Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

Post Reply
David Vizard
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1158
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:19 pm

Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by David Vizard » Sun Nov 12, 2017 10:46 am

I am just in the process of testing a third set of Edelbrock SBF Performer RPM heads.

I have had these heads on a variety of short blocks -302 -347. They have always worked well on my builds but, never -the-less, I would like input from others who have used them before I do the write on them in my Ford book. On a 302 with a 10.5/1 CR and an Edlebrock Performer air-gap 2 plane intake they don't seem to need much cam to go by 425 hp with ease.

Below is a before and after porting exercise I have just done to see what we can get from a 302 with modified heads and a ported 2 plane Perf RPM intake. Will show head flow efficiency numbers in next graph.
Comments please.

DV
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
David Vizard Small Group Performance Seminars - held about every 4 weeks. My shop or your shop. Contact seminar organizer at marvingvx@gmail.com for details.

Walter R. Malik
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3408
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan (just north of Detroit)
Contact:

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by Walter R. Malik » Sun Nov 12, 2017 5:38 pm

David Vizard wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2017 10:46 am
I am just in the process of testing a third set of Edelbrock SBF Performer RPM heads.

I have had these heads on a variety of short blocks -302 -347. They have always worked well on my builds but, never -the-less, I would like input from others who have used them before I do the write on them in my Ford book. On a 302 with a 10.5/1 CR and an Edlebrock Performer air-gap 2 plane intake they don't seem to need much cam to go by 425 hp with ease.

Below is a before and after porting exercise I have just done to see what we can get from a 302 with modified heads and a ported 2 plane Perf RPM intake. Will show head flow efficiency numbers in next graph.
Comments please.

DV
They were on the "Total Performance" 414 flat tappet engine I entered in the Engine Masters Competition this year and did OK, achieving 600 horsepower with a very flat torque curve.

Those ported heads were in the 300/200 range at .600" lift, ported within the confines of the original casting.
http://www.rmcompetition.com
Specialty engine building at its finest.

David Vizard
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1158
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:19 pm

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by David Vizard » Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:27 am

Walter R. Malik wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2017 5:38 pm
David Vizard wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2017 10:46 am
I am just in the process of testing a third set of Edelbrock SBF Performer RPM heads.

I have had these heads on a variety of short blocks -302 -347. They have always worked well on my builds but, never -the-less, I would like input from others who have used them before I do the write on them in my Ford book. On a 302 with a 10.5/1 CR and an Edlebrock Performer air-gap 2 plane intake they don't seem to need much cam to go by 425 hp with ease.

Below is a before and after porting exercise I have just done to see what we can get from a 302 with modified heads and a ported 2 plane Perf RPM intake. Will show head flow efficiency numbers in next graph.
Comments please.

DV
They were on the "Total Performance" 414 flat tappet engine I entered in the Engine Masters Competition this year and did OK, achieving 600 horsepower with a very flat torque curve.

Those ported heads were in the 300/200 range at .600" lift, ported within the confines of the original casting.
Walter,
Sounds like you did quite a lot of work on your Perf RPM heads. Mine are still using the 1.9 intake that they came with. Would I be right in thinking you used a 2.02 or even something larger?

DV
David Vizard Small Group Performance Seminars - held about every 4 weeks. My shop or your shop. Contact seminar organizer at marvingvx@gmail.com for details.

Walter R. Malik
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3408
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan (just north of Detroit)
Contact:

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by Walter R. Malik » Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:46 pm

David Vizard wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:27 am
Walter R. Malik wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2017 5:38 pm
David Vizard wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2017 10:46 am
I am just in the process of testing a third set of Edelbrock SBF Performer RPM heads.

I have had these heads on a variety of short blocks -302 -347. They have always worked well on my builds but, never -the-less, I would like input from others who have used them before I do the write on them in my Ford book. On a 302 with a 10.5/1 CR and an Edlebrock Performer air-gap 2 plane intake they don't seem to need much cam to go by 425 hp with ease.

Below is a before and after porting exercise I have just done to see what we can get from a 302 with modified heads and a ported 2 plane Perf RPM intake. Will show head flow efficiency numbers in next graph.
Comments please.

DV
They were on the "Total Performance" 414 flat tappet engine I entered in the Engine Masters Competition this year and did OK, achieving 600 horsepower with a very flat torque curve.

Those ported heads were in the 300/200 range at .600" lift, ported within the confines of the original casting.
Walter,
Sounds like you did quite a lot of work on your Perf RPM heads. Mine are still using the 1.9 intake that they came with. Would I be right in thinking you used a 2.02 or even something larger?

DV
Those heads were gotten right from Edelbrock with 2.02" intake valves and are in their catalog; #60259 ... and that is what was used for the ported 200cc intake ports.
http://www.rmcompetition.com
Specialty engine building at its finest.

turbo2256b
Pro
Pro
Posts: 296
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 5:48 pm

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by turbo2256b » Mon Nov 13, 2017 6:20 pm

iS THAT 414 cu in engine?

