The first set of 333s I did are on my engine. I probably have 20hrs in those but chalk it up to the learning curve. I did another set for a buddy's 348 and probably spent 12hrs on those ones and they came out really nice.
333 409 heads
- Thread starter DonSSDD
- Start date
It's still in progress. But it'll be sweet. Mild stroker, tri power, going in a 34 ford pickup
333s don't work. Awful heads. Give me $50 and I will take them off your hands 
When I bought my '61, 348, I took the heads off and went to the machine shop with them. I don't know which heads they were, but I believe stock heads. I spoke with the machinist who looked them over and said that he could do a valve job and rework them; making them better then factory. Not sure what rework consisted of. I asked what this cost would be and he said about $1200.00. I knew I could buy the aluminum Edelbrock heads for $1049.00 each and asked him which would be the better way to go. He said he hates to turn away work, but the Edelbrock heads, even more expensive, would be a better deal. Each head is also about 30 lbs. lighter, so I went with the Edelbrock heads. No regrets. I still have the cast iron heads but I don't think there is a big market for them.
CDNpontiac409guy
Banned
I like that, Ronnie. Isn't that within about 10-15 CFM of a factory large port head ?
I think the exhaust can even come up a bit from there. On the set that are on my tired re-ringed 409, I ported them to basically match the large port exhaust, and also milled away the valve guide boss in the bowl. That engine made 465.8 HP / 466 ft lb torque, with a single carb
I think there's potential with these common heads, to have a streetable 500 HP
I think the exhaust can even come up a bit from there. On the set that are on my tired re-ringed 409, I ported them to basically match the large port exhaust, and also milled away the valve guide boss in the bowl. That engine made 465.8 HP / 466 ft lb torque, with a single carb
I think there's potential with these common heads, to have a streetable 500 HP
Those numbers Ronnie posted are excellent!!! CFM needed to feed an engine at a certain RPM is less for smaller cubic inch engines all other things being equal. I think a set reworked like Yellow Wagon Jason's, Aubrey's, or Ronnie's above.....would be extremely effective on a 348 stroker or stock stroke 409 for anything short of an all-out race build.
Just think of Ronnie's flow numbers compared to decent aftermarket sbc aluminum heads......on top of a 383" stroker or 406" small block. Most people who build those as a stout street/strip engine would be HAPPY to get 260 Intake/188 Exhaust flow!!!
Just think of Ronnie's flow numbers compared to decent aftermarket sbc aluminum heads......on top of a 383" stroker or 406" small block. Most people who build those as a stout street/strip engine would be HAPPY to get 260 Intake/188 Exhaust flow!!!
I helped a guy from work build a 383 sbc with this head http://www.jegs.com/p/AFR-Airflow-R...reet-Aluminum-Cylinder-Heads/2827547/10002/-1 , with the correct cam it made 522hp @6000 rpm with a rpm air gap and 750 hp holley.
It looks like 500hp is doable.
61 Bubble
Well Known Member
500Hp is very DO-ABLE. In either a stroked 348 or a 409 and 409+ engines. As Aubrey has said, he's already at 465 with the mild build, minor cleaning from there and changing to a roller will put him over 500Hp. I've personally seen roller set-ups give 40-50Hp over flat tappet cams on the dyno.
I'm quite confident that my very own 380 incher (that WAS Aubrey's and he did the motor) could get to 500, and probably still run pump gas WITH 333 heads. But that's just me, don't tell me that CAN'T be done. Would make a fun little 380 streetcar motor with 500Hp and a 4 speed. The key to this whole deal is AUBREY'S intakes AND going to a full-roller cam, with a "good" head porter that can make the heads AND intake work together with the cam.
I do not see any reason why a well designed and followed plan WITH the 333 heads can not make 500Hp, relativity easy. Aubrey's overbored 409 is RIGHT there with MILD 333's, so changing that to a roller and he is right at 500Hp. So with 30 or so less cubes, you need a BIT MORE in the heads and cam and your there as well.
The 333 seems to be a really good, somewhat of a bargain head from what I see.
I'm quite confident that my very own 380 incher (that WAS Aubrey's and he did the motor) could get to 500, and probably still run pump gas WITH 333 heads. But that's just me, don't tell me that CAN'T be done. Would make a fun little 380 streetcar motor with 500Hp and a 4 speed. The key to this whole deal is AUBREY'S intakes AND going to a full-roller cam, with a "good" head porter that can make the heads AND intake work together with the cam.
