I'm running a similar setup to yours (with the dove heads) and I'm pretty happy with my cam from Crower (hyd flat tappet)
Prt # 22244
Lift- .588 int/ .604 ex
112 degrees lobe separation
the 10.5 to 1 compression you figured is about right IMO. I'm running JE flat tops at about 11.5 to 1.
Let me know if you are going to get rid of your SCJ heads
I am glad to see what I am seeing. I thought there were gonna be numbers all over the place. I wanna thank all of you for you input.
LO helped me a lot. Special kudos to him. I think he likes me just cause I got a Southwind!!
Beached, I am getting rid of the heads, but some one has dibs on them. If for some reason it dose not go though, I will let you know.
I would appreciate it if you would..
BTW, I just edited my last post with a little cam inf.
LO is a wealth of knowledge on our BBF's.
D3VE-A2A, are these heads any good? I thought I had DOVE heads but guess not. What cc? I got rid of the exhaust humps.
Hoss, Your D3 heads are fine but are 91cc chambers. On a stock 460 only have about 8 or 8.5 to 1 depending on what block deck height you have. The D0VE heads have 75 cc chambers. If you swap your heads for a pair of D0VE heads it will raise your c/r to app. 9.5 to 10 to 1. Grinding the lumps out of the exhaust will help alot, well worth the trouble.
Originally posted by HOSS
D3VE-A2A, are these heads any good? I thought I had DOVE heads but guess not. What cc? I got rid of the exhaust humps.
Contrary to popular belief, D3VE heads are fine heads once ported. Like the C8VE, C9VE and D0VE heads, they suffer from poor exhaust flow. Once ported, then can support as much as 650HP.
The D3VE heads were long overlooked as performance pieces because they came out duing the gas crisis and emissions crunch. Also, they were released after the shitty D2VE heads which should be avoided at all costs. The D2VE head was a true smogger head that flopped so badly that Ford made a wise choice and, for the D3VE, reverted back to a proven combustion chamber design (of the early C9, C9 & D0VE heads) but simply lowered the compression ratio. Domed pistons for the bigger combustion chambers of the D3's didn't come out for a while, nor were we building strokers. Today, the heads are a welcome option.
Anybody that thinks D3VE's are junk is living in the yesteryear of BBF's and providing outdated mis-information. My pair of D3's are testament to this and proved so scientifically--both on the flow bench and in the real world.
We should be happy to know that there is a whole new OEM cast iron cylinder head out there that was under our noses for years just waiting for somebody to come along and invest ample time to discover how to make it work. Not everybody is building a 7500 rpm 900HP stroker. There is a performance application for every head that Ford offered over the years (with the exceptoin of the D2VE). Some better than others, sure.
Unported, the early style heads (D0VE's et al) flow just 135 cfm @ 28 on the exhaust but can be ported to flow well over 200 cfm. The D3Ve's unported flow 125 cfm but can also be brought to 200 with excellent portwork. Grinding the thermactor boss out (the "exhaust hump") helps significantly, as does widening the lower-radiussed, shorter turn off the exhaust seat (don't make it any lower than it already is in the center; just widen the sides down to the center height.
LO
Originally posted by LakesOnly
Contrary to popular belief, D3VE heads are fine heads once ported. Like the C8VE, C9VE and D0VE heads, they suffer from poor exhaust flow. Once ported, then can support as much as 650HP.
The D3VE heads were long overlooked as performance pieces because they came out duing the gas crisis and emissions crunch. Also, they were released after the shitty D2VE heads which should be avoided at all costs. The D2VE head was a true smogger head that flopped so badly that Ford made a wise choice and, for the D3VE, reverted back to a proven combustion chamber design (of the early C9, C9 & D0VE heads) but simply lowered the compression ratio. Domed pistons for the bigger combustion chambers of the D3's didn't come out for a while, nor were we building strokers. Today, the heads are a welcome option.
Anybody that thinks D3VE's are junk is living in the yesteryear of BBF's and providing outdated mis-information. My pair of D3's are testament to this and proved so scientifically--both on the flow bench and in the real world.
We should be happy to know that there is a whole new OEM cast iron cylinder head out there that was under our noses for years just waiting for somebody to come along and invest ample time to discover how to make it work. Not everybody is building a 7500 rpm 900HP stroker. There is a performance application for every head that Ford offered over the years (with the exceptoin of the D2VE). Some better than others, sure.
Unported, the early style heads (D0VE's et al) flow just 135 cfm @ 28 on the exhaust but can be ported to flow well over 200 cfm. The D3Ve's unported flow 125 cfm but can also be brought to 200 with excellent portwork. Grinding the thermactor boss out (the "exhaust hump") helps significantly, as does widening the lower-radiussed, shorter turn off the exhaust seat (don't make it any lower than it already is in the center; just widen the sides down to the center height.
LO let's not forget to add that D0VE heads are already set up with an adjustable valve train, whereas D3VE heads are not. just more money right. D0VE heads are not as plentiful but often can be bought for near the same price as D3 heads. I guess what I am shooting at is although D3 heads can be made to perform it takes much less machine work and 'tricking out' to get D0VE heads to perform as well or better.
I have seen pics of your heads LO and they are very impressive. If you had to pay someone to build a set of D3 heads versus a set of D0VE heads comparable to your setup which would be cheaper?
Omega
Omega the dove are ready to convert to adj valve train.You need to switch the rocker studs to bbc type,use bbc rockers,get the guide plates from ford and hardened push rods and you have it.
But easier than the newer type heads IMO and cheaper
Machining the D3's to accommodate the early-style rocker assembly is the only cost difference I am aware of. I admit I often overlook this.
But--although I have not had personal experience with them--it is my understanding that somebody (Crane, maybe?) makes a roller rocker that bolts directly to the D3VE head as-is, thereby eliminating this extra machining step. Anyone have more info?
Side by side, if I were to choose between early and late style heads for a build, I would probably choose the early-style heads over the D3's 7 times out of 10. This in itself does not make the D3 a poorly engineered cylinder head; on the contrary it is essentially as good a head as the early style heads. This is partly because in order to get good exhaust flow, like in a jet boat application, 180 cfm through Ford's exhaust port is sufficient, and either head will readily support this figure with just "common-sense grinding." I would choose the early style head 7 times out of 10 simply because more applications suit it...but there are places where the D3 is just as good. And if one is to build such an engine and he already has D3's, then it might be the more cost effective way to go (over buying Doves) and still get the same results.
LO
Can someone show me a picture of the humps cause my d3's were ported intake and exhaust sides but it looks like there is some kind of boss in there.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote