383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc - Team Camaro Tech
Performance Our High Performance area

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 26 (permalink) Old Mar 31st, 05, 04:24 PM Thread Starter
Senior Tech
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 154
383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

I've decided to have a 383 built for my 68 vert. The builder has given me two options at the same price.
Option #1
Dart Iron Eagles, 200cc runners, 72cc chambers, flat-top pistons.
Option #2
Pro Comp Aluminum Heads, 190 cc runners, 64cc chambers, dished pistons.

I'm looking for a streetable "pump gas" engine with compression around 9.5:1. What are the pros and cons of 64cc chambers with dished pistons versus 72cc chambers and flat tops?
68driver is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 26 (permalink) Old Mar 31st, 05, 04:59 PM
Senior Tech
Chad
 
67 Plum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Thomasville,Ga.
Posts: 4,384
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

My vote is for 72cc with flat tops.I think you get better combustion and the ability to make more power with flat tops.9.5:1 will work good with iron heads and 91 octane.With everything dialed in good 89 should be enough. My 327 is 9.42:1 and runs on 89.JMO
67 Plum is offline  
post #3 of 26 (permalink) Old Mar 31st, 05, 09:57 PM
Senior Tech
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Houston Tx.
Posts: 2,646
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

Get a dished piston that matches the shape of the chamber, that will make the best power.

67 camaro
420 - 641hp HRcam 1.39, 9.79 @ 137.5
502 - 626hp 252/263HRcam 1.44, 10.08 @ 132.7
62 Nova
383/200-4R/12-bolt w 373s
224/224 HR cam
1.57 10.97 @ 121.2


67RS502 is offline  
post #4 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 1st, 05, 09:39 AM
Senior Tech
Eric
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Kentwood, MI
Posts: 8,097
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67RS502
Get a dished piston that matches the shape of the chamber, that will make the best power.
Ditto -- provided you get the right compression ratio for your cam and fuel.

E85 racer and E85 carb builder
www.horsepowerinnovations.com

68 Camaro, E85 powered 427" small block. 9.96 @ 133 MPH, 1.319 sixty foot on motor. 5.92 eighth @ 116 with a 1.42 sixty breaking beams with back tire on the bottle
Eric68 is offline  
post #5 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 2nd, 05, 05:08 AM
Senior Tech
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: DULUTH, GA.
Posts: 917
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric68
Ditto -- provided you get the right compression ratio for your cam and fuel.

I agree.......do your "squish" or as some call it "quench" here, and DCR homework too...it's as important for pump gas issues as anything else
HOTRODSRJ is offline  
post #6 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 2nd, 05, 07:00 AM
Senior Tech
Tim
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Central New York
Posts: 125
Send a message via AIM to murrayo
Post Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

If I could add to the question asked here, I think what is being asked here is if the compression ratios are the same, what is the advantage of a larger or smaller chamber size.

In my plans for a 383, I was looking to keep my compression ratio down to 9 - 9.5 to 1. My thinking was to get the heads that will give me this ratio with the bottom end of the engine having flat top pistions that are zero decked and using normal .039 - .041 head gaaskets. My thought is you get a better burn across a flat surface of the piston.

Any other thoughts???

Timo

P.S. Don't hit the ESC key when typing your message, It goes away...

Timo 67 RS/SS 350 Camaro
murrayo is offline  
post #7 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 2nd, 05, 11:19 AM
Gold Lifetime Member
Harry
 
dawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Colebrook CT.
Posts: 3,989
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

go with flat tops
the domes will require higher octane and bump compression up to 12:1 or close to it.
sure its good to have high compression but will you be willing to pay the price for higher octane?
or even racing gas at around 7 bucks a gallon now.

Dawgs 69
434 stroker
US Navy retired
http://www.northeastf-bodyassn.com/
dawg is offline  
post #8 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 2nd, 05, 04:16 PM
Senior Tech
Eric
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Kentwood, MI
Posts: 8,097
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

Assuming the compression ratio is the same my preference of combustion chamber design is as follows:

1. D-dish piston, small combustion chamber
2. Flat top piston, medium combustion chamber
3. Dome piston, large combustion chamber
4. old style dish piston (no quench pad) and small combustion chamber

There has been some tests and some debate about how much (if any) advantage there is to a D-dish piston over a flat top piston. I personally believe that if the compression ratio is the same the D-dish has a slight advantage due to combustion chamber shape -- being more compact in the center of the chamber will IMO burn a little faster and more efficiently than a larger, flatter chamber.

Pretty much everyone accepts the idea that the design of the combustion chamber makes a big difference in power production, but a lot of the time people forget that the cylinder head is only the "top half" of the combustion chamber -- the piston crown makes up the other half.

