Fast Burn head question

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Oct 4, 2009 | 11:25 AM

flatop

Thread Starter

Advanced

Joined: Nov 2007

Posts: 63

Likes: 0

From: Hockley Texas

Fast Burn head question

I am interested in building a 383 or 406 for my 77. I already have a set of Fast Burn heads that were given to me. I know most opinions are to use AFR's or other brands because they flow better. Has anyone upgraded to 2.02 and 1.60 valves and checked flow values? I have read everything I can, and can find no data for this change even though Chevy reports the seats are large enough. Most other heads are at least 2.02 and 1.60 or better. I know about the velocity idea behind the 2.00 and 1.55 sizes, but most of the motors from the Chevy crate motors are fairly mild cammed. The runners are substantial with 210 intake and 78 exhaust. If I modify these heads and decide to build a 406, would they be a fairly good combination or a waste of money? I know it may not be worth it for the 383, although all say to let em breath. Any input would be appreciated. Just trying to use what I have if possible. Thanks guys!

Flatop

Oct 5, 2009 | 02:37 AM

gingerbreadman1977

Drifting

Joined: Apr 2006

Posts: 1,911

Likes: 2

From: gold coast queensland

are you crazy. gmpp fastburn heads are up their with the best heads in their category. yes they have small valves with large intake runners but its the way they are designed and there is a patent on it stopping other manufacturers from copycatting so if you got them as a gift or for free you would be mad to go buy another set of afr or something else rather then use these . here is a few articles for you to read....
i am biased as i have these heads on 2 cars but my mate has same components as 1 of my cars with different heads and mine is much stronger. it can only be the heads.they are good for 500hp but will need stronger or at least shimmed springs if you go a big cam.

http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/te...ine/index.html

http://www.superchevy.com/tech/0310s...wer/index.html

Last edited by gingerbreadman1977; Oct 5, 2009 at 02:40 AM.

Oct 6, 2009 | 06:56 PM

flatop

Thread Starter

Advanced

Joined: Nov 2007

Posts: 63

Likes: 0

From: Hockley Texas

Quote:

Originally Posted by gingerbreadman1977

I appreciate your reply, and no I'm not crazy,I think! I have never found an article or engine build with more than a 350 ci in which larger valve and valve springs were tried. Even Gibert Chev. built a Limited 500 HP 383 and did not use these heads. They used AFR and Edelbrock #2204 cam. I have read,printed, and tried to compare every 383 combination I can. I'll have to find the material, but one on Chev. parts article stated the seats were specifically large enough to go to the 202/160 valves. I just have not seen anything to show the possibilties of increased flow or not. I am just posing a what if ? Most of the things I read show the heads were mainly designed for the 350 and at 383 ci everyone jumps to other heads if they are seeking more than the crate motored 425 HP. Don't get me wrong I know they are substatial flowing heads, just investigating the pros and con if any. I am just curious if I use larger valves/springs and build either the 383 or go to a 400+ ci., will this be a wasted effort(remember the heads were free).Thanks for the respose.

Flatop

Oct 6, 2009 | 11:34 PM

gingerbreadman1977

Drifting

Joined: Apr 2006

Posts: 1,911

Likes: 2

From: gold coast queensland

i have a set of these heads unmodified on a flat topped 383 . gm eliminator mainifold. demon 750 DP, crane hydraulic cam. 420 hp all day long ( if i went to a bigger cam 450+ NP) . now i have never touched the valves so i dont know what the pros and cons are but gm does warn not to do it or modify the ports.
i like it when i open the hood and people go ...
OH what are those ?
and then i think its nice to have something different to the usual edelbrock,afr etc etc
what did you think when you read the 2 links i attatched?

Reply Subscribe