Engine: 289 V8 head gaskets

[M-Webb]

Moving onto the top side of my motor, putting on the heads is next up. Reminder, this is a 289 R2-ish type motor. And I'm not going for max compression and hp, hoping this motor will actually run well enough on the cheap pump gas is the goal. So with that, I'm going with the thicker type gasket hoping for better chances of max sealing and no leaking, not trying to use the thinner type for max compression.

With that, I ordered a set of gaskets from Phil Harris while getting a few other things. He sent me a set that appears to be Fel-Pro 7669. I assume these are pretty good gaskets, but before I go with it, thought I'd just ask here any opinions + or -. If they are good enough for Phil, I assume they are more than good enough for me.

The gaskets that were in the motor before are shot as the 3rd shop must have sprayed the one with gasket dressing and it had to be scraped off and ruined in the process. The other one had no dressing on it. So putting together the history, I guess the 2nd shop did not use any dressing so when the 3rd shop took it apart to check things, it was clean and free, just all came apart cleanly. But then when they put that head back on they sprayed it with dressing, but left the other one as was. Not exactly top shelf work in my book, but water under the bridge at this point.

I do not see any markings on the old gaskets, so don't know what they are or who made them. But they are not the same as the Fel-Pro. The Fel-Pro seem to be of some sort of layered thin metal with a zinc or tin-like coating on them, measure at about .058" thick. The other gaskets seem to be a fiber composite of some sort with metal edges, measure at about .040", so slightly thinner.

So question is, is the Fel-Pro set a good set to use? Or is the fiber type better for any particular reason? I am planning to use the copper spray for them, seems to be what people suggest, assume is good to use with the Fel-Pro.

Of note, the whole reason I sent the motor out to get checked by the 2nd shop to begin with is that after I finally got the motor from the 1st shop a couple years ago now, I found that the head bolt that is used to hold the throttle assembly onto the rear of the motor was rusty when I went to pull it out to put that on. That gave me obvious concern and pause to maybe have somebody check the motor out internally before I went much further. And good thing I did, as of course the rest of the head bolts weren't much better and the heads had already leaked from a short initial test running of the motor before it got shipped to me. That was the very beginning of the saga of having to deal with the 2nd and 3rd shops trying to get this motor checked out and put back together properly to begin with. So long story short, I now really want to get this part right. Not end up with another leaky head gasket(s) after all of this I've been through with this motor at this point. Needless to say, the head bolts will all be spotlessly clean and torqued exactly to spec. of course. And there won't be any gasket sealant plugging up the oil chases in the rocker supports like the last shop did either.

Anybody have any words of wisdom or thoughts before I roll with this as is and put the heads on?








.

[StudeRich]

These look more like Best Gasket Co. copies of the Original Victor as used on 1955 and 1956 V8's before the thin shim, metal, half point higher comp. FelPro head gaskets started use in1957.

But as you said, they measure thinner, so with flat top Pistons, I would grab every bit of compression lowering I could get, since either of these will work and seal just fine with Permatex Copper Spray Sealant.

The Original Victor 1100, now Victor Reinz by Dana, and some FelPro have silver aluminum on both sides and seal rings on all bolt holes.

Victor uses number 1100BS for the thin shim type.

[64studeavanti]

The fibre ones may be from Best gaskets. I have used them on an R1 build and they are working well.

The choice of gasket thickness will depend on many variables. For example, the R1 I am speaking of was zero decked, bored .060 over and fitted with flat top pistons. I used the Best Fibre gaskets to attain a .040 squish to provide good quench.

A NOS Isky ST5 camshaft was also installed.

If the block and/or heads have not been machined flat, the composite Felpro or the Best gaskets may provide a better seal.

If you have flat top pistons, and the block has not been zero decked, you may experience detonation due to not enough squish, and hence poor quench, by using either of the composite gaskets.

FWIW, stock R1, R2 engines, and most late Stude V8s, used a thin steel shim gasket.

