01-16-2007, 03:40 PM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rock Hill, SC
Posts: 421
|
882's
I bought some 882 heads the other day from a guy that said they came off of a running truck and took it to the machine shop to have bigger springs and bigger valves put in. My engine is a 4 bolt 350 Crate engine that has a mild cam and the stock heads with a 600 edelbrock carb. My questions is how well will this combo (below) waken up the engine when I get it put on? Already have everything just need free time. The engine is fairly stout now but it obviously needs more power so Im hoping this will be very noticeable...what do yall think? Thanks
none of the items below are on the truck yet -Engle Cam 494 232/284 -Edelbrock thunder series 650 w/ electric choke -882 heads with bigger valves -Edelbrock Performer RPM Intake
__________________
1968 chevy shortbed, Dark Shadow Gray 4 bolt 383 Stroker,Weiand Super Charger, disc brakes, 9 inch, 391 gear, 20" Eagle wheels, muncie 4 speed/ Hurst shifter, 4/7 drop, Hedman midlengths, 3 inch exhaust w/ 2 chamber flows. 1966 Mustang with 306 roller, c-4, 9 inch Detroit locker rear. 1965 Fastback Mustang w/347 stroker, top loader 4spd, 9 inch detroit locker. 1966 Mustang coup, 306 roller, c4, 9 inch. 65 Cobra, 427, T6oo, 9inch, of course. First gen Hayabusa, airbox mod and running 2 exhaust cams.. Zoom Zoom Zoom Last edited by smoked68; 01-16-2007 at 03:41 PM. |
01-16-2007, 06:58 PM | #2 |
67-72 parts finder
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: southeast mo
Posts: 788
|
Re: 882's
882 heads are decent you're not gonna notice much of a gain with them though they aren't performance heads you need some more flow like a double hump or a vortec head or something similar 882's should have 75-76 cc's and 194, 150 valves
__________________
1969 chevy shortstep 2wd (under construction) 1981 chevy scottsdale lwb 2wd (parts chaser) 2004 pontiac gto (daily driver) 2004 pontiac grand prix gt (the ol ladys car) 1985 chevy short wide 1970 chevy c10 lwb (another parts rig) 1969 gmc lwb (rainy day project) 1968 chevy lwb c10 250 I6 3 spd (soon to be swb) |
01-16-2007, 07:32 PM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rock Hill, SC
Posts: 421
|
Re: 882's
There are alot of heads that I would rather have had than the 882's but I picked them up for $50 bucks so I was happy. Still going to be better than the stock heads. Btw putting 202 valves in...
__________________
1968 chevy shortbed, Dark Shadow Gray 4 bolt 383 Stroker,Weiand Super Charger, disc brakes, 9 inch, 391 gear, 20" Eagle wheels, muncie 4 speed/ Hurst shifter, 4/7 drop, Hedman midlengths, 3 inch exhaust w/ 2 chamber flows. 1966 Mustang with 306 roller, c-4, 9 inch Detroit locker rear. 1965 Fastback Mustang w/347 stroker, top loader 4spd, 9 inch detroit locker. 1966 Mustang coup, 306 roller, c4, 9 inch. 65 Cobra, 427, T6oo, 9inch, of course. First gen Hayabusa, airbox mod and running 2 exhaust cams.. Zoom Zoom Zoom |
01-16-2007, 10:51 PM | #4 |
Msgt USAF Ret
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan
Posts: 8,719
|
Re: 882's
I have a set on my 74 vette and it runs pretty decent. Gm used them on most of the 72 through 80 vettes. They are prone to cracking between the valve seats if the engine ever overheats. I would never put larger valves in these heads for that reason. they are referred to as smog heads and probably are the best for that era. In my opinion they would work great in a stock or mild performance engine, but with 76cc chambers it'd be hard to get higher compression. My vette is rated at 8 to 1 with dished pistons. I've got flattops in it now and I think they will help a lot.
