The SC build... which 8v or 16v

[Anonymous_User]

Time for a new poll on my SC build.

Car is to be a drag car that is capable of being driven on the street. Not a daily driver, but driveable. Starting with a 2.5 shortblock, JE pistons, stock crank and rods (reconditioned) and good hardware throughout.

I don't want to debate the value of 16v vs 8v, just what'cha think I should do?

Information:

I have a Neon DOHC head. I would need to build intake manifold and header. Would need cam gears and dizzy adapter. Valves and porting should be adequate as built.


I have several 8v heads (of course, who doesn't?) Would need to build intake (stock won't cut it). Would need +1 valves, bowl work at a minimum.

I think cost wise it is a wash.

Oh, I have swirl and bathtub. I'll throw 655 on the poll just for the halibut.

[Austrian Dodge]

16V for teh win!!1 :D

[Tony Hanna]

I voted for the DOHC head also. Should be easier to make big power with the better flow.

[turbovanman²]

No brainer, 16 valves, much easier to make power, :thumb:

[Shadow]

Since your staying with stock rods, that will be your limit. I say 8v seeing that 450whp is easily done with race gas and higher boost (track) and will still net you 350whp on pump (street) I've been summer driving the S/C for 3 solid years running 11's or faster for all 3 of those years and have only had to change 1 H/G. (maintenance wise) Everything else I changed was my own choise. I will add that a 16v will make you power easyer though.

[cordes]

If you can do everything for the hybrid yourself, go for it. Otherwise, stick with the 8v.

[JuXsA]

Ditto what Cordes said

[GLHS592]

If I had it to do over again, I'd have swapped a complete 2.4 turbo in my car.

[BadAssPerformance]

I didnt see 2.4L swap, so I'll vote 8v... or heh heh, cool! :D

[slasky]

How fast do you want to go. I hit 12.4 in my SC in full street form, except for slicks, and no weight reduction at all. I made that on basically a stock 8V head, intake and exhaust manifolds. The real surprise is that I consistently made 12.5 pass after pass for three years with only a used turbo failure. I am planning for 11s next season with a ported head, custom intake, and TU cast header for next season.

[Aries_Turbo]

16v gets my vote.

Brian

[bakes]

16 v head and big boost FTW:evil:

[Hemi417]

depends on how serious you want to go the whole 16valve thing makes me worry about dependability , just because of the little stuff , and build time , for my vot e 6v because of availibiliy of parts but i cant find hardly any 16valve parts in the yards i deal with around here

[Hemi417]

ha ha 8 valve i cant type g-head 445

[turbovanman²]

Since your staying with stock rods, that will be your limit. I say 8v seeing that 450whp is easily done with race gas and higher boost (track) and will still net you 350whp on pump (street) I've been summer driving the S/C for 3 solid years running 11's or faster for all 3 of those years and have only had to change 1 H/G. (maintenance wise) Everything else I changed was my own choise. I will add that a 16v will make you power easyer though.

I wouldn't say its easy to build an 450 whp 8 valve. You of all should know that.

There aren't that many that have reached 400 or more.

[GLHNSLHT2]

If you're gonna go 8v bathtub head use the 655. Probably gonna be easier to make big power for the 8v heads. 16v hybrid is going to be a lot of custom work initially. If I were gonna go with a neon 16v I'd go the whole 2.4 route as well. But with an Lbody you can go plenty fast with an 8v and still have a nice interior.

[turbovanman²]

If you're gonna go 8v bathtub head use the 655. Probably gonna be easier to make big power for the 8v heads. 16v hybrid is going to be a lot of custom work initially. If I were gonna go with a neon 16v I'd go the whole 2.4 route as well. But with an Lbody you can go plenty fast with an 8v and still have a nice interior.

Ditto, L bodies are so light they don't need as much power as the heavier cars.

[Shadow]

I wouldn't say its easy to build an 450 whp 8 valve. You of all should know that.

There aren't that many that have reached 400 or more.

