Need a comparison between the C302b heads and Roush intake vs the Edelbrock aluminum heads and RPM Air Gap intake

quote:

Originally posted by T.Solo:
I’ll start this and let you experts chime in and educate me.
I need a comparison between the C302b heads and Roush intake vs the Edelbrock aluminum heads and RPM Air Gap intake.
The recent sales post for the C302b heads and Roush intake got me thinking and wondering about what the difference would be performance wise given the same bottom end?
I’m currently running the Edelbrock combo with the Holley TB EFI. If all fits under the stock engine cover, barely but it fits. I believe the Roush intake is considerably taller than the Edelbrock RPM Air Gap. Could the Roush intake be milled down and if so what would be the drawback of doing so? Steve

The discussion probably needs to start with power level are you're wanting to achieve and what you're willing to compromise to get there. I don’t know how you’re presently set up but with Eddy Heads and Air Gap maybe =<450HP on 351 cubes or so? If so, assuming it’s more power you’re after, say >550HP, unless you’re willing to run a stouter cam and accept all that comes along with that, there’s probably not much point in switching to a high port head from what you presently have.

If you do, the vast majority of all intakes made for C302B will be spider type open plenum single planes and will be quite tall. Reducing their height will reduce plenum volume, flow, tune,......and performance. I picked up 15 HP by adding a 1” four-hole HVC spacer to mine. With a fair amount of work other intakes can be adapted that are lower in height but may not suit your combo. You will also need new headers as the existing will not work, probably need to cut and rework your tail pipes to match the headers, and maybe relocate one or both coolant tanks to accommodate the new headers. The higher power levels won’t like the stock Ansa muffler cans either.

Depending upon the power level and your style of driving and your existing cooling system, you may or may not get by without needing to upgrade there. Still interested?

Best,
Kelly

Kelly,

More power would be nice! Getting there is another story. My motor has the Comp-Cams 290HR #32-541-8 and I have the Wilkinson stainless exhaust. Moving the swirl tank is not something I had thought about. Maybe someone can confirm if that is required? Which vendors supply headers for the high port heads?

Steve

The number 4 primary (rear passenger side) is the closest to the tank. I’m 9.5” deck and the 2” diameter primary touched the tank. It's hard for that diameter pipe to make the turn quickly enough and even so, why fit a high port head and then run the port into a short radius?

As far as vendors, my experience was 10 years ago but I tried three different sets that were represented to be for my combo and ended up sending them all back and making my own. They were all coated so reworking them would have been a mess and I figured if I was going to have to do that kind of surgery I may as well start from scratch instead of a custom header price. The vendors were all apologetic and cool about it. It’s tough to accommodate bolt on parts for custom combos.

Besides the interference with primary and tank, the position of the collector on the header is important in order to run the tail pipe through the suspension with clearance at the extreme of control arm travel. It’s surprisingly tight and all of the collectors on the units I tried were suboptimal and compromised to quickly transition to 2 ½” tail pipe. IIRC, the passenger side is the most problematic. The last set I had would have worked except the tri-lobe flange on the collector was clocked in a manner that made it hit the shock. The Driver’s side primaries come very close or hit the gas tank heat shield but this is very common even on the popular GTS 4V headers. You may have better luck since you’re 9.2 deck but besides the different flange pattern on C302B vs 4V the ports are significantly raised (about 1 ¼” higher) so trying to rework a set of 4V headers with a new flange won’t work for the above reasons.

IMO C302Bs are great heads; tried and true, can support a lot of power and at this state of tune really don’t give up anything to the 25yr plus newer contemporary aftermarket heads unless you’re a pro but they are a fair amount of work to get them adapted and packaged properly for the Pantera thus my earlier comment that unless you're going to use them in a combo that can use their power potential it may not be worth it.

Are you stock displacement or stroked?

Best,
Kelly

Kelly,

My motor is 0.020" over and stock stroke. Stock dished pistons so my compression ration is less than 10:1. I plan on changing that when the motor comes out but that will be a winter project.

