That was one idea; the combustion chamber however was re-machined once it was caught by QS.
Printable View
That was one idea; the combustion chamber however was re-machined once it was caught by QS.
I'm somewhat suprised that nobody proposed an alternate cam for the alloy head cars. Why not dumb them down in h.p./ torque to what a good iron head engine made.
The reality is, the iron head is a difficult animal to make a base line off of. What do we know about the Quicksilver Iron head that was dynoed? I have a dyno sheet from an iron head pinto, an alloy head pinto and a Zetec and I would say that the head used as a test mule is an "average" head. Does it now mean that a top level iron head with the new cam and flywheel will be the engine package to have? I guess we'll see...
All I know that is factual is that young Morgan flogged around that old clapped out DB6(no offense Jim ;)) with a tired iron head pinto at track record speed at the Flordia nationals. The point I'm making I guess is that a well driven car that is 1-2 h.p. down can with the runoffs...yes, even at Road America.
It is a stressed member in certain chassis was the reason I heard most frequently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jnovak
akilcoyne,
offense taken, we pride ourselves on using fresh body tape every session!
Cole uses it on the car, Jim uses it on HIS body.Quote:
Originally Posted by jim morgan
Chris,
there is a difference between rolls of tape and rolls of fat!
John- The BOD was told that the head would be identical to the cast iron head only made from aluminum.The engine builders and the CRB wanted this badly.We were also told that strict tolerances on location of valves,porting and a clear definitive way to inspect them for modifications was mandatory.That did not happen and thats why we have the issues.I think the latest CRB rule for equalization of the Zetec,Alloy head and cast iron head pintos is going to get us close.I believe we will still may have to slow down the alloy pinto but we will wait and see.The BOD has put much trust to all involved on the alloy head and the latest rule set to achieve a better situation for FC.The FC community has almost unanimously endorsed this new rule set.I believe it is a work still in progress but time will tell.Remember we make decisons on info brought to us and from member imput.We are suppose to trust the system and the members involved in it.Sometimes it does not work that way. Mike SauceQuote:
Originally Posted by John LaRue
If the aluminum head that was produced did not meet the specifications that were requested, ie it was not identical to the iron head, it should have been rejected. Are you saying that the BoD received a head that was different from what they requested and approved it anyway?Quote:
Originally Posted by M.Sauce
[edit]
I have been 'enlightened' on some of the details of the steel headed Pinto issues as well as the new aluminum head—among other things.
There are a lot of messy factors in this entire program, and I only hope that everything evens out in the wash. It's too bad that there are so many factors in this that are invisible to the regular SCCA racer. :(
My goodness, let's put this dead horse in the ground and go racing...
:whiteflag:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Valet
Tom, I agree 100%!! It should have been disallowed.
Perhaps it wasn't done quite right. And the cost of the aluminum head is certainly not within our budget range. But, it isn't really as bad as I thought it was if this price and what's included is correct? $3,500 for a ready to bolt on complete head flow tested?
http://fastforwardracingcomponents.c...inum-head.html
and:
There's obvioiusly another market for this head as produced and in 'pumped up' form. Which may account for 'slightly improved' performance from the intentions of the SCCA.
http://www.4m.net/showthread.php?t=44125
Keeping in mind another comment above that the engine builders 'wanted' this aluminum head. Perhaps they see, over the long term, a shortage coming that we (as the users) don't. A proactive move perhaps?
In any case, it's here, it's pricey. Those who can will. Those who can't won't. And maybe over the long haul, we'll all have too.
Now about that Esslinger 8.5 pound flywheel for the 2 liter :) :meatball:
I don't see a "cam" in that head from "Fast-Forward".........could / would make the price more!!!!!
Or valves,springs,keepers, Rocker-arms, pedestals.........
Dave, it's 15 degrees here in New York, no racing for us for at least 4 months. We have nothing better to do than bitch and moan until it warms up. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by RacerDave51
Okay, from what I had heard in the past, you're probably right. However what confused me perhaps is the statement:Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceRace
Included with the purchase of each head:
-2.0L aluminum cylinder head
- Complete ARP head stud kit with studs, 12-point nuts, and hardened steel washers
- Hardened steel washers for cam follower adjuster pedestals
- Steel spring seats
- Complete valve job by Elite Engines
- Complete flow test and verication by Elite Engines.
