Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner

Ok I am porting my 289 heads

21K views 26 replies 12 participants last post by  PaulS1950 
#1 ·
Heads or C6AE 289 heads from a '66 Mustang

Ok so far this is what I have done to the exhaust side



First I smoothed out the bump in the exhaust port (thermactor, egr, or whatever bump) But the roof is not completely flat. The upper edges are a little higher, can I go higher??
Second if you look to either side and to the rear of the exhaust valve guide, it is still as cast, Can I clean that up and remove some of the valve guide ??

Thanks
Rusty
PS more pictures to follow!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: rusty105 on 7/9/06 10:12pm ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: rusty105 on 10/9/06 9:54pm ]</font>
 
See less See more
1
#3 ·
You want to shape that guide area like an airfoil pointing to the middle of the port. In the picture it looks like it is going to cause turbulance to the flow that will be highest in the direction of flow. It is beneficial to have a more rounded curve at the inside radius of the bend from the chamber to the pocket. It looks like you removed too much material there and caused a "step" instead of a rounded radius.
I would sugest getting a porting template set and use it to tell you what material to remove where. You can actually cause so much turbulance by removing material in the wrong areas that your ports are bigger but flow less air than they did when you started.
Paul
 
#6 ·
On 2006-10-08 04:56, PaulS1950 wrote:
You want to shape that guide area like an airfoil pointing to the middle of the port. In the picture it looks like it is going to cause turbulance to the flow that will be highest in the direction of flow. It is beneficial to have a more rounded curve at the inside radius of the bend from the chamber to the pocket. It looks like you removed too much material there and caused a "step" instead of a rounded radius.
I would sugest getting a porting template set and use it to tell you what material to remove where. You can actually cause so much turbulance by removing material in the wrong areas that your ports are bigger but flow less air than they did when you started.
Paul
The picture really doesn't do justice to the port. The glare is distorting the view. As you can see the area immediately around the valve guide is untouched, except for a little on the downstream side of the exhaust valve. I haven't started to remove material from the roof, except the bump, and was looking for an idea of how high I can go with the roof, compared to stock, my guess is there is some more room up there.

On another note, or notes.
1) Anyone have suggestions for taking pictures without all the glare?
2) Anyone have a source for templates for the ports, or maybe measurements??

Thanks
Rusty
 
#9 ·
OK did some port molds today


First one is Side by side, stock on right.


Second one is top view, stock on bottom



From what I can see the short side radius looks the same on both. Not sure if that is good or bad. From the top view you can really see how much the 'bump' protrudes into the port, and how Ford tried to compensate by 'bending' the port wall. I cleaned up the wall so it is pretty straight.

What does everyone think so far?
Thanks
 
#15 ·
OK, I poked and prodded around these heads, and I still can't tell if there is water inbetween the intake and exhaust bowls. Any clues guys??

And if there are any other places to look out for water let me know


Thanks
Rusty
There is water between the ports. It is circulated around the exhaust port to keep things cool.
The best home porting job increases the mouth of the port to the size and shape of the gasket and blends that into the port for about 3/4". Smoothing the floor of the port to make it easy for the gasses to follow and blending the shape to a decreasing curve from the pocket to the mouth will provide gains in performance. Taking the bumps out of the roof and carefully blending it to the existing shape will reduce the turbulence and remove the restriction of the hump without causing more with the hole in the roof.
I am not sure where you can get porting templates any more. I used to get them from friends in the the performance industry. Ford, Chrysler and Chevrolet used to have them available upon request for racers and those who supported their racing programs. If you can get drawings (engineering) of your ports you can use the cross sections and the sectioned runs to make a complete set of porting templates.
 
#17 ·
The biggest gain you will find is by putting a 1.600 dia exhaust valve and a 1.88 dia intake valve, All the flow goes down the TOP of the ports, both in and ex. do not waste any time on the floors, What I have done for people who want to try this is port one in and one ex port to show them what works, then they try to copy it,If you dont have a flow bench to measure your work, there is NO way to tell what your results will be. A fully ported set of heads on a strong 289 or 302 can be worth as much as 45 HP. A mild port job is worth 20 to 25, IF you dont do anything stupid.


JOE SHERMAN RACING ENGINES
 
#19 ·
25 years ago, when I was did many pairs of SBF heads, the ports would always come out looking like a "D" shape. This porting job was good for about 40 HP with the 1.54 valves. On this set of 69 quencher chamber heads, (stock with 1.84 and 1.54) I also had 1.94 intakes installed.

The lower right hand side of the exhaust port, there is a water jacket for the spark plug. Watch out for it.

Hard to see in this photo, make sure you de-sroud the intake valve, on the chamber side, that will help a lot too. These heads pushed my 4000 pound Torino to a 13.5 second 1/4 when on my 351W.



 
#21 ·
Yes, inside the chamber.

I have never seen a pair of those heads, but the De-shrouding has it's best effect when the valve is opening and closing.

While it is lifting or seating, only 5/8ths of the valve is unrestricted. Once it is past 1/2 way open the valve shrouding effect starts to decrease.

But be sure, if it looks like a restriction, then it probably is. Just a little rounding off of the corners is all it takes to de-shroud. Wish I had a good photo to share.

Open chamber heads are not as bad for shrouding as the quencher chamber heads I show in my photos.
 
#22 ·
Thank you Mikes 66 The info on the 289 head porting will really help . And I will stay clear of the water jackets . I have full ported lots of SB Chevy heads in the past . But now I own a very clean 1965 Mustang 289 K 4speed car . I would like to build its 289 up to 350HP . And I think the only way is with a set of full ported 289 heads and the right camshaft .
 
#23 ·
Auto part Engine Automotive engine part Carburetor


wow, that was a lot of work, somehow FM wouldnt recognize it as a image, but whatever, like i said, they are aussie 2Vs, pretty sure with 4V valve sizes. I just bought them from a 3rd party, so i dont know all the specifics. But to me it looks like they could use some deshrouding, especially on the intake side, what do the smart people on the board say?
 
#25 ·
Those look like Boss 302 Heads. But it has been a while since I seen a pair... like 20 years ago....and from the other side, not the chamber side....

Those look like awsome heads to have. Small chamber, offset valves... and they are big, looks like the intake charge would swirl very well too.
 
#27 ·
Your 289 is going to be running about 7000 rpm to get the 350 hp that you are looking for so unshrouding the valves is worth some work. You will want to radius the valve pockets on the intakes but the Aussy heads are much better than the heads that we have here in the States.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top