The "AFR 225" Thread
10-26-2004, 10:04 AM
#1
The "AFR 225" Thread OK….I have been promising you guys some information on the new AFR 225 heads we are about to release so what I propose is that any and all questions pertaining to this “topic” be kept here under this thread. It will be easier to keep track of all the information that way, and I’m hoping that many of the questions you might come up with might have already been addressed on this thread saving everyone a lot of time.
Rick (the President of AFR) would prefer me to be brief, but the reality of the situation is there is quite a lot to talk about and I will be making additions to this post fairly regularly (time permitting), as well as answering as many questions as I can as well.
First off, so as not to string this out any further, we ARE accepting deposits on the 72 cc chamber version of the AFR 225’s effective tomorrow October 26th. We already have a “pre-order” list in the works for some time now and those people will come before any new orders placed tomorrow on a first come, first serve basis. Our sales techs will start contacting all the large chamber 225 customers on the pre-order list tomorrow and begin processing work orders. Once all the pre-order list customers have their “spot in line” so to speak, all orders placed from tomorrow forward will be handled in the same first come, first serve fashion. It’s the only fair way to handle the influx of orders on a product that currently has a lot more demand than supply.
Don’t forget, we can still flatmill a 72 cc chamber as low as 65 cc’s (the same figure as a stock LS6 head), but any of you looking for a higher compression (11 to 1 etc.) stock displacement shortblocks will unfortunately have to wait an additional 3-4 weeks or so till we start taking deposits on our 62 cc version which has the capacity to be milled into the mid 50 cc range. Don’t forget, the 225’s will in most cases require valve notching (due to the larger 2.080 valve) and even a 65 cc head ends up slightly lowering your compression due to the couple of extra cc’s from the valve reliefs you would need to cut into your pistons….although that might not be too big a concern on a forced induction application.
Also, our 225 small chamber version already has a pre-order list (significantly longer than the large chamber version) and anyone wanting to get on that list prior to us accepting deposits can simply do so by calling myself or any of the AFR sales techs during business hours. More than likely by the end of next month, we will begin processing all of those orders as well as accepting deposits for any new orders. Bottom line, the 62cc and smaller camp (myself included) will have to wait an additional month or so till engineering makes all the proper changes to insure your 62 cc head drops on your engine just as flawlessly as our 72 cc version (or a stock head for that matter) with all manifolds, headers, bolt holes and mating surfaces allowing a true “bolt on” no hassle install.
Castings are due to arrive at AFR the end of this month and we expect to start shipping large chamber 225’s by the 2nd week of November. We have already snuck a few out the door for some SEMA projects and a couple of high horsepower blower build-ups….one to be in a magazine featured with twin turbo’s on a 408 CID engine we are hoping eclipses the 1000 HP mark and then some. Any input and power figures from the few prototype projects that have left here already will certainly be shared with you as soon as the data becomes available.
OK….enough for now…next installment will be on design parameters and goals for the 225’s as well as discussing flow numbers on this product, as well as flow numbers in general, especially some of the loftier figures flying around the internet and how they never seem to show their face in Pacoima, CA on AFR's testing equipment.…must be all the smog obstructing the flow.
Till next time….
Regards to all,
Tony Mamo
AFR Sales / Product Design
(818)890-0616
Rick (the President of AFR) would prefer me to be brief, but the reality of the situation is there is quite a lot to talk about and I will be making additions to this post fairly regularly (time permitting), as well as answering as many questions as I can as well.
First off, so as not to string this out any further, we ARE accepting deposits on the 72 cc chamber version of the AFR 225’s effective tomorrow October 26th. We already have a “pre-order” list in the works for some time now and those people will come before any new orders placed tomorrow on a first come, first serve basis. Our sales techs will start contacting all the large chamber 225 customers on the pre-order list tomorrow and begin processing work orders. Once all the pre-order list customers have their “spot in line” so to speak, all orders placed from tomorrow forward will be handled in the same first come, first serve fashion. It’s the only fair way to handle the influx of orders on a product that currently has a lot more demand than supply.
Don’t forget, we can still flatmill a 72 cc chamber as low as 65 cc’s (the same figure as a stock LS6 head), but any of you looking for a higher compression (11 to 1 etc.) stock displacement shortblocks will unfortunately have to wait an additional 3-4 weeks or so till we start taking deposits on our 62 cc version which has the capacity to be milled into the mid 50 cc range. Don’t forget, the 225’s will in most cases require valve notching (due to the larger 2.080 valve) and even a 65 cc head ends up slightly lowering your compression due to the couple of extra cc’s from the valve reliefs you would need to cut into your pistons….although that might not be too big a concern on a forced induction application.
