Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

delete

Discussion in 'The Garage' started by R72K5, Apr 26, 2005.

  1. R72K5

    R72K5 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    8,905
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    central IL
    kjhgfds
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2005
  2. 75-K5

    75-K5 3/4 ton status

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2002
    Posts:
    5,353
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Anderson, Indiana
    According to Mortec they are 76cc heads off a 71-72 400sbc.
     
  3. DesertDueler2

    DesertDueler2 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2004
    Posts:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chandler, AZ
    I would just use your 882 heads. My friend has had really go luck using those heads on his bracket car. He has those heads on a 9:1 compression motor with an edlebrock performer rpm, holley 750, headers, and dual exhaust. His bracket car runs low 14s. Its an all steel 65 malibu.

    Dan
     
  4. R72K5

    R72K5 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    8,905
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    central IL
    882s ar ebad they warp and one is burnign oil really bad foulidn g plug
    i always throw away 882 they are all junk and risky to run

    i just got done rmeoving another set of 882 from another CMJ 1974 cast 350 engine cuz drive side one was burning water real bad, they were both warped badly

    882 are complete crap heads, cannot trust them for a second, just liek gov lok units, same deal!

    i will never do anything with 882 cept put in scrap iron, they are total crap, too risky to use, those who run them and no problme are ticking time bomb and are damned lucky, also the 624's they are light cast and crack all the time, 78-85 or so years mostly on 350 engines also,



    so these 493 are 400 heads cool

    :thumb:


    thanks
     
  5. beater_k20

    beater_k20 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2003
    Posts:
    10,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Elkhart, IN
    Randy, you are aware that 882s are one of the best vintage small block heads available short of double humps, right? all small block heads with 1.94+ valves are prone to cracking just like you claim the 882s are so bad about.
     
  6. dyeager535

    dyeager535 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2000
    Posts:
    26,978
    Likes Received:
    189
    Location:
    Roy WA
    I think his comments are about how light the castings are. I know nothing of the '882's, but I KNOW the Vortecs have thinner castings than other heads, (and they are 1.94's of course) which can lead to problems you might not see with heavier heads. At the very least you can't mill them as much as a head with thicker material.
     
  7. R72K5

    R72K5 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    8,905
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    central IL
    882 are total crap im not gonna sit and argue about i know they are from personal experience, many a time have i seen 882 heads ruin a perfectly good 350 or 400 engine due to warpage and/or cracking, they are total crap,

    however each to his own, as in all cases in this life,
    if you run 882 and no problems then yay go buy a lottery ticket cua youre one lucky mo-fu!

    also i would run any voretec any day of the year, i have neve rheard of nor sene any problem associated with any later light cast heads such as vortecs, never, ever, no worries there

    just with the 624's and the 882's, these are the two gm heads to junk, they are not worth the iron they are cast/smelt from, by any means, but unfortunately they are one of the top most mass produced heads from gm, so everyone runs them, its really sad,,

    for your reading pleasure: http://hotrodders.com/forum/t61029.html


    last post in this one:
    http://www.hotrodders.com/t61029.html&highlight=882


    6th post down into this thread on the vortec heads:
    http://www.carkb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/gmc/2123/Dissappointed-in-the-350


    and yay after some previous research i found that the 493 heads are 68.8 cc :
    www.nhra.com/tech_specs/engine/blueprints/CHEV-71.rtf


    :thumb:


    thanks
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2005
  8. beater_k20

    beater_k20 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2003
    Posts:
    10,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Elkhart, IN
    also keep in mind that there are no Vortec heads out there that are over 10 years old. they havnet been subjected to the heating and cooling cycles that many older heads have, so there's less chance of them cracking, even though they are a "lighter duty" casting. working a GM service parts counter at a dealership, for 2 years, who services several fleets of K3500 Vortec 5.7 equipped trucks, i have yet to see a set of Vortec heads that were cracked, despite nearly 300,000 miles on some of them. i also havent heard of a set cracking anywhere else. the deck surface thickness on the heads is nearly identical between a set of Vortec heads and a set of 882s, besides cracking issues were between the valve seats, and didnt have anything to do with the deck surface itself. BTW, 882s are heavy castings.
     
  9. R72K5

    R72K5 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    8,905
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    central IL
  10. beater_k20

    beater_k20 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2003
    Posts:
    10,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Elkhart, IN
    keep believing everything you read on the internet Randy, especially since it has no credible source or proof to back up the statments. demolition derby board as fuel for an arguement on engine performance? :haha: give me a break!
     
  11. R72K5

    R72K5 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    8,905
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    central IL

    grow up..


    thanks
     

Share This Page