TA Performance heads for the BOPR and SBB

[castlesid]

If the lifter bores for the centre two ports are 3/8th off line for the 215/300/340/Rover heads would this not put a lot of side thrust on the lifter bores and valve gear?

Kevin.

[BlownMGB-V8]

Not that much. That's about 3/8 in 12 or more inches or a ratio of about 30:1 or greater so for 300 lbs of lift pressure you'd get 10 lbs or less of side pressure. The valve train can easily handle that, provided the lifter isn't spring loaded in that direction. If it is, solid spacers instead of springs would solve the problem.

Jim

[pcmenten]

Regarding canted pushrods, my Olds heads have offset rockers. I wonder if they'd help cure the canted pushrod problem.

Re; 300 vs 350, I'll have to do a search, but I think the 350 block is taller, and that might be a deal breaker in an MGB. But the weight of the 350 block being the same as a 300 is pretty impressive.

[roverman]

It would be great with these, out-there, engine builds to see a price tag, maybe dyno results? Just for me, I would turn down the counterweights vs. cutting down the pistons underneath. With lighter pistons/rods vs., oem.,one might not need that much heavy metal to balance. Has anyone out there run "deck plates" on a BOR. with the new  sleeves through it all ? Other than the core shift issues, I don't see the late Rover block as all that fragile.roverman

[NixVegaGT]

I suppose you could destroke a touch to get it to fit a late Rover block. Do they make OS journal bearings up to like 50 thou or something? Maybe it would be possible to destroke a 350 crank to 3.75" and use the SBC 5.7" rod with a custom 10 over 305 piston.

Then again that's a lot of work and money for only 50 lbs weight savings. It would be a dimensionally smaller engine though. Smaller cid too: 330. The rod ratio would totally suck though.

[BlownMGB-V8]

See that's where you need to take advantage of the low pin position on the Buick pistons and move the pin up to get a better rod ratio. You still run into the problem of interference between the crank counterweights and the piston skirts though and I don't know how severe that would be with a 3.85 stroke in a Rover block. Maybe custom forged pistons would solve it, maybe you would need to cut the counter weights as Art suggested. But his point that with lighter rods and pistons the weights could be reduced is a good one and it might be worth talking to an engine balancer about. After all, any decent sized lathe could handle that job easily. Personally I'd rather have the iron block, and building a 350 by using a 300 block is certainly feasible if deck height is a real concern.

But as far as build cost goes, I have probably around $1500 in my reciprocating assembly and that's with Venolia forgings and 7" Scat rods. The other costs have been largely comparable to any standard rebuild except for a few things like o-ringing the deck. So while I can't give you a total, I'm quite comfortable in saying that I could duplicate the engine for under 3 grand, not including induction or assembly costs.

Now if I was starting over with a 350 short block and putting nominal costs at about $1500, plus the TA heads for about 2 grand, plus a custom roller cam and lifters at around another grand, plus an intake at about five hundred, that might get us in the ballpark of what such an engine would cost to build. So for around 5 grand or so, a pretty hot engine that doesn't need zink additives in the oil and can run about as hard as most guys are willing to push it. That's not too bad, and really, no custom machine work and the short block is bone stock or close to it so it's a cheap and easy replacement if needed. The heads can be rebuilt indefinitely. That's not such a bad deal. Horsepower of such an engine would be a very flexible thing, depending on cam choice, etc. but over 300 would be the baseline with a stock cam and it would go up significantly from there.

Jim

[roverman]

If I just had a P-76 block, I could commit to a 32 valve with 3.85" stroke. No "bump" issues on the cam, there all upstairs in the Lotus heads. Reworked heads with bigger valves reported to flow 305 @28" and .450" lifts.In other words, these heads would adequately support the inches. Jim, did you say "7" rod? Compression distance on your piston? Go with the flow, in a good way, roverman.

[BlownMGB-V8]

Yep, 7" C-C. They are FHF rods so they use the Buick bearing inserts and have a 3/4" piston pin. That's a mite small perhaps and the pins I ended up with are thin wall. But very light. That's the one place in the engine I feel might be a little weak, but what's done is done. The pistons have a 1.283" compression height so with a 10.208" deck, 20cc dish and 52cc chambers the compression came out to 10.6:1. The pistons are actually a bit proud of the deck, maybe .008" depending on rock and .050" head gaskets.

But the compression height on regular Buick pistons is closer to 1-7/8". Depending on your ring package you could easily get down to 1-1/4" so that's 5/8" you have to play with on rod length and stroke, maybe more.

Jim

[BlownMGB-V8]

I just got word that TA is halfway finished with the programming and setup to machine the 4 sets of new head castings. Based on that I'd say they will be ready to ship by about Thanksgiving. At last check there was one set out of the three that wasn't spoken for. Price is going to be in the 2000-2500 range and those who have seen the heads on the MGB-Roadmaster 455 will recognize that these are quality pieces. This is actually a rare opportunity and I wouldn't be surprised if the 4th set aren't already spoken for, but I'd like to see one of my peers get them if possible. How many sets are made will depend entirely on how well they sell. If these first four sets go out the door right away they will order up some more immediately. If not, no more will be made until the last set sells, and maybe not until another set after that is ordered. You see how this works? A small volume producer can't afford to tie up a lot of assets in inventory. So if you're on the fence, calling them up to see if you can get that last set does two things. It either gets you a piece of a very exclusive production run, and if not that at least gets you in at the beginning (They are probably numbering them and the other sets are going to Australia), and it insures that at least one more set of castings will be run. Both good things for you and the rest of us. I'd do it myself if I could.

