Cadco steel heads

48Austin

Safety First! Then pull the trigger!
Joined
Oct 14, 2017
Messages
770
Reaction score
338
Points
63
Location
Over here
What vehicle(s) do you drive?
1964 Commercial, 1948 Austin, 58 Pan
Mea culpa, mea culpa, It's my fault, I apologize.

It isn’t even my time of the month and the edginess is coming through loud and clear. I am sorry.
With that said, please allow me a brief explanation of where I went wrong.

The first post in this thread mentioned: I had requested flow numbers from the order clerk and later from the machinist and never got any, so I had one flowed locally a few days ago; done on a 4.625 bore with a 1.75 exh. Pipe." My “QUICK” read of that sentence gave me two wrong impressions (both my own) 1, you had purchased something but weren’t getting the information you needed from the vendor, 2, the bore of your engine was 4.625. My bad!

My first thought was, “has this guy been told his engine bore is XXXX and the heads he purchased would flow more than they do?” Wrong assumptions in both cases.

Following posts by others also expressed some uncertainty with the heads, and with that, I keep going on my merry way thinking you had been told / sold a bill of goods! It should be clear that is easy for me to screw things up.

ENOUGH SAID.

I screwed up.

bro. “shamed” d

I'd go to my room but I'm already there.
BAILIFF!! WHACK HIS PEEPEE!
 

5one9

Active Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2018
Messages
751
Reaction score
218
Points
43
Location
WV
What vehicle(s) do you drive?
2007 Magnum SRT8, 1957 F100
I don't understand what is going on about a 4.625 bore. If you read the posts I stated that the ports were flowed on that size because the next smaller that he had
was 4.125, shrouding the valves. My block is an overbored standard block. Who said anything about my bore being 4.625?? I thought you'd catch your own mistake if
you read it. What discrepancy? If I had gotten flow numbers I never would have bought these. The clerk never sent flow numbers after I asked twice. The machinist stated
they didn't flow them because of the altitude in Albuquerque (he never heard of flow correction I guess). 5one9: after this time and expense "maybe he'll sell them cheap as
junkers" ??? Are you effing serious??? Big help. I just hope no-one gets screwed as bad as I did.

You gave that info several posts after I asked "why 4.625?" I never once considered you having anything other than 4.33-4.38". I just wondered why your boy chose a 4.625" sleeve. You finally answered just like I figured you would "because that is what he had". I'd question why a respectable head flow shop didn't at least have a 4.25" +0.030" or +0.060" for a big Chevy 427/454.

When you get the Boogieman heads, have him load them up on the same machine with the same 4.625" sleeve and see if he can't kill 40 or 50cfm off of them also. And post results if you will.

The people that are verrrrrry versed on the questions that you have about your current heads, the flow bench method/equipment that your boy used, and everything Boogieman are over on the Facebook site. Join up. I'll slide over there and wait for you to post this same complaint in the same manner that you did here and watch you get hacked shitless.

14 years and this is your first post. Congratulations, it went very well.
 

Caddylackn

Active Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
278
Reaction score
97
Points
28
I question the flow measuring done by the flow bench tester on these Pro Comp heads.

They should be able to mock up your bore for the test, and they should be able to tell you how many inches of water vacuum they flow tested these at. The standard is 28 inches of water. Testing at a 4.6" bore size would not accurately mimic the same flow shrouding from the cylinder walls you have in your motor.

So the flow bench tester only had 4.125" or 4.6" bore available? So, they basically can't accurately flow test heads from motors in the 400 cubic inch to 550 cubic inch range? Which means they can't do accurate flow testing on any big block under 550 cubic inches, except a 427 BBC. Good luck with staying in head flow testing business.

I am betting this flow test is bunk numbers and the heads are probably fine. I can't imagine having only slightly higher than stock flow numbers with oversized valves that big, unless there was no bowl work or port work done. The pictures will verify that.
 

5one9

Active Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2018
Messages
751
Reaction score
218
Points
43
Location
WV
What vehicle(s) do you drive?
2007 Magnum SRT8, 1957 F100
A 427 has a 4.25" bore. He can't do that either. A 400 SBC is 4.125" and lots of big, big, big stuff has a 4.625". Nothing in between? Geez.
He can't do 427, 454, or 502 Chevy. He can't do 427, 429, or 460 Ford. He can't do any Dodge big block. He can't do a 455 Pontiac. He can't do 455 Olds, 400 Pontiac, and several others if they are even slightly overbore. 430 or 455 Buick? Nope. And on and on and on...........................Yep, that's where I would have taken a much more common engine than any of the above, a Cadillac 500. I'd say that we saw the results that we would have predicted if we had known a 4.625" bore was being used..............incorrect results.

I still hope to see some Boogieman head flow data on a 4.625" bore from that shop soon.
 

48Austin

Safety First! Then pull the trigger!
Joined
Oct 14, 2017
Messages
770
Reaction score
338
Points
63
Location
Over here
What vehicle(s) do you drive?
1964 Commercial, 1948 Austin, 58 Pan
My guess also that the numbers are wrong. Not by what everybody is saying about bore size and all the other tech stuff. But by years. This guy hasn't been in business for 30 to 40 years by cheating anyone. Sure some prices on things are higher, but it is one stop shopping. Remember MTS/CHP has been sold 3 or 4 times since Delavin, WI. Courtney STILL owns it.
 

ccjohn2

Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
72
Reaction score
24
Points
8
Location
NWIndiana
I asked why 4.625” in post #3. I figured the answer would be “because that’s what he he had” to which I would have replied “then your results may be correct, try something smaller”. But we never heard back from him. Maybe he’ll sell them cheap as junkers. I do wonder why they wouldn’t give him flow data when he bought them.

Bro. D, check your mcisprint on post #6. That’s 0.100”, not 0.0100”.

Bro. “Just sayin’ “ Steve
I had Cadco port a set of older virgin Bulldog heads for me. They used 2 sets of them in the Engine Masters Challenge some years back. And did fairly well. They did not flow mine either. They stated that because of the altitude they are located at the flow numbers they provide wouldn't be correct for where I live. So I'm going to have mine flow here where I live to get some numbers. I was wondering why they flowed the OP head on a 4.625 bore fixture also. I would think it would mess with the velocity of the charge coming in to the cylinder.
 

Psychoholic

Professional Idiot
SUPPORTING MEMBER
Joined
May 28, 2018
Messages
143
Reaction score
48
Points
28
Location
Loganville, GA
What vehicle(s) do you drive?
72 Miller Meteor
Anybody get much out of this thread? I didn't. Time to pull the plug.

I wish you had a stock set of heads that you could send to your flow guy. I'm curious what his bench would read for stockers over your ported ones that didn't seem to do very well.
 

48Austin

Safety First! Then pull the trigger!
Joined
Oct 14, 2017
Messages
770
Reaction score
338
Points
63
Location
Over here
What vehicle(s) do you drive?
1964 Commercial, 1948 Austin, 58 Pan
Bill! Your not getting much out of this thread o_O ? Many guys have chimed in and given you many good suggestions and opinions:confused:.
 
Top