All, My name is James and I publish a newsletter called the British V8 Newsletter. It's for folks who are in love with their little British cars, but want more power. In an interest to improve the current state of affairs, I tried contacting a few American manufacturers to see if any of them would take on the task of making a new and improved aluminum head for the Buick/Rover small block. One company responded in the afirmative if there is a market for it. This company currently makes an aluminum performance aftermarket head for the Buick V6 (GN) and would be approaching this from the angle of adding one more chamber to their existing performance V6 design, since all the other critical dimensions are effectively identical. My job is to help them find out how many people are seriously in the market for a pair of heads that can outflow the existing Buick 300 and Rover 4.6 designs. So, please respond if you would seriously consider buying a pair of new performance heads for the Buick/Rover small block, and let me know what you would consider paying. Please ask your friends too, if they don't follow this list. This may never materialize, but we have to start somewhere. Please help me to help them make this happen! Also, if you are interested in the British V8 newsletter, respond here or drop me an e-mail. Thanks, and Happy New Year James J.
If they're something like the Champion heads, I'll take a set! http://www.championgn1.com/gn1/products_alumcylinder.html Greg
Just a few words, please. It would be nice to see some new heads for the Buick/Rover small blocks, especially if we had a true "New Age" design ( I hate to use the term, but it fits here). Let me start back in the early eighties when a certain red-headed driver from Georgia (like me) named Elliot was seriously outdistancing the competion on NASCAR racetracks. Although some clandestine aerodynamics were incorporated into that Thunderbird, the real secret weapon was under the hood. A young engineer from Texas named Widmer had worked with Ford to cast a different head that seemed to have all the "wrong stuff", like smaller valves, smaller ports (especially the "peashooter" exhaust ones), and funny kidney bean combustion chambers. This caused great controversy, GM was scrambling to play catchup and the engine builder (the driver's brother, Ernie) was lying and trying to keep a lid on the secret. Then comes the mid- eighties and many GM (and other) manufacturers are producing "high swirl heads" such as the Chevrolet Vortec, Oldsmobile had some 307 ones, Buick had some for the V6. I've tried to study Widmer's stuff for years, but he is very secretive. He once cast some 350 GM heads and pistons and ran them in a street car and truck, after having to have some super high torque starters made, these two had conservative cams (around 270 degrees, I believe) ran 12's in the quarter and approached 40 mpg (ran on 89 or 91 octane gasoline)!!! His firm now has an affiliation with Honda, but they have worked in the aircraft, aerospace, and top secret government sector for years. Look, he knows his stuff. I appreciate James from 'across the pond' offering this invitation for an alternative head than the Wildcat design (which, by the way, the centerline placement of the valves do not promote "swirl"). What I'm trying to say is, if we can use the "Larry Widmer Formula" for extreme efficiency it would put our little engines into a "David vs Goliath" league. The drawbacks are very specifically designed heads, cam (also smaller), and a super high-compression cam with a specific dome (on the intake side for a conventional engine), also an aftermarket geared starter would be needed. The 300 engine just happens to have the correct rod length/stroke that L.W. (now "the Old One") concludes to be "critical" (cylinder pressure-"quality of the burn"- relative to crank angle) which is what rotates the crankshaft, rather than big airflow numbers. I'd like to see a "package" for our engines, the challenge, though, means R&D with lots of money and I fear, because of the lack of demand, it wont happen. It would be like a small NASCAR engine, but could be streetable and very efficient to boot (pay for itself in fuel savings). I hope that I won't be castigated for what I've said, I hope that I've helped someone to think, things aren't always what we perceive of them, materially OR spiritually. In 1999, Old One finally gave us a glimpse into the "black art" of his engine work, to understand more, check this out; http://theoldone.com/articles/The_Soft_Head_1999/
Head Theory In case there was some confusion, I'm an American living in America. The British V8 Newsletter is for those of us in the States with British cars. Anyhow, the only problem with developing a very specific head/cam package is that it narrows your customer base, possibly to the point where it's not cost effective to make such a product. IMHO, the Buick/Rover design heads produce great low-end torque. Rover has never had an incentive to improve these, since they have put the lion's share of these engines into Land/Range rover SUVs, which need their performance in exactly the RPM range the heads excell at. Sure, Rover did improve the head a little in the late 70's when they were putting them into sport sedans and the SD1, but that effort was confined to the limits of the existing castings. I don't know what TVR does to the heads, if anything. Within my community, most of us want a great street car: The charming MG or Triumph that can make the punk in the rice-burner say "WTF?" at the stoplight before his turbos have had the chance to spool up. We spend alot of time on back roads in 3rd gear pulling away from curves, etc. But the existing heads start to wheeze at 4000+ RPM. I'm hoping to arrive at a design that let's us extend our torque curve, but has the potential to be ported to high CFM rates for those of us who will see nothing but high RPM track time. I'm afraid that if we start with a head that sacrifices low rpm torque for peak performance at 7000rpm, we'll loose alot of potential customers, and therefore the interest of the company I'm trying to involve in this project. Just my $0.02 James J.
