve lift, but this is a very tight number. The standard clearance spec for seal to retainer clearance is .050", but in the head that we measured, we barely had .460" total from the retainer to the seal. At a true 0.475" of valve lift, this results in a crushed valvestem seal. To retain a true .050" of retainer to seal clearance, this leaves roughly 0.410" of allowable lift, with perhaps .420-.430" if you feel lucky!!!"
"The stock springs are somewhat weak and with the retainer to seal limitation, any more cam than .450" lift is treading on dangerous ground, especially if you were to over rev the engine and put the engine into valve float."
The Vortecs do look cheap at first but when you consider the new manifold =480.oo http://store.summitracing.com/partde...5&autoview=sku
Then the machine work to the valve guides to increase the clearance + new springs..... + exhaust port work ......
You get the point don't cha? You would be into these heads for more than a grand before you could use them. and if that was the case you could buy any number of aluminum heads for the same price.
I know that it was long winded
but I hope it helps...... search for the Book I quoted from it's worth the $ and a great read!!!!
The vortec's do look great at first glance but there's more to them than meets the eye.....
Quotes from Graham Hansen's "HIGH-PERFORMANCE CHEVY SMALL BLOCK CYLINDER HEADS"
"The Vortec head was first produced for light duty trucks in 1996, and at first no one really gave these new castings much more than a cursory look. But the word soon spread by way of the performance magazines, especially the one story that pitted the venerated BOW TIE performance head against the Vortec with the Vortec coming out on top. Considering that the Vortec came with conservative 1.94/1.50" valves and a mere 170 cc intake port, there were many that were skeptical. After all, the Bow Tie sported a bigger intake port with larger 2.02/1.60" valves. So how could this puny production head be better than the Bowtie? The answer lies hidden in the confines of the port design and with the GM engineers who paid attention to a couple of keys, not the least of which was that intake velocity is a key player in the torque game "
"To this end, despite it's deminutive port deminsions, the Vortec creates outstanding velocity (as measured in CFM flow per square inch of port area) especially in the .300-.400" of valve lift areas. Just the flow #'s by themselves are good, but when you include the velocity #'s, it's true potential begins to take shape."
Unfortunately there's more.....
Quotes from Graham Hansen's "HIGH-PERFORMANCE CHEVY SMALL BLOCK CYLINDER HEADS"
"If serious performance is your aim with these heads, there are other situations that must be addressed as well before you bolt these heads on an engine. Because this head was originally designed as a production piece, the stock Vortec's max valve lift potential is definitely limited. GM Performance Parts literature claims the the stock head is limited to no more than .475" of valve lift, but this is a very tight number. The standard clearance spec for seal to retainer clearance is .050", but in the head that we measured, we barely had .460" total from the retainer to the seal. At a true 0.475" of valve lift, this results in a crushed valvestem seal. To retain a true .050" of retainer to seal clearance, this leaves roughly 0.410" of allowable lift, with perhaps .420-.430" if you feel lucky!!!"
"The stock springs are somewhat weak and with the retainer to seal limitation, any more cam than .450" lift is treading on dangerous ground, especially if you were to over rev the engine and put the engine into valve float."
The Vortecs do look cheap at first but when you consider the new manifold =480.oo http://store.summitracing.com/partde...5&autoview=sku
Then the machine work to the valve guides to increase the clearance + new springs..... + exhaust port work ......
You get the point don't cha? You would be into these heads for more than a grand before you could use them. and if that was the case you could buy any number of aluminum heads for the same price.
I know that it was long winded
but I hope it helps...... search for the Book I quoted from it's worth the $ and a great read!!!! Joined: May 2005
Posts: 972
Likes: 11
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba. Canada
Car: 1989 T-Top GTA
Engine: 5.7L TPI> 6.2L
Transmission: 700R-4
Axle/Gears: 3.27
Re: dump question about heads & tpi
By the way look into World S/R Torquer heads if you want cheap iron heads.... at least there wouldn't be a new base to buy.... and they are already set up with screw in rocker studs and springs good till .560" lift. with the same 170cc intake port & 1.94/1.50" valves
http://store.summitracing.com/partde...5&autoview=sku
http://store.summitracing.com/partde...5&autoview=sku
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sanjay
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
1
Aug 12, 2015 03:41 PM