I really am baffled that ppl are having trouble making 400whp, think about it. I have a Non-CB stock T2 bottom end with forged pistons. Stock turbo cam, stock ported exhaust mani, big --- turbo with free flowing exhaust and big --- I/C with custom intake mani and +1mm ported G-head. Add the right amount of fuel and boost and Away we go! (get that part wrong and Kaboom!) I really don't see the difficulty. :confused2: I will say 1 thing though, I've noticed that most of the high HP ppl that have had a hystory of ongoing success with these cars are ppl who seem to pay close attention to detail.....like myself.;)

[turbovanman²]

I will say 1 thing though, I've noticed that most of the high HP ppl that have had a hystory of ongoing success with these cars are ppl who seem to pay close attention to detail.....like myself.;)

Exactly, :o

[The Pope]

I really am baffled that ppl are having trouble making 400whp, think about it. I have a Non-CB stock T2 bottom end with forged pistons. Stock turbo cam, stock ported exhaust mani, big --- turbo with free flowing exhaust and big --- I/C with custom intake mani and +1mm ported G-head. Add the right amount of fuel and boost and Away we go! (get that part wrong and Kaboom!) I really don't see the difficulty. :confused2: I will say 1 thing though, I've noticed that most of the high HP ppl that have had a hystory of ongoing success with these cars are ppl who seem to pay close attention to detail.....like myself.;)

Many are still trying to make the power with a 140 CFM 1 piece.. A stock G head out flows the 1 piece runners... You do a poll on how many people here have bolted one to a ported head to try and make power and you'll under stand real fast. Your intake has higher CFM runners, shorter runners and 3 times the plenum as most 8v builds. Just for fun bolt a stock 1 piece on like many of these people do and see what it dyno's, no other real changes. :thumb: Your numbers will cause a be sensation!

[BadAssPerformance]

It definitely is a package deal and limited by the largest restruction... I know a ported 2pc intake can barely get to 400whp with a decently sized hybrid turbo, ported big valve head, custom header, etc... now a stock 1 piece? ... no way!

[Shadow]

Just for fun bolt a stock 1 piece on like many of these people do and see what it dyno's, no other real changes. :thumb: Your numbers will cause a be sensation!

That's not a bad idea. After all, I'm comfortable with the HP the mtr is making relative to the parts I've used. I still intend on reaching 500whp and I know for sure the stock ported exhaust mani will make it no problem. My best guess on the intake would be 30WHP loss going back to my FULLY ported 2 piece and 40+WHP if I swapped a 1 piece on it. I have no other intention for this car/build other that it being a fully street legal, full bodied 10 sec 500whp summer cruiser, which it practically is right now. So over the next couple years I will probably do some dyno sessions with different parts just to see the effect, and weather it is or isn't what one would expect it to be. Starting with the cam!

[bgbmxer]

im for the g headed eight valve just because people like shadow are making more power than most people ever need with an eight valve and i plan on getting dam close to 400 myself here someday plus you already have the parts to do it right in your garage no special machining or re wiring like with the 16 valve. i will try 16 valve someday but i was thinking the mopar midget block would be the true best 4 cyl motor for big power now if only i can find a way to bolt a 555 up to it or if that fails put it in a gutted tube chassis conquest and go eights with it

[turbovanman²]

That's not a bad idea. After all, I'm comfortable with the HP the mtr is making relative to the parts I've used. I still intend on reaching 500whp and I know for sure the stock ported exhaust mani will make it no problem. My best guess on the intake would be 30WHP loss going back to my FULLY ported 2 piece and 40+WHP if I swapped a 1 piece on it. I have no other intention for this car/build other that it being a fully street legal, full bodied 10 sec 500whp summer cruiser, which it practically is right now. So over the next couple years I will probably do some dyno sessions with different parts just to see the effect, and weather it is or isn't what one would expect it to be. Starting with the cam!

I bet you'd lose 75-100 whp putting the one piece back on, :eyebrows:

[Shadow]

I bet you'd lose 75-100 whp putting the one piece back on, :eyebrows:

Now wouldn't that start an uproar! :lol:

[turbovanman²]

Now wouldn't that start an uproar! :lol:

Do it, do it, :eyebrows:

[Directconnection]

I bet you'd lose 75-100 whp putting the one piece back on, :eyebrows:


Really re-think your statement, Simon.

[turbovanman²]

Really re-think your statement, Simon.

Why????????

You honestly think the one piece flows????? :confused: and yes, you flowed it, and I don't think a flowbench means a thing for a boosted engine.

[The Pope]

Why????????

You honestly think the one piece flows????? :confused: and yes, you flowed it, and I don't think a flowbench means a thing for a boosted engine.

