An aside on the flow capability of original heads. When John Mummert was studying & porting the factory Y heads some years ago, he wrote an article on what he found. He discouvered that one of the biggest flow problems, wasn't the heads.. it was the available intake manifolds!  No stock intake & most aftermarket intakes wouldn't allow maximum flow. Hense the Mummert 4 Bbl intake he came up with, which was in itself a game changer! 


Paul

I just flowed a set of mint -G heads with 1.925/1.510" valves, and stock the upper port flowed 177 cfm, the lower 180 cfm, and the two exhaust ports flowed 123/124 cfm--as cast.  In theory that would support 370 horsepower.( 180 x .257 x 8 = 370.08 hp).  All of the stock intakes I have flowed are capable of flowing around 185 cfm average or slightly more.  The 2009 EMC entry with porting and larger valves (2.020/1.600) flowed ~223/211 cfm with extensive porting.  All the new aluminum heads I have flowed as cast and without any porting flowed ~240/224 cfm in upper/lower ports and around 180 cfm on the exhausts.  Almost all the new Mummert intake manifolds I have flowed as cast flow ~ 274/276 cfm average, and the BTs almost always flow 278/279 cfm average.  John's new Race heads flow ~290/280 and 190ish on exhaust.  Big difference in horsepower potential.  We don't need to handicap the Y by going back to "as cast" in EMC competition.  JMO.  Joe-JDC

JDC

Joe.  Thanks for the detailed flow information on the various heads and intake manifolds.  That very short but precise post could eventually end up being the holy grail of Y head information down the road.
 
I did send in my entry for this years’ Engine Master Challenge.  I didn’t see much point in going backwards in Y-Block performance in using the iron heads; I had already done a Y engine with iron heads at the EMC back in 2009 and it was a respectable performer but was severely outclassed that year due to the better aluminum heads available to the other engines.  While I believe that the iron heads would be competitive against the other iron heads, I simply don’t see them being the top place finisher considering some of the other iron headed engine options out there.  The driving force in entering this years’ competition with a different engine family ultimately boils down to expense; in my case an iron headed Y that is built to be competitive against some of the other players out there is cost prohibitive as that particular engine would not be easily repurposed at the conclusion of the competition.  With that in mind, I’ve started working on what I’ll call a bored and stroked 383 M-E-L Mercury engine as the basis for the 2017 EMC competition.  That engine family not having a combustion chamber within the cylinder head does present some challenges but at the same time opens up some head flow capabilities not seen on conventional and/or regular production heads.

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)

Ted  just curious Why is the  MEL  Engine allowed into the Vintage class? I thought the Engine had to be introduced before 1955?

Was the MEL engine  not first built for the  1958 model run? 

They make exceptions for less known, less used engines.  The Mopar Poly Engines are the same.  I think it is best to think of the vintage class as the not mainstream class.  If it's not a common, popular, engine, there is a good chance that it will be approved.


Lawrenceville, GA

When the Vintage Engine class first came into being in 2015, it was pretty much unlimited as far as blocks, heads, intakes, etc. which put the SBC engines at a definite advantage had they been allowed.  Sixty plus years of SBC development would have shined in an unlimited class as I’ve seen 860HP in my own shop on those engines still being normally aspirated.  In that particular case, that engine did not have a single oem piece remaining but it was still SBC architecture.  Hence the ‘before 1955’ rule which simply took the SBC engines out of the fray in this particular class.  With this years’ oem iron head rule and no epoxy or welding allowed within the heads other than for a simple repair, the Ford Y-Block could easily go head to head with the SBC engines also equipped with oem heads.

As Charlie mentions, exceptions are allowed to the ‘before 1955’ rule with the Poly and M-E-L engines now being on the exception list.  Simply writing in to the rules committee with a proposed engine for the class is all it takes to start the process to add an engine to the exception list.  I had a 312 engine prepared for the 2008 EMC but it was disallowed due to the mushroom tappets rule for that year; "no mushroom tappets allowed".  For the 2009 competition I pushed for an exception that allowed mushroom tappets for those engine originally equipped with them.  That exception was approved and as a result I was able to enter a Ford Y in the 2009 competition and that was the year that I entered the competition with an iron headed Y.

With the Ford Y-Block taking a first place finish for the first two years of this particular competition, it was inevitable for a rules change to help level the playing field.  Hence the move back to oem iron heads.

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)

The rule change doesn't surprise me. If Ford keeps winning in NASCAR watch them make a rule change to handicap Fords.


Dan      Kingman Az.      86409

I'm sure it has nothing to do with preventing Ford from reaching the top. The Ford Y-Block is the SBC of the vintage class, in terms of the development behind it. Eliminating aluminum heads makes it more fair for everyone. Hopefully it brings some different engines out, as well. There are lots of neat vintage engines that could run and have not yet.


Lawrenceville, GA

hi ted! it doesn't say if porting the heads is allowed? I would think that if exhaust plates are allowed that porting would be allowed! I remember a guy that raced at milan dragway in Michigan used exhaust plates on a FE engine in a 66 ford shortbed  pick-up back in the 70's. the MEL  like the FE had small exhaust ports with too much angle to them! do you think that exhaust plates would help the MEL? also, is it possible to use a 460 crank in a MEL? the bore spaceing is the same!

 lincoln/merc. y-blocks &mel's                                                               bucyrus, ohio.

You can port the heads to death as long as you don’t break through.  Only one epoxy or weld repair per intake and export per head which eliminates the extensive modifications seen in the past.  The rules are not clear on the exhaust ports though in what happens if you break into the water ports.  Pushrod tubes are allowed though.
 
A 460 crankshaft drops into the MEL with just a few modifications.  Besides having to turn the mains down to the MEL journal sizes, the front crankshaft timing gear would need to move forward to align it with the cam gear.  There are a couple of other items but are not show stoppers.

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)