Walter R. Malik
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3408
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan (just north of Detroit)
Contact:

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by Walter R. Malik » Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:54 pm

turbo2256b wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 6:20 pm
iS THAT 414 cu in engine?
Yes ... 4.058" bore x 4.000" stroke.
http://www.rmcompetition.com
Specialty engine building at its finest.

Walter R. Malik
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3408
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan (just north of Detroit)
Contact:

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by Walter R. Malik » Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:40 pm

Looks like not many people have any experiences to share about using those "Performer RPM" Edelbrock heads for a small block Ford engine...
http://www.rmcompetition.com
Specialty engine building at its finest.

Joe-71
New Member
New Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 5:46 pm
Location: SA TX

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by Joe-71 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:36 pm

When they first came out, the floors were too flat and no short turn, so we migrated to the TFS high port, TFS Twisted wedge. The exhaust was decent and 210-220 cfm with 1.6" valve was easy. Getting the intake to flow was the problem since the flow wanted to shear over the short turn and take the shortest distance. The TFS heads were easy to get 320-330 cfm with either the 2.020, or 2.050 intakes, so they became the "go to" head of choice. Also, the TFS heads had the 5/8" fire deck whereas the early RPM heads were .500" fire decks, and they would lift with boost of more than 8 psi. AFR, TFS HP, TFS TW, TFS R, were cast in different runner cfm, making them easier to match to the EFI crowd, so the RPM lost favor. I raced a set of RPM heads on a 358W/ Victor JR in my '69 Mach I @11.0/121-123 mph for several years during the late '90s-2004. I still have a set of the KPI/TFS high port heads on my '86GT. I believe you would be happier with the RPM Air Gap over the regular RPM if you are trying to maximize overall performance, but a Funnel Web 302 might just surprise you if you keep it small. Joe-71

Walter R. Malik
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3408
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan (just north of Detroit)
Contact:

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by Walter R. Malik » Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:37 am

Joe-71 wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:36 pm
When they first came out, the floors were too flat and no short turn, so we migrated to the TFS high port, TFS Twisted wedge. The exhaust was decent and 210-220 cfm with 1.6" valve was easy. Getting the intake to flow was the problem since the flow wanted to shear over the short turn and take the shortest distance. The TFS heads were easy to get 320-330 cfm with either the 2.020, or 2.050 intakes, so they became the "go to" head of choice. Also, the TFS heads had the 5/8" fire deck whereas the early RPM heads were .500" fire decks, and they would lift with boost of more than 8 psi. AFR, TFS HP, TFS TW, TFS R, were cast in different runner cfm, making them easier to match to the EFI crowd, so the RPM lost favor. I raced a set of RPM heads on a 358W/ Victor JR in my '69 Mach I @11.0/121-123 mph for several years during the late '90s-2004. I still have a set of the KPI/TFS high port heads on my '86GT. I believe you would be happier with the RPM Air Gap over the regular RPM if you are trying to maximize overall performance, but a Funnel Web 302 might just surprise you if you keep it small. Joe-71
Two years ago we were forced by the rules package to use the Edelbrock "Performer RPM" heads with valve sizes as received in the EMC contest on a 400+ cubic inch engine and I thought they were going to be a real big bottleneck but, I was surprised when I was finished with them, that it was not the case as they produced more torque UNDER the torque peak RPM than I imagined.
I am sure there may be better choices out there however, these were not awful in horsepower as well.
http://www.rmcompetition.com
Specialty engine building at its finest.

David Vizard
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1158
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:19 pm

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by David Vizard » Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:59 pm

Joe-71 wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:36 pm
When they first came out, the floors were too flat and no short turn, so we migrated to the TFS high port, TFS Twisted wedge. The exhaust was decent and 210-220 cfm with 1.6" valve was easy. Getting the intake to flow was the problem since the flow wanted to shear over the short turn and take the shortest distance. The TFS heads were easy to get 320-330 cfm with either the 2.020, or 2.050 intakes, so they became the "go to" head of choice. Also, the TFS heads had the 5/8" fire deck whereas the early RPM heads were .500" fire decks, and they would lift with boost of more than 8 psi. AFR, TFS HP, TFS TW, TFS R, were cast in different runner cfm, making them easier to match to the EFI crowd, so the RPM lost favor. I raced a set of RPM heads on a 358W/ Victor JR in my '69 Mach I @11.0/121-123 mph for several years during the late '90s-2004. I still have a set of the KPI/TFS high port heads on my '86GT. I believe you would be happier with the RPM Air Gap over the regular RPM if you are trying to maximize overall performance, but a Funnel Web 302 might just surprise you if you keep it small. Joe-71
Joe, Walter,

The info you both are posting here is just the stuff I need to talk about when it comes to porting these heads. I would like to talk to both of you about the results from the more extensive porting you have done compared to the basic stuff I have done which is all the time I can allot to this.
As a starter I will be posting a test of the heads as a simple out -of-the-box replacement for a stock set of E7TE's. After that the ported ones.