A flow bench does matter. However, HOW the intake works is different than how much it flows. Shorter runners and a big plenum feed the intakes valve better. The 1 piece sucks for plenum, runner length and CFM. So even if it made the CFM enough for a +1 valve G head it wouldn't better better. My price is right guess is 65 WHP :)

[turbovanman²]

A flow bench does matter. However, HOW the intake works is different than how much it flows. Shorter runners and a big plenum feed the intakes valve better. The 1 piece sucks for plenum, runner length and CFM. So even if it made the CFM enough for a +1 valve G head it wouldn't better better. My price is right guess is 65 WHP :)

I honestly believe its a useless tool which we rely on too much. N/A sure, its great, but for a boosted motor, not reliable. As you know, the one piece intake takes the air in thru a restricted elbow then has the air flow turn over itself and flow back down narrow passages. Steve flowed it and it was close to a 2 piece? :confused: We all know a 2 piece destroys a one piece for flow and power so if you rely on flowbench numbers, then you'll never make any power.

I still say 100 whp, the one piece is a total cork.

[BadAssPerformance]

I honestly believe its a useless tool which we rely on too much. N/A sure, its great, but for a boosted motor, not reliable. As you know, the one piece intake takes the air in thru a restricted elbow then has the air flow turn over itself and flow back down narrow passages. Steve flowed it and it was close to a 2 piece? :confused: We all know a 2 piece destroys a one piece for flow and power so if you rely on flowbench numbers, then you'll never make any power.

I still say 100 whp, the one piece is a total cork.

Disagree with 'useless' but I do agree than many put too much credit into 'flow' for components on a turbo car.

Anything that helps N/A will also benefit a turbo car, but a turbo does mask inefficiencies... at the same time a cork is a cork.

So to be a little scientific about it, the real question is what is the cross sectional area and length of the neck of a stock 1-pc intake? and what is the maximum CFM that particular restriction can flow at 30psi, or however much pressure to be used?

FWIW, I am 99% sure that the restriction on my 8V was the ported 2pc intake, as the car did not increase much in power going from 24 psi up to 30psi...

Hmmm... I think 100 is a little to high Bob, with "Price is Right rules", if that was the lowest bid, I'd bid 1 :D

[GLHNSLHT2]

So to be a little scientific about it, the real question is what is the cross sectional area and length of the neck of a stock 1-pc intake?

less than a 46mm TB.

[Shadow]

less than a 46mm TB.

I cut one up 10 or so years ago and I'm pretty sure it was very close to a 52mm TB. (took a wire, formed it to the size of the inside neck and soldered it together, then opened it into a circle and compared it to a 52mm TB) But if you take loss over distance + the ugly elbow you will never get 52mm of flow out of it.

[Shadow]

FWIW, I am 99% sure that the restriction on my 8V was the ported 2pc intake, as the car did not increase much in power going from 24 psi up to 30psi...

What turbo were you using? I'm sure I was beyond the 400WHP mark with the 2 piece before I build my custom intake mani. Mtr made power right to 38psi! Although, that 2 piece was as ported as it ever could be!

[turbovanman²]

Disagree with 'useless' but I do agree than many put too much credit into 'flow' for components on a turbo car.

Anything that helps N/A will also benefit a turbo car, but a turbo does mask inefficiencies... at the same time a cork is a cork.

So to be a little scientific about it, the real question is what is the cross sectional area and length of the neck of a stock 1-pc intake? and what is the maximum CFM that particular restriction can flow at 30psi, or however much pressure to be used?

FWIW, I am 99% sure that the restriction on my 8V was the ported 2pc intake, as the car did not increase much in power going from 24 psi up to 30psi...

Hmmm... I think 100 is a little to high Bob, with "Price is Right rules", if that was the lowest bid, I'd bid 1 :D

Useless is a bit strong, ;)

The other issue you guys keep forgetting about a one piece is the way the air has to bend back over itself, not good. I still stand on my 100 whp on Shadow's engine, :thumb:

[The Pope]

Useless is a bit strong, ;)

The other issue you guys keep forgetting about a one piece is the way the air has to bend back over itself, not good. I still stand on my 100 whp on Shadow's engine, :thumb:

137 CFM stock 782 head
140 CFM 1 piece with TB
168 CFM with ported 2 piece
155 CFM stock 2 piece

These are the figures with the stock plenums. With a stock 782 a 1 piece does OK, there isn't a big gain there. But once you get over that with a G head or a ported 782 the 1 piece is the cork.

