Best GM SBC Casting (performance-wise) ?
The 461 and 462 casting heads are good for street performance, especially the 461X casting, which featured runners of 170CC (vice the "stock" 461 casting 160CC runner). HOWEVER......
Neither the 461 or 462 have BOLT HOLES cast in the face of the head for your alternator, power steering, smog pump, etc.... SO, I would rate both of these castings as good for a restoration, resto rod, or budget racer ONLY.
Additionally, most of the 461, 462, and 186 castings came with pressed in rocker arm studs. Add the cost of having your heads surfaced and tapped for screw-in studs.
ALSO... guys my age remember that older SBC heads with 2.02/160 valves had an ugly habit of cracking between the valves.......
Two factory heads were not mentioned: the 487 and vortec heads.
The 487 was used on early 70s sbc performance engines. It has good intake/exhaust runner volume/velocity, accepts decking well, and is not prone to cracking like the later 882 and other 70s castings. It accepts 2.02/160 valves well, but most had pressed in rocker studs. They are larger chamber heads, but this allows you to run a flattop piston and still keep your CR under 9.5:1. There are also a SMALL number of 487X castings out there, these also feature a 170CC intake runner.
The new Vortec sbc heads are TOUGH to BEAT for a street head. They feature intake runners that promote intake air velocity over brute volume, hence a head that promotes TORQUE, the true friend of STREET rodders. Yes, the valves are 1.94 or 2.00, but they are part of an excellent, matched package. Many tests run by many mags prove that the Vortec head flows better than ANY OTHER factory cast head, except, of course, the 292 casting and maybe the rare X castings. Also, lets face it, the older sbc valve cover sealing, in a word, sucked. The Vortec has the superior center bolt cover/raised rail system that really eliminates oil drooling from under your covers. Best thing about them is the price, especially when compared to aftermarket heads. BUT... they are only a 64CC chamber, SO dished pistons are a consideration.
Hope this info is helpful. And now, I shall go outside, smoke a cigarette, and take the V12 Jag out to terrorize the locals. Which is weird, because I don't smoke......



I also realise this is an older thread. That being said, just today
I was wondering if I should change out the heads on my low mileage
'90 L-98, (113 casting) for the original heads (462?) that need screw in studs installed and probably a valve job, guides?
Doing cam and intake change, motor is in '67 roadster since '91.
Bolt holes not an issue
Info here tells me 462's not that much better than alum 113's,
in view of the expense to get my 462's ready, which will probably be
2 to 3 times more than I'm thinking right now, ($200-300)

My 113's run just fine and barring suprises, need only spring and
guideplate ghanges. I'll bring the 462 set home and have a look at them....
Comments?
Cheers, GA
(Current and ongoing victim of project creep) me
As far as flow The Chevy Turbo heads are the very best old iron. The part # is 340292 The I/E ratio is 88%. Flow is 201 int 177 ex @ .600 lift. This is as good as any modern aftermarket head with a similar port size. They are rare and were a GM over the counter performance head. If you can find a set buy them.
The 492 is next @ 209/141 @ .600 lift
The 186 and 041 is next @ 188/140 @ .600 lift
In comparison the AFR 195 eliminator flows 286/215 @ .600 lift
See why they make big HP numbers!