Well, that sounds pretty good, James. Sorry, if I got on my soapbox, the NASCAR type package is going overboard for most,(even they have reduced CR since the mid-eighties). It's a shame that Detroit is still giving us basically the same Otto cycle engine as 100 years ago, just added computers and sensors to make them more unreliable. A quantum leap in efficiency was accomplished in the eighties, but we haven't caught up. A good head with a "high swirl" combustion chamber does tend to reduce detonation even with a flat top piston. Going too big on valves and ports isn't where I'd like to be, it's easier to port out than to fill in, if necessary. Any more specifics on the ports, will the stock manifolds fit or will it be a "high port" design? What about exhaust port design? Valve size? Estimated price? Could they be purchased bare as well as complete? Do you have a website for the British V8? Thanks.
Head question Daniel, I don't mean to barge in but, I have a set of stock heads I was going to take down to the machine to have worked. You mentioned smaller valves and higher CR . Would I be going wrong to upgade to the TA Stainless "highflow" valves along with milling them to around 53 cc. The valves measure 1.92 and 1.55. Just want to have another opinion. Thanks Clint
Clint, the smaller valves and higher CR is part of a package, but it doesn't hurt if your application is a mild one. I would probably save my money on the valves, just have the machine shop backcut them. Smaller valves make more torque at a lower speed, which is what you want for the street. As far as milling the head, I wouldn't do that, you change the shape of the combustion chamber and diminish swirl (yes, old Buick heads do this to a point). Pistons are the best was to increase CR, but if you must mill something, do the block. While you have the valves out of the head, before the machinist does the seats, pocket porting will go a long way, plus you can bias the intake port to increase swirl. Also,you need to take off the sharp edges in the combustion chamber.:3gears:
Hello James, Thank you for taking the initiative on this possibility. If the manufacturer can produce a set for approximately $2000, I would be interested. I'd encourage you to consider taking the same initiative for a performance aluminum intake manifold for the 1965-67 Buick 300. On a separate note, if they produce the heads and need somebody to rep these at car shows, drag strips, vendor fairways, etc. in the Northeast, I'd be happy to talk it over with them.
I'll keep you in mind for the trade shows. I don't know about the manifold, as it would be an all-new casting, but if we get that far, I'll ask. Thanks, James. p.s. Let me know if others are interested in the heads too.
daniel : years back, i studied a combustion chamber design called "fireball" which relied on swirl, and upon pulling heads from my first 300, noticed the design promoted some swirl. question is, given the design of iron 300 heads (more common than aluminum) could they be modified, with suitable pistons and camshaft, to enhance the effect? isn't it easier and cheaper to have cams reground and domed pistons modified to promote swirl than to have an entirely new head designed (and still need custom cam and pistons to go with)? am i making any sense?
