This guy is selling some and they are off a 70's 350 fully assembled cleaned and everything are they worth $100?

 

That depends on their purpose. They have 76cc chambers so on most applications the will lower compression ratio. If you need heads for your 70s era truck or van, that's a fair price.

 

well i was think that i could put them on the 350 in my Firebird, but before that port and polish and maybe a shave?

 

Not worth it. Wouldn't be worth it, even if they were FREE, and even if somebody else did all the work and paid all the misc expenses like gaskets and such to put them in your car. No matter what heads you have now, that casting is worse. Even if you have TBI swirlies. They're SURE not worth putting labor and machine work money into.

That's one of the worst, most anti-performance castings there is.

I've PAID people to come haul piles of that kind of crap off my property.

Catch me sometime when I'm not in such a good mood and I'll tell you what I REALLY think of them.

 

I'd really like to know where people keep thinking 882's are good castings. It must be printed somewhere. There are 2 different 882 castings and neither are good. One casting has a single center exhaust port running to the heat crossover. The other casting has both center exhaust ports running to the heat crossover. Both are prone to cracking in this area. If they're free and you just need a factory replacement head then they're a good deal.

There are much better older castings to pick from and some newer castings are even better.

882's make good door stops and boat anchors.

 

It's in a magazine article someplace, where somebody did some flow tests. People quote that article MERCILESSLY. Whether it's even "true" or not, I couldn't say. Although since it's been on the Internet, it must be true. Isn't it illegal to post stuff on the Internet that's not true? Didn't Al Gore set it up that way when he invented it? He DIDN'T?!?!? You gotta be KIDDING! Oh my G**!!!!! We're in trouble now.

As if some random goob's flow #s are all that there is to a particular head casting.

 

I just check over at mortec.com. only one 882 listed there. Hot rod magazine put 2.02/1.6 valves in a set and made 296hp. Chevy High performance hired Westech Performance Group to flow test some stock chevy heads and said the 882s out flow l98 iron heads found on TPI 3rd gens. Engine Masters 1999 magazine dumped $1250 into a set and got 341hp.

Here's a link with some combos using 882s:
http://vetteworks.tripod.com/combo.htm

http://people.smu.edu/acambre/nova/n...ovabert76.html


"Next came aWeiand 8004 intake, a set of ported 882 heads from Power Heads and amild (emissions legal) Pure Energy 246 cam from Comp Cams. We finishedoff the small-block with the installation of an Edelbrock Performer RPMAir Gap intake and 650 cfm Speed Demon carburetor. It was this newinduction system that brought the power numbers up to 364 hp and 422lbs-ft of torque."
http://www.superchevy.com/technical/...sts/index.html

 

OK great; my stock Q-Jet carbed 305, with 1.94"/1.5" valves, makes 237 RWHP; or about 290-295 crank HP, IN THE CHASSIS, and not on some enthusiastically optimistic West Coast engine dyno. Passed California emissions while I lived there.

I'm impressed.Now THERE was a wise use of cubic $$$.

This is why they're GARBAGE. No matter what the raw flow numbers are. In addition to the well- and widely-known cracking problems Stephen mentioned; which makes porting them almost a certain path to suicide.



This is a GOOD set of heads, with PLENTY of meat for porting. 882s are considerably thinner - if you can even imagine such a thing being possible, and it not leaking right through the metal - in the spot where these double-humps cracked.

 

The castings aren't any lighter than the 416s or any other smog head.

 

Maybe not lighter in total weight, but lighter in the wrong places. I had one crack on the external casting line that runs between the exhaust ports - left a stream of coolant in the parking lot at work. A different cam and 1.6 rockers made absolutely no difference in performance when I had a set on a 350 in the '57 (granted, I never tried to port the heads). The Camaro is over 1.5 seconds faster than the '57 ever was with the 350 - although again, granted, I'm smarter with the Camaro than I was when the 350 was in the '57 (thanks to TGO).

It's really maddening that these magazines don't do apples-to-apples comparisons. Yes, it was a "bolt on" article, but when they tried another set of heads (Holleys, in this case), they put in a new cam as well. The XE268 isn't that wild a cam, but with the Holley heads, they got 419 HP - a pretty big jump over the 364 of the 882's. And, peak torque was at a lower RPM. Had they put the Holley heads on with the same cam, made a pull, and then changed the cam, or run the XE268 with the 882 heads, you would have seen just how poor "ported" 882's are compared to out-of-the-box aftermarket.