I do not see any reason why a well designed and followed plan WITH the 333 heads can not make 500Hp, relativity easy. Aubrey's overbored 409 is RIGHT there with MILD 333's, so changing that to a roller and he is right at 500Hp. So with 30 or so less cubes, you need a BIT MORE in the heads and cam and your there as well.
The 333 seems to be a really good, somewhat of a bargain head from what I see.
Thats just it, everyone just assumes they need the large port heads for a street car and you really don't. Me, I'm always on a budget with everything I do so I try and make stuff work. My engine made 473hp with 333s on 91 octane. Bit more compression, slightly larger cam and its right there also. Mine is 416"
CDNpontiac409guy
Banned
yeah.... for the moment... 'till this catches on
thanks, John
I have to admit, my heads weren't exactly "mild"
. Pretty aggressively done actually
The "weakness" in that second-time-around re-ringed stock 409 engine, was it's oval / "cone shaped" cylinders
Didn't you see the shop rag on the breather tube when it was on the dyno ?
... ah yes, nice and looseI don't know about the roller cam setup, as being consistent with a budget head. Damn, cam / lifters alone, pushing $900....
rather than $350.
I guess it depends on what someone is trying to accomplish;. Is the goal to reach 500 hp with 333s? Yes, it can be done. But why? Just to get a dyno read-out? instead of a 500 hp dyno sheet, I would be more impressed with low e..t. time slips with 333s. Jason's engine is practical.. Can you tell the difference between 450 and 500 on the street doing normal driving? As far as 333s being low budget or a bargain build., even though its been a few years, I believe I had $1,400 in the set I did for myself and I did the porting. And the heads were free. Of course I am an amateur , so a professional could have done better but for what fee? In my opinion, the Edelbrocks are a better investment overall. I would not want someone to read these posts and decide the 333s are the way to go and then get sticker shock of the machine shop bill for all the improvements needed to make them into a strong head; Would someone spend money to port and not upgrade to screw in studs, good seals, etc. I used 2.19 valves even though most of the experts said 2.06 should be the maximum. I saw no downside to the 2.19s. Some will say the 2.19s cut down air speed, the engine idled perfectly at 700 rpm and accelerated great. Would it have run better with 2.06s? I don't know. How would you measure that in a street car? Build it the way you want then go have some fun. But my point is, the modified 333s are not a bargain basement way to make big hp. These engines cost so much that if you want even some now and then drag strip time , go ahead and spend a little more and buy bigger heads. Jason was on a mission and wanted to do his own heads. He had his reasons and his engine made big hp, at least in my opinion. Not really wanting to steer anyone to go one way or the other but just thought some of the new guys should have all the facts before they make a decision.
Correct on all points Ronnie. Basically, anyone wanting to do a set of 333s, you are only using the bare castings. Nothing more. Then they need new valves, valve seals, screw in studs, guideplate, porting etc. It DOES all add up. But there is also a bit of satisfaction there that you did the grinding on them and they DO get the job done. I also like doing things the hard way I guess. Root for the underdog in the NCAA tournament, build a stock stroke engine and see what it can do when everyone else is building strokers. I like the challenge, my wife just says I'm being a pain in the ass
61 Bubble
Well Known Member
I see your points, and yes there is some costs. BUT I do not see the cost since your rebuilding the heads anyway, So the cost for valves, seals, seating is a moot point, is it not????
The point is, you have a nice set of 333's that make plenty of power and as much as most on this site would want/need. ME on the other hand, would be putting Bob's heads on and making power to break things. Eddys heads are, in my humble opinion just OK. If it were me, and since the cost are close, I would be using BWR heads.
.
The point is, you have a nice set of 333's that make plenty of power and as much as most on this site would want/need. ME on the other hand, would be putting Bob's heads on and making power to break things. Eddys heads are, in my humble opinion just OK. If it were me, and since the cost are close, I would be using BWR heads.
.
I think Ronnie meant once you add up all the parts you need to add to the 333s to make them work properly, you could just buy the Edelbrocks. I think I have $1100 into my 333s
Well the way I look at is this,Ronnie's of course correct.IF [and that's the important part].one has the ability and desire to do his on labor[porting],he can build a nice set of 333's for much less than the large port stuff.Edelbrocks complete will run you 22-2300 per set,690's or 583's will run you about that used,before rebuilding.If you're looking for about 450-500 streatable horse power,then the 333's would come out cheaper in the total cost of the build.If you're building a bigger inch engine,then you will need to spend the money on better heads such as factory stuff,Edelbrocks,or preferrably Bob Wallas.It all comes down to what your goals,and intended use for the powerplant is.Jasons engine is a great "benchmark"by which to gauge things.