__________________
VetteVet metallic green 67 stepside 74 corvette convertible 1965 Harley sportster 1995 Harley wide glide Growing old is hell, but it beats the alternative. |
01-17-2007, 12:05 AM | #5 | |
Account Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Monroe, WA
Posts: 3,814
|
Re: 882's
Quote:
http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles..._882_head.html The 1025-H cam w/.494 lift is a pretty hefty lift cam - for any cam over ~.450 lift you need to check for coil bind, retainer clearance, rocker/stud clearance and finally valve/piston clearance pretty carefully. Are your springs rated for that much lift? The 650 carb and RPM intake won't buy much with the flow you'll get from the 882s...but they're pretty Even at 90% VE a 350 won't use 650 CFM until 7100 RPM. Note that the cam and the RPM intake are made to make power at the higher end of the RPM range...so you'll give up low-end torque for high-end HP...be sure this is what you want. I would expect to see ~20 HP with this upgrade, but that's just a guess without knowing your current cam and intake. |
|
01-17-2007, 02:09 PM | #6 |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rock Hill, SC
Posts: 421
|
Re: 882's
The 1025-H cam w/.494 lift is a pretty hefty lift cam - for any cam over ~.450 lift you need to check for coil bind, retainer clearance, rocker/stud clearance and finally valve/piston clearance pretty carefully. Are your springs rated for that much lift?
The springs that I am putting are good for up to 550 lift and our engine guy said that we would be good on everything with this cam because he knows our engine setup. Hopefully he was right and I wont have a problem.
__________________
1968 chevy shortbed, Dark Shadow Gray 4 bolt 383 Stroker,Weiand Super Charger, disc brakes, 9 inch, 391 gear, 20" Eagle wheels, muncie 4 speed/ Hurst shifter, 4/7 drop, Hedman midlengths, 3 inch exhaust w/ 2 chamber flows. 1966 Mustang with 306 roller, c-4, 9 inch Detroit locker rear. 1965 Fastback Mustang w/347 stroker, top loader 4spd, 9 inch detroit locker. 1966 Mustang coup, 306 roller, c4, 9 inch. 65 Cobra, 427, T6oo, 9inch, of course. First gen Hayabusa, airbox mod and running 2 exhaust cams.. Zoom Zoom Zoom Last edited by smoked68; 01-17-2007 at 02:09 PM. |
01-17-2007, 02:23 PM | #7 | |
Account Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Monroe, WA
Posts: 3,814
|
Re: 882's
Quote:
|
|
01-17-2007, 08:41 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Edmonton Alberta
Posts: 458
|
Re: 882's
way to much cam for the combonation. Unfortunately that motor will not make any torque.
|
01-18-2007, 10:41 AM | #9 |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rock Hill, SC
Posts: 421
|
Re: 882's
I dont need an engine that makes alot of power. just decent power and I want it to sound like it makes alot of power. I wanted a cam that hit a really hard lick and this is what the guy recommended. I don't plan on drag racing and I barely have any traction as it is so alot of power wouldn't do much good anway.
__________________
1968 chevy shortbed, Dark Shadow Gray 4 bolt 383 Stroker,Weiand Super Charger, disc brakes, 9 inch, 391 gear, 20" Eagle wheels, muncie 4 speed/ Hurst shifter, 4/7 drop, Hedman midlengths, 3 inch exhaust w/ 2 chamber flows. 1966 Mustang with 306 roller, c-4, 9 inch Detroit locker rear. 1965 Fastback Mustang w/347 stroker, top loader 4spd, 9 inch detroit locker. 1966 Mustang coup, 306 roller, c4, 9 inch. 65 Cobra, 427, T6oo, 9inch, of course. First gen Hayabusa, airbox mod and running 2 exhaust cams.. Zoom Zoom Zoom |
01-18-2007, 11:20 AM | #10 |
Account Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Monroe, WA
Posts: 3,814
|
Re: 882's
I'd have to say if that's your intended usage then you're not spending money in the right place. The heads really aren't a signficant upgrade from your stock heads given the usage, and that cam is wrong for what you want although it will be lumpy. What you're getting with these swaps is worse driveability, far worse milage and likely less power under 5000 RPM.
I would upgrade your cam in place with one of the CompCams milder 4x4 cams (< .450 lift), a good set of headers, do some tuning work on the ignition and carburation and let it go at that. You'll have something that sounds GREAT and runs great...and has a genuine increase in power. IMHO, a rumpty cam that can't back it up when the long pedal on the right is pushed can be downright embarassing on the street. |
Bookmarks |
|
|