94 casting vs 89 casting cyl heads

figulaz

SCCoA Member
I getting ready for final bolt-up on my 92 SC. I have 2 sets of perfectly good heads an 89 casting and a 94 casting. Which ever I install will just get valve lapping and a new valve stem seals. My question is one yr superior over the other? I noticed the rocker arm balls were larger in the 94 casting. Also the bolt is a 13mm head and goes deeper into the head instead of the 10mm. Does one have superior flow? Outside of the rocker arms they look identical. Any input is appreciated.
 
I am not aware of any flow differences but I can say Dalke has explained to me to steer clear of the 94/95 castings. Evidently they are more prone to cracking, etc.
 
I am not aware of any flow differences but I can say Dalke has explained to me to steer clear of the 94/95 castings. Evidently they are more prone to cracking, etc.

I'm getting old and forgetful but I thought the opposite. I also remember something about 94/95 deck being thicker but I'm probably wrong as usual........:confused:
 
I've never heard of that..........hmmmm.........I just put a set of '93 SC steel valve covers with '93 gaskets on my '94.

Early heads with late valve covers is a recipe for oil leaks. But they will interchange and bolt on. Then again early gasket design is the sickness.
 
Well if flow is the same and valve covers will match up better I guess I'll go with the 89s. Thanks all.
 
Back
Top