E85 racer and E85 carb builder
www.horsepowerinnovations.com

68 Camaro, E85 powered 427" small block. 9.96 @ 133 MPH, 1.319 sixty foot on motor. 5.92 eighth @ 116 with a 1.42 sixty breaking beams with back tire on the bottle
Eric68 is offline  
post #9 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 3rd, 05, 06:53 PM
Senior Tech
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: skiatook, ok
Posts: 3,692
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

I wonder how much difference there is between a modern fast burn style 64cc chamber vs. a 72cc chamber of the same design. I bet the difference isn't near as significant as the old 64cc gm iron heads vs. the 76cc iron heads.
Interesting too is the fact that the few dyno tests that I have seen of small vs large chamber heads always shows the larger chamber making more power on the top end due to less valve shrouding.
travis is offline  
post #10 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 4th, 05, 06:01 AM
Senior Tech
Eric
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Kentwood, MI
Posts: 8,097
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

That's true Travis . . . larger chambers can flow better. Especially if the extra volume is in the right place.

Anyone ever seen a set of SB 2.2's up close -- like a used set that had been worked for a cup team? The chambers are a work of art themselves . . . the ones I saw had a shallow flat chamber -- only 44cc's if I remember correctly.

E85 racer and E85 carb builder
www.horsepowerinnovations.com

68 Camaro, E85 powered 427" small block. 9.96 @ 133 MPH, 1.319 sixty foot on motor. 5.92 eighth @ 116 with a 1.42 sixty breaking beams with back tire on the bottle
Eric68 is offline  
post #11 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 4th, 05, 08:59 AM
Senior Tech
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Iowa
Posts: 887
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg
go with flat tops
the domes will require higher octane and bump compression up to 12:1 or close to it.
Dish and dome are virtual opposites. Dome is convex, dish is concave. Dished pistons lower compression, not raise it.

'68 SS 350 4speed 3.31 posi
sicsD8 is offline  
post #12 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 4th, 05, 02:06 PM Thread Starter
Senior Tech
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 154
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

Talked with my engine guy this afternoon, and he his now presenting OPTION #3.
>> Dart Iron Eagles, 180cc runners, 64cc chambers, dished pistons
Equipped with larger valves. 2.05 intake / 1.64 exhaust

Five sets in stock, and about $300 less expensive. But are 180cc runners sufficient for a 383 street engine? Would I feel any power loss at lower RPMs, or mostly just on the top end?
68driver is offline  
post #13 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 4th, 05, 05:08 PM
Senior Tech
Eric
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Kentwood, MI
Posts: 8,097
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

Sounds kind of strange -- larger valves with smaller runners . . .

It depends on the cam you pick and the RPM range you want to run. If you use smaller runners don't plan on making good power much over 5500, sure it will rev higher but you will be giving up power up top. I don't think you would loose power down low -- you might even pick up some low end grunt.

E85 racer and E85 carb builder
www.horsepowerinnovations.com

68 Camaro, E85 powered 427" small block. 9.96 @ 133 MPH, 1.319 sixty foot on motor. 5.92 eighth @ 116 with a 1.42 sixty breaking beams with back tire on the bottle
Eric68 is offline  
post #14 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 4th, 05, 05:37 PM
Senior Tech
Tim
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Central New York
Posts: 125
Send a message via AIM to murrayo
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

68D,

What cam are you going to run? How much are the heads setting you back?

I was thinking of going with that combo for a large flat torque curve. The cams I was looking at were the Comp XE268H or the Crane Z-268-2

Timo 67 RS/SS 350 Camaro
murrayo is offline  
post #15 of 26 (permalink) Old Apr 4th, 05, 07:54 PM Thread Starter
Senior Tech
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 154
Re: 383 heads: 64cc vs. 72cc

Quote:
Originally Posted by murrayo
68D,
What cam are you going to run? How much are the heads setting you back?
The builder is recommending a Wolverine Blue Racer (Crane) camshaft #WG1064 (Crane grind# 300-2H). .488/.510 lift, 234*/244* duration @ .05, and 112* lobe separation. I first thought it sounded too big for a street driven car. What do you think? I'm mostly looking for low end street power on pump gas.

I'm pricing a complete engine build, so it's hard to say what the heads really cost. But he said that an upgrade to 200cc heads would cost an additional $250 to $300. He has five sets of 180cc heads in stock and I guess he really wants to move them.

They just dropped one of these engines in the owners Chevy pickup. I'm going to arrange a test drive before I make my final decision.
68driver is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Team Camaro Tech forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address.
NOTE we receive a lot of registrations with bad email addresses. IF you do not receive your confirmation email you will not be able to post. contact support and we will try and help.
Be sure you enter a valid email address and check your spam folder as well.



Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome