What's the Deal with the buick/Rover head for TA Performance?

The same TA head design upon which this new head is based supports 1500 hp from 274 cid engines. So I suspect the limiting factor may be whatever the factory block will tolerate.

 

These would do just fine:
http://triumphroverspares.com.au/page.asp?parentid=5&parent2id=16&parent3id=29&productid=87

A little pricey though.

Jim

 

Ok, but that's with forced induction. The heads that are on the link posted earlier are naturally aspirated and making 550 h.p. I wonder what those Buick 6 head's performance are naturally aspirated?

 

They do have some nice $tuff. I reckon anyone in the U.S. who wanted to use the new heads to their full potential would do better to make up a tunnel ram with straight runners, one or two carbs, or EFI. You would need to make a valley cover for the iron head 300 and the 340 anyway, may as well do it all in one go and get the runner length and volumes exactly right for the application.

 

565hp@7150rpm 14:1 one carb 345.6cu.in. Big cam. That's my guess.

 

A couple of things..

Remember that the figures for the Wildcat heads are calculated at 10".. The more common industry standard is higher... 28" I believe..
so Im not sure what the conversion tool is but those heads flow way more at 28"!!! I believe the stage II were based on the Buick Indy head.

I am also curious what the planned intake runner volume is on the TA heads???

 

Multiply flow @ 10" by 1.67332 to get flow @ 28".

 

So for comparison sake using your calculation..

The Wildcat stage 1. which uses standard Intake and pushrod arrangement.. flows 217 CFM out of the box... This is similar to what others have posted with modified 64 Buick 300 heads with Buick V-6 stage 1 valves and porting...

The Wildcat stage II heads flow 250 CFM out of the box.

So again.. Im wondering what the intake port volume will be on the TA heads? They certainly sound like they will be more affordable for us guys stateside.

 

Based on the V6 it'd be 156/72 (SI) and 163/73 (SE). Chamber volume, 46 and 55(cnc ported).

Jim

 

275 CFM on a 156 CC intake port??
Brodix and AFR both require at least a 195 cc port to get those numbers while maintaining any kind of velocity

 

A Chevy intake port is longer than the Buicks. The important thing is the cross sectional area (csa). To give you an idea, a P76 intake port is about 100cc. A 215 is probably about the same but I've never checked, someone else might know.

 

Brodix and AFR both require at least a 195 cc port to get those numbers while maintaining any kind of velocity

narrower runners are what give you velocity. if TA is pulling the same flow number on a 40sc less cross-section, we're going to have velocity out the wazoo.

 

Here is the TA v6 head in action

 

One more post:

 

Here is the TA V6 head in action:

http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/engine/buick_v6_turbo_block/index.html

 

I was checking out those links posted for the Ozzy stuff and noticed a roller cam engine. I couldn't find any other info on roller cam packages though. I would hope that somebody will step up and offer a roller cam package for us once these new heads come out.

Do the first gen engines require some oiling mods? I see the 350 lifters advertised as '70-up. I know the oiling system changed on the big blocks at some point too.

This is all great news!

Brian

 

They changed between the 69 and 70 model year also.

 

So any update on the new ta head? Is there any pics of any part? Any specs? I know they said comparable to the v6 head, but there sould be some kind of info? It has been 2 months and it sould be soon, I hope?

 

It has been 2 months and it sould be soon, I hope?

they haven't got the 455+ blocks and accessories into full production yet. chill out.

this isn't anything like the Bulldog "5 years in and still don't have blocks for most of the prepaid customers" death march.



Cason,

nevermind. i see you caught your mistake.

 

bump