DATE 4-8-05

FSPP is currently looking at a couple different designs, and will choose the design that best suits our intended goals and design parameters. The primary goal is to produce an aluminum head which will achieve 300 HP naturally aspirated. Once a final design has been chosen, a proto type will be produced and flow test. Finally we will do several test on an engine dyno to assure optimum performance and reliability has been achieved. Only then will it go to the production stage, which is targeted for the early spring of 2006. However, a lot of research and work needs to be done before then, but we are confident we can meet or exceed our goals. FSPP looks forward to producing and offering the very best cylinder head available, at a price all inline enthusiast can afford.

The first stage of the project is to outline the goals and parameters for the new aluminum head. Will the new cylinder head be produced purely for maximum power gains, for economical street use, or a combination of both. What type of induction systems will be utilized, will we use the stock configuration or cross flow technology, how many valves per cylinder, utilize the stock exhaust pattern or redesigned for improved flow. All these questions need to be considered before we begin designing the new head.

One of our major concerns is the ability to use U.S. style headers. Considering many of our potential customers will already have headers, purchasing new headers would just be an added expense. Those that have headers, would more than likely wind up selling them on e-bay at reduced prices, since used parts never return the full purchase price regardless of the condition.

Other points to consider, are the additional cost and frustration of rebuilding or modifying the exhaust system. As well as the availability of replacement gaskets for maintenance issues. If a custom exhaust port arrangement is utilized, Classic Inlines would be the only source for the gaskets. Many of our potential customers purchased headers which require removing the header for starter replacement. Imagine the frustration of breaking down while on the road, and not being able to go to the local parts store for replacement parts because you forgot to carry a spare or two in the trunk. Or possibly having to waiting a few days for a new gasket to arrive.

Hence, if we can utilize the current port arrangement, and header designs, we eliminate all these potential problems and expenses. All which would add to the overall end cost of installing the new aluminum head. If we utilize a cross flow design, the same would hold true for the valve cover gaskets. However, this is not the case for intake gaskets, as they can be cut from sheet gasket material available at most parts stores.

For more information see the pages on the Design Updates and Specifications, or read about the OZ250-2V head. You can also view pics in the Aluminum Head Photo Gallery.

	Produce an aluminum cylinder head capable of 300HP (or more) when naturally aspirated
	Utilize the stock exhaust pattern and angle, allowing the use of current header designs.
	Eliminate the siamese exhaust ports while maintaining the stock exhaust pattern and angle.
	Incorporate the ability to utilize both shaft style rocker assemblies and stud mounted rockers.
	Utilize the stock valve cover design if possible, allowing the use of FSPP's new alloy cover and aftermarket chrome covers.
	Design and incorporate a new 4 barrel intake manifold with EFI and/or boosted induction options.
	Achieve maximum HP and torque averages, while designing for economy and daily street usage.
	Utilize existing intake manifold designs which are available for various carburetor options (triple SU and Weber intakes).

During my conversations with the design engineer, we talked primarily about the overall design. Would it be based on the popular Australian 250-2V pre cross flow head, which would meet most of the above specifications. Or start with a clean sheet and develop a cross flow design which would produce more power, more efficiency. Both have their advantages and disadvantages, yet some issues with a cross flow design may be difficult and/or expensive to overcome. Such as the clearance between the distributor and the bottom of the intake manifold. This is more of an issue with the 200ci. as the 250ci has a higher deck.

	Allows the use of redesigned ports and chambers for better efficiency and substantial power gains.
	Allows the use of existing header designs, eliminating additional purchases if currently owned/used.
	Allows the use of existing rocker assemblies, eliminating additional purchases if currently owned/used.
	Allows the use of existing valve covers, eliminating additional purchases if currently owned/used.
	Allows the use of aftermarket manifolds, eliminating additional purchases if currently owned/used.
	Allows the use of aftermarket shelf stud mounted rockers, reducing user end cost.
	Allows the use of aftermarket EFI systems, and/or induction boosters.
	Allows the use of aftermarket Portflow oversized valves, out of the box, reducing user end cost.
	Allows the use of aftermarket gasket sets which are readily available, reducing user end cost.
	Allows the use of existing carb linkage for current OZ cylinder head owners, reducing user end cost.
	Eliminates the need for aftermarket port dividers and its associated problems, reducing user end cost and the frustration of loose and noisy port dividers.
	Eliminates the need for extended R&D, reducing user end cost.
	Eliminates the possible need for redesign of the distributor, reducing user end cost.

	Minimizes maximum power potential by limiting port and chamber designs.
	Maintains the intake manifold and carburetor in a stock location, over the headers.
	Limits booster (turbo and supercharger) locations and associated parts.

	Maximizes power potential by allowing port and chamber designs similar to V8 style cylinder heads.
	Relocates the intake manifold and carburetor to the opposite side of the motor, away from the exhaust system (high heat), reducing intake air temperatures.
	Maximizes location for induction booster and associated parts, as well as reducing the issues and/or problems associated with high exhaust temperatures.
	Allows the use of aftermarket stud mounted rockers, allowing more options and possibly reducing user cost.
	Allows the use of aftermarket manifolds, eliminating additional purchases if currently owned/used, and/or the development of new intake manifolds.
	Allows the use of aftermarket EFI systems, and/or induction boosters.
	Allows the use of aftermarket Portflow oversized valves, out of the box, reducing user end cost.
	Allows the use of existing and aftermarket gasket sets, reducing user end cost.
	Eliminates the need for aftermarket port dividers and its associated problems.

	Requires extended R&D, increasing the user end cost.
	May require a redesign or modification of the distributor,increasing the end cost.
	May require new header designs for maximum power, increasing the user end cost.
	May require all new designs for intake manifold, increasing the user end cost.
	May require a new or specialized valve cover, increasing the user end cost.
	May require all new gasket designs, increasing the user end cost.
	Increase production time due to the increase in R&D of related parts.

It is clearly evident that a cross-flow offers the best power potential, however it would also require extensive research and the development of associated parts, which would substantially increase the price of the cylinder head.

Which ever we choose, by using the latest technology, equipment, and the experience of the industries leading experts in cylinder head design, the benefits in performance will be substantial over all other current options available, and our goals will have been met.