Generation IV Internal Engine - New TFS 245cc heads..Questions..

I got some of the new TFS 245cc heads coming for the 454LSx I'm having built. I cant seem to find any flow #'s or comparisons to the TFS 235's.

What kind of gains should be noticed? I know the 235's have some unbelieveable mid lift flow #'s. Do you think the 245's will have a comparible flow? Do you think I will notice any low speed/partial throttle issues.

with a 245 cc runner that 454 will still have huge midrange. i would venture to say the 245 runner will probably be up 10-20 cfm in the .500 on up range but that would be just a guess. pm or call brian tooley and i'm sure he will be glad to answer your questions.

If they where ET 245`s I could help you! Good luck on the set-up!!

with a 245 cc runner that 454 will still have huge midrange. i would venture to say the 245 runner will probably be up 10-20 cfm in the .500 on up range but that would be just a guess. pm or call brian tooley and i'm sure he will be glad to answer your questions.

Talk about nailing it...

The TFS 245 heads flow around 10 cfm more air than the TFS 235's from .500" on up.

Flow numbers for the 245 are now posted on our site.

http://www.totalengineairflow.com/products/gmhead/tfsls1/

Thanks for the heads up. I just got off the phone with Bryan at LME and he said my heads are being worked on as we speak.. :hail:

I'll tell you what, although the 245's flow great, it really goes to show you how well your 235's flow. Had their been a big difference i price, I would have gone with the 235's instead. Those things are just awesome.. :chug:

245cc Flow Data
Intake Exhaust
0.100 69 56
0.200 146 130
0.300 237 201
0.400 294 249
0.500 336 269
0.550 348 273
0.600 353 276

Tested on 4.185" bore @28


Flow numbers for the 245 are now posted on our site.

http://www.totalengineairflow.com/products/gmhead/tfsls1/

What would they flow on a 4.00 bore ? Would they even fit the bore? I know they are probably better on a big bore but some like me are not going to have one but would like a max effort head. Maybe go down to a 2.08 valve if that would make it work better on a 4.00.

What would they flow on a 4.00 bore ? Would they even fit the bore? I know they are probably better on a big bore but some like me are not going to have one but would like a max effort head. Maybe go down to a 2.08 valve if that would make it work better on a 4.00.

What you are asking for is a 235 head.

No. The 245 head. I see that the flow data stops at 600 lift also. Could we see beyond the 600 mark ? Thanks alot and I am very interested in buying a set of the 245's.

No. The 245 head. I see that the flow data stops at 600 lift also. Could we see beyond the 600 mark ? Thanks alot and I am very interested in buying a set of the 245's.

I'm sorry I should have explained myself. If you put a 2.080 valve in the 245 head you would pretty much have a 235 head, the flow numbers would look very similar to the 235 head. The problem with these heads that are developed specifically for big bore applications is they tend to underperform when put on smaller bore's. Also these heads are developed for big airflow from .300-.550" lift they tend to flatten out after .600". We could change some things around to make them flow at higher lifts but that would be the at the sacrifice of mid lift airflow.

I was still like to see the flow numbers of 600+ to see what cam combo would work the best.

Not to hijack your thread but this is what my ET 245`s did after Greg Good cleaned them up. These heads flowed very we`ll before he got them

These are the numbers from my bench. 28", 4.030" bore, and no pipe on the exhaust port.


Intake Exhaust
.200" 148 117
.300" 228 160
.400" 301 196
.500" 339 247
.600" 354 263
.650" 354 269
.700" 355 272

Hope this helps! But TFS makes a awsome head, then let Greg play with them!

Not to hijack your thread but this is what my ET 245`s did after Greg Good cleaned them up. These heads flowed very we`ll before he got them

These are the numbers from my bench. 28", 4.030" bore, and no pipe on the exhaust port.


Intake Exhaust
.200" 148 117
.300" 228 160
.400" 301 196
.500" 339 247
.600" 354 263
.650" 354 269
.700" 355 272

Hope this helps! But TFS makes a awsome head, then let Greg play with them!

I see your sig says sheetmetal intake, are you still running it?
How much power did your combo make?
Thanks.

