<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"><BR>
In a message dated 2/9/14 14 24 52, daniel.c.jones2@gmail.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE CITE STYLE="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px" TYPE="CITE"></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"><BR>
Not too bad for 1970's small block cylinder heads.<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"><BR>
<BR>
>>>Can you provide some additional context, i.e. compare those numbers with standard 351C heads, CHI, C302B, and any others that are known?<BR>
<BR>
Also, I presume that flow numbers can translate into horsepower, but is there a linear relationship? Can a head flow TOO well, such that the engine only works at higher rpm? (That was always the armchair criticism of the 351C--that the 4V ports were too large to produce good power results with only 351 inches at moderate rpm levels).<BR>
<BR>
Right now we've got (some) data. What we need is information, which is different. :>)<BR>
<BR>
Thanks!<BR>
<BR>
Mike</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"></FONT></HTML>