 

Now we're comparing 882s to aftermarket? The original poster was asking for information on a pair of $100 heads. He was told "That's one of the worst, most anti-performance castings there is." Its my opinion that that's not an accurate statement. They may be better than the L98 head( if the chamber volume is not an issue). But I didn't post my opinion. I posted examples of these heads being used in a variety of combinations with a variety of results. This information may be useful to Firebird_dave7 as he decides on whether he wants to spend $100. I do not own 882s nor do I plan to. I don't care if Firebird_dave7 buys them or not. But he won't be getting the same performance from these heads as an out-of-the-box aftermarket head and I'm sure he knows this.

 

Thanks chesterfield for clearing up my question, i will have to think about them a lil longer to make a decision.

 

That's just it: they are NOT better than L98 heads. Regardless of the flow numbers some magazine article quotes.

Note that NOT ONE of those magazine articles has ever told you what happened when they took that crap off and stuck ANY OTHER stock heads, let's say L98 heads or double-humps or even 416s, on those motors. It's your typical "in a vacuum" kind of write-up: you have NO WAY to know whether the combo at hand was any better, or worse, than anything else. All you have is "oh yeah it ran good". Not, "it ran xxx HP and yyy ft-lbs of torque BETTER (or worse) than what was there before" which is something you can actually use to make a decision. Typical magazine article stuff; the kind of thing that sets it apart from the real world.

I've been taking off 882s, 624s, and 993s and throwing them in the trash, and putting on 186s and such in their place, for 30 years now. NOT ONCE has it failed to add about 20-25% more power.

The guy that's trying to tell us all about how good they are, openly admits he doesn't have any; probably never has; all he knows is those magazine articles with their lack of comparison.

I would not pay $100 for a set of 882s. I would not accept them for free, because then I'd just have to throw them away. My boats all have anchors already, I don't need any more. If someone insisted that I accept them for free, I would shoot them for littering on my property. That's how much they're worth.

 

I can remember 15 years ago when everyone talked about 882s. It seemed like all the machine shops around sold them. THey would get tons of em, do a cheap port and polish, stick some bulk purchased 2.02s and 1.60s in em. Installed with crappy valvesprings and sell them as stage II ported and polished heads. That was before you could readilly get the selection of aftermarket heads. Now all those same machine shops have aftermarket heads in stock.

 

Automotive cast is worth around $0.11/pound. How much does a SBC head weigh?

 

I had a set on my old Low Output delivery van. Put over 350k miles on them before the van was hit from behind. Never had any cracks, at least none that slowed me down. I also have a set of 186s with one crack between the valves. But that's just anecdotal and proves nothing. As you pointed out, anyone can make crap up and post it on the internet, even you. So if Chevy High Performance magazine hires Westech to flow heads and they say the 882s flow better than your 186s or L98 heads, that might hold more weight with me than what some unknown posters on TGO say. And if I see over and over again people racing their home built hotrods and getting results that outperform stock 3rdgens, I might think that these heads are acceptable for a budget build. If some guy at tgo says 882s are the crappiest heads going and then I see where some magazine gets 364hp out of them, who should I beleive? The bulk of evidence suggests that your assesment is wrong.
Sofakingdom, you characterized me as " the guy who's trying to tell us how good they are". Let me repeat myself. I'm providing Firebird_dave7 with information I've found. He asked for information. I don't care what you do with it. I'm not trying to impress you and I'm not telling you how good they are. Yes, this is the internet and the rest of us are allowed to post information that is contrary to your opinion. Get used to it and try not to take it personally.

 

Well, let's approach this from a different direction:

Firebird_dave7, what heads do you have now, and why were you looking at these 882's? What plans/goals do you have for your engine/car?

(BTW, nobody is taking anything personally - unless you are. . .)

 

Sure they did.

But they didn't tell you how much they got out of the same motor with ANYTHING else on it. Flow numbers or no. Like, they didn't tell you that they made 364 HP with 882s, and then took them off and made 415 on the same motor with 186s, or 435 with Vortecs, or 227 with 434s, or whatever. Or, they took a stock L98 and it made 247 on the dyno, and they stuck 882s on it and it made 212 or 330 or whatever. Nothing of the kind. No comparison. They just stuck that number out there in a vacuum.

There's more to a set of heads, than just some random flow numbers.