I think it would be an intresting comparison to put a set of the 235's or 245's (if the 245's are set up for a 4 inch bore) on and test them back to back against a set of the ET 240's to really see how they stack up.

I am going to guess, that the cam selection would be relativly close to the same for both applications, I am unsure if both are available in the same combustion chamber size or not but of course that would have to be maintained as well for consistancey compression wise. Also have to set the et head up with the same rockers, just to make sure there's on inconsistancey there as well.

I would think that the ET heads would cost alittle more. Dont you have to get their rocker stands and possibly new rockers ?

I would still like to see the flow numbers after 600 lift.

The ET heads will work with stock rockers and their rocker stands, that is what I'm running myself. The trickflow's you have to use an aftermarket rocker, which in that case I think you could do the same with the ET head and be fine as well... so it's a mute point. Either buy aftermarket rockers or the stands for the et heads, or buy the rockers for the trickflows......


I still think it would be a good real world test if you could do a swap with the 2 and see what you get. I don't really want to rip my car apart for what I suspect would be little to no gain, so I'm not gonna do it.... but someone with an engine dyno and some tiem on their hands, it would be intresting.

I seen this post and thought I'd chime in...

Looking to build a 455 for my TA and would like to keep the FAST 90/90 as the LS7 stuff really does not flow a huge amount more than this.
Not really looking for red line hp on my setup but want midrange torque so these heads might do well ???? I have Dynamax 1 3/4 stainless headers that I was thinking of reusing on the car also.
What do you all think?

Thanks for any info,
David

so let me get this right.... the LS& heads still flow more then these ported heads? what about portin an LS7 head what would happen then???

I seen this post and thought I'd chime in...

Looking to build a 455 for my TA and would like to keep the FAST 90/90 as the LS7 stuff really does not flow a huge amount more than this.
Not really looking for red line hp on my setup but want midrange torque so these heads might do well ???? I have Dynamax 1 3/4 stainless headers that I was thinking of reusing on the car also.
What do you all think?

Thanks for any info,
David

I think you need to get bigger headers for that or you will choke the hell out of it. :nod:

I was always under the same assumption with the header side, but I've heard of soem recent results with an lsx that's over 430CI running 1 3/4 headers that trapped 148 n/a, so I'm not as sold on needing them as I was. Of course it's a solid roller setup that is running on 116 race fuel, but still that's on the extreme end of things and the smaller header doesn't seem to be holding that car back at all, would it run faster with a bigger header maybe but they're not at a point that will say yes or no to that at this point.

I have 1 7/8 kooks on mine. Car pulls to 7700rpms if I let it. Bad thing is my 4l60e doesn`t like it and the valve train isn`t set-up to do that all the time. So I shift at 6800 right now! What comes in has to come out! :nod:

! What comes in has to come out! :nod:


100% true

The ET heads will work with stock rockers and their rocker stands, that is what I'm running myself
No trying to hijack the thread..but how well did the stock rockers line up on the valve when you used the rockerstand(pedestal). I have a set of 240 ET heads,and using the stock rockers, the rocker arm tip barely touches the valve. After a full rotation, the contact patch covers about a third of the valve.
I didnn't buy the TFS 245's, because I remember Brian saying of a similar issue when using stock rockers with them.

so let me get this right.... the LS& heads still flow more then these ported heads? what about portin an LS7 head what would happen then???
There is really no need to port the intake side of a ls7 head. That intake port will support over 800 hp. The exhaust side could really use some help, but the intake port is fine.

would they work on a 416

I have heard/read about quite a few instaces where the ET's can NOT run stock rockers at all. You have to run aftermarkets..
As a matter of fact, the member "69TA" has a set of brand new ET265's for sale right now, and they came with Jesel rockers for this exact reason.

I was also speaking to someone yesterday and they said its the same problem with the TFS 235/245's. Can anyone "Confirm" this for a fact?
No trying to hijack the thread..but how well did the stock rockers line up on the valve when you used the rockerstand(pedestal). I have a set of 240 ET heads,and using the stock rockers, the rocker arm tip barely touches the valve. After a full rotation, the contact patch covers about a third of the valve.
I didnn't buy the TFS 245's, because I remember Brian saying of a similar issue when using stock rockers with them.

