561 casting flow #'s
12-26-2002, 09:11 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Red Oak Texas
Posts: 1,509
561 casting flow #'s
I finally have flow #'s for the 561 casting LT1 head. They are about 10-12 cfm better than the other LT1 heads. The ports are the same size as the other LT1's but the external roof casting is about .100 shorter than the others so if you try and maximize the port you will fall through at the spring seat area on this head before the others. The shortside seems to be a little better shaped than the others and I am guessing this is where the extra CFM comes from. The exhaust ports flow the same as the other LT1's.
Enough talk, here are the #'s
lift---cfm
.050-30.1
.100-59.6
.150-84.1
.200-115.9
.250-144.2
.300-170.8
.350-191.4
.400-213.5
.450-223.4
.500-221.0
.550-218.8
.600-218.5
NightTrain66
Enough talk, here are the #'s
lift---cfm
.050-30.1
.100-59.6
.150-84.1
.200-115.9
.250-144.2
.300-170.8
.350-191.4
.400-213.5
.450-223.4
.500-221.0
.550-218.8
.600-218.5
NightTrain66
12-27-2002, 02:10 PM
#5
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Red Oak Texas
Posts: 1,509
I am not really sure what year these come on.
They are an aluminum head and look just like all other LT1's except the ports look a lil diff. (lower) from the top of head while looking below the rocker arms. The easiest way to spot em if off of the car is by looking on the deck side and where the intake ports branch off from chamber side of the deck. It is hollow like on a LS1 in this spot and also has "561" stamped here and other LT1's are solid all of the way across from the quench pad of the chamber to the intake mounting flange.
Until about 6 months ago I never knew of a diff. LT1 head and then Phil (SkarodoM) asked me about em and I started looking for em. I had seen 2 sets since then but both were ported already and I knew they could not be taken out as far as the other LT1's but Phil mentioned some pretty good flow#'s with minor portwork. Cody brought a set over and we measured the ports and they were about .100 shorter on the outside of the castings but the inside was the same as others. I had finally got my hands on some "un-molested" 561's and thought I would post the #'s since several people have e-mailed me wanting them and I did not have any until now.
NightTrain66
They are an aluminum head and look just like all other LT1's except the ports look a lil diff. (lower) from the top of head while looking below the rocker arms. The easiest way to spot em if off of the car is by looking on the deck side and where the intake ports branch off from chamber side of the deck. It is hollow like on a LS1 in this spot and also has "561" stamped here and other LT1's are solid all of the way across from the quench pad of the chamber to the intake mounting flange.
Until about 6 months ago I never knew of a diff. LT1 head and then Phil (SkarodoM) asked me about em and I started looking for em. I had seen 2 sets since then but both were ported already and I knew they could not be taken out as far as the other LT1's but Phil mentioned some pretty good flow#'s with minor portwork. Cody brought a set over and we measured the ports and they were about .100 shorter on the outside of the castings but the inside was the same as others. I had finally got my hands on some "un-molested" 561's and thought I would post the #'s since several people have e-mailed me wanting them and I did not have any until now.
NightTrain66
12-27-2002, 02:14 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 786
Yeap, I got the first set I'd ever seen a few months back. I went ahead and did a quickie job on those, and it wasn't very difficult to have peak numbers in the mid 260's, so I think there's a fair amount of potential there.
If someone wanted an Econoport, i think they'd be a good choice, since you'd end up getting more for your $ IMO.
If you want a full port, I'd still have to suggest going with a "normal" 93-95 LT1 casting
If someone wanted an Econoport, i think they'd be a good choice, since you'd end up getting more for your $ IMO.
If you want a full port, I'd still have to suggest going with a "normal" 93-95 LT1 casting
12-31-2002, 09:10 PM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 752
I have 561 casting #'s on my 97 trans am stock heads. As I am building a 383 right now we have come to the part where its time to port the heads. Eddie has a set of LT1 heads from a 95 z28 in his shop on the shelf. And we are going to port to the MAX....which set of heads would flow better ported all the waY??
my 97 trans am 561 castings? or the older style 95 Z28 heads?
my 97 trans am 561 castings? or the older style 95 Z28 heads?
01-01-2003, 08:01 AM
#9
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Red Oak Texas
Posts: 1,509
The roof cam be raised a lil higher and the shortside can be widened and layed back a lil more on toe "other" LT1 heads. By "other", I mean "not 561's".
The 561's that I did came out right where the other LT1's end up at. They were a set with stock valves. If you are installing oversize valves you may have to shape the shortside a lil diff since it is thinner here and maybe can not get the same #'s.
It depends on what ya mean be "fully ported". Some opinion of "fully ported" may be another persons "econo port".
basically, here are my feelings.................
Mild port ------------preferably 561's but any will do.
Full port with stock valves- --------ANY LT1 casting.
Full port with over size valves----------not 561's.
NightTrain66
The 561's that I did came out right where the other LT1's end up at. They were a set with stock valves. If you are installing oversize valves you may have to shape the shortside a lil diff since it is thinner here and maybe can not get the same #'s.
It depends on what ya mean be "fully ported". Some opinion of "fully ported" may be another persons "econo port".
basically, here are my feelings.................
Mild port ------------preferably 561's but any will do.
Full port with stock valves- --------ANY LT1 casting.