BTW my big valve flows 182 then drops to 140 with just the 1 piece added, those intakes flow numbers are with the bigger flowing head.

If your runners are short enough and you have enough plenum the runner CFM wouldn't matter that much. But in this case the cross sectional area of the 2 piece runners are larger, they do flow more CFM and the plenum is bigger. Lastly the neck CAN be opened to a 52mm TB.

The question I get is "what about a ported 1 piece". A waste of time because of the neck, which can't be ported to be fixxed.

Then comes the back to back testing clowns that test the 2 piece and 1 piece with a stock 782 and don't see an increase. Stock they both have issues but I can fix most of them on a 2 piece pretty easy.

Simon may be onto something though, I've never seen more than 350 WHP with a 1 piece even with insane boost. Thats 130 WHP lower than Robs car right now.:thumb:

[contraption22]

Simon may be onto something though, I've never seen more than 350 WHP with a 1 piece even with insane boost. Thats 130 WHP lower than Robs car right now.:thumb:

What would you consider insane boost?

[BadAssPerformance]

What turbo were you using? I'm sure I was beyond the 400WHP mark with the 2 piece before I build my custom intake mani. Mtr made power right to 38psi! Although, that 2 piece was as ported as it ever could be!

T3 (Stage-III, .63A/R) / T4 (60-1 HiFi with a T04B cover)

2-piece was match ported between halves (but not as large as the plenum gasket), bumbs welded and removed and 52mm around the bend, so not as huge as it could have been.

[Shadow]

T3 (Stage-III, .63A/R) / T4 (60-1 HiFi with a T04B cover)

2-piece was match ported between halves (but not as large as the plenum gasket), bumbs welded and removed and 52mm around the bend, so not as huge as it could have been.

Same hot side as my old 57 trim, but larger compressor wheel with lower PR. My 57 trim was an extended tip like the new BW turbo's and had a PR of about 4.0. Also, when I port a 2 piece I funnel the lower from the gasket size down to the inj bore area and then open it up to match the head (after welding the lumps area). Then I take a ball about the size of the gasket (a little smaller so it rolls through easy) and I port the top half into the plenum till the ball rolls through. I gaurantee my 2 piece, ported this way WILL support 400+WHP.

[BadAssPerformance]

Sounds like a nice 2-pc :thumb: pics? :D

[Shadow]

Sounds like a nice 2-pc :thumb: pics? :D

First 2 piece I did like that was on an 11.6 car we built 5-6 years ago. Didn't take any pics though. (never really though enough about what we were doing at the time to take any):(

[boost geek]

I would like to see some 655 headed engines happening, seeing I have one on my workbench, and a 2 piece intake waiting to get welded and die grinded...:eyebrows:

Think I'll have to piece together some big valve seats and valves over Christmas.:)

[The Pope]

I would like to see some 655 headed engines happening, seeing I have one on my workbench, and a 2 piece intake waiting to get welded and die grinded...:eyebrows:

Think I'll have to piece together some big valve seats and valves over Christmas.:)

The 655 has been used for years. In the 80's Kolfel's Place was running low 13's with an NA auto trans Charger in an NHRA class. The other heads even with a big valve don't flow much over .500" lift, the (stock) 655 is still gaining speed at .600" lift. The Kolfel's Place car ran an old Crane .610" lift cam.

The 655 would have been more widely known years ago, but bad mouthing it shelved them. I was told that the 655 had horrible low lift flow because the ports were shaped wrong and they were too big. The 655 is equal to the G heads in low lift flow (.300") and stomps the tar out of a 782 head, all stock. Then I looked at total flow and the 655 beat them all at .500". What is intresting is all the other heads run flat at .500" lift, the 655 is still gaining at 600". If only we had a good large oval runner and large plenum intake from the factory to use the head. That is the only down side to it. My first 655 was given to me by my machine shop assembled for free! It sat on the self for 8 years :thumb: And flow benching is $50 a head so I figured I'd try it, then I posted the graphs on TD.com fuming. In the end you can buy them on Ebay once in a while for $125 and do a little match porting. The intake with plenum can cost $450 :yuck: But atleast you don't need to spend $1,500 on a polished turd then an intake!

