Inliners International Forums General Discussion Hi Performance Brazilian Head

Anyone actively using the Brazilian head? What improvement would anyone like to see in this head. I'm getting a cracked head and want to make patterns to cast it in aluminum. Yea it maybe down the road a bit but, if we don't do it now no one will try to do a 12 port head that is less expensive than the Kirby/Sissel head. I have not seen any movement out of Classic Inlines as to this so I thought I want to have a go. Save an Inline----Roast an import head for aluminum!!!!!!! A lot of Toyota heads were make right here in the USA from virgin 356A aluminum. I did some inspection work at a foundry in Missouri that made them back in 1996. Let me know what you think. (naysayers too - Freedom of speech)

Randy S. Hager
Venus, TX

Randy:

I'm not familiar with the Brazilian head at all. Can you point me to a web site (or two) with photos and maybe some descriptive text? Without some basic education on my part, I'm sure in no position to make any suggestions but one that probably would apply to any aftermarket head: Consider raising the valve cover mating surface to provide room for roller rockers (and stud support?) without having to use a spacer.

Turbo6 (Harry) is using one now.

Sounds like a good idea,but the 12 port head does not seem to flow all that great,,,but it has 6 intake ports,which is better that our siamesed 3 port.

Lotus designed the cylinder head IIRC?

I would not copy it exactely ,but would try to improve the flow.

two cents

MBHD

Turbo6 posted some flow #'s for the Brazilian 12 port a while back. Like MDHD said, even when ported, they don't even really come close to what a siamese head will flow with the bolt-in lumps. The bolt-in lump heads are in the 240-ish CFM range. A Kirby/Sissell head and a fully ported siamese head have the capability to flow well over 300 CFM, so I would look at trying to copy a head like that as opposed to the Brazilian head. Even though, further porting and improvements could probably be made to the Brazilian head, I don't think it would be a good head to try to copy.

I have talked w/a couple guys from Brazil that say the limit for the 12 port head is around 500 HP,,,then the heads seem to crack (thin castings)

Harry has made more than 500 HP so far,so maybe he will put that myth to rest. ;-)


MBHD

Just a comment,,,,just because posts are huge,,,does not mean it will work good.

My intake port is only 1.71" round port & flows 320 cfm.
2.08" intake valve.

With a race port job & w/a 2.10 intake valve the Kirby/head flows about 400 cfm.
A little too much for my street car.

Douglas has the same port & valve size configuration I have.
So far,he ran 8.6 in the 1/4


MBHD

The Pontiac Iron Duke 4 cylinder heads can also be used. They share the exact same bore spacing and bolt hole locations, so you don't end up having to modify the deck surface of the block as you do if you use the SBC heads. They are pricy, and then you have to buy (2) of them to cut up. The Fontana heads are also pretty expensive. I think if he could come up with a newer casting that was kinda' the middle of the road between a siamese head with the bolt-in lumps and a ported Kirby head, that would be a good starting point. Something that started off flowing in the 270 CFM range maybe, and then had the potential to exceed 310-320 CFM for a fair amount of money would be a pretty successful new product, I think....

Here are a couple pics of the intake ports.
MBHD

Awesome head Hank! Also Randy, if you can pattern a new head to use existing intakes and valve covers and stuff, that would also help boost its acceptance amoung the potetial users.

Hank, do you have any pics of your car that you are putting that engine into.

Randy:

I’m trying to do some research on the Brazilian head but in the mean time I’ve done some thinking on the subject of an aftermarket Chevy L6 aluminum head. I’m certainly no expert on such things but I can see where the technical issues and marketing realities makes this a very difficult proposition.

Classic Inlines apparently got a lot of grief for not developing a cross-flow design for their small Ford (144/200/250) aluminum head. But I think they actually got everything just about right in the sense that the head could utilize nearly all of the OEM parts and pieces, or at least readily available off-the-shelf aftermarket items. This keeps the true cost of ownership down to a level that makes the head viable from a marketing standpoint since existing intake and exhaust manifolds work, as do valve covers and rocker arm assemblies. I believe CI did raise and reshape the intake and exhaust ports to significantly improve overall flow and velocity, and to get the exhaust flow into a much more optimal relationship to the intake. Of course, there is the obvious benefit of casting in aluminum that reduces weight and that allows for higher compression without detonation problems due to better cooling.

