fakeyankee

according to the write up in CHP smc build-up. I don't understand this if the 882's were such crappy heads !!! I understand the more modern stock iron heads are built better, but i'm apparently missing something here. I have a set of l98 iron heads 083's that i'm rehabbing to replace the 882's. But acording to the CHP article the 882's even flowed better than the L98 Aluminum heads across the board !! with the exception of the exhaust/intake relationship percentages, in which case it seems the alum L98 were better. Now that i'm dazed and confused.....can someone sort this stuff all out for me ?? Need a little schooling !!!

dimented24x7

iTrader: (2)

scary, isnt it? Now if theyd only gotten rid of the huge cc they might have been a somewhat decent head. The aluminum L98 heads flow pretty terribly but then again they where designed for use with the low revving tpi system so is it really any surprise?

fakeyankee

I know that there are alot of variables in choosing a proper head for your application, but what are they ??? What determines which is a better head...flow, cc , exhaust vs intake dia. Please fill me in !! Where does my 882's stand up to my iron 083's and is it a compression issue that makes the difference ??

RB83L69

In totally bone-stock form, the 882s flow more than alot of other heads. However, they are very thin in certain places, particularly around the 2 center exhaust ports. They're already prone to cracks because of this. So if you try to port them, they get even more likely to crack; as a result, their potential as a high-perf head is very limited. They are what they are as they come, and that's that, with little room for improvement.

Add to that of course the problem of the huge chamber; you end up having to run a domed piston to get the CR up to a usable level, and a dome-piston large-chamber motor is inferior to either a small chamber dish-piston or a medium-chamber flat-top setup, in flame travel, combustion efficiency, emissions, and thermal efficiency.

All in all, they are a very poor choice for a high-perf buildup; as all of us who suffered through the golden years of the 170 HP 350 and 180 HP 400 remember so fondly.

F-BIRD'88

Don't believe everything you read.

There are two versions of the 882. One is a heavy pre74 casting.
The other is a later 70's lightweight casting. The late light weight casting really stinks, like a 624.

The 441{X} 487{X} 336 and 920 are considered some of the better of these large chamber heads.

That head flow test is probabily with a non factory 3 angle valve
job and bowl hog. They don't flow near that from the factory.
The article qualifies this in the first couple paragraphes.
Take it with a grain of salt. If you did that to a Camel Back
you'd be flowing in the 230/160 cfm range. in/ex.

fakeyankee

It just seems that there are alot of different factors involved when one considers which head ( stock ) is more appropriate for adding HP and torque on certin engines. I'm running a perfectly good pair of 882's as I write but also have a pair of L98, 083 heads that need to be rehabbed. My question is that whats going to work best for my engine as I add the performer intake and the 268 cam ??? Granted, that I respect all prior advice from senior members and junior, as myself !!! I just need to understand what determines one heads better performance over the other. Just seems to be really a confusing issue !!! I do plan on adding after-market heads in the future but I have to work with what I have for now. Thanks guys !!!

Ward

iTrader: (1)

I have a pair of 882's (1980 casting, lightweight) on my 400 right now, and I promise you they suck. My engine has nothin but torque, and even still it has absolutely nothing past 4000 rpm. Sooner or later I'll get around to buying some new heads.

F-BIRD'88

Of the two head castings you have to work with , the 083
L98 head is the better of the two.

Better casting quality, smaller better high swirl combustion chamber, better plug position.
Install new 2.02's and 1.60's fully port them with a quality valve job and guide reline, and you'll have a decent set of heads for the money invested.

What's your horsepower goal?

RB83L69

I totally agree.... I have actually paid somebody to come out and haul off a pile of 882 heads when too many of them had accumulated around my space.

Trying to build a hot-running motor with smogger heads like those is a total waste of time and money. You can do so much better with better heads, it isn't worth limiting yourself to crappy castings. Power lives in the heads. If there is any one place that pays off to get the best you can afford, it's the heads.

fakeyankee

My goal on the HP issue is around 350. Really nothing major, but would really like alot off the line..........Say, stop light to stop light....but also a descent all around driver too. I will be on the highway also, so good mileage per gal. of fuel wouldn't hurt. I know I can't have my cake and eat it too, but I would like to find that fine line between torqe, HP, and good gas mileage. This will be a daily driver, but when the Jap machines or the Stangs roll on up to the side and give me that **** Eating Grin...I just want to be able to give em a good run !!! What's wrong with that !!!!

mrr23

dymno with 882 heads on engine. as you can see they don't go past 3500 rpm.

mrr23

now with lt1 cam and l98 iron heads