I'm here to tell you that the picture of the .980 head is deceiving. I'm not saying that it does or doesn't flow better, but I am saying you cant just look at the pictures and tell (I was hoping someone has some kind of figures between the two).

I can tell you this. After sitting the two heads side by side on my garage floor and looking at them, the port floor on the .980 head isn't as poorly radiused as it looks in the pictures, and with the intake on, the flow path is MUCH more similar to the newer head than in the pictures as far as total flow is concerned. I'm also saying that if you machined second gen head flat to the side of the head like the .980 has and not like how it came from the factory, the two would look almost identical. On the later head, the Injector angle Is not that fantastic. You're so adiment about the charge air going through the valves, but if you bolt the intake up to the head, the injectors are aimed at the back of the port wall.

There are way more differences to these heads past that of a simple intake port shape and I'm quite willing to bet that emissions and the cost to produce the head are going to be BIG in this design. You have to remember that in the early 90's, right when the 1st Gen M104 came out, there were quite a few wide sweeping emissions control changes and it's probably very likely that the early model head even with EFi would have been incapable of meeting these regulations. On the other side of the world, there were quite a few engines that never made it to the US shores from Japan just for this reason.

Do I think the later head is going to flow better? Most likely. But it's irresponsible to out and out discount the early head when it produced the same power as the later motor with a sad CIS system, a dizzy (which just cant provide the spark accuracy) and 200 less CC's.

__________________
1993 190E 2.6 Sportline