My goal is to provide the results and learnings from long years of experience, as opposed to re-printing magazine articles that fly in the face of every engine builder that has ever worked with those things. So, I'm just giving dave_7 info, too. NOT merely repeating sales pitch type stuff out of a magazine that sells copies by telling people what they want to hear. Which of course is, "every motor that has 882s is slower than any otherwise identical motor that has practically anything else, but you've got a set on your 78 Z28 so we'll help you feel like you've got a fighting chance even though the facts clearly indicate otherwise. Buy me."

882s are GARBAGE of the worst sort... 11¢/lb. That fact remains, in spite of any magazine articles. There are quite possibly NO heads that are less suited for high-performance use, and more specifically, as "replacement" for the heads on an existing L98 (if that's what we're working with here... as seems likely although dave_7 didn't tell us). No magazine article will change that fact, no matter how much HP they claim to have got out of it. Nothing personal about it, it's just FACTS and REALITY.

 

Now you're speaking for every engine builder everywhere, huh? So if I found an engine builder somewhere that said 882s weren't all that bad, you'd say he was full of BS, right? Well, I'll have to put myself in the place of Willem of Ockham and ask myself "What conclusion fits all the facts?" Gm put 882s on carbureted Corvettes and rated it at 250hp. That's more hp than the fuel injected 3rdgen TPI is rated by GM. If 882s are garbage of the worst sort then so might be the L98 iron head.

 

It's not that they're garbage. They're actually the best of the worst. If you had a chance to choose from other production heads, 882's are nowhere near the top of the list and many others are farther down the list.

It's like everyone still thinks the old camel hump heads are the best thing to use. Well maybe 30+ years ago when there was little to no aftermarket choices they were good heads in comparison to the other production heads. By today's standards they'll still work but it takes a lot of work and money to get them close to a set of aftermarket heads right out of the box. Even after all that work is put into them they're still a 30+ year old casting.

As mentioned above, yes they can be made to make power but unless you're comparing different heads on the same engine, the results are meaningless. There's also the reliability issue to the heads. 882 castings are prone to cracking. What good is it if they make lots of power but have a short life span if used for anything other than stock replacement heads.

 

Well honestly i dont know exactly what heads i have and it doesnt matter because they are the first thing im changing(real nasty, but clean and great valves, but thats life). I was looking at these heads because i heard that if you do alil bit of work to them they can be a great addition to a daily muscle like my Bird is goin to be. But i am planning on my engine having around 350-400hp to the crank and 300-350hp to the wheels hopefully, and around 400-410ft-lbs to the crank and around 390ft-lbs to the wheel and having a peak torque in the low and peak horse in the mid-high. As for the car daily driver that i can be proud of(even though im already pretty damn proud of it) And i plan on gettine a black interior from a boneyard, and getting either spohn or hotchkis subframe connectors and spohn torque arm, control arms and hotchkis sway bars. So this is what plan on for the next year on doing.

 

Might want to go ahead and get a set of AFRs or Trick Flows then. You won't make that with the 882s

 

Well im just gonna pull some damn vortec heads off a truck, because i aint got the cash for TF or AFR.

 

You'll have to watch the lift at the valves, because stock Vortecs are known for limited lift capability. New valve springs should be assumed. A new Vortec intake is mandatory, as well as self-aligning rockers.

The sdparts.com upgraded Vortec head kit, while around $1100 plus shipping, is about as good a deal as you'll find. You'll know the heads don't need rebuilding; can handle plenty of lift; have good valve springs; includes the gaskets, intake, bolts, and rockers you'll need.

 

Good choice.
Also, carbed Vettes were rated in a different way than the 225HP 3rd gen injected TPI engines. If we rolled up a '75 Vette next to an '88 Camaro 350 TPI, both bone stock i'd put my money on the Camaro being faster.

If you have a '70s 350 in yoru firebird now, chances are really good it already has 882 heads on it anyway. They are the single most common head casting in the SBC world (along with 993's I believe). You have lofty goals, you'll need aftermarket heads to get 350RWHP, or modified vortecs and LOTS of cam. Good luck though!

FYI
400 at the crank would be 320 or so at the wheels, or less. If you want 390 to the wheels you'll need upwards of 500 at the crank. Very much aftermarket heads and BIG CAM territory (and/or stroker).

You definately want to leave 882 heads in the dust.


Hey chesterfield - if 882's aren't the worst of the worst, what would you, in your personal opinion consider to be the worst? 267 heads? '70's 305 heads? What about worst of the worst 350 heads?