$3495.00
Pretty hard to do a valve job and flow test without the cam, valves, etc in the head. Maybe they forgot to say buyer supplied 'other parts' in the ad. Way beyond our dreams in either case.
My view from the iron head side, aluminum was already out there, $1,000 is less than $3,500 + to stay on the pointy end. This is only an issue at the national level , the Zetec guys were hung out to dry by the Club and deserved to be let back in.
This whole exercise will cost less than one brain fart by the driver (ie. one corner)
Let's go racing!
If you read back through the archives Art Smith has been asking exactly how these things happen and to lay bare the process and procedures. I've yet to see it and when mistakes like this happen there are no consequences but to the racers and they usually equate to costs (how can the FF head be made for $900 and the Pinto head is $3500?).Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Carter
While I understand we are a volunteer organization there should still be procedures that are followed and in the event that a product arrives that doesn't meet specs (even a year after it's promised delivery date and way over initially estimated costs) it should be rejected not rubber stamped and pushed through. We are 3 years down the road and I've yet to see a drastic shortage in Pinto heads.
While I agree with the new rule proposal - I don't think we would be in this situation if this wasn't pushed through. It was highlighted with the intake manifold where something was ramrodded through and almost approved, it's highlighted here again - have the checks and balances been put in place to avoid this in the future?:confused:
The real question of the relative cost of the al head is what does a complete from scratch top level pro built head cost from say Sandy or Steve or Jay?
Back out the cost of the springs, valves and the cam from that number. Then you have an apples to apples comparison.
I bet the al head costs less when compared that way.
Does the aluminum head offer greater longevity, life between rebuilds / adjusting or any other benefits when compared to the steel head?
I may have missed this somewhere before, but how many aluminum headed pintos have there been so far?
The $900 bare head is ready to assemble for a BobCat. A prepped one ready to race from builder is very near the Ally Pinto head. So thats really not a fair comparison and just contributes to missinformation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joefisherff
I spoke with Doug yesterday (he is very patient and helpful) and he said there have been about 50 Alum heads done so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by kea
To those of you out there that are in my boat (as Sgt Schultz used to say on Hogan's Hero's "I know Nothing!") before thinking about doing the new Elgin cam in your old iron head it's a good idea to find what head casting you have. As I understand from Doug, the older head castings will benefit little or none from the new cam as a result of the intake & exhaust runners being too large to work well with the stock cam grind. Your engine builders can shed more light on this subject, I'm sure. In the meantime, I'm pulling my valve cover...:confused:
Add to that the fact that the Bobcat head is (more or less) mass produced.Quote:
Originally Posted by TimW
50 Aluminum cyl heads...Assuming they are all being run at this time. it would be nice to know how many are in FC, not S2 or ???. All the latest SCCA changes are based a large percentage of these heads being used in FC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RacerDave51
Well, that certainly adds a bit of humor to this. So, an iron head upgrade may now include the purchase of a new head any way.. Duhhh.
Keith,
much earlier in the blog here - the 50 aluminum heads translated into 38 in the field with 19 or 20 going to S-2000 cars and the remaining 19 going to all others - that is f-2000 - so all of this effort is about 19 potential cars our of a base of about 300-350. I may be off a car or two but that is the universe of cars.
David Keep
Not that this particularly applies to you, but...Quote:
Originally Posted by rickb99
IMO, if a head is one that would not be helped with the new cam, it probably was not one of the "good" iron heads anyway, and, as such, probably was significantly down on HP compared to a good one even before all this.
So, to be really competitive, a new head would be required in any case, with or without the aluminum head coming in. Therefore, again, IMO, nothing has really changed.
That always was and still is the problem with the iron heads - if you have a great one, the aluminum head would probably be a downgrade, but if you don't have a great one, you suffer in the HP dept. There have always been outstanding iron heads, but most engines never had or ever will have one.
The aluminum heads have the potential, since they all start out basically equal, to raise most engines' performance to a level similar to a very good iron head. Getting all iron heads to that performance level is just not in the cards.
The aluminum-head scenario is closer to that of the Zetec - there will always be the possibility that some iron-head-Pinto engine will out-perform it, but not to the degree of difference commonly seen within the iron-head-Pinto ranks.