Jim

[Greg55_99]

P76 block with a Buick 3.85" stroke crank...

Yeah, I've seen one of those....  Be nice with a set of those TA heads and a 3.75" bore...

Greg

[roverman]

How-bout a "Swan Neck? Peeped on the JE(John Eales) site.Separate IR man's.(ram-tuning) for ea. bank/any deck height,cost,360 sterling. Looks like a copy of the factory "works" set-up. Set-up for DCOE's but how bout twin flow meters and port injectors, or better yet,slide plate? "May not clear a std. MGB bonnet-results may vary",roverman.

[NixVegaGT]

The TA heads made it into their catalog. Although the price is listed as "to be determined". The idea of changing the valve angle to put them closer to the centerline of the cylinder is pretty smart. 2.02 intake 1.6 exhaust is pretty awesome. Would work great with a larger bore.

I don't know, guys. I'm pretty keyed up to get these. I'm a bit surprised they built these heads before the 350 though. Interesting. They're showing pix of the rough cast with the flanges and deck finished. No CNC work on the ports yet. I'm pretty sure they were talking about doing that. I was also thinking they were going to sell them with valve gear installed. Having bosses for their valve covers would be great too. I'm pretty sure they were talking about doing that too. I do like the more parallel valve cover flange. The "flatter" stock flange really doesn't help much in regard to room for larger valve lifts.

Those V6 heads of theirs are pretty great. I'm hoping they are ready to by this summer.

[87gn@tahoe]

I think there's a MUCH bigger market for the Rovers than there'll ever be for the 350 and making them work on the early SBB's is just an added benifit.. It was a smart business move.

If anything they should work on developing a "kit" to retrofit a 350 with these heads (cam, rockers, intake, headers/manifolds), rather than go through all of the R&D to make 350 heads that they may never even break-even with.

Marty at EELCO makes aluminum intakes for the Nailhead, was in developement of a SP 'nail intake (quit due to poor flow #'s), is IN developement of a DP 'nail single-quad intake.. perhaps some poor sap could convince him to work on Rover-BOP-SBB intakes???

[BlownMGB-V8]

I don't know how many of the 350 guys will go for these, they are a pretty fanatical bunch. But a few will if the parts are available. The rest are still hanging on promises that TA will make the 350 heads, and TA is still promising to do it. You can't really blame them, it's really been a fantastic engine.

As far as which market would be the best one, that's a complete crap shoot with no way to tell. 350 production numbers are something like double all of the BOP/Rover and early SBB combined if I remember right but of course many are long gone. What the actual market is, nobody really knows.

But I'm glad they are making these heads, even though I consider them overpriced based on their other heads. They should perform very well.

JB

[NixVegaGT]

Their other heads are between $1200 and $2500. That seems pretty reasonable. Are they planning on charging more than that? I mean it is more than the SBC heads but there is a LOT of competition there. I wish they were less expensive too but I'll probably buy them. LOL!

[BlownMGB-V8]

Their final price isn't set yet but they were talking a couple grand over those prices last time it came up. Personally I think they've lost their way. Hopefully they may recover because I think their volume will go way up if they can stay close to current pricing, but this deal with TR Spares has them seeing dollar signs so I don't know. We may have another part for the rich racers only on our hands. I don't know how much of that the world can stand, especially in these troubled economic times.

JB

[roverman]

Ok, This is "probably" a reach, but what if there was a better performing head for street use, that the average gearhead could install?  Say like a 907 "kit" ,I'm thinkin Rover head market is a fairly small niche anyway, might be enough 907 heads to go around ? Yes I know, would'nt the "valves" cost twice as much?  roverman

[NixVegaGT]

Seriously?! That's way off. $4k!!? That's a bit depressing. I hope they'll come around.

[BlownMGB-V8]

Yeah, I'm not in that market.

[castlesid]

Looks like TA are thinking that if Ian Richardson at Wildcat can charge what he does then why not up the price,

Ian may only sell a handfull of sets of heads a year so you can see why his price structure is what it is, I would have thought that TA were looking at a higher volume production and sales and therefore their pricing should reflect that.

We will no doubt see in due course.

Kevin.

[BlownMGB-V8]

I hope they come to their senses. Mike's been seduced away from their traditional market and that's good for Rovers but could be very bad for TA. We'll see.

JB

[roverman]

I would truly enjoy putting a "smart" hemi head, into the mix,( bigger valves in a smaller bore), but just a bit much on my plate already.  You know, the "ancient", early hemi, just placed an, awe inspiring, 3rd place in the "Engine Masters  Challenge" ! That means there were 37 "modern" engines behind it !!  As an antique myself, that makes me feel pretty good. roverman.

[mgb260]

Art, What's the bore spacing on the 53-57 241-270-325 Dodge Hemi? Hey, I know this is a Buick thread but you got me thinking, and you mentioned it first! Found it!Bore spacing early Dodge=4.1875,Desoto=4.3125.

[NixVegaGT]

It sounds cool but aren't those heads like 1000 lbs.? I wonder what the new hemi's bore spacing is... Nevermind, it's 4.46".

[roverman]

Jim, " one casting-one casting only".Nic'," there is no box-feel the force". Rover could finally be the "Lead" dog. Don't forget Plymouth thru 56', roverman.