 

That only if i lose that much in the driveline.

 

If you can only lose 10HP on a 400HP engine (2.5%) you're going to have to share your secret. Typically 15-20% or more for an auto tranny and 12-15% for a stickshift are fairly typical. Including differential losses.

 

The ratings are SAE net since 1972, right? The same year(1974) the vette 350 was rated at 250@5200, the base 2bbl 350 was rated at 145@3600 and the 400 was rated at 150@3200. I don't see where these numbers are inflated. I only bet on sure things. I looked at the timeslips a f-body.org. Found an L98 at 15.56 and one at 15.02. Those are the slowest so probably stockish. I found a Car and Driver run of 15.1 with a 1973 corvette with 250hp 350. That was the year before the 250hp 350 with 882s,(1974)...its your money. 1975 corvette was detuned to 205hp.

 

If its for your 'fun' car, a set of 416 or 601 heads can be had for CHEAPER than 882s 99% of the time, and have alot more performance potential on a 350.

Also, just a note, you can find World Sportsman heads for only $200-300 a set now on various message board classifieds and Ebay. Those would be better than any factory casting. I got a set for about $500 last summer with all fresh machine work (milled .007, cleaned, new valve job, new valves, springs, etc) and hadn't even been bolted on yet.

Look around and you can find much better heads for better deals.

As Sofa was saying, there is more to a set of heads than raw flow numbers. Those 882s are cast light in all the wrong places, and are notorious for cracking, and they are more likely to crack when you install big valves. They also have enormous 76cc chambers - big even for a 400 small block. Those chambers are also very detonation prone because of some poor design elements - and thats twice as big of a problem when they are cast as thin as they are.

If you can't be persuaded away from using a smog type casting, at least use a set of 993s - they are pretty similar to the 882s, but are a heavy duty casting.

 

Well Then i have a few questions.

What can i pull 416's off of and 601's?

Are they dependable?

And what size combustion chamber are they?

 

I posted raw flow numbers that weren't too bad. I posted links to track numbers that weren't too bad. i posted links to dyno numbers that weren't too bad. On a standard bore 400 with flat top pistons 9.6:1 compression. Now 76cc heads have detonation problems? Where did that one come from?

 

You're really a fan of those heads eh chesterfield? I think that's lonely territory, i'm pretty sure you're one of few on this forum who likes 'em, and theres a whole lot of other people here who've dealt with 993's/882's and would rather have anything else (including 416's/601s/081's).

I'll be absolutely damned, I didn't think the small upgrades bumped the same 350 from 145HP to 250HP. Same heads and cam right? Just a 4bbl and different intake and exhaust?
An L98 runs 15.0 flat? Holy cow that's sad. I didn't know that, I can honestly say I thought there were a mid 14 second car generally. I thought the 250HP Vette would be a 15.0 car though, so they are close. Sad that 15 years of technology only got us that far...

Poor chamber design (bathtub) promotes poor swirl/tumble and poor A/F mixing qualities. Bad quench design. All that translates to being more detonation prone. A better chamber design would help fend off detonation at higher CR levels.

416's are the stock heads for '80s 305 engines in cars. 601's were stock heads for the 305's in the '80s in trucks/vans. There are some exceptions to that rule, but that's a good starting point. 081's were the 305 heads from TPI engines.

Those are all 58cc chambers. I opened up my 416 heads to 64cc's with a die grinder.

 

No, that was the L82 engine, more or less the same as the Vette and Z28 used since '73. It had a much better cam than the other 350s, still had around 9:1 CR, had a better breathing dual-snorkel air cleaner, and a bit more aggressive ignition curve (its all relative though).

A healthy L98 car with a good driver should be a solid mid-high 14 second car. Even the L69/5-spd cars were high 14 second cars with a good driver.

He described it better than I would have, so I'm not going to add to it.

Yes - but the 601 heads were 53-55cc chambers, and had a little bit better chamber design tham the 416, though not too radiacally different.

 

.

 

Alright, why did you delete your post flesh and blood? We get emails with your full post, so the people who are subscribed to this know what you wrote....
Don't worry, I won't get offended, I like nothing better than a good debate (non-heated). If we all can learn from it, then it's great stuff. With that in mind, I will touch on a few points from your post (PS - are you one and the same as chesterfield? Otherwise i'm somewhat confused..)