Thanks
DV
David Vizard Small Group Performance Seminars - held about every 4 weeks. My shop or your shop. Contact seminar organizer at marvingvx@gmail.com for details.

David Vizard
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1158
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:19 pm

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by David Vizard » Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:23 pm

Here are the curves for the E7TE VS the Edlebrock Perf rpm heads.

There is a little more to things than seen at face value with these tests.

First I made sure that each set of heads had the optimum LCA cam for the job but used the same profiles. Secondly each cam was timed in optimally courtesy of a Jesel belt drive.

For what it's worth the Edelbrock heads with the 1.9 inch intake valve need to be on a about a 1 degree tighter LCA than the 2.02 versions. Also they need to be timed in 1 degree more advanced. Combining these moves in the power range shown here is worth better than 10 hp you would not otherwise see from these heads.

The Performer RPM Air gap intake makes for a really good streetable combo here. I have tried a variety of carbs on combo's similar to this thanks to Holley's kind co-operation. If it is a real street machine that needs a choke and a vacuum secondary for better mileage then, in my experience, those smart looking low buck Demon carbs work very well out of the box. That said the top of the hp producing pile from Holley still seems to be the HP range. Carb used here was a regular vac sec electric choke Holley with a dyno tune on it.

Note the use of 1-5/8 headers. At this stage of the game any bigger produced nothing in the way of extra top end but it did loose a goodly amount of low speed torque.

Some figures apart from increased peak #'s might be of interest here. First peak figs went up from 340 lbs-ft & 342 hp to 365 lbs-ft & 398 hp. Average from 2800 to 6600 for the stock ford heads was 306.7 lbs-ft and 272.7 hp while for the Performers these numbers climbed to 336 lbs-ft and 303 hp. an increase of 29.7 lbs ft and 30.3 hp. Increase at 6600 was

But those aforementioned average increases are for the rpm range from 2800 - 6600. If we look at the gains over the rpm range that would typically be used on the drag strip the Edelbrock heads show even better. For the best top 1400 rpm range the stock setup delivers an average of 307 lbs-ft & 327 hp. The Performers delivered 347 lbs-ft and 378 hp.

All this looks pretty decent to me but I would like to see the results that possibly some of you dyno hounds out there may have experienced. I need to know if what i am seeing is about the norm.

Thanks
DV
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
David Vizard Small Group Performance Seminars - held about every 4 weeks. My shop or your shop. Contact seminar organizer at marvingvx@gmail.com for details.

Joe-71
New Member
New Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 5:46 pm
Location: SA TX

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by Joe-71 » Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:28 pm

I see the RPM heads now have 5/8" fire deck, which is good. Their flow sheets only show 246/174 cfm @ 0.600" for 1.9/1.6, and 255/175 @ 0.600" for the 2.020/1.6 heads with 60 cc combustion chambers. The flow backs up at 0.700" a small amount on the intakes. I have to be honest and say I have not ported the Edelbrocks in five or six years, because of interest in other engine groups, and involvement with those has kept me away from the Edelbrock heads. TFS, AFR, Brodix, Dart, World Products, RHS all are easier to make horsepower for the SBF crowd, and can usually be bought at a better price. Recently, the RHS heads have been the surprise for 1/8 mile drag racing. Yates style heads are still top runners, though. Joe-71

David Vizard
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1158
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:19 pm

Re: Performer RPM SBF heads -- need a second opinion

Post by David Vizard » Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:00 pm

Joe-71 wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:28 pm
I see the RPM heads now have 5/8" fire deck, which is good. Their flow sheets only show 246/174 cfm @ 0.600" for 1.9/1.6, and 255/175 @ 0.600" for the 2.020/1.6 heads with 60 cc combustion chambers. The flow backs up at 0.700" a small amount on the intakes. I have to be honest and say I have not ported the Edelbrocks in five or six years, because of interest in other engine groups, and involvement with those has kept me away from the Edelbrock heads. TFS, AFR, Brodix, Dart, World Products, RHS all are easier to make horsepower for the SBF crowd, and can usually be bought at a better price. Recently, the RHS heads have been the surprise for 1/8 mile drag racing. Yates style heads are still top runners, though. Joe-71
Thanks Joe,

I have a set of new C3's and several sets of unported D3's. An 8.2 deck 380 inch road race build could well be in my future.
DV
David Vizard Small Group Performance Seminars - held about every 4 weeks. My shop or your shop. Contact seminar organizer at marvingvx@gmail.com for details.

Post Reply