Jump to content

Which is better 2-V Cleveland or 4-V??


Recommended Posts

Probably lots of you guys and gals have seen this on TV but I do not get that channel on my cheap hook up, lol. Horsepower TV. I was watching some safari hunts in Africa and switched over to engines. 

They took a Cleveland and built it doing pretty much what a lot on here are doing. Went to roller cam, rockers and not lots of compression and used the 2-V heads. They also built a set of 4-V heads and took it all to the dyno. 

They also took a 351 W that they put Cleveland style heads on and made a 408. The W engine put out more HP but it also have more cubes and more compression. 

I like the fact that they ran same engine with both 2-V and 4-V heads. Go view I will not tell the results hear it straight from them. Hope the link works.

When a man is in the woods and talks and no women are there is he still wrong??:P

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:goodpost:

 

Thanks Chuck!  We can always count on you to "KEEP IT REAL".

 

Ray

1971 Boss 351  

1972 Q code 4 speed convertible 

1971 Mustang Sportsroof  351-2V FMX 

1971 Hardtop (parts car)

1973 Mach 1 (parts car)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, there is a myriad of different supporting hardware items required in the comparison between 2V heads and 4v heads. All they changed was the heads and did not change the intake manifold, headers or camshaft to compliment the 4V heads. Quite a poor comparison but the episode was all to basically tout the Edelbrock heads on the W.

Mike

__________________________________

Black 1985 GT

Yellow 1973 Mustang Mach 1

Black 2012 5.0 GT, 6-speed, Brembo brakes, 3.73's

Wimbledon White 1966 F-100 Shortbed Styleside, 390ci, Tremec 3550, FiTech EFI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree here. Remember Edelbrock is their main sponsor and pays their salaries. :)

73 Grande H Code. Headman long tube headers, T-5 Transmission, 3.70 Traclok, Lowered 1" all around, Aussie 2v heads w/ 2.19 intake, 1.71 exhaust, screw in studs, full roller cam 608/612 lift 280/281 duration LSA 112, Quick Fuel 750 CFM double pumper, AirGap intake.

 

- Jason

 

 

082-hot-rod-power-tour-2017-1970-1970s.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just another smoke and mirrors game. Not only do the 4V heads work well at higher RPMs, they respond well with the increased air volume requirements of stroker engines. The Edelbrock heads and intake would not have looked so impressive if they would have built a 408 Cleveland with stock iron heads with a Blue Thunder intake to compare them to.

 

 

“If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.”

--Albert Einstein

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been there done this. My 71 Grande I built the original 351 2v with Comp cam Edelbrock performer Mallory unilite 750 Holley C6 2800 stall 4.11 gear. 

I ran  my brother in his bone stock 85 GT and lost by 2 car lengths. Well the 2v motor broke a stock valve shortly after. The next motor was a 70 4v pretty much built the same. Weiand Xcelertor intake and headers the only thing different. I ran my brother again and smoked him by 4 car lengths.

 

In my opinion if your going to spend the money to build a Cleveland for performance the 4v head is the only choice.

- Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They picked pretty much the worst cam possible for the 351C, the 284 grind from Comp with a square pattern 224* duration and 110 LSA. Maybe they should have talked to someone that actually knew how to pick a Cleveland cam before doing this shootout, but then they might have hit well over 400hp and made the Edelbrock kit look worthless. Lets add that a 2V and 4V head engine have very different cam requirements.

 

Let's combine that with the intake "we chose a single plane Track Heat intake" derp. Then "2v heads are the one for the street" derp.

 

Basically, the put together a complete crap combo to hobble the 351C test to make the Edelbrock Clevor combo look good.

 

Heck, in this video they ran a stock B351 cam and hit 397hp.

 

 

 

Things I learned from the video - nothing.

 

Things that were reinforced - most automotive media is complete crap and this one is no exception. These "TV" shows are just as happy to do feature length ads for performance parts companies as the magazines were.

 

Summary - More cubes plus a bigger cam equals more horsepower. (duh)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...