Also, our 225 small chamber version already has a pre-order list (significantly longer than the large chamber version) and anyone wanting to get on that list prior to us accepting deposits can simply do so by calling myself or any of the AFR sales techs during business hours. More than likely by the end of next month, we will begin processing all of those orders as well as accepting deposits for any new orders. Bottom line, the 62cc and smaller camp (myself included) will have to wait an additional month or so till engineering makes all the proper changes to insure your 62 cc head drops on your engine just as flawlessly as our 72 cc version (or a stock head for that matter) with all manifolds, headers, bolt holes and mating surfaces allowing a true “bolt on” no hassle install.
Castings are due to arrive at AFR the end of this month and we expect to start shipping large chamber 225’s by the 2nd week of November. We have already snuck a few out the door for some SEMA projects and a couple of high horsepower blower build-ups….one to be in a magazine featured with twin turbo’s on a 408 CID engine we are hoping eclipses the 1000 HP mark and then some. Any input and power figures from the few prototype projects that have left here already will certainly be shared with you as soon as the data becomes available.
OK….enough for now…next installment will be on design parameters and goals for the 225’s as well as discussing flow numbers on this product, as well as flow numbers in general, especially some of the loftier figures flying around the internet and how they never seem to show their face in Pacoima, CA on AFR's testing equipment.…must be all the smog obstructing the flow.
Till next time….
Regards to all,
Tony Mamo
AFR Sales / Product Design
(818)890-0616
10-26-2004, 10:15 AM
#3
Your web site is a little inconsistent on the small chamber size. One place it says 66cc's and another it says 62cc's. Above you said 62cc's. What is the size of the unmilled chamber, 66 or 62? Also, can we get the 225's with a 2.05 valve for a 346ci?
10-26-2004, 12:00 PM
#6
More info...
Originally Posted by 1fastWS6
Your web site is a little inconsistent on the small chamber size. One place it says 66cc's and another it says 62cc's. Above you said 62cc's. What is the size of the unmilled chamber, 66 or 62? Also, can we get the 225's with a 2.05 valve for a 346ci?
The 225 was designed to work with the factory small bore utilizing the larger 2.080 valve....Much time on the flowbench with the small bore/big valve combination proved this to be a winner when combined with the right valvejob, specific intake "throat" size and shape, and new 225 chamber design(it's not the same chamber as the 205 head). The 225 will be just as effective on a small bore motor as it will be on a larger bore, and while still all "theory" at this point, from what I have seen across my flowbench (and considering the 225 is still somewhat conservatively sized), I'm reasonably confident stock shortblocks will have a much easier time producing power levels higher higher than we have typically seen in the past.
Also, our website is currently being updated to reflect the latest and more accurate info concerning the 225 program.
Thanks,
Tony
10-26-2004, 01:57 PM
#7
Tony, can you give us flow numbers at various lifts? 205s vs. 225s?
__________________
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2018 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 Pat G tuned.
LS1,LS2,LS3,LS7,LT1 Custom Camshaft Specialist For custom camshaft help press here.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
2013 Corvette Grand Sport A6 LME forged 416, Greg Good ported TFS 255 LS3 heads, 222/242 .629"/.604" 121LSA Pat G blower cam, ARH 1 7/8" headers, ESC Novi 1500 Supercharger w/8 rib direct drive conversion, 747rwhp/709rwtq on 93 octane, 801rwhp/735rwtq on race fuel, 10.1 @ 147.25mph 1/4 mile, 174.7mph Half Mile.
2016 Corvette Z51 M7 Magnuson Heartbeat 2300 supercharger, TSP LT headers, Pat G tuned, 667rwhp, 662rwtq, 191mph TX Mile.
2009.5 Pontiac G8 GT 6.0L, A6, AFR 230v2 heads. 506rwhp/442rwtq. 11.413 @ 121.29mph 1/4 mile, 168.7mph TX Mile
2000 Pewter Ram Air Trans Am M6 heads/cam 508 rwhp/445 rwtq SAE, 183.092 TX Mile
2018 Cadillac Escalade 6.2L A10 Pat G tuned.
LS1,LS2,LS3,LS7,LT1 Custom Camshaft Specialist For custom camshaft help press here.
Custom LSX tuning in person or via email press here.
Trending Topics
10-26-2004, 04:53 PM
#11
BS Comments...
Originally Posted by masterdill
This thread is useless without flow numbers...
And you guys wonder...
10-26-2004, 04:54 PM
#12
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Texas
Posts: 8,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is certainly not useless w/o flow numbers. And while I agree with you Lostpatrolman....flow numbers are still a good reference tool if taken for what they are 
Tony, what kind of PtV clearence are we looking at with a 65cc chamber on a stock bore w/these 225's? Flycutting wouldn't be a problem really, just tryin to get a feel for what I'm look at.