I have ET 225's and I had to shim the rocker stand up to get the stock rockers to work.

My car has seen 7800 rpms with no signs of valve float.

Ashley's car has ET 255's with stock rockers and hers has been over 8,000 rpms with no valve float.

I have yet to see a set of TFS do any better than ETP's or AFR's.
All 3 are very good heads .... its all in what you want.

My valves and whatnot are perfect with stock rockers, and they were also shimmed slightly. I've had mine to 7600 with no problems, carries power right to it too.

With the 265's you have to run a differnt rocker I do believe, as well as a custom intake. But, if you need those heads, you're probably running all custom anyway.

TEA says roller tip rockers are required on TFS heads because of the change in valve angle.

I was also speaking to someone yesterday and they said its the same problem with the TFS 235/245's. Can anyone "Confirm" this for a fact?

The first TFS heads that were released had geometry optimized for roller rockers and used 7.700” long pushrods, which made the head incompatible with stock rockers. TFS eventually changed their geometry to be like stock GM and now uses 7.500” long pushrods. TFS did a ton of durability testing and found that no matter what geometry was used that stock rockers caused considerable wear on bronze guides. So if you have a stock GM head, or an ET head, or an AFR head, and use stock rockers, they will eventually cause significant wear on the bronze guides. I know one other aftermarket head manufacturer knows about this problem but has not yet to post anything about it.

Well......

I heard it from the horses mouth.. I ordered some new Yella Terra rockers today.

Thanks for the info.
The first TFS heads that were released had geometry optimized for roller rockers and used 7.700” long pushrods, which made the head incompatible with stock rockers. TFS eventually changed their geometry to be like stock GM and now uses 7.500” long pushrods. TFS did a ton of durability testing and found that no matter what geometry was used that stock rockers caused considerable wear on bronze guides. So if you have a stock GM head, or an ET head, or an AFR head, and use stock rockers, they will eventually cause significant wear on the bronze guides. I know one other aftermarket head manufacturer knows about this problem but has not yet to post anything about it.

The first TFS heads that were released had geometry optimized for roller rockers and used 7.700” long pushrods, which made the head incompatible with stock rockers. TFS eventually changed their geometry to be like stock GM and now uses 7.500” long pushrods. TFS did a ton of durability testing and found that no matter what geometry was used that stock rockers caused considerable wear on bronze guides. So if you have a stock GM head, or an ET head, or an AFR head, and use stock rockers, they will eventually cause significant wear on the bronze guides. I know one other aftermarket head manufacturer knows about this problem but has not yet to post anything about it.

Its funny you say this. I heard the same thing about AFR's :nod: This is why I am going with yella terra light weight rockers with my setup.

So basically, its a design flaw straight from GM. If we use stock rockers with the stock heads, we are going to cause significant wear on the broze guide?
How long till the wear is bad?

So basically, its a design flaw straight from GM. If we use stock rockers with the stock heads, we are going to cause significant wear on the broze guide?
How long till the wear is bad?


i would like to know too-????

I need to ask Erik what he used on my ET 245`s. I have forgotten!

Send us some TFS 245s Brian well test them, for free even :)

So basically, its a design flaw straight from GM. If we use stock rockers with the stock heads, we are going to cause significant wear on the broze guide?
How long till the wear is bad?

The stock GM heads have powdered metal guides and will not wear, but the stock rockers can still cause marks on the tops of the valves.

If you put bronze guides in a GM head the guides will wear if you run over .550" lift, you will probably see wear within 10,000 miles, and you will eventully see oil consumption. It depends on what oil is used, how often it is changed, etc but it is just a matter of time before you see oil consumption with ANY head that uses bronze guides and stock rockers over .550" lift.

So what aftermarket rockers would you recommend for me? I have a set of ETP 240 heads, so I am guessing the rockers will need to be adjustable, right?

Yella Terra are my choice to run with these heads.

Are the Yella Terras adjustbale?

Jesel is the the only ones that will work for ETP's I think.

Guess I better get rid of my stock rockers. Funny I've never heard of this from ET or AFR..... only until TFS come out and you HAVE to run after market rockers with there heads that they say ....oh ya you have to do it with every head. Sounds suspect to me.