As I understand it, CI is following the same path with their big Ford (240/300) aluminum head and I’m sure hoping for similar results and another exceptional product. It’s my understanding that they have a prototype head nearly (?) ready for testing but that the overall project is apparently on the “back burner” mainly due to the economy (which is understandable). But I have no doubt that the big Ford head priced around $1,600 in street trim when it finally comes to market will be another great success, particularly for those interested in racing applications since the restricted flow of even a fully reworked stock head really can’t support larger displacements (300+ cubic inches) at high RPM levels.

So when I think about a Chevy aluminum head, I would take the CI model into account and would work towards a head that is a straight bolt-on replacement, that improves and balances port flow, that increases combustion efficiency, and that allows the buyer to use most (if not all) of his existing parts (i.e. intake, exhaust, valve cover, rocker arms, and such) or at least those aftermarket parts that are already available.

The first obvious problem has to do with the stock head bolt placement relative to the siamesed intake ports. The bolt location needs to stay in its stock location – I think that’s a given. So splitting the three siamesed intake ports into six individual ports would seem to require enough room between the adjacent pairs of ports to clear the head bolt such that any original or aftermarket intake manifold will no longer work. If you now require the use of a new cast or custom fabricated intake manifold, the cost of ownership might become prohibitive and so far fewer heads would be sold. Not a good outcome when you’re trying to recoup your R&D, production, and marketing costs, much less make a reasonable profit.

So what if you could find another make of inline six that has a good offering of aftermarket intake manifolds and adjust the new Chevy head intake port configuration to align? While that would not allow the buyer to use his existing manifold, there would at least be substitute manifolds already in production from which to choose. But the problem with this approach is that I know of no other inline six with the same order of intake and exhaust ports that would match the Chevy, and that also has a workable selection of aftermarket intake manifolds. Re-positioning the new Chevy head intake ports to use manifolds designed for (say) the 258 AMC/Jeep or the 240/300 Ford would, at a minimum, require a custom ground cam to deal with the changed intake and exhaust valve order. I’m guessing such a cam would cost as much, if not more than a new dedicated intake manifold. Hardly a bolt-on proposition.

One other thought would be some kind of an intake adapter that would merge the new head’s six individual intake ports (that are split to clear the head bolt?) back into the original three siamesed ports so the buyer’s original intake could be bolted up. That solution might work but it also might create a number of linkage, alignment and clearance problems – particularly in tight engine compartments. Then there’s the wisdom of using an intake manifold that doesn’t take advantage of the individual ports to consider.

So this sure isn’t an easy puzzle to solve effectively. My guess (which aligns with CNC-Dude’s comments above) is that, if you produced an aluminum head that takes into account all the best practices of the highly modified original Siamese port iron heads and price the street version at the $1,500 to $1,600 range (as CI has done with the small Ford head), I suspect there would be considerable interest. It won't have the potential of Mike Kirby's 12-port head, not to mention a true cross-flow design. But both of those options come at a significantly higher price due to the need for specialized intake and exhaust manifolds, and in the case of the cross-flow head, some solution to the ignition issue.

Such a head could incorporate the added lump port inserts and altered head bolt treatment as an integral part of new aluminum casting. Possibly the ports could be slightly raised (but kept in there original orientation so existing intake and exhaust manifolds would not be adversely affected) to improve flow and velocity even a bit more. Of course larger valves and hardened seats would be part of the package, as would the provisions for springs that would support much more radical cam choices. As I mentioned earlier, I’d also raise the valve cover mating surface to accommodate roller rockers and a rocker support without needing a spacer or custom fabricated valve cover. I’d also expand the openings to allow for larger diameter push rods and it might be worth looking at the combustion chamber size and shape for possible improvements.

Much more than just 2 cents worth . . .

