Aftermarket CR head.

Hamilton Cams

Hamilton Cams

ignorant
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
2,639
Now that the work is finished on our 12v head, we will be releasing those in the next 30-45 days to the public. On to the next couple of projects. We are going to be working on heads for the Common Rail dodge, Duramax and some variation for the TDI.

First up, the Common Rail. The good news, the tooling is already finished for the outside of the head, we are just redoing the intake and exhaust ports so we should have samples in the next 4 months!

Due to the large number of trucks that have dropped valve seats, these heads will feature induction hardened seats like the 12v head. On request we can have seats pressued in.

here are some of the features we are going to offer.

-larger runner volume
-optimal port shape designed by Greg Young
-45 degree intake and exhaust valves
-side flow intake
-thicker deck
-thicker port walls

If there is anything else you are wanting to see in this head, post up.

Zach
 
I know the CR head is very similar to the 24v vp Head but why not do the 24v vp head?
 
Last edited:
these along the same price estimate of the 12v heads or what might we expect ballpark?

And is it possible to get them without a ZZ patern cut in the side for the intake?
 
I probably should Lee.

They should end up being less than the 12v head.
They will come in either a stock intake or a ZZ style cast manifold. From a manufacturing standpoint, the CR is a much bigger market so we will attack that. With a new set of lines and some small tweeks they will work fine on a 24v so we will do the CR.

My hope is to make the port walls thick enough, so that the larger bore engines can accept larger valves and some extreme porting! We will be building a large bore engine with a 5.9 crank and some high rpm programming to really see the maximum potential of this head.

Zach
 
Will these heads still have 7 intake runners with the inner 10 valves sharing a port and the outer 2 valves having thier own ports? Havine an intake plenum made to clear the Gov. housing on a p-pump would be great aswell. Also screw in freeze plugs on all the coolant passages to prevent blow out, plus if the plenum still requires the same freeze plug design at the #1 and #6 as the stock head, make those screw in aswell so that some one could easily adapt thier own "spool aid" kit. Although, if the flow numbers are as high as the new 12v head or higher, then the need for a spool aid probably will be obsolete.
 
The npt plugs instead of the press in freeze plugs.....Check. On the intake runners there is not a lot of way around that design due to the pushrod bores and the connector tubes. This head is going to be handicapped on the intake flow potential due to the connector tubes. If everybody would not gripe too much, we could do away with the connector tubes, use a duramax injector body with lines bent for feeding through the valve cover. We could raise the intake port considerably at that point. With the cost of injectors I think we should stick to the dummed down version that uses stock injectors. people want a good flowing head but I don't think you are willing to buy new injectors to get the flow out of the park.........are you? CFM or ease of install? your call
 
Last edited:
I would request we divide the siamese runners with a wall with enough meat to allow it to seal an IR intake.
 
Clearance for a P7100 would be great. Just ensures you don't leave out a small part of the market and should have minimal impact on design.

On edit... I see kino-fab mentioned p-pump clearance as well.
 
Since this head will not have an intake on it, there will be no reason an intake can't be made to fit a p-pump.

We were looking at dividing it further back, raising the roof of the port and making the roof taper to a point. I am hoping we have enough room to extend the ports into the intake, divided with radiused openings. This along with better programing, bigger cubes, better cam profiles and ball bearing turbos should make an exciting combination!
 
Hamilton Cams said:
The npt plugs instead of the press in freeze plugs.....Check. On the intake runners there is not a lot of way around that design due to the pushrod bores and the connector tubes. This head is going to be handicapped on the intake flow potential due to the connector tubes. If everybody would not gripe too much, we could do away with the connector tubes, use a duramax injector body with lines bent for feeding through the valve cover. We could raise the intake port considerably at that point. With the cost of injectors I think we should stick to the dummed down version that uses stock injectors. people want a good flowing head but I don't think you are willing to buy new injectors to get the flow out of the park.........are you? CFM or ease of install? your call
Click to expand...

One could always fill the connector tube ports with hard-block and port the intake runners as far as they want to get the desired flow numbers. I'd say design it for stock injectors. $.02
 
No, because the ppump and VP guys get screwed. And us VP guys get screwed enough.
 
roachie said:
No, because the ppump and VP guys get screwed. And us VP guys get screwed enough.
Click to expand...

do I hear it???? ohh wait. I do!!1!!11!!! I can hear the worlds smallest violin!

I hear ya. But im sure there's a market for both eventually.
 
JasonCzerak said:
do I hear it???? ohh wait. I do!!1!!11!!! I can hear the worlds smallest violin!

I hear ya. But im sure there's a market for both eventually.
Click to expand...

I'm certain there would be a market for both...eventually. But you're better off going the more basic route then building a flat out upgrade later. Although if I had a CR i'd say go with the DMax injector version.

And Zach, sorry I missunderstood the lack of intake.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top