I had to send my AFR's back to AFR due to excessive wear. They replaced all the guides and valves..
This isnt new..I've heard by many guys that you cant run stock rockers (on most aftermarket heads)..I mean, I guess you can do anything you want. You just have to shim the shit out of them in order to get a decent wipe pattern. Its just wether or not you want to do it cheap (or right)..




Jesel is the the only ones that will work for ETP's I think.

Guess I better get rid of my stock rockers. Funny I've never heard of this from ET or AFR..... only until TFS come out and you HAVE to run after market rockers with there heads that they say ....oh ya you have to do it with every head. Sounds suspect to me.

I had to send my AFR's back to AFR due to excessive wear. They replaced all the guides and valves..
This isnt new..I've heard by many guys that you cant run stock rockers (on most aftermarket heads)..I mean, I guess you can do anything you want. You just have to shim the shit out of them in order to get a decent wipe pattern. Its just wether or not you want to do it cheap (or right)..

Ya .. I heard it from that one guy on that other site to :gtfo:

How about facts not he said she said.

So your telling me anyone with stock rockers on aftermarket heads is cheap and there rocker arm geometry is wrong? I call Shananagans!

I've never seen it posted by Tony Mamo or Carey or Craig at ETP.

I think someone should get ahold of Tony, and Craig or Carry, and have them comment on this thread as well.

I personally have yet to see this problem.However doesn;t mean it doesn't exist. Could it be a specific problem with a brand of bronze guide ? I personally prefer Iron and PM guides. In fact I have a SBC at 427ci with Brodix heads and I had the bronze guides taken out and replaced with Iron guides and K liners to combat this wear issue. then again not everybody is runng .680 lift cams on a .850 base circle with RC and NZ lobes. It can cuase some wear issues regardless of what rocker you use. Bronze is just to soft for a DD IMO.

My bigger question is what the purpose behind using Bronze Guies outside of the fact that they are easier on tooling ? Is there some cost benefit ratio ?Why not Kliner Stock or Iron Guides ?


The stock GM heads have powdered metal guides and will not wear, but the stock rockers can still cause marks on the tops of the valves.

If you put bronze guides in a GM head the guides will wear if you run over .550" lift, you will probably see wear within 10,000 miles, and you will eventully see oil consumption. It depends on what oil is used, how often it is changed, etc but it is just a matter of time before you see oil consumption with ANY head that uses bronze guides and stock rockers over .550" lift.

Theres no he said she said going on here....

1) I PERSONALLY had problems.. Dont get me wrong, I loved my heads, and would definately still have them today if they would have worked on my new setup.. I'm also not saying anything about AFR, I was making a comment about aftermarket heads in general.

2) Do a search..Jesus, theres a thread every other day about ET heads not allowing for the proper setup of stock rockers.. Last week, there was 3 threads on the first page alone..

3) No, im not saying "Its cheap." I'm saying that ALOT of guys would rather toss in a couple of washers and pray that they got it right, rather than setting up the proper geometry..
How many times have you heard of a guy installing pushrods WITHOUT taking the proper measurements to verify wether or not he's using the right size, only to find out he's got horrible valvetrain noise cause his guess was wrong.... There is AT LEAST 10 threads a week between the different forums for this EXACT reason.. All cause they dont want to buy a 30 fuking dollar pushrod length checker... Its called being CHEAP..


Ya .. I heard it from that one guy on that other site to :gtfo:

How about facts not he said she said.

So your telling me anyone with stock rockers on aftermarket heads is cheap and there rocker arm geometry is wrong? I call Shananagans!

I've never seen it posted by Tony Mamo or Carey or Craig at ETP.

Guess I better get rid of my stock rockers. Funny I've never heard of this from ET or AFR..... only until TFS come out and you HAVE to run after market rockers with there heads that they say ....oh ya you have to do it with every head. Sounds suspect to me.

How many in house dyno's does TFS have to perform durability testing on and how many does AFR and ET have?

2,0 and 0 respectfully.

It seems that if you don't already know it then it must be wrong or does not exist. How much more do you know than you did 2 years ago, or 3 years ago, or 5 years ago? How many things did you think were one way 5 years ago that as you learned you found were wrong? Or were not as you thought they were?