Yes, I guess I kinda lied. A 76cc head with "poor combustion chamber design" vs a 64cc head with a good chamber should be such that the lower CR with the 76cc head (with identical bottom end) should be LESS detonation prone than the 64cc head, simply because of the lower CR. It has been said (purely word of mouth here) that the difference in CR is LESS effective at warding off detonation than the combustion chamber design. This would be when talking about an old smogger 76cc head vs a brand new iron 64cc head made by Dart or someone. That's not stock-stock comparision, but gives an idea about how import chamber design can be.

However if you used dome pistons with the 76cc smogger heads, and flat tops with 64cc (non-smog) heads, and lets say ended up with an identical 10:1 CR, identical camshaft, etc etc. ---- In that case, the 76cc-dome piston combo would be MORE prone to detonation than a 64cc-flat top combo. Dome pistons interrupt the flame travel and have basically zero quench properties.

However that being said, I don't have access to any proven scientific data, or back to back dyno tests to back this claim up, so I guess we'll all have to take it with a grain of salt :shrug:

I have no doubt people are out there with 882 heads and enjoy their ride thoroughly and go fast. What myself, Air_adam and sofakingdom are saying, is that if we were to sneak into their garage, and throw on a set of L98 heads, with zero other changes (err, intake manifold tweak...) sneak back out - the next morning they would have more power in their car. Furthermore, 882 heads don't seem to respond well to porting, due to their thin casting areas in the ports and chambers (again, purely anecdotal info here), compared to a 416, 081, 083 head which has more meat to it. It's not like us hot-rodders to leave stuff stock, so porting is when the fun starts.

I have my set of ported 416 heads on my garage floor right now, and a set of digital calipers, and old school internal & external calipers. So if anyone wants a measurement of anything, now's the time to ask. Keep in mind i've already been in there with a die grinder.

I'd like to see a pic of 882 heads vs 416 heads, in the chamber. I think the 882 heads had less flat material opposite the spark plug, and was more open.

 

I agree 100% that the 882s are JUNK. The 083 is a MUCH BETTER head. I hope the person that brought up the 882 heads on the old L-82 realizes that the L82 was the best of its time and that it wouldn't have come close to passing the late 80s emissions. It had 2.02/1.60 valves, a cam that was 224/224 @ .050, .450/.460" lift, high rise 4bbl intake and big 4bbl carb, and usually a 4spd transmission. The L98 only had 1.94/1.50 valves, a tiny little cam 203/206 @ .050, .415/.430" lift, and the TPI manifold. The stock L98 engine is a 285 HP engine, that loses 40 HP from the stock TPI. The L98 made 245 HP @ 4,600 (345 TQ @ 3,200) to the 250 HP @ 5,600 rpm (280 ft/lbs @ 4,000) of the L-82. On the street, I am going to go with a well driven L98, SORRY.

 

Holy, I didn't know the torque difference was so vast, 60ft/lbs? And only a 5hp difference? I have a feeling the power curve for the L98 was probably a lot flatter as well, purely due to the superior fueling/ignition system.

 

The fact of the matter is that no stock head is intended for high performance use. And you will never get 400 to 500 hp out of a stock head without about $1500 to $2000 dollars worth of work being done to them. So why would you do that when you can have a nice set of aluminum heads to look at for the same money. There was a guy on here at the beginning of this thread, that hit the nail on the head, you can get a set of world cast iron or dart iron eagles( with I am a big fan of) and will out flow any stock head by far. And any respectible engine builder will tell making good power starts with a good set of heads. Hope this helps!

 

I would also agree that the 882 heads are not your best choice but are not the worst thing either. They dont flow the best numbers, they dont have the best valve size, and no they dont have low CC chambers. But they still can make decent power. Not earth shattering but they still can perform as long as you match compression, cam, and rpm to what the heads can handle. For instance. My father and I build his 79 camaro to run the 1/4 mile but still be a nice driving street car.

It had 9.5:1 compression
882 76 cc heads
Street dominator intake
650 carb
Cam was a .480 lift.
Stock tranny with shift kit
4:10 posi (the old version from a 70 camaro with springs and not clutches)

This car ran 13.3XX @ 102 when we sold it.

Can they work? Yes, but it depends on what your trying to do. If you want a 12 second car I would stay away from them.

However I know MANY dirt track racers who use them and make quite a lot of power but they are pushed so close to the limit that they come apart quite easily.