For $900 you get Pierce Head complete - you can send it to Curtis Boggs and for around I would guess $1400 maybe less now that he has the CNC programmed you can get a nationally competitive head. No where near the base price of $3500 for the Pinto Head and well below the $4000 to $4500 it was going for a year ago. So much for the mis-information - the fact remains that the racers got the shaft. If the BOD/CRB would approve it I'll bet I can have a duplicate of the same head made and sell it for half the price. One of these days they will learn that having a single supplier benefits no one and always leads to higher costs.
Joe:
Comparing $900 & $3500 instead of the real FF price of $2500 from Sandy or Jay versus $3500 is still spreading misinformation. I don't have any horse in this race, as neither do you I understand, but I do know that Doug laid out a hefty nut to get these made, and he deserves to both recoup his up front investment in a much smaller market than what Pierce did for the bobcats, and second, he deserves to make a living. As I'm sure you know, the majority of the cost in a casting is in the tooling. The fewer parts it gets used for the higher percentage of the tooling cost is amortized over each part.
The real issue to be debated is why what was promised is different than what was delivered causing the inequity. The cost difference between race prepped FF head & Pinto heads is irrelevant. If you can make them for half, then you should-but you won't be able to after investing in the tooling if you're making ~50 units or prolly even ~150 units.
Tim
If an earlier post can be believed, there was never an intention for the new aluminum head to be equal. It was planned to be better.Quote:
Originally Posted by TimW
Doug has probably invested, in time and actual cash, well over $100000 in this project, before he even produced the first good part. If he has made 50 heads so far, that represents $2000+ per head in just R&D per head. Add in the cost of the casting - probably upwards of $350 - $400 each, and another $500+ each for machining, and you can see that he is making squat-all on these. Actually, I doubt highly that he has even reached the break-even point yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joefisherff
While the complaints about the end performance and what is being done to mitigate the differences have merit, the complaints against Doug are way off base. :blackflag:
Joe, If I read your post correctly, for $2300 I can have a top notch first class national iron head.
Never got one that cheap before.
Just want to make sure I read it right.
Might change my decision making process on to AL or not to AL.
Before spending $4k on an aluminum head you might want to consider the source of your information. Every vendor will say their product is better than a competitors. The dyno graphs posted earlier in this thread are from a lower performing head and it still made 3+ hp with the new cam. Go back a few pages and take a look. As Dave W. pointed out, a good steel pinto with the old cam makes better power than the one tested (in the range of 144-145 hp), the one tested makes 141 therefore I would not call it a good head but it still saw significant improvements.Quote:
Originally Posted by rickb99
If you have a lower performing steel head like the one dyno'd you need to decide if you want to spend $200 for 3 hp or $4000 for 6 hp. I suspect if you didn't spend the money on a good steel head in the past you probably won't on the aluminum but to say you won't see any benefit from the cam with your old head doesn't jive with the dyno data.
IMO the best solution is to find a really good steel head and put the new cam in it, that will likely be the best package especially with the new pistons. One major advantage to consider with the aluminum head is the ease of repair. I have two excellent steel heads with broken cam tower that are now junk. If they were aluminum I would have been able to repair them.
Chas,
Through a miracle purchase (and a very kind seller) we ended up with 2 engines. What we know about them at the moment (as there were no rebuild documents in the binders) is, one is blue and the other is gray. Before we got them, one was run 'a lot' (olde blue) the other, gray, not so much.
The blue one got us through 6 weekends in 2008 and still 'sounds' good. We'll test the merits of the gray one in 2009 and some time this year (hang in there economy) 'good olde blue' will end up at Ivey. Once we find out how it held up we'll decide what direction to go on the whole head/cam issue.
Yes, low budget. But want to keep the car in decent, competitive shape. Which is why I'm concerned about watching the rebuild cash register going Ka-Ching.
Hopefully when the time comes, we can at least get the cam but didn't think a new head would be needed. Where are all those 'good' iron heads that have been replaced by aluminum being sold? Are guys hanging on to the iron just in case?
I've been following this with interest, not just because I've got a FC that will be running in SCCA later this year but also to see if SCCA is still up to the same old things (looks like they are;)).
Now I'll at some time fit the new cam & lighten the flywheel... but how much difference in my lap times will it really make? I'm already down a bit on power, my dyno sheets show a bit over 138hp - so in a way every little bit counts.