[JoeHall]

The ones on the left appear to be Felpro's version of the "sandwich" type, also made by Victor, as Rich said, and also by McCord. I like that they have seal rings around all holes. For same reason I would avoid the ones on the right, since they'd be prone to oil and/or coolant seepage, without those rings. The thin "shim" type gaskets also have those rings. All head gaskets are one time use only, needless to say. With the sandwich gaskets, just torque them down once and forget them, as they will continue to squish down each time you retorque them similar to cork oil pan gaskets. So, of those there, I'd go with the Felpros on the left. Not sure about squish concerns, as mentioned in post 3, but did inadvertently install flat top pistons in a 289 in a 63 Cruiser once, and used shim gaskets, and it came out OK but ran a bit warm in summer. I do not recall any ping in that motor, but it definitely had extra zip over standard 289.

[64studeavanti]

With the combo I mentioned in my previous post, I can run 93 octane pump gas here in FL without any issues. If you have flat top pistons, I would recommend premium gas.

IIRC, the thin shim gasket measures .017.
The R1 and R2 engines were designed as quench engines.

[M-Webb]

Sounds like these Fel-Pro gaskets are a good product and a good option for my needs. I have full dished pistons, not flat. But they are custom made from Auto-Tec and not sure exactly how they compare to stock pistons as far as that goes for compression and quence and all of that. Also not sure if the block or heads have been decked or how much if so. So will just have to be a little bit of mystery on that. Not that concerned about getting every last bit of hp out of it. I just don’t want these leaking right away or down the road is my concern as far as that goes. I’ll proceed with these. Thanks guys!

[enjenjo]

I believe those 7669 Felpro gaskets are what are know as MLS(multilayer steel). That is the go to for modern gaskets. They are designed to be installed Dry, but I don't suppose Copper Coat would hurt them. A couple over length studs make the heads easier to install without damaging the gaskets

[M-Webb]

Frank, yes, these seem like a multi-layer metal coated piece of some sort. Looking at the Fel-Pro website and searching 7669, I found this set of instructions which appears to be for their older legacy type product which these seem to be. It says for a fiber gasket, do not use any sealant. But for a metal gasket, use a spray sealant. So guess that would apply to these to use a spray sealant with them. Their newer type products look like they have a blue coating on them and says to not use anything else with them. But these are not that.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/vsdam-driv/Repositories/FE0812619C5046AF853EC6520F0004E0/d082090e-4eca-4dff-9b8a-ae130e20b61f/d082090e-4eca-4dff-9b8a-ae130e20b61f.pdf

[JoeHall]

If you are using a performance cam you definitely want the extra compression with the thinner, shim gaskets. But if you are using an OEM cam, the Felpro sandwich gasket will do just fine. As for MLS, technically those Felpros may qualify for that term, but IIRC the MLS brand did not come out till late 1990s - early 2000s, and were first made for Harleys. They look totally different from yours. Yours appear identical to the OEM sandwich gaskets in some 1960s Studes, pretty sure I have a pair of NOS McCords hanging on the wall that look identical. I installed MLS in a couple of Harley EVOs (actually SnS) motors in early 2000s, and they had a thick middle soft steel gasket, and a steel thin gasket on each side, with two rivets to lock the layers in place. The rivets were soft metal, and sunken, so when the heads were torqued they were flat. They are excellent technology, and nowadays MLS makes gaskets for just about everything.

Playing with a couple of Harley SnS motors, I discovered I could make the Harley go faster, or go farther, but not faster AND farther. In the end, after two SnS motors failed, I rep;aced the second SnS with a bone stock EVO crate motor and never looked back.

[M-Webb]

Joe, I have a NOS standard V8 cam in it, not an R1/R2 cam. The heads are '57 GH heads (casting #535976) redone with bigger valves. Again, not sure if they have been decked previously or not, or the block. My guess looking at them is they have at least been cleaned up once in not too distant past since it's been worked on for me by either the 1st or 2nd shop, probably the block too. GH heads are apparently suppose to be 7.5:1 comp ratio, so this might end up slightly higher than that if so using a gasket close to the original in thickness, whatever that would have been.

