How do Eddie Meyer Heads Compare to other big names?
- Thread starter Shoebox
- Start date
To be clear, these are Don Orosco's patterns that H&H bought from his estate and are using.
If I'm recalling correctly from Don's old Monterey Speed & Sport website and catalog, this patterns have the Eddie Meyer cosmetics, but the chambers are very similar if not the same as Offy or others available.
If anyone has other information, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Ronnieroadster
Well-known member
There's really no additional benefit gained with the Eddie Meyer heads when compared to Offy, Edelebrock, Fenton, Navarro and overall many other brands as well. Eddie Meyer heads and intakes had were very low production numbers when originally produced compared to many of the other manufactures. This made them desirable to collectors when Don Orosco decide to get into the reproduction business he picked the low production names to make it worth the effort. The current reproduction as Tim wrote above are the Orosco patterns.
Ronnieroadster
Ronnieroadster
tubman
Well-known member
I hate to sound like a broken record, but the only heads with any significant difference (advantage) are Edmunds heads. The spark plug is re-located enough that it misses the exhaust valve, allowing the use of extended tip plugs. With the spark out in the transfer area, the flame front travels faster. Combine this with the proper quench, and it adds up to a real difference in combustion efficiency. After running a set of Edelbrocks and a set of Offies, I have used Edmunds on my last two engines. I like them so much that there is a set of brand new, never installed Offenhauser 8BA heads up on my mezzanine. They were slated for my 258" "hot rod" engine, but got ignored after I read "'Ol Ron's" take on these heads and confirmed it with a set of used Edmunds that I got cheap locally.
Brian
Well-known member
I've got to respectfully disagree with tubman....The early 21 stud Eddie Meyer heads have different combustion chambers to stock Ford heads....Most aftermarket heads very closely resemble stock ford combustion chambers. Sure, those Edmonds heads, that tubman prefers on account of the relocated spark plug, have a very low roof, I don't think they breathe as well.
It's the old trade off....we want to increase the compression ratio, so we lower the roof. However, the incoming fuel/air mixture upon exiting the inlet valve wants to continue its upward motion, but can't; it gets deflected by the roof. Now, if we raise the roof, that'll improve the breathing, but have the adverse effect of lowering the c/r. Or will it? Stock, [and most aftermarket combustion chambers], basically follow the same shape as the head gasket....Those early Eddie Meyer heads I referred to earlier, have a high roof, but it is narrowed, measure at 60cc, provide excellent breathing and compression. In my opinion, this design is far better than the Edmonds design. Now, if only the spark plugs were in the Edmonds location....
It's the old trade off....we want to increase the compression ratio, so we lower the roof. However, the incoming fuel/air mixture upon exiting the inlet valve wants to continue its upward motion, but can't; it gets deflected by the roof. Now, if we raise the roof, that'll improve the breathing, but have the adverse effect of lowering the c/r. Or will it? Stock, [and most aftermarket combustion chambers], basically follow the same shape as the head gasket....Those early Eddie Meyer heads I referred to earlier, have a high roof, but it is narrowed, measure at 60cc, provide excellent breathing and compression. In my opinion, this design is far better than the Edmonds design. Now, if only the spark plugs were in the Edmonds location....
tubman
Well-known member
Brian may be right if we are talking maximum performance at high engine speeds, where chamber filling becomes important, but that's not where I'm coming from. I'm really not interested in racing; I just want my engines to run efficiently under normal conditions, which means compression is more important to me than breathing. 99% of the time, my engine is running at less than 3000 RPM. After that, all it does is make more noise, and even with a MAX-1, anything over 4000 rpm is an exercise in futility. At worst, the Edmunds heads flow 75-80% of the old Eddie Meyers which is more than enough at 2500 RPM. I don't know anything about the old 21 stud heads, but even if they make power up to 5000 (which I doubt), it's all wasted on a street engine. Everyone talks about how you have to balance flow against compression on a flathead, but in my opinion, compression trumps flow on a street engine every time.