Currently looking at FM13/14 or a TSP 231/237.
Tony, what kind of PtV clearence are we looking at with a 65cc chamber on a stock bore w/these 225's? Flycutting wouldn't be a problem really, just tryin to get a feel for what I'm look at.
Currently looking at FM13/14 or a TSP 231/237.
Last edited by cyphur_traq; 10-26-2004 at 04:59 PM.
10-26-2004, 05:05 PM
#13
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Texas
Posts: 8,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Tony Mamo @ AFR
It's quite obvious your busy schedule prohibited you from reading my entire post where I state VERY clearly in the last paragragh my next post will address flow numbers etc.
And you guys wonder...
And you guys wonder...
but tony, i thought you said your 2nd post would be flow #s, not verbal ownage! 
10-26-2004, 09:28 PM
#16
10 Second Club
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: eastern north carolina
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
good info tony keep it all comeing. i guess i got ot wait a little longer for the smaller 225 head but that ok gives me more time to save up
Eddie
Eddie
10-26-2004, 11:37 PM
#17
Finally.... Hey Guys...
For our next "AFR installment"…..How about we talk about FLOW NUMBERS??
Sounds like a plan and I know it’s the “meat and potatoes” you have all been waiting to see. First off, if your even thinking about comparing flow numbers from one source to another….don’t bother. At best it might be close…..at worst you might be 40 CFM away, and the reality is that in most cases, the actual results if compared on the same bench will be somewhere in the middle. Too many variables, and I know this has been hashed to death in the past, but to name a few….What make or type of flow bench?...When was it calibrated last?....What size bore fixture?.....Does it leak any air?....What type of a radiused inlet was used (clay or otherwise)…..How was the head positioned on the fixture?......Was a pipe used on the exhaust?......Was it actually shaped like most production headers (curving almost immediately exiting the port)?......Who operated the equipment and how was the data recorded? Etc…Etc….Etc. Not to mention are the flow numbers “advertised” that you are comparing actual production numbers or are they the best numbers recorded off the best port of a prototype head the was copied and your actual results might “vary”. Bottom line, even the AFR 205 at an actual 298-301 CFM’s (about the average from many production pieces tested) has outflowed 85-90 % of factory ported castings that I have seen from all over this country (and accomplished this with a considerably smaller intake port). AFR has been obtaining, borrowing, and in some cases BUYING, products from our competitors as part of the exhaustive R&D effort just to see how we truly stack up against as much of the competition we could get our hands on….not to mention we will continue to do so in the future. Don’t ask for names because I WON”T even go there….Have I flowtested every product every manufacturer offers?….of course not. But the products I have had the opportunity to evaluate have been quite a bit off of their advertised #’s….at least on our testing equipment….some of them off as much as 40 CFM!! (that would ruin your day after laying out you hard earned dollars).
With that said, let me cut to the chase….Our goals with the 225 head was to stay true to our beliefs that big power is not made with huge ports and “sexy” big peak flow numbers….big power is made with a cylinder head that has a moderately sized cross section (and runner volume) and moves a lot of air…everywhere…at high airspeeds for better cylinder filling….especially all thru the low and mid-lifts where the valve actually spends MUCH more time than close to a peak number on a cam card. You know how much time in crank degrees a .610 lift cam actually spends over .600 lift….probably NONE. At higher RPM’s , deflection in valvetrain parts coupled with hydraulic lifters slightly compressing under load would probably knock .010 -.020 lift right off the top. BUT….do you know how many crank degrees are spent between .500 and .550 with the same cam ….if its an XER lobe, probably 60-80….not to mention all the time spent on the way to those lifts as well as all the time spent on the way back down from those lifts.
During the “design phase” of the 225, I made several conscious decisions in shaping the port, shaping the valve job etc., that HURT peak flow because I saw a significant increase in flow from .200-.500 lift. I felt it was a “good trade” that would actually enhance power output, although I can’t lie….it always killed me knowing I was losing some “bragging” rights in our catalog and website.
On to the numbers….This information was recorded utilizing an SF600 Superflow with a 4.125 bore, radiused inlet, “hooked” 1.875 exhaust tube (about 10 inches in total length, and represents an “average” of many of the 72 cc 225 heads tested as we “dialed” in the program over the last few weeks. Advertised numbers you will soon see in our catalog and website might vary slightly by a CFM or two.
Intake Flow @ 28”
.200 152 CFM
.300 221 CFM
.400 268 CFM
.500 306 CFM
.550 315 CFM
.600 322 CFM
Exhaust Flow @ 28” w/ a 1.875 Flow Tube
.200 122 CFM
.300 180 CFM
.400 220 CFM
.500 241 CFM
.600 250 CFM
By the way, the exhaust numbers are crushing everywhere and reflect some of the best numbers I have personally witnessed from a small block “production” style cylinder head (versus what I would call more “exotic” like a raised runner 12 or 14 degree head).