I'm definitely looking more for reliability using cheap pump gas and less chance of leaking than trying to squeeze the most hp out of these heads. Does it seem like the Fel-Pro gaskets I have are still the best option for that? Or should I consider the thinner shim type instead and go with those?

[PackardV8]

To determine if Studebaker V8 heads have been surfaced and by how much, measure the thickness of the head, from rocker cover rail to deck. The blueprint dimension is the same as the cylinder bore; 3.5625".

jack vines

[M-Webb]

Thanks for the tip on that Jack. Measuring one head at 3 spots and averaging it, I am getting about 3.5533”. So it does seem like the heads at least have been decked and by close to .001”, which might have been the intended target amount. The rocker cover rail is not as precise at this point as the block side of course, so exact number is hard to get.

How much would that affect the comp ratio, if it matters to make much of a difference? And assuming maybe about the same on the block.

The 3rd shop spent some time trying to physically measure the volumes to get a compression ratio. I recall them saying something like would maybe be around 7.75:1 with the thicker gasket and maybe close to 8:1 with the thinner. But I don’t recall off hand the exact numbers they told me now at this point. They did try to convince me that that was low and I really should scrap my custom made pistons and get new ones made for a higher CR so can get more power out of the motor. Or deck the heads more if possible without causing other problems like intake fitment. I told them my goal was for it to run reliably well on cheap pump gas, not max hp. But they told me that is a mistake and wanted to debate about it. Because as you know, compared to a SBC, yadda, yadda, yadda....., whatever. In the end I just told them to leave it as is and move on. They of course did not like that, was the beginning of the end with them I think, and where the crappy attitude and piss poor corner cutting work started. And then of course, they couldn't even manage to finish doing that, and now in retrospect, luckily so.

[64Avanti]

That 8.0:1 compression ratio with thin head gaskets is about right. I would use the think head gasket.

[bezhawk]

The stock Golden Hawk heads were 7.8:1 compression ratio with the composition gaskets. You gain roughly .5 bump in compression with the thinner shim gaskets. so, 8.3:1. This is with the stock deep dish pistons. Shallow dish is another .5 higher, and flat top pistons a point higher than that.

[PackardV8]

Thanks for the tip on that Jack. Measuring one head at 3 spots and averaging it, I am getting about 3.5533”. So it does seem like the heads at least have been decked and by close to .001”, which might have been the intended target amount.

That would indicate .010" removed; typical surface cleanup.

How much would that affect the comp ratio, if it matters to make much of a difference? And assuming maybe about the same on the block.

Typically, rebuilder pistons are "destroked" an inaccurate term, as it's a reduced compression height, to result in the same compression as OEM.

To guess your compression ratio, we'd have to know the compression height of your custom pistons. Since your heads are still off, what is the deck height? That is at TDC how far below block deck is the piston crown?

jack vines

[StudeRich]

Those Huge custom Intake Valves do not play well with a Low Compression Engine with stock Cam that you are attempting to build to run on Regular Fuel.
Other than the Low compression Heads with oversize valves and the Avanti R2 Vibration Dampener, it is all a very Standard, a bit less than Stock like build, not a performance build as you stated you do not want, so it became a Mix-Match.

When my Son had a 289 '57 Golden Hawk engine rebuilt using those low compression heads without bumping up the compression to 8.5 to 9.0 where a good running 289 should be with Shallow Dish Pistons, I noticed what a slug it became.

[M-Webb]

Jack, thanks for the correction on the math! Yes, .010" seems more reasonable now that I think of it. It actually came out to .0092" difference and I just mentally rounded up and forgot to move it over a 0 in my head while at it. I was thinking though if was only .001", how was that going to amount to much of anything, lol. .010" sounds more notable.

I doubt the custom pistons were made to compensate for the decking, but who knows. I'll take the last step and measure the top of the piston to the block deck and report back when get a chance. Of course being dished and custom, I also don't know what the cc's of that is, at least not without breaking out the clay and trying to figure it out or something like that. Or maybe I can call Auto-Tec back again and see if they can tell me how it was made, which is certainly possible and probably would be most accurate.