Full port with over size valves----------not 561's.
NightTrain66
01-01-2003, 02:53 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 752
By porting to the max I mean porting as far as we can go, No econo junk.. We are going to use 2.02 /1.60 valves. Im stil la bit confused on the benefits of using the older style heads vs the 561's.You said that the 561's flow better ported with stock valve size. But to use the non 561's if im going with over sized valves.....
Iguess waht I really need to know is which set of heads would i get the most CFM out of using 2.02/ 1.60 valves? And the porting is going to be as far as he can possibly port. No porting held back here.
Im just not getting enuff evidence to chose going with the older heads over my 561's.
I need more details please
I need to make my decision by tomorrow or hes gonna kick my butt and chose for me.
Iguess waht I really need to know is which set of heads would i get the most CFM out of using 2.02/ 1.60 valves? And the porting is going to be as far as he can possibly port. No porting held back here.
Im just not getting enuff evidence to chose going with the older heads over my 561's.
I need more details please
I need to make my decision by tomorrow or hes gonna kick my butt and chose for me.
01-01-2003, 03:29 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In a house by the bay
Posts: 2,985
Do you really want 'max porting'? I mean, it's not hard to get the max out of a head... you just hog the thing out. The bigger it is, the more volume it will flow... common sense.
Generally speaking, I think this fascination with peak flow numbers is putting alot of undue stress on the realy experienced head porters. Let's say you've been porting heads for street and competition engines for the past 20 years and a guy brings you a set of heads and just tells you... "I want them to flow the max they can".... nothing about his application, just that he wants the 'max'. I don't know about you but I'd be a little ticked. It's a catch 22 for the head porter..... does he port the head to make best performance in that application or does he do the 'max' port like the customer wants. Everyone's a pro nowadays and if the heads don't flow as good as someone elses hog-job then the guy is going to smear the name of the porter.... regardless of the performance increase. I'm just happy I don't port heads.
One thing I've found is this... find someone who you know really knows their stuff and then trust in them to make the port fit your application. If you need a 300cfm port job, then I'm sure that's what the porter will work for. Otherwise, I'd just say... buy or borrow a sonic checker and port them yourself. Seen alot of 350-383 cid small blocks w/260ish cfm 190ish cc heads go 550 hp with extremely flat torque curves. Makes you wonder.
-Mindgame
Generally speaking, I think this fascination with peak flow numbers is putting alot of undue stress on the realy experienced head porters. Let's say you've been porting heads for street and competition engines for the past 20 years and a guy brings you a set of heads and just tells you... "I want them to flow the max they can".... nothing about his application, just that he wants the 'max'. I don't know about you but I'd be a little ticked. It's a catch 22 for the head porter..... does he port the head to make best performance in that application or does he do the 'max' port like the customer wants. Everyone's a pro nowadays and if the heads don't flow as good as someone elses hog-job then the guy is going to smear the name of the porter.... regardless of the performance increase. I'm just happy I don't port heads.
One thing I've found is this... find someone who you know really knows their stuff and then trust in them to make the port fit your application. If you need a 300cfm port job, then I'm sure that's what the porter will work for. Otherwise, I'd just say... buy or borrow a sonic checker and port them yourself. Seen alot of 350-383 cid small blocks w/260ish cfm 190ish cc heads go 550 hp with extremely flat torque curves. Makes you wonder.
-Mindgame
01-02-2003, 04:15 AM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 752
Thanks for the help guys, and Mindgame I think you went off on a totally different direction.
I wasnt asking your opinion on Head porting techs LOL....u kinda missed the whole subject of this post. But thanks for your input.
And as for the guy I chose to do my 383 stroker build, He has owned his own business for 11 years and has been building engines for twice as long. He has already built an L98 for my 88 GTA I used to have and he did a wonderful job porting those heads.
But we decided to go with the 561 castings off my car, and to port them to best suite the 383 stroker. Did I mention he is an expert aluminum welder? He can do many " trick" things to aluminum heads. I hope to see over 300 CFM. hes gotta flowbench in his shop. I will be sure to post flow #'s
I wasnt asking your opinion on Head porting techs LOL....u kinda missed the whole subject of this post. But thanks for your input.
And as for the guy I chose to do my 383 stroker build, He has owned his own business for 11 years and has been building engines for twice as long. He has already built an L98 for my 88 GTA I used to have and he did a wonderful job porting those heads.
But we decided to go with the 561 castings off my car, and to port them to best suite the 383 stroker. Did I mention he is an expert aluminum welder? He can do many " trick" things to aluminum heads. I hope to see over 300 CFM. hes gotta flowbench in his shop. I will be sure to post flow #'s
01-03-2003, 07:42 PM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1
Hey gang...
I have a friends pair of non 561 LT1 heads and have been working on porting them. This is my first set of Chevy heads. I've done lots of Ford heads in the past.
Anyway, someone mentioned 300+ cfm on the intake side???? Is this at 28 inH20??? At what lift? I don't really see how that is a possibility, from the pair that I have.
I have a friends pair of non 561 LT1 heads and have been working on porting them. This is my first set of Chevy heads. I've done lots of Ford heads in the past.
Anyway, someone mentioned 300+ cfm on the intake side???? Is this at 28 inH20??? At what lift? I don't really see how that is a possibility, from the pair that I have.