I have respect for what you do and have accomplished, you should have the same respect for others.

After reading this, I actuallt popped a valve cover and looked at my valves and stock rockers (runnign ET 240 heads)

Yes they are shimmed, and the wipe pattern was right in the center, nice and clean,and there was no signs of anything funny going on.

I guess there is a possibility that it can be a problem, but if you have a good engine builder that knows what he is doing, I think it can be done either way.

How many in house dyno's does TFS have to perform durability testing on and how many does AFR and ET have?

2,0 and 0 respectfully.

It seems that if you don't already know it then it must be wrong or does not exist. How much more do you know than you did 2 years ago, or 3 years ago, or 5 years ago? How many things did you think were one way 5 years ago that as you learned you found were wrong? Or were not as you thought they were?

I have respect for what you do and have accomplished, you should have the same respect for others.

Brian, I give respect when its given to me.
To say that or imply that I'm cheap and dont know what I'm doing because I use stock rockers is just dumb.
Do you think a 6,7,or 8 hundred dollar set of rockers is going to break the bank when you have 30 to 40 thousand in the car? If I thought it was wrong I would not have put it on my car.

Have you tested any AFR or ET heads on your durability dyno?
If so what were the set ups? (head size, valves used, rockers used)


Thanks Brian and I apoligize if I offended you.

Guys,

Bronze guides (or guide liners) have been used for years in many performance applications (GM, Ford, Mopar, etc.) and represents the material of choice because they provide better "lubricity" and can run with less oil before sticking a valve. The downside (there's always a downside) is they do not last last a long as a powdered metal (or steel) guideliner which is naturally a harder material and resists wear a little better. Performance engine components usually come with a trade-off....that is certainly one of them, BUT, with the right valvetrain geometry that longevity issue can be greatly extended due to a proper wipe pattern and less valve side loading. Some individuals (and shops) just don't take the proper time to adjust stand height (or pushrod length with studmount set-ups)....especially if it calls for a lower stand height requiring machine work (it's easy to shim a pedastal mount higher). Also, while stock rockers have been and always will be very effective (from a cost and performance standpoint), they will always cause a little more wear simply because of they way they wipe across the valve. A roller tip will always give you far less travel than a stock style rocker but the problem there has always been the additional heft of the rocker causing valve control issues costing you more power than the better geometry helped. Fortunately there are some lighter weight options on the market now so its possible to improve your geometry and reduce your wipe pattern (and valve side loading) without costing you power from control related issues (valvefloat).

That said, everyone shouldn't go into a panic if they are running stock rockers. They have been working for years and if this was truly a problem of epic proportions (excessive guidewear and oil consumption), with the fact our heads (stock geometry) have been out there for over four years now, as well as many factory ported heads with replacement bronze guides or liners, I think there would be alot more threads of horror discussing it. With the Internet, bad news travels fast as most of you know.

Are the stock rockers effective?....yes. Do they offer some small compromises?....yes again. Is the aftermarket finally responding with better products more aimed at hydraulic roller applications and lighter weight?....thankfully yes again.

The key is, regardless of the set-up you have, to spend the time to center the wipe pattern and optimize geometry and guide wear concerns will always be minimized. But to expect a performance head with bronze guides to maintain the same guidewear as a head with a powdered metal or steel guideliner when the miles really start adding up just isnt realistic. Much like performance valvesprings need to be periodically replaced if you want optimal performance and reliability. Compromises....there just the nature of what we are involved in. Alot of people take for granted the power levels these modified engines produce (the "LS" engine platforms really pushing the envelope of late). With the latest advancements in engine design and cylinder heads we are thankfully involved in this hobby when you can drive a legitamate 10 second daily driver, but make no mistake about the fact it wont live as long as your stock 03' F-Body or C5 parked in your driveway before it needs a freshen up. The factory is closing the gap with engines like the LS7, but performance engines will always represent some trade-offs.

Hope this helps clear up a few things....

Tony

Have you tested any AFR or ET heads on your durability dyno?
If so what were the set ups? (head size, valves used, rockers used)

AFR 205's with stock rockers, and they experienced guide wear.

