I have a 460 with this number on the heads, D3VE-A2A. Could some one please tell me what heads I have??

Thanks Leland

 

those are the run of the mill passenger car smog heads. used from 73 till around 86 on all car and trucks (exception being the rare police interceptor heads with D2OE casting). not bad heads but not great either

2.08" intakes
1.78" exhaust
95 (give or take) cc combustion chambers
bolt down pedastal rockers


biggest drawback is that they have very restrictive exhaust ports.

nothing special about them. with work can be made to support around 600 or so hp, but with the money speant on doing that, you can get a nice set of aftermarket aluminum heads that will blow them away for not much more money.

rgds
Mike

 

Thank you very much for that info. I was thinking that they were not all that special!!

Thanks Leland

 

These are the same casting numbers on my heads. Yes, from what I understand there are better heads---but there are also worse heads.

For someone like myself these will work just fine. I'm going with a mild build and have more time than money so I'll do my research (and my best) to port and smooth the exhaust side and call it good.

 

I'm in the same boat with you carlmaass. Money being the determining factor, research and elbow grease will be the way for me also. Thanks for the reply.

Leland

 

Mike is right across the board but one part needs cleared up a little. Yes they have restrictive exhaust ports but so do all the other casting numbers. Basic same port as the early heads so switching to those doesn't gain anything. Even the SCJ and D2OE heads have restrictive exhaust ports which is the downfall of the 385 series heads. It is also why you run split duration cams with I prefer 10deg more exhaust duration then intake. (it is also why all out race heads like the A heads run a BBC exhaust port configuration)

 

monsterbaby, I appreciate the info on the split duration cams, gives me more to look at in the rebuild process. I also have a 429 that came out of a 68 T bird, which of these would be a better hp build for a 4x4?? tremendous low end torque and good all around power??

 

Can't beat cubic inches especially for the torque factory.

Only read advantage the 68 motor will have is smaller combustion chambers so higher compression but since your rebuilding it's a no big deal situation just order pistons for the heads you decide ot use to get into the desired compression ratio.
The 68 heads will have a 75cc nominal combustion chamber.

 

I think there are HUGE power differences in the 460's as the years went on. I know that some of the power loss is due to retarding the cam and perhaps the cam itself was involved in the "detuning process".

The early 460's had 500 lbs of torque and 365 hp while the later had closer to 400 lbs of torque and only 200 hp. Ouch! As the compression ratio was lowered so was the power output. What would the maximum comp ratio be for running 87 octane?

Cams: Is there a particular cam that would be ideal for the stock lower comp ratios? I have not heard of "split duration". I have however heard that one must be careful when choosing a cam for the lower comp ratios.

Any head work aside, I believe an early timing chain with an RV cam will really liven up a 460 for a truck.

 

the power difference between the early and late 460's can also be attributed to the way the two measurements were taken by the factory. pre 72 (or maybe 71) the motor was run without any accessories or in some cases exhaust manifolds and smog equipment. after that the power rating was the engine fully dressed with all accessories, manifolds and smog equipment. so the actual difference in hp between early and late is not as huge as it is made out ot be on paper.

the other reason i like the early small combustion chamber heads (68 - 71 heads), is that they used a screw in rocker stud. that way you can adapt roller rockers and non-poitive stop rocker studs a lot easier then the newer heads that either require machining the rocker pedastals or buying the conversion kits.

rgds
Mike

 

Ah yes. I forgot they changed the way they measure the power output.

Thank you sir.