Steve

Steve,

It’s not in my car any more but I ran a hydro-roller cam of similar specs to yours except it was split duration and on 427CI. It had C302B heads that had minimal bowl work and essentially just the ports cleaned up so the CSA was very modest. For my tastes on that displacement, it was a very mild cam, but that was the intent. At the time, I just wanted a good running, reliable, street engine which it was and still is for that matter. According to the engine dyno it made 518HP @5250rpm and was nosing over from there on but more importantly, it was North of 500 ft-lbs from 3250-5250 rpm, idled, transitioned, and pulled very well in that range. The steel distributor gear on the steel cam looked like the day it was installed. That “temporary” power plant was a trouble free driver for almost 10 years. This was on the engine dyno with dyno mufflers whereas in my car it ran GTS cans. The engine was built to support much higher power and plan was to change cam at a later date but I drove it for a long time and still have the engine.

However, the above is not an apt comparison for your question of just a C302B head swap onto your short block since there is 20% more displacement. At your lower displacement, provided your Eddy heads could flow it, which could be a big if depending upon how they were worked, I would think peak power would occur at higher rpm, say +1000 rpm or so, and the torque figures would be more modest.

If you have stock dished pistons and standard stroke I would think you may have more like 9:1 CR unless the Eddy heads have smaller CCs which could have some performance impact as well. Ever had it on engine or chassis dyno?

Best,
K

I just wanted to point out that there is a Ford Motorsport version of the Edelbrock Torker that was made for the A3 heads.

The ports would be wider than those of the C302b heads. I don't know how much that would effect it BUT it fits in a Pantera just like an Edelbrock Torker would. I believe it is an A341 numbered intake.

I had three of them at one time. The last one I sold went for $850. They are very hard to come by these days.

It matches the high port intakes (1/4" higher) and has no exhaust heat crossovers.

I HAVE used Devcon Plastic aluminum on the ports of regular Edelbrock Torkers and so far, the engine has not eaten any of the filler...so far. I don't really feel comfortable with using the stuff long term.

Lots of the circle track racers do use it but they normally destroy a couple of engines a season and tear down and rebuild anyway.

I haven't seen dyno numbers from Dan Jones on that set up yet. He did dyno the regular Torker and it did quite well. I would have to think the A341 should do even better?

quote:

Originally posted by PanteraDoug: I just wanted to point out that there is a Ford Motorsport version of the Edelbrock Torker that was made for the A3 heads......I would have to think the A341 should do even better?

I’m not aware of a Ford high port intake with the A341 designation but there is one like you describe designated M-9424-A331. There is also a completely different Ford high port intake that bares that same part number but it is a tall air gap, open plenum, single plane, usually has "Jack Roush Engineering" cast on the #1 runner, and is similar in appearance to most the other Ford high port intakes.

The vast majority of the Torker style A331 intakes were cast with ports to match A3s but there were others cast to match the smaller high port C3/C302/C302B and maybe B3 ports. I own several and one of the smaller port versions which I’m sure you will remember. I’ve also owned several that were B3 port size but they may have just been the small port version ported to the intermediate B3 port size.

They are low profile and will fit under the Pantera engine screen however, they do have an angled carb pad so best if run in a Pantera with a leveling wedge plate or milling and re-drilling flat carb pad. They can be a good performing intake for higher rpm engines do to their relatively short runners, and actually pretty good all around, but in most all cases I’ve seen they respond very well to the addition of a 1-1.5” carb spacer.

A 4V Torker can be filled to very closely approximate this intake and fit to high port heads with the use of a thick gasket and opening the mounting holes a bit. It’s a lot of work but an ordinary Torkers can be routinely bought for $150 or less and the A331s are quite rare and valued.

Though a 4V Torker can be adapted to high port heads as described above, an A331 will not adapt well to a 4V head. Though the roof of the A331 runner can be filled slightly to match a 4V, there is not enough intake flange on the A331 to seal on the lower part of a 4V intake port unless the lower portion of the 4V port is stuffed with enough integrity to hold a compressed gasket, and in this case, will require a modified high port gasket, as a 4V gasket won’t cut it.

Best,
K

Yes, a331. I had one that had ports the size of 5.0 Ford ports and a raised plenum floor.

It was about seven pounds heavier than the a3 torker.

The 331 "came in" about 700 rpm lower than the standard torker which would hit in at about 4200rpm.

Dan Jones showed the torker second best to theHolley Track Dominator on iron 4v heads.

I dont know what it would do with any of Ford aluminum heads.

Many of the c3 heads I have seen on the bench come very close to the as cast a3s.

Keyy,

I have not had the opportunity to dyno the car. The Edelbrock heads are advertised at 60cc combustion chamber. We did a rough calculation when they were installed and came up with 9.4:1cr.

Steve