[boost geek]

So you do have flow numbers for this head? You remember what they were? ;)

[bgbmxer]

what is this 655 head and where do i get more info about it

[shelbyplaya]

16v gets my vote. I've been running around 1ith 8v for years. A STOCK 16v head out flows the best ported 8v heads, So from the prospective it's a gimme. my 16v is running the same time as my 8v was on 8 less pounds of boost, 6/8* less timing and my cams are out to lunch.

it's not that much more to bulid a 16v either, If you can do all the work your self it save your self alot of money. Just pay attion to the details and you'll be fine.

[shelbyplaya]

You can have the BEST ported 1 piece intake and no matter how well it's ported for the TB or the runners you still have the tinny little opening. How mennyof you have actuly seen what i'm talking about? I'm the 8v is capable of 400whp, But how hard everything has to work to get there. BUT the 16v flows ALOT more even in the intake side of things. I'm running a stock intake manifold off a stratus, stock 52mm TB off a mini van, stock head, and my car layed down 225whp and 310wtq on 15psi, stock T3 w/ .63 exhaust and a DP that was crused to clear my rack so it got down to about 1.25" x 2.5". Now, show me a stock 8v that would have been able to do that.


So a stock 8v head flowing 156 cfm / 135 cfm running 15psi vs a stock 16v head flowing 237 cfm / 195 cfm running 15psi will make more power based on the fact that it is flowing ALOT more air.

[bgbmxer]

know one who is making over 400 horse with a 8 valve runs the one peice or ever the two peice for that matter its the cork even more so than the head is

[turbovanman²]

know one who is making over 400 horse with a 8 valve runs the one peice or ever the two peice for that matter its the cork even more so than the head is

They run the 2 piece or a hybrid of a 2 piece.

[Shadow]

They run the 2 piece or a hybrid of a 2 piece.

OR an INSANE hybrid of a 1 piece! :eyebrows:

[turbovanman²]

OR an INSANE hybrid of a 1 piece! :eyebrows:

Sorry, option #3, Bob, :lol:

[bgbmxer]

lol:lol:

[The Pope]

So a stock 8v head flowing 156 cfm / 135 cfm running 15psi vs a stock 16v head flowing 237 cfm / 195 cfm running 15psi will make more power based on the fact that it is flowing ALOT more air.

What 8v flows what? Try 135 / 99 for a 782,,,, with the spark plug in LMAO :)

Also the HUGE FACTOR that no body ever seems to bring up, the 230 CFM 16v ALSO FLOWS 230 CFM with the intake bolted up. You buy yours self a 230 CFM (with the spark plug removed) 8v head and bolt on the 1 piece and your 230 CFM head flows 140 CFM, period. Oops, based off a 156 intake your looking at a 160 CFM 1 piece lol.

Once you port a 16v the same thing happens, but the Neon people can actually buy an intake. :( Most 8v turbo's have a 782 head stock and a 1 piece or a log. The one piece flows as much as a stock G head. The neck is bad enough people complain about worse mileage with a 52mm TB and no power. So the neck most likely is cavitating the air with a bigger TB.

What I have found with the 782 is greatly improving average flow makes a lot more power, even with a 1 piece. Basically the intake only flows less than 140, so you try to make the head flow 140 at really low lift like .300". So when I port a 782 and cut the combustion I greatly increase the flow between .200" and .400" lift. To max the intake over the whole lobe cycle as much as possible. Or just bolt on a G head that murders the 782 stock at low lift :thumb: But even that head has room to improve.

Then you hog out your lower piece to flow close to the head at high lift. You shorten the runners by removing the top piece. Then you add a plenum that has as much or more CID as the engine. Then your using that expensive head. If you run a 16v Neon head you buy an Indy intake, if you run an 8v you better save up and get to work :thumb:

[The Pope]

OR an INSANE hybrid of a 1 piece! :eyebrows:

Anything can be done, but I can do a unported 2 piece with plenum in an hour though :faint:

[bgbmxer]

what head is the 655?

[Shadow]

Anything can be done, but I can do a unported 2 piece with plenum in an hour though :faint:

Hey, at the time I had a brand new tig welder, some aluminum rods and a dozen or so 1 piece intakes to practice on! (didn't want to wreck any of the 2 piece intakes I had) 3 days later I had an intake that would support 600whp and I could (somewhat) weld with a tig. lol

[turbovanman²]

what head is the 655?

G-head.