It's all moot anyway, because it sounds like the only heads out here that have the high, narrow roof are the 21 stud Eddie Meyers. I doubt there are 5 builders in the world that are building a 21 stud engine that could even come close to utilizing the extra breathing they provide. All of which begs the question, "Why didn't they use that chamber design on the other heads they made if it's so much better?".
It's all moot anyway, because it sounds like the only heads out here that have the high, narrow roof are the 21 stud Eddie Meyers. I doubt there are 5 builders in the world that are building a 21 stud engine that could even come close to utilizing the extra breathing they provide. All of which begs the question, "Why didn't they use that chamber design on the other heads they made if it's so much better?".
Brian
Well-known member
99% of the time, my engine is also turning less than 3000 RPM, as are most street engines. Point I was trying to make is you can have compression and breathing by changing the combustion chamber shape from stock. People seem to think that by fitting a nice pretty set of finned heads, they've improved performance. have they? or is it just eye candy?
tubman
Well-known member
Lack of imagination? "It's the way it has always been done"?
"Ol' Ron" asked that question on here several times.
tubman
Well-known member
Probably "eye candy". The first "real" flathead I built was a 276 incher for my '36 3-window. I did the popular things; 390 Holley on an Offenhauser manifold, Isky cam, a complete MSD ignition system (including distributor), and just bolted on a set of brand new Offenhauser heads. I was never happy with that engine. It made adequate power (enough to occasionally break the stock drivetrain components), but overheated occasionally and never had the "snap" I've gotten out of subsequent builds (two flatheads and an early hemi). I now believe the overheating was due to a wrong advance curve in the MSD distributor and the general uninspired performance to the heads that were probably low in compression and no quench. I base this on the fact that every head I have used since (all used) required anywhere from .030 to .055" milled off of them to get the quench close. I shudder to think what you would get by just bolting unmodified new heads on an engine.
To your first point, you don't need a lot of breathing below 2500.
tubman
Well-known member
And I'm sure I wouldn't be happy using what makes his Bonneville car so successful in my driver '51.
There is a BIG difference between enhanced street performance and all out racing.
Brian
Well-known member
Yeah, but your isky cam ain't doing much under 2500, worse in fact than stock. Do you need a 4 bbl for 2500 RPM? Thing is, you use parts that will complement each other for max performance at your desired RPM.
The performance you'd get from simply bolting on NEW heads would be similar to what you'd get bolting on NOS heads
The performance you'd get from simply bolting on NEW heads would be similar to what you'd get bolting on NOS heads
I agree with Brian. Heads are one part of the equation and you already believe that the timing was off on your distributor set up. Add a cam choice into the mix and I think there were more issues than just stock performance heads.
I've never ran Edmunds, but I see your point on the plug location. Not sure why others didn't move them.
I can't say for modern Edelbrocks, but Bobby Meeks and Vic Edelbrock were no dummies. They used dynos to test their engines, so they had a reason for what they did.
I've never ran Edmunds, but I see your point on the plug location. Not sure why others didn't move them.
I can't say for modern Edelbrocks, but Bobby Meeks and Vic Edelbrock were no dummies. They used dynos to test their engines, so they had a reason for what they did.
tubman
Well-known member
Guys, please read my post more carefully. The engine I was dissatisfied with was built over 30 years ago, before there was a H.A.M.B. or Ford Barn and I was real rookie.
I'm doing much better these days. Too a large extent, the Edmunds heads are responsible for the improvement.
Remember also that this thread started with a question about whether some 8BA heads ae superior to others.
I'm doing much better these days. Too a large extent, the Edmunds heads are responsible for the improvement.
Remember also that this thread started with a question about whether some 8BA heads ae superior to others.
Last edited:
Everything else’s being equal, I would surely think compression ratio is absolute key to more performance. Just look at how the hp ratings dropped during the early 70s as compression ratios dropped to levels around 8.5:1 from around 10.0:1 or more. I understand they went to net SAE ratings in 71, but still from a thermodynamics perspective, mire compression = more power.