We have replaced guides in several sets of AFR heads due to oil consumption. This is because the AFR heads have been out the longest and have the most miles on them and were run with stock rockers and bronze guides. The wear was not because of material defects, quality problems or anything of the sort. Once again, any head with GM geometry and BRONZE guides and stock rockers running over .550" lift is going to experience guide wear.

A stock rocker arm actually ROCKS the valve open like a rocking chair, they should never "sweep" or scrub, but they scrub after .550" lift.

Shimming them up only makes the scrub worse.

not to negate the scrubbing conversation here but I have yet to really see any of this out here in the real world. I fial to see how this is not an issue on a honda motor which uses a very similar setup and can run high lift IE close to .600 and use bronze guides with a similar follower contact setup and not have wear issues.

It could be that the guide wear has absolutely nothing to do with the rocker and is just the nature of bronze guides. your running a very hard sticky material Steel/stainless in a very soft metal bronze.


then again I recomend running high additive oils like V50 valvoline in normal wieghts and the euro spec oils to help cut down on scuffing wear in these motors.

but to just say that non roller rockers cuase scuffing seems a bit silly from my perspective. The way the tip of the rocker is designed its got to have close to the same contact friction as a roller tip.A roller tip still will side load a valve even a roller tip will still push the valve across the Arc of travel. you cannot get away from angular loading in a valvetrian. you can minimize it but never eliminate it.


AFR 205's with stock rockers, and they experienced guide wear.

We have replaced guides in several sets of AFR heads due to oil consumption. This is because the AFR heads have been out the longest and have the most miles on them and were run with stock rockers and bronze guides. The wear was not because of material defects, quality problems or anything of the sort. Once again, any head with GM geometry and BRONZE guides and stock rockers running over .550" lift is going to experience guide wear.

A stock rocker arm actually ROCKS the valve open like a rocking chair, they should never "sweep" or scrub, but they scrub after .550" lift.

Shimming them up only makes the scrub worse.

Tony, Thanks for the info.

Brian,
have you done any tests to see how much longer the roller rockers will help the guides last compared to stock?
And since you guys have done all the testing roughly how long will a bronze guided head with stock rockers last? 10, 20 , 30 thousand miles?

Tony, Thanks for the info.

Brian,
have you done any tests to see how much longer the roller rockers will help the guides last compared to stock?
And since you guys have done all the testing roughly how long will a bronze guided head with stock rockers last? 10, 20 , 30 thousand miles?

In the testing that was done we could see several thousanths of wear (.002"-.003"), which would probably equate to 10K-15K miles. The same test performed with the roller rockers yeilded practically no wear. (<.0001")

not to negate the scrubbing conversation here but I have yet to really see any of this out here in the real world. I fial to see how this is not an issue on a honda motor which uses a very similar setup and can run high lift IE close to .600 and use bronze guides with a similar follower contact setup and not have wear issues.

It could be that the guide wear has absolutely nothing to do with the rocker and is just the nature of bronze guides. your running a very hard sticky material Steel/stainless in a very soft metal bronze.


then again I recomend running high additive oils like V50 valvoline in normal wieghts and the euro spec oils to help cut down on scuffing wear in these motors.

but to just say that non roller rockers cuase scuffing seems a bit silly from my perspective. The way the tip of the rocker is designed its got to have close to the same contact friction as a roller tip.A roller tip still will side load a valve even a roller tip will still push the valve across the Arc of travel. you cannot get away from angular loading in a valvetrian. you can minimize it but never eliminate it.

How many aftermarket LS heads with bronze guides have you disassembled and checked guide wear on?

How many of those same heads had the type of damage to the valve tips that AFR was covering?

How many of those valve tips actually had the required Rockwell hardness but still looked like crap?

A roller tip ROLLS, a stock rocker SCRUBS across the top of the valve when it goes past .550" lift, and it causes guide wear as well as some valve tip damage. If the stock rocker scubbed at the initial opening when spring pressure is lowest you would probably never see valve tip and guide damage. But since the rocker is scrubbing at the point of HIGHEST spring pressure, it causes damage.

How many aftermarket LS heads with bronze guides have you disassembled and checked guide wear on?


I have seen enough sets to know that this whole guide wear argument is way overhyped.



How many of those same heads had the type of damage to the valve tips that AFR was covering?