But will my driving skills be good enough that I've got no room for improvment as a driver(no...), car setup optimal (doubt it...), good set of tires (no...) and would these maybe offer even better lap times more less money?
I think unless you are looking at being a top national driver it's not really that relevent, not the best cost ratio.
I certainly understand the budget vs staying competitive balancing act however if you are trying to stay competitive on a budget you should also consider the new pistons at rebuild time regardless of the head package.Quote:
Originally Posted by rickb99
Another nice thing about the aluminum head is they are all suppose to be very good so if you go that route it should ensure you have top HP, it's just a very expensive route especially if you are buying two. They also have the added benefit of lower CG, they sound mean and as previously mentioned they can be repaired.
When I looked at the cost of buying two ally heads for my pintos vs selling all my pinto stuff and installing the zetec it was worth it to install the zetec in our 2000 car (we still have a pinto in the 97 VD). I'm not sure I'd do it again but it's something to consider even in an older car. Here are some ROUGH numbers...
2 pinto engines (sell them) = $4k
Misc pinto parts to sell = $1k
2 ally heads you don't have to buy = $4k
2 pinto rebuilds you won't need = $8k
2 sets of Ivey pistons you won't have to buy = $1400-$1600
Total = $18k- $20k
Cost to install a zetec = $20k-$24k
So for roughly the cost of 1 more rebuild you can install the zetec and hopefully run it for 8k miles or more. Most importantly HP increases only require a keyboard stroke.
Chas,
I don't think a Zetec will fit in the older cars without some frame mods.
Since we are discussing heads, I have a stock cast iron head in storage. How do I ID it to see if it is one of the "good" ones talked about in this thread?
Yea, what Bob just said....:confused:
OK. About iron heads. My understanding is thet it is not the stock heads that are a concern, they are all basically the same. It is what happened to the stock heads as they were converted to racing heads. As somebody worked on a flowbench, or not, they modified the passages within the tolerances allowed by the GCR. Realize this has been going on since the early 80's. 25 plus years.
As this process got better. Flow benches etc. Each generation of modified head got progressively better. So, it stands to reason, for the most part if you have a head that was ported in 1992, it's not as good as one ported in 2008. Understand?
Now you have to determine who ported the head, and check with them to see if it's a good one or not. Heads have machinists numbers punched on them by respective builders that is the first step in the research.
The builders keep fairly good records.
What complicates it. I have a '98 pro Quicksilver head. It has been freshened by Butler three times since then. So it's painte Butler black, not QS blue.
Regardless, that head will not be as sharp as a head Sandy just did in 2008.
Found one of the aluminum heads... in an S2 for sale on Race-cars.com. Claims 150 HP, engine by Ivey. 49 more to go??
Froggy,Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Frog
IIRC, there ARE significant differences between Pinto heads before they reach engine builders. Because of different core patterns and core shifts due to different manufacturing locations and tooling deterioration/replacement, etc., there are (were) better raw heads to start from. These "better" heads have as-cast ports that lend themselves to superior results when porting. The key factor here is that, by the rules, material is not allowed to be added to fill areas of inferior ports that were already too "large" to get an optimum port contour.
I distinctly remember being told by QSRE that only a small minority of the general population of cylinder heads could be successfully made into a racing head with good flow characteristics (i.e., high HP).
EDIT: And, I infer from this that, given the laws of probability, a VERY small number (count them on the fingers of one hand?) of raw Pinto cylinder heads are/were suitable to be a starting point for a "world-beater" race head.
That makes sense as I recall Steve @ Elite telling me my head was the best year/casting to work with to make max HP. During that rebuild I did not do any flow work, as I had to invest $$$ in upgrading some of the older parts.Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveW
That's why I keep Dave around. To keep me on the point. ;) :) :thumbsup:
To expand on this:Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveW
That, alone, reinforces the premise that the Zetec or the Pinto aluminum head are probably the way to go to be sure to have really competitive HP, except for the lucky few that already have a "world-beater" iron Pinto head.
Frog,
That is unless you cheat.:mad:
BTW, this also means that if a head (even one that was initially from a preferred batch) was "over-ported," i.e., the ports were at some time made too large, or a desired area cut away, they can never be brought back up to the level of one that was ported correctly. So, casting numbers tell only part of the story.Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveW
WHAT? I thought you were a Frog!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Frog