[GLHNSLHT2]

Ghead in the chamber basically, but huge runners. If you look at the stock manifold gasket the 655 is the exact shape of the gasket on the intake. It's why the gasket is shaped like that.

[boost geek]

what head is the 655?

Came on 81-82 carbed cars.

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k302/boostgeek/100_2517.jpg

[shelbyplaya]

What 8v flows what? Try 135 / 99 for a 782,,,, with the spark plug in LMAO :)

Also the HUGE FACTOR that no body ever seems to bring up, the 230 CFM 16v ALSO FLOWS 230 CFM with the intake bolted up. You buy yours self a 230 CFM (with the spark plug removed) 8v head and bolt on the 1 piece and your 230 CFM head flows 140 CFM, period. Oops, based off a 156 intake your looking at a 160 CFM 1 piece lol.

Once you port a 16v the same thing happens, but the Neon people can actually buy an intake. :( Most 8v turbo's have a 782 head stock and a 1 piece or a log. The one piece flows as much as a stock G head. The neck is bad enough people complain about worse mileage with a 52mm TB and no power. So the neck most likely is cavitating the air with a bigger TB.

What I have found with the 782 is greatly improving average flow makes a lot more power, even with a 1 piece. Basically the intake only flows less than 140, so you try to make the head flow 140 at really low lift like .300". So when I port a 782 and cut the combustion I greatly increase the flow between .200" and .400" lift. To max the intake over the whole lobe cycle as much as possible. Or just bolt on a G head that murders the 782 stock at low lift :thumb: But even that head has room to improve.

Then you hog out your lower piece to flow close to the head at high lift. You shorten the runners by removing the top piece. Then you add a plenum that has as much or more CID as the engine. Then your using that expensive head. If you run a 16v Neon head you buy an Indy intake, if you run an 8v you better save up and get to work :thumb:


i got the numbers from thedodgegarage.com. Like you said, you can get intakes and exhaust's for the neon head. the after market support base is MUCH larger then that for the our 8v set up. A well ported 16v top end will be able to suppot more power and have more potentional then a well ported 8v.

I've personaly found the biggest issue i'm havint with my 16v is the PCV set up sucks (but thats my own fault).

Other then that the drivability and and fuel economy is 100x better then the 8v.

[bgbmxer]

Came on 81-82 carbed cars.

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k302/boostgeek/100_2517.jpg

thought g head and bathtub head were the same this is confusing me

[shelbyplaya]

thought g head and bathtub head were the same this is confusing me

they are. the older g-heads (carbed) amd the newer ones (turbo) have differnt casting numbers for some resion.

[bgbmxer]

85 and older were g heads then

[Anonymous_User]

Bathtub and swirl refer to the combustion chamber shape. G-head is a name for a bathtub style head that came on 85 and older turbo engines.

The 655 is a bathtub style head with larger ports. Used on older yet carbed engines.

For years the 655 was put down as not a good choice, but lately the benefits of the 655 have come to light.

[bgbmxer]

learn something new everyday. i feel so like a newb again lol

[The Pope]

Came on 81-82 carbed cars.

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k302/boostgeek/100_2517.jpg

Should mention they look likle this UNPORTED. This thing has some rough taken out with a sand paper role.

Mopar named the 445 / 287 a G head from the intake port design. So you can call a 655 a g head. It is a bathtub though and uses the same valves and so on as the G heads.

The bowl size is much larger with the 655 even on the exhaust than all the other heads as well.:thumb:

[The Pope]

Bathtub and swirl refer to the combustion chamber shape. G-head is a name for a bathtub style head that came on 85 and older turbo engines.

The 655 is a bathtub style head with larger ports. Used on older yet carbed engines.

For years the 655 was put down as not a good choice, but lately the benefits of the 655 have come to light.

The 655 came with compression that was really low, 7.8:1 I believe. The head had the worst intake, unequal length runners and they were too long. The exhaust manifolds were horrid in the beginning as well. Then last but not least you can create a whole forum on how bad the carb was. So sure the 655 at the time really sucked. But if they made a good turbo intake for it and sold it on a 89 T2 things would have been different. But lets be fair....

[bgbmxer]

is anyone using the 655 head making big power or is know one messing with it

[turbovanman²]

is anyone using the 655 head making big power or is know one messing with it

The 10.99 upgrade thread, Terry, ;)

[bgbmxer]

sa baisically its what i want for big power 8 valve