Russ

PS: I assume the photos above are of one of Kirby's 12-Port heads? They are a thing of beauty and I sure wish one would show up under my Christmas tree this year. Fat chance!

By the way, the design does seem to be very similar to the Fontana 4-banger head (or vice versa since I don't know which came first). I think there may be a difference in the valve angles and the combustion chambers are not the same as I recall.

I think one thing that has contributed to the siamese heads resistance to having much competition in the marketplace, is the fact that with porting, it can be made "tremendously" better in terms of airflow. Where the Ford inlines will only see marginal gains with even the most aggressive stages of porting that can be done to those heads. Even though the Kirby head can be made to flow better than a full blown "brazed" lump siamese head, the cost to do so will set you back about 2-1/2 times the money as a comparable siamese head will cost(with all the bells and whistles factored in, intake, valve cover, headers, etc.). It really would be hard to develop a head that would be better than either one of these heads that are fully ported to their potential. One of the cost factors that I think might be contributing to Kirby's costs, is that it has taken him over 2 years to machine the (25) heads he is doing now, and is still way out from having them finished. It seems that it would be hard to keep track of all your time over that long of a time period to accurately offer a fairly priced product. I bet if he tried to get them CNC'd from start to finish(even the porting)it might significantly reduce his total cost involved per casting, and could even be offered cheaper to the customer, and on a more regular basis too, perhaps. In comparison to the Ford aluminum head that CI makes and sells for the $1600 price tag ready to bolt on, why can't Kirby do the same. Aluminum is aluminum isn't it....the heads are close to the same size, aren't they....it doesn't take more aluminum to pour a Kirby head as a Ford six head can it. In just the few years that CI has even been making their heads, they have far exceeded the total # of heads that Kirby has sent out the door in the 17 years he has made his....why. I think the Chevy 6 crowd is a lot stronger than the Ford 6 crowd is as far as interest in this type of performance product goes, and the demand is there for this type of head, as with the Ford crowd. If Randy can get a comparably priced head as the Ford, that is capable of the same performance levels as either the siamese "lumped" head or the Kirby 12 port for less money, it would be a gold mine.....

CNC-Dude:

Your observations seem to be spot on and I think we end up on the same page, if perhaps from somewhat different directions.

If Randy (or anyone else) can come up with a Chevy head that delivers the performance you speak of at the CI price point, and that allows the buyer to use his existing intake, exhaust, valve train, and valve cover if he chooses to do so (to keep the "cost of ownership" at an affordable level), there's no doubt you would be looking at a winner.

An interesting aside is to look at the Hesco aftermarket aluminum head for the AMC/Jeep inline sixes priced at $1,995 ready to bolt on. There is apparently a lively enough market over in that camp and the pricing isn't too far off what CI's Ford small six head trades for. So you would sure think a comparable Chevy head at the CI price point should be doable.

Maybe im just partial to the Chevy 6's, but who would have thought the AMC/Jeep crowd would have a larger market than us. I think that this just reinforces the need for a fair priced performance head for these engines. Maybe we can collectively pool our individual resources to help develop one as a group. Maybe we could approach Kirby to purchase his patterns, and then update them with the needed repairs they need to be put into a more higher volume/modern machining production project. Just a thought....

CNC Dude,,
I need to take some pics,,but it is a 69 Camaro.
Thanks!


MBHD

CNC, here in the Moab area our annual car show draws about 650 cars from all over the country. The annual Easter Jeep Safari draws about 2000 4-wheelers. Those jeepers are avid modifiers and attack the local rock like you wouldn't believe!

Thanks so very much for all your comments. Heres my plan of attack. I only wanted to see if there are small changes that could be made to improve the Chevy/lotus 12 port head. I'm not after the RACE PREPPED head. Just a replacement for the Siamese head. Production if you would call it that would be to make a few heads and run them for a while to see if I did a good job or not. (I'm the first Guinea pig) I sure there is someone here that could make them at a faster rate then I could but that is not what I'm intending. Price?????? For what I want to do that is irrelevant right now. Sand and some recycled aluminum I could make a suitable replacement for the stock head. (yea multiport EFI is on the list)

Randy S. Hager
Venus, TX

I also forgot to mention that the most durable casting material is baked sand. You don't have to pour right away and they only break down with heat and water. Anyone here know this process????? I only have book knowledge but I'm willing to learn all of this. Edy just found his old cracked Chevy/Lotus head and offered it to me for this project.

