When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Those are actually '86 E6SE heads, that casting number should be on the bottom of one of the intake runners. They were a 1 year experiment and ended up being the worst SBF head ever produced. Chambers are 64cc nominal, the intake valve is badly shrowded, and the exhaust port has a massive thermactor bump in it which all makes for terrible airflow.
I wouldnt outright say the E6 is garbage. Theres guys out there that swear by them (as if thats saying much). The idea is theyre a high swirl design... they do outflow the E7's that replaced them, but not by a lot. They were a one year only head, that much is definitely correct.
Its very common for vehicles to have previous year or years parts and or casting runs. Example, E7TE heads (read: boat anchors) were used on all small block fords excepting cobras and lightnings until 96.5. E7TE is the casting number, correlating the the latest revision. Sometimes the number is updated with almost or exactly zero improvment, consider C3AE (?) connecting rods rods, used for roughly 30 years.
Those are actually '86 E6SE heads, that casting number should be on the bottom of one of the intake runners. They were a 1 year experiment and ended up being the worst SBF head ever produced. Chambers are 64cc nominal, the intake valve is badly shrowded, and the exhaust port has a massive thermactor bump in it which all makes for terrible airflow.
They were not a one year head. They were in production until 91. Used in the big car lines (Crown Vic, Marquis and Lincoln) Chambers were 68 cc, his look to have been milled, so could be less.
I wouldnt outright say the E6 is garbage. Theres guys out there that swear by them (as if thats saying much). The idea is theyre a high swirl design... they do outflow the E7's that replaced them, but not by a lot. They were a one year only head, that much is definitely correct.
Its very common for vehicles to have previous year or years parts and or casting runs. Example, E7TE heads (read: boat anchors) were used on all small block fords excepting cobras and lightnings until 96.5. E7TE is the casting number, correlating the the latest revision. Sometimes the number is updated with almost or exactly zero improvment, consider C3AE (?) connecting rods rods, used for roughly 30 years.
They do not out flow E7's. E7's made 25 more HP than the E6's. E7's were not boat anchors. The D8 heads were.
they where shaved 10 thousands when I had the 5.0 rebuilt.....interesting info and opinions on these heads, I must say the motor pulls real nice with the setup I'm currently running...... thanks for your opinions and feedback.
No these definitely do not outflow E7's which work well enough to make about 275hp with the right combo of parts. The lopo 5.0 engines these were used on made 150hp, that exact same engine with E7 heads made 185hp. The head was used for 1 year on the Mustang 5.0 where it was maxed out making 200hp so Ford went back to the standard wedge design with the E7 head the following year. I had a set of E6s that I ported as best I could removing all the choke points and they still didn't make as much power as untouched E7's. What they did well was low rpm torque so that part of the design was good, but the chamber is much deeper than it needs to be and the ports are terrible even by Ford's standards.
General consensus is theyre not the best heads, but theyre not as bad as made out to be. Im fairly sure there was a engine masters build that used them and did well. All of the information ive seen, i surely wouldnt go out of my way to pull them for E7's. Easy to find lots of opinions regarding the E6s but this is one of the only places ive found any actual tested information on them. The guy is well known around the web and generally is the go to site for people looking to do light porting on GT40 and P heads. If i remember correctly, 87 was also the first year for the HO roller cam and EFI, so while its easy to point at the heads for the power discrepency, there were plenty of other changes there.
Some flow data I have seen shows that it does not flow as bad as it looks up to .5" lift. The flow numbers are similar to stock E7TEs. Also, with the high swirl chambers, the net power output may be slightly higher than the E7TE
I have these heads right now. On my street 5.0 They aren't bad as long as you understand their limits and match the combo.
The exhaust on the lopo engines stock were very restrictive. The intakes were choked down and had 17 lbs injectors. They also have a dish in the piston with no valve reliefs. The 68cc chamber is deeper than other heads. And i have read stock these heads can take up too .600 lift with out hitting the piston with out valve reliefs. But since it doesn't flow well at that lift it doesnt really help.
On mine the long block is stock including the camshaft. (I do have a explorer camshaft, gt40 3 bar heads and 1.73 cobra rockers for later on). But i have the speedway tight fit headers, 2.5 inch dual exhaust (no H or X pipe), 1985 mustang (4speed) sure spark roller gear distributor, edelbrock 289 street master intake and 670cfm 2v TBI.
The intake matches very well with this combo as it's over with at 4500 rpm just like the heads are.
If I ever pull these heads and keep them they will be ported on the exhaust side before being reinstalled.
General consensus is theyre not the best heads, but theyre not as bad as made out to be. Im fairly sure there was a engine masters build that used them and did well. All of the information ive seen, i surely wouldnt go out of my way to pull them for E7's. Easy to find lots of opinions regarding the E6s but this is one of the only places ive found any actual tested information on them. The guy is well known around the web and generally is the go to site for people looking to do light porting on GT40 and P heads. If i remember correctly, 87 was also the first year for the HO roller cam and EFI, so while its easy to point at the heads for the power discrepency, there were plenty of other changes there.
86 was the first year for MPEFI. The 86 Stang turned in slightly better 1/4" mile E.T's due to the better bottom end torque these motors made. The 87 motor made more HP, which was what everyone was looking at in buying a performance car. There was no discrepancy in the power output numbers, it's well documented what the difference was between the E6 and E7 heads. Ford even posted the numbers in their 5.0 Tech Manual.
General consensus is theyre not the best heads, but theyre not as bad as made out to be.
Except that they are. They don't work as well as E5,E7s which don't work as well as some of the early heads(C9,D0) or the GT40s so they are in fact the worst performing head ever made for this engine series. And from what I have been able to gather over the years the casting number quoted on DIYporting is wrong, the actual casting number is E6SE which makes sense because these heads were originally produced for a car engine not the trucks.. even thought they found their way into some trucks later on.
Except that they are. They don't work as well as E5,E7s which don't work as well as some of the early heads(C9,D0) or the GT40s so they are in fact the worst performing head ever made for this engine series. And from what I have been able to gather over the years the casting number quoted on DIYporting is wrong, the actual casting number is E6SE which makes sense because these heads were originally produced for a car engine not the trucks.. even thought they found their way into some trucks later on.
Id still take them over early truck or 2bbl heads. I have C9s, other than having a decent sized chamber, theyre hot garbage from all that ive been able to find. They manage to flow a whole whopping 145cfm and have garbage low lift.
More restrictive exhaust.
Dished pistons with no valve reliefs.
later models had a roller camshaft, it's on the below list under base.
8.9 CR
S or swirl port heads, 68cc chamber that is deeper not wider, valves are longer than regular heads and suck deeper into the heads.
17 lbs injectors
ECM tune is restrictive
The intake has a smaller throttle body and smaller ports
150 hp on single exhaust models, 160 on dual exhaust models, 270 lbs of torque.
