Is that why the Windsor stayed in production so much longer? Because the Clevo was banned so much?

​@peterj5751 windsors don't make any power until you put a non ford head on them.

@@flatbrokemodsquad4241 which makes you wonder why the Cleveland was discontinued long before the Windsor.

Discontinued because of emissions controls, was built in Australia through to around 83. During the 70s most V8s from factory were strangled by pollution gear.

​@@flatbrokemodsquad4241that's not true either. Just built a windsor 408 stroke all cast iron except for the intake 522 horsepower.

Spot on! Yes, the CHI runs a great chamber design. The LS engine is also a good example of a well designed chamber requiring less ign timing.

I run mine on propane and use the 302 Cleveland 2V heads on the 351 , greetings from Australia 🇦🇺

I had a 72 f100 4×4 with the little transfer case and 4speed... Was a favorite of mine...

You’ve made my day mate! Glad you’re enjoy it all. 😊

We've found similar results of both single and dual plane with the tapered. We also have straight 4 hole, completely Open and tapered open in our test set, both 1 and 2 inch high variants. We often fit all 4 styles in a session to see which works best on a given intake manifold design.

@@GlennEverittMasterofMachines Which one seems to work best on Ford windsors and a super victor intake?

Me too

Hi Chris! Thats a good question and I’d have to ask PowerHouses’s machine shop division in this case, but in most cases yes, castings are purchased bare and fettled in house with tweaks, finishing (sometimes even CNC porting) and then John’s choice of preferred hardware to complete the end product.

Just don't need it at this rpm level. 30 years ago I helped a friend run a Cleveland in his gas econo dragster with a totally stock bottom end. Regularly ran it to 7200 rpm with nothing more than oil gallery restrictors and a Melling HV pump. Never had an issue with the bottom end.

Thanks mate! Power wise the EFI would be similar, although EFI provides more tuneability and therefore provides a more efficient engine drivability wise, better cold start, fuel economy, etc.

@@GlennEverittMasterofMachines Sorry mate...took me a year to say thanks for your info! Hope you're going great Glenn. BTW...what kind of dollars are we looking at for a donk like that? Keep the videos coming. Cheers mate.

Hi mate, great to see you've caught my channel after all this time. Unfortunately, I had to move the project on as I ran out of budget to complete it. Thankfully I have a sister car but in a road variant these days.

@@GlennEverittMasterofMachines cheers for clearing that up mate. Now to get through your back catalogue of uploads. Cheers 👍

@@psyopgypsy , will do! Great to have you onboard.

I was as well. Those heads, 10.7 to 1 compression 240 somthin at .050 dur. & I believe he said a 950 cfm carb?? I guess with a set up like that I'm used to seeing outrageous numbers?? Those are Yates heads?? Kaase was making well into the 600's in the engine masters challenge with those heads & 400 ci??

Me too my friend, iam too tired of hearing about LS s also✌🏻

Amen

I like smoking ls builds with my junk iron head junk.

Well said

Clevelands eat ls's and crap bowties 😎

You mean when the secondaries opened and activated the accel pump during the early stages of the run?

Looks like they didn't have the vac advance hooked up either

Yes Andrew, our Premium 98 octane pump fuel (straight from a regular Service station) uses the RON (Research Octane Number) measurement system. I think the US use the MON (Motor Octane Number) method. Depending on the composition of the fuel, I'm told the MON measurement can be about 8 to 12 octane lower than the RON, but there is no direct link between RON and MON. One thing to Keep in mind is that compression ratio, camshaft profile and combustion chamber design has a huge bearing on ignition timing requirements. The CHI heads used on this engine have a very efficient chamber design, requiring less ign timing to achieve the desired power output.

I'm not trying to be a smart ass, but I'm sure you've heard of this guy with this particular 400 M build. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jbxjerWa183OYJc.htmlsi=mzD1s6no0iXXesM_

Look at back when Kaase was winning all the engine masters challenges. He was using these heads on the 400. There are articles about his builds. I dont remember what yrs but im sure if u Google it u will find them. He won like 4 in a row or somthing??

2 dollars 34 cents

Started as an apprentice mechanic aged 15, eventually owned my own dyno shop, got out of the game when I was 40 and entered TV and media, but I couldn't stay away from the performance game, so I'm back! It's an addiction!

Ran out of budget a while back and had to chop it sadly. I have a street equivalent these days thankfully, same colour and all.

The water brake was on and applying load to the engine. The plug read was fine and backed up what we saw on the O2 sensor readings.

No, it's an oil spill. That's no.5 cylinder on a Clevo too.

Definitely high 600s on an honest dyno

​@GlennEverittMasterofMachines Agreed. Have a 408 W with AFR 205's, 12.8 to 1, and .700 lift solid roller. 661 H.P. @ 7100. So... yeah.

I agree Michael, their 195 variants would also be worth a try. It’d be an interesting experiment.

@@GlennEverittMasterofMachines absolutely glen I built a 408 AFD 2v heads many moons ago. Small solid roller cam and single plan intake for a 1981 XLT Bronco. 536 ft/lbs of torque..579 hp @ 6,100 rpm -Oh boy what torque monster. Felt like big block the second you touch throttle. The torque just poured right in.

Duration is measured at .050 . 240° @ .050 . Valve lift I believe was .600". When you consider a factory 4V Cleveland probably had 218° @.050 and 445" lift , this modern cam is a big step up.

And the M400 Block

Yeah I thought that too. Carb should be like 750 maybe.

@@jegr3398 I'm running a 750dp on mine and I'm still lean I'm having issues a bit of sputter on tip in so I'm going to change power valve center squirters and go to 50cc pumps front and back to see if that helps

It’s an optical illusion. There is no hole.

What about a 363 with its big bore.

It's all in the cylinder heads. You could achieve the power output with some old school cast 4v's with 351 cubes but the port is so huge that torque output and power under the curve would suffer. There is always a trade off to do it right and reliably, it just cost $ in componentry.

In the US we just start with a 400 cube ford motor out of a 70s era truck. Chunk all the smog crap, and use good Cleveland top end parts and decent pistons to up the compression.

Yoy'd have to ask the manufacturer CHI, but I'd say they're placing these heads in between a 2V and 4V variant port runner size wise, hence the name 3V.

@@GlennEverittMasterofMachines Thanx.

@@steveskrobot9496 The "V" in this case stands for venturi. Meaning the 4V heads are appropriate for 4V (venturi) carburetors, AKA 4 barrel carburetors. 2V heads were for 2 barrel carbs. The 4V heads were designed for 8500 RPM race engines and had HUGE ports. Too big for the street. The 3V heads are an in between size, larger ports than the 2V but smaller than the 4V so they're still streetable.

@@jegr3398 Yeh im aware of the Venturi abbreviation , hence the 3V makes not alot of sense.