I know some of you have asked some questions which I will address tomorrow as soon as I find some time….This post is already way too long but hopefully you hung with it and maybe picked up on some things you haven’t considered in the past.
Regards,
Tony Mamo
For our next "AFR installment"…..How about we talk about FLOW NUMBERS??
Sounds like a plan and I know it’s the “meat and potatoes” you have all been waiting to see. First off, if your even thinking about comparing flow numbers from one source to another….don’t bother. At best it might be close…..at worst you might be 40 CFM away, and the reality is that in most cases, the actual results if compared on the same bench will be somewhere in the middle. Too many variables, and I know this has been hashed to death in the past, but to name a few….What make or type of flow bench?...When was it calibrated last?....What size bore fixture?.....Does it leak any air?....What type of a radiused inlet was used (clay or otherwise)…..How was the head positioned on the fixture?......Was a pipe used on the exhaust?......Was it actually shaped like most production headers (curving almost immediately exiting the port)?......Who operated the equipment and how was the data recorded? Etc…Etc….Etc. Not to mention are the flow numbers “advertised” that you are comparing actual production numbers or are they the best numbers recorded off the best port of a prototype head the was copied and your actual results might “vary”. Bottom line, even the AFR 205 at an actual 298-301 CFM’s (about the average from many production pieces tested) has outflowed 85-90 % of factory ported castings that I have seen from all over this country (and accomplished this with a considerably smaller intake port). AFR has been obtaining, borrowing, and in some cases BUYING, products from our competitors as part of the exhaustive R&D effort just to see how we truly stack up against as much of the competition we could get our hands on….not to mention we will continue to do so in the future. Don’t ask for names because I WON”T even go there….Have I flowtested every product every manufacturer offers?….of course not. But the products I have had the opportunity to evaluate have been quite a bit off of their advertised #’s….at least on our testing equipment….some of them off as much as 40 CFM!! (that would ruin your day after laying out you hard earned dollars).
With that said, let me cut to the chase….Our goals with the 225 head was to stay true to our beliefs that big power is not made with huge ports and “sexy” big peak flow numbers….big power is made with a cylinder head that has a moderately sized cross section (and runner volume) and moves a lot of air…everywhere…at high airspeeds for better cylinder filling….especially all thru the low and mid-lifts where the valve actually spends MUCH more time than close to a peak number on a cam card. You know how much time in crank degrees a .610 lift cam actually spends over .600 lift….probably NONE. At higher RPM’s , deflection in valvetrain parts coupled with hydraulic lifters slightly compressing under load would probably knock .010 -.020 lift right off the top. BUT….do you know how many crank degrees are spent between .500 and .550 with the same cam ….if its an XER lobe, probably 60-80….not to mention all the time spent on the way to those lifts as well as all the time spent on the way back down from those lifts.
During the “design phase” of the 225, I made several conscious decisions in shaping the port, shaping the valve job etc., that HURT peak flow because I saw a significant increase in flow from .200-.500 lift. I felt it was a “good trade” that would actually enhance power output, although I can’t lie….it always killed me knowing I was losing some “bragging” rights in our catalog and website.
On to the numbers….This information was recorded utilizing an SF600 Superflow with a 4.125 bore, radiused inlet, “hooked” 1.875 exhaust tube (about 10 inches in total length, and represents an “average” of many of the 72 cc 225 heads tested as we “dialed” in the program over the last few weeks. Advertised numbers you will soon see in our catalog and website might vary slightly by a CFM or two.
Intake Flow @ 28”
.200 152 CFM
.300 221 CFM
.400 268 CFM
.500 306 CFM
.550 315 CFM
.600 322 CFM
Exhaust Flow @ 28” w/ a 1.875 Flow Tube
.200 122 CFM
.300 180 CFM
.400 220 CFM
.500 241 CFM
.600 250 CFM
By the way, the exhaust numbers are crushing everywhere and reflect some of the best numbers I have personally witnessed from a small block “production” style cylinder head (versus what I would call more “exotic” like a raised runner 12 or 14 degree head).
I know some of you have asked some questions which I will address tomorrow as soon as I find some time….This post is already way too long but hopefully you hung with it and maybe picked up on some things you haven’t considered in the past.
Regards,
Tony Mamo
10-26-2004, 11:56 PM
#19
Wow, those midlift intake numbers are awesome and the exhaust is even better. I have an excel chart I made for a bunch of different heads with flow vs lift and these have much more area under the curve. I already ordered some of your 205's, but I think it's the right choice for my daily driver.