Rpm

[Jim C.]

Was there a noticeable performance increase with the change ? I believe it was a 63 to 64 transition and was thinking of swapping my heads if it made a noticeable improvement

[Michael H.]

Re: 190 vs 202 heads

Jim,

Changing from 1.94" to 2.02" intake valves would almost definitely not be worth the energy/money spent. I think you would be very disappointed with the results. Also, if I remember correctly, the increased size of the valve would require a bit of a cut in the combustion chamber wall to un-shroud the valve. Removing material from the chamber decreases compression ratio so you may come out even. Larger valves generally only help increase HP at higher RPM so unless you have a lot of other things set up for higher RPM operation, the change probably wouldn't be noticeable.

Spend the money on a set of off road mufflers instead. Better bang for the buck and it would sound more powerful too.

[Tom B.]

Re: 190 vs 202 heads

There is no cut needed with a 4 inch bore block. That's what these heads came on.

[Timothy B.]

Re: 190 vs 202 heads

Tom,

The 2.02 intake valve required a cut in the combustion chamber within the head.

[Tom B.]

Re: 190 vs 202 heads

Sorry. I thought the question was about swapping heads.

Tom

[Jim C.]

Re: 190 vs 202 heads

Jim,

Changing from 1.94" to 2.02" intake valves would almost definitely not be worth the energy/money spent. I think you would be very disappointed with the results. Also, if I remember correctly, the increased size of the valve would require a bit of a cut in the combustion chamber wall to un-shroud the valve. Removing material from the chamber decreases compression ratio so you may come out even. Larger valves generally only help increase HP at higher RPM so unless you have a lot of other things set up for higher RPM operation, the change probably wouldn't be noticeable.

Spend the money on a set of off road mufflers instead. Better bang for the buck and it would sound more powerful too.

thanks Mike, that is what I needed to know