Thanks again guy's
Randy S.Hager
Venus, TX

Randy,
I have been out of town for the last 2 weeks, This weekend at Bowling Green Ky. for the Goodguys event and made my best run to date 9.89 but broke my engine I think the head is ok. Anyway the Brazilian head is exactly the same as the US head except the intake ports are about a half inch higher than the exhaust ports. If you get that broken head and redesign the intake ports for better flow, they are way too small for any decent flow unless pressurized. Just make them wider and a little more short side radius and I think you would have a direct bolt on with only the intake to deal with, You could also make an intake manifold. But the exhaust manifold, rockers, valve cover and all will bolt on as stock. I don't see any strength problems if you do not port the head too much, I'm over 600HP with out any problems the heads look to be the same thickness.

Harry

There is a brazilian head for sale on ebay presently. Looks like it could have possibly been milled alot. Unless they come with 57 CC chambers from the factory?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/12-Port-C...sQ5fAccessories

Guys:

Randy, I sure understand your approach and it will be a very interesting project regardless of the direction you ultimately take.

Turbo-6 and Tlowe, thanks for the info on the Brazilian head. Up to this point, I hadn't seen one and the ebay listing (along with Turbo-6's comments) was enlightening. It sure has some similarity to the 242/4.0L AMC/Jeep I6 head with the individual (and raised) intake ports.

I know this may be off the track a bit, but I ran across an old article from back in 1967 about an Explorer Scout project to build an altered roadster powered by a Pontiac OHC six. As I understand it, the Pontiac uses essentially the same block as the Chevy and the single overhead cam head uses the same 4-bolt configuration in some manner that doesn't affect the pairs of intake ports. The Pontiac head is a 12-Port design with individual intake ports which got me to wondering:

1. How well can these intake ports be made to flow?

2. Is there a good relationship between the flow of the intake and exhaust?

3. Would this head be a good starting point for a new Chevy head if you could replace the overhead cam with traditional rocker arms and push rods, and allow the use of the typical Chevy valve cover?

4. Are there any viable aftermarket intake manifolds available for this head so that additional development could be avoided?

5. Does the Pontiac's exhaust ports line up in the same location as the siamese port Chevy so exhaust manifolds would be useable?

Don't know if the Pontiac head has any real (or potential) advantages over the Brazilian configuration but it's at least another example of a 12-port design that has some commonality with the Chevy head. Interesting . . .

PS: After doing a little research, apparently the OHC exhaust port layout and bolts don't match the Chevy siamese port head. So that would be a potential issue.

FYI: At one point, a 24-valve DOHC aftermarket head was being developed for the Pontiac. Don't know what happened to the project but the prototype head (in progress) looked great.

As this is the best approch right now. I want to look into making the intake ports almost like the LS1 narrow/long type since they seem to flow even better than the SBC rectangular ports. After I get the head I will see ifit can be modified to have the narrow/long intakes and keep the exhaust as is. I really need to have the head in hand before I can see if it is possible to make any mods within the stock container head.

Love all the comments guy's. I need something to think about.

Randy S. Hager
Venus, TX

Look into being able to install the L92 heads.Or copy that design.

They flow much better than the cathedral tall narrow port LS1 heads.

http://www.proheads.com/WCCH%20L-92.html

Bolt pattern is pretty close.


MBHD

There are a few problems with the L92 head design.
1. Still need a special intake and exhaust (cost)
2. Those big valves will not fit into a small bore engine.
3. If you keep the valve arrangement, then need a special cam

I have and still am checking into that same theory. It is a tough one. Tom

I do know the valves will not fit our bore sizes.

I was basically stating to copy the design of the ports,just think what it would flow w/a 2.08" valve,,,pretty damm good still.

