D port head VS Round port head

vristang

15 Year Member

Mar 31, 2005

4,933

101

124

Seattle

Jun 7, 2006

#1

• Jun 7, 2006

• #1

Basically I am looking for some pros & cons.

Is there even a significant difference?


Thanks,
jason

 

vristang

15 Year Member

Mar 31, 2005

4,933

101

124

Seattle

Jun 8, 2006

#2

• Jun 8, 2006

• #2

I found the following Flow Data here…
http://www.turboford.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=040342

I put the data in graphical form.

The Round port Turbo heads seem pretty decent for stock un-ported heads.

 

Attachments

• 2.3 head option.webp

  13.3 KB · Views: 1,448

Red_LX

I’m not much help unless you’re looking for ****!

Founding Member

Nov 29, 1999

5,896

73

129

Morgantown, WV...where couches meet their doom

Jun 8, 2006

#3

• Jun 8, 2006

• #3

If you're looking at the light blue line that goes way up the scale, that's not the line for the Ranger round port head, that's the line for the Esslnger ARCA head (which is a $1000+ aluminum race head). The ranger round port is fairly lackluster and is outflowed by the stock Turbo D port. I'd say stick with a D port and get it ported.

 

vristang

15 Year Member

Mar 31, 2005

4,933

101

124

Seattle

Jun 8, 2006

#4

• Jun 8, 2006

• #4

Actually I am trying to compare the round port from a turbo tbird with a Dport head (not sure where the Dport came from).

The graph does show that the round port tbird head to flow better than the Dport in stock form.

Do both of these heads accept porting the same way?

Thanks for the help
jason

 

Red_LX

I’m not much help unless you’re looking for ****!

Founding Member

Nov 29, 1999

5,896

73

129

Morgantown, WV...where couches meet their doom

Jun 8, 2006

#5

• Jun 8, 2006

• #5

How do you get from that graph that the round port is shown as flowing better? In every part of that graph it flows the same, or worse as valve lift increases.


Morever, the only vehicle round port heads came on stock was the Ranger with the 2.0L (which was a debored 2.3). There is no round port thunderbird head.

 

vristang

15 Year Member

Mar 31, 2005

4,933

101

124

Seattle

Jun 9, 2006

#6

• Jun 9, 2006

• #6

I knew I should have cleaned that graph up before posting it.
I attached a better one, showing just the stock heads and a ported Dport.

I guess the real question is...
How will a ported round port head compare to the ported Dport.

If there are any sites out there that have done back to back comparisons, feel free to just point me in that direction.
I am not opposed to doing my own leg work, but I don't really know where to go for this type of info.

Red_LX -
I am not trying to be argumentative, just trying to understand what I found in the j/y.
The T-bird had a turbo (removed now), and does have round exhaust ports. If Ford never used round ports on a turbo'd Tbird, then someone went to all the effort of changing intake/exhaust mainfolds to install an n/a Ranger head.
This seems like a bad idea to me, but I am new to the 2.3 world so maybe there is something I am not aware of?

Thanks for any help you guys can provide on the head flow and application questions.

jason

 

Attachments

• clip_image002.gif

  5.6 KB · Views: 841

Red_LX

I’m not much help unless you’re looking for ****!

Founding Member

Nov 29, 1999

5,896

73

129

Morgantown, WV...where couches meet their doom

Jun 9, 2006

#7

• Jun 9, 2006

• #7

I had a funny feeling you might be looking at the exhaust ports...

When people refer to a head as a round port, D-port, oval port, whatever, they are referring to the intake ports. To my knowledge ALL 2.3 heads had round exhaust ports, so they are distinguished by the intake ports.

So, odds are your Thunderbird has a turbo D-port on it.

 

vristang

15 Year Member

Mar 31, 2005

4,933

101

124

Seattle

Jun 9, 2006

#8

• Jun 9, 2006

• #8

Red_LX said:

I had a funny feeling you might be looking at the exhaust ports...

When people refer to a head as a round port, D-port, oval port, whatever, they are referring to the intake ports. To my knowledge ALL 2.3 heads had round exhaust ports, so they are distinguished by the intake ports.

So, odds are your Thunderbird has a turbo D-port on it.

Click to expand...

I ended up not getting the head because the cam lobes were completely wiped out.

Thanks for the time.

NOOB

 

Red_LX

I’m not much help unless you’re looking for ****!

Founding Member

Nov 29, 1999

5,896

73

129

Morgantown, WV...where couches meet their doom

Jun 9, 2006

#9

• Jun 9, 2006

• #9

What shape are the combustion chambers on that D-port you have? If they're heart shaped, you won't want to use it for a turbo build as it will bring up the compression too much (plus as you can see on the graph, those d-ports flowed like crap). You may want to go back and get the head off that Thunderbird after all. Never hurts to have a couple extras.

 

vristang

15 Year Member

Mar 31, 2005

4,933

101

124

Seattle

Jun 9, 2006

#10

• Jun 9, 2006

• #10

I will double check come Sunday, but I am 98% certain that the 2 heads that I have are not heart shaped. The cam looked half-way decent on one of them.
I would check now, but I live 2hrs drive from my garage. A Mustang enthusiasts wort nightmare.

Is there any other 2.3t head knowledge you can pass on to the current noob?

I am still thinking on the head, but atleast I got second oil cooler out of it.

thanks again
jason

 

Red_LX

I’m not much help unless you’re looking for ****!

Founding Member

Nov 29, 1999

5,896

73

129

Morgantown, WV...where couches meet their doom

Jun 10, 2006

#11

• Jun 10, 2006

• #11

Umm...well, one definite good idea is to have the head you want to use magnafluxed as the turbo heads tend to crack around the valve seats. However, most people run them cracked anyway as long as the cracks aren't too bad.

Other than that, I don't have a whole lot to pass along I guess