josh-kebob wrote:

BILLY WALTON from GEORGIA wrote:

Thats nuts I can find better places to spend that money on the car.

You're catching on Billy. That sbf you have right now is enough for the stang. Run what ya brung and be happy. Me thinks too often we get caught up in the hoopla and before you know it, piles of money are thrown at unnecessary stuff. It's your daily driver so, tune it, and take care of all the safety items. Then, drive the piss out of it and have a smile for every mile....

Lotta common sense right there.

Here are some mid 90s prices.  I did that very thing to a set of 1966 heads before aluminum became available.  Back then it was work stock heads or buy World products.  Cool thing is, I still have these heads.  They are on my convertible engine all wrapped up and rotting. 






$620 on stock heads
That was pretty expensive to me back in that time frame and those are I did a lot of work helping in the shop for him prices.

Last edited by Greg B (1/16/2022 6:13 PM)

I agree this car will be drove just like my old one....to and from work and to bashes and to anywhere else I need to go, My 66 got 23 mpg. I have decided that the engine in car may come up for sale and rebuild the one in my wrecked car. I may be getting  the engine out of my dads 87 f150 my nephew has it ....he put GT40p heads on it a cam that required a huge stall converter but I would get it apart and rebuild it with a friendlier cam and put my intake and carb and ride with it.

Toploader wrote:

MS wrote:

Considering what will be in the rest of the engine, the stock 289 heads with a good valve job and some proper springs will do the job and not be noticeably deficient on a street engine. It just won’t make that much difference in the RPM range where your engine will typically operate.

So the general consensus is that porting and polishing heads, milling them to increase compression, roller rockers etc... won't do much?

It'll do some, but the issue is you'll end up with close to the same money in them as you could buy a set of entry level aluminum heads.  In the end though the aluminum heads will still be significantly lighter, still tolerate a full point more compression without fears about detonation, and still have inherently better port design.  Personally I started running aluminum heads in the late '90s and haven't looked back since. 

Bearing Bob wrote:

If Edelbrocks are the same price as AFR 185s, why would ya buy the Eddys?

True that! 
 

Steve69 wrote:

Nos681 wrote:

Stock 5.0 with E7 heads is still a fun combo in my 65.

My previous combo was 289 with 351w C9 heads and Edelbrock Performer 289 camshaft/intake/carb.

Both combos have been fun to me.

This car has pretty much had a high school/broke college student budget…and I love it.

I got a ride in it and it does fly!  
 

Ditto that!

back in the early 70's a friend of mine had a brother who owned a speed and machine shop. he told me that he and his brother put chevy valves 2.02 and 1.60. heads were ported at least that is what i remember. the engine was built to the hilt, scot told me that it had the most aggressive cam that crane built at the time.