MBHD

Hey guy's I don't want to do a race head right now but I do want it to flow good since the engine is an air pump. To keep velocity up the port volume needs to be keep small and runner lenght makes more torque. I just want to make a stock replacement head but make it a little better than even the Chevy/Lotus head.

Randy S. Hager
Venus, TX

FYI:
Edy Rodriguez and I are in the modeling phase right now on the Argentinean head he has called the Bertha. This is a better flowing head then the Brazilian Chevy/Lotus 4.1L head. It will need an intake made to go with it so it will not be a true bolt on. It will however be a lot better flowing head and can be used for racing. The intake will not be for carbs but for Multiport EFI. I also think it will need to have an exhaust make to fit so I will look into making header starter flange and tubes so someone can build their own headers from that. This process still will be over a year from now so I will keep you updated on any progress.

Randy S. Hager
Venus, TX

Is it similar to the head(Berta head)designed by the racing engineer Oreste Berta for F1 racing in S/A. It had 12 non-crossflow type ports that were all fairly equal in size and shape, kinda' roundish to oval, and very, very large. Not practical for any use other than F1 racing. Do you have any pics of it you can post.

Yep,
intake ports are huge!!! Kinda like a super cobra jet head for a BBF.

You can sit a "D" sized battery & it still does not fill up the port.

Douglas had one but sold it & I convinced Mike to sell a
Sissells
/Kirby 12 port.

MBHD

MBHD, I knew they had gigantic ports in them, maybe if they reconfigured them into a more useful size and shape, they might be on to something there.

My bad I did not spell it correctly. Yep same head. We felt that it would be a better head to cast up for others. I don't know too much about the head except what Edy has told me. This thread has given me some more information. The only thing is we do not know how the water circulates through the head. If it is similar to the stock head we will be alright.

Randy S. Hager
Venus, TX

Here is Edy's Berta Head. Even with big ports it can be improved. I want to raise up both intake and exhaust to have a better short turn radius with of course 1.90"/1.60" valves.


Randy S. Hager
Venus, TX

Are the exhaust port configurations on the Brazilian 4.1L MPFI 12 port and the Chevrolet 250 9 port engines the same? Will the two piece Brazilian exhaust manifolds for the fuel injected engines ('95-'98) bolt on to the US Chevrolet 250 heads?

Hello guys!!

i have been kind away, but Randy keeps me informed about what´s going on here!!
The Brazilian Exhaust manifold will fit the stock 250 head. it´s been done here is Brazil, here some links:

http://www.opaleirosdoparana.com/preparacao-f30/coletor-escape-silverado-omega-no-opala-t8584.htm
http://www.opaleirosdoparana.com/mecanica-geral-f28/coletor-escape-omega-41-t6951.htm

sincce the berta is also in discussion i am placing again some links to pics of my berta head, you guys can take a look here:

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1008/4217/1600/DSC00024.jpg
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1008/4217/1600/DSC00022.jpg
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1008/4217/1600/DSC00021.jpg

Edy

Edy:

Wow! That's quite some head! The ports are sure large enough. It looks from the photos that the intake and exhaust ports are the same size but that the exhaust ports are positioned in a slightly lower plane in relation to the intake ports.

I'm guessing the head would be a great platform for an all out racing engine. But would the large ports be a problem with a typical street (or hot rod) engine that typically runs a lower RPM? I'm assuming they would be.

Regardless, I wouldn't mind getting my hands on one, or a new aftermarket aluminum version.

Russ

Thanks Edy, I have a set of the 2 piece exhaust manifolds in shipment from Brazil.

russk

This head was designed for race indeed, but with the correct cam, and intake manifold it can be streetable! well with lot of work and some lucky (or it would be with a lot of lucky and some work) ;-) we will have available a good flow and low budget head!! the work is already in progress!!!

Edy

Where can I find info on these brazilian 12 port heads was just curious about them

Oh at this post is coming back from the grave

Josh someone had posted on the Hot Inline Sixes Facebook page pictures awhile back.Also posted was pics of a new dual overhead cam head that had been developed along with a aluminum block.