I have seen stock valve's running .650 with stock rockers I have seen Rev valve Running .650 no problems. Why isn't it a problem on the ASA engine that runs stock rockers ?Those motors turn 4800-7500 rpm for 500 miles with .600 lift cams

How many of those valve tips actually had the required Rockwell hardness but still looked like crap?


How many had sufficient hardening depth? you can harden the top .005 of the valve tip and sure it'll be sufficiently hardened. that doesn;t mean the depth of the hardening was sufficient and that the materials to construct the valve were adequately speced out.



A roller tip ROLLS, a stock rocker SCRUBS across the top of the valve when it goes past .550" lift, and it causes guide wear as well as some valve tip damage. If the stock rocker scubbed at the initial opening when spring pressure is lowest you would probably never see valve tip and guide damage. But since the rocker is scrubbing at the point of HIGHEST spring pressure, it causes damage.

Are you telling me that a roller tip rocker can defy the laws of geometery ? There will always be thrust loading on a valve guide.the srcub is of little consequence.

The issue could be the material the valve is made out of maybe the valves you are talking about have a higher friction coffeicent then a steel stock valve.That could easily explain the guide wear.Has anyone done any materials testing.

I have taken apart heads with .800 lift cams that have beautiful valve guides and I have taken apart heads with .500 lift cams with tons of wear. Is it the guide or the rocker ? All had optimized geomtery.

I have seen enough sets to know that this whole guide wear argument is way overhyped.

I don't believe you have done this, because if you had, you would know I am telling it how it is.

the srcub is of little consequence.

That is a COMPLETELY laughable statement, once again, you clearly haven't done any testing. If the scrub will cause a valve to wear ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE LOCKS on a valve that didn't have the proper heat treat, like you took a angle grinder to it, don't you think there is enough friction to cause guide wear? Don't forget, that stock rocker wore away STAINLESS STEEL and the guide is BRONZE.


I have taken apart heads with .800 lift cams that have beautiful valve guides and I have taken apart heads with .500 lift cams with tons of wear. Is it the guide or the rocker ? All had optimized geomtery.

You type this and then question my credentials?

When I ran stock rockers and daily drove my T/A it beat the piss out of my guides and I would have to replace a few every season. When I switched to comp rollers everything was mint.

Waiting on LS1curious with baited breath. Dude, you need to stop posting in this thread before your credibility is completely destroyed. :rolleyes:

And Brian and I arn't the best of friends to say the least. But when your right, your right.

I think Tony and Tooley should meet at the bike racks after school!

Tooley, watch out for Morpheus' flying knee drop.

Mamo, watch out for dirty tricks; Tooley's an Irish.

I think Tony and Tooley should meet at the bike racks after school!

Tooley, watch out for Morpheus' flying knee drop.

Mamo, watch out for dirty tricks; Tooley's an Irish.

Now I don't care who you are, that there is funny ;)

But I missed the part where Tony and I were fighting, just the contrary, I commented that the guide wear had nothing to do with AFR's materials used or quality control.

I would be curious to know how many of the heads returned to AFR for soft valve tips ended up needing guides too, especially the valves that didn't get damaged. I know we've had several sets in here, and with mileage they needed guides.

Our tolerances may be different, we size our guides to .0008"-.0010" clearance, and we will replace a guide at .0018" With a stock rocker those numbers will eventually grow to .002",.003",.004" or even .005". Those numbers may be OK in some peoples opinion, but not in ours.

We use a digital checker accurate to .0001", and you can see the loading of the valve inside the guide, because the guide may be .0015" from front to back of the engine and then be .003"-.004" or more from intake side to exhaust, so you can actually see how the guide has worn oval in shape from the friction of the rocker. And it will generally be bigger at the top of the guide as compared to the bottom, once again due to the friction from the stock rocker.

Can you do me a favor?????

Quit posting, and ship my damned heads to LME.. :burn: I talked to Bryan today, and he still doesnt have them...Tic Toc Tic Toc... :) :D


Now I don't care who you are, that there is funny ;)

But I missed the part where Tony and I were fighting, just the contrary, I commented that the guide wear had nothing to do with AFR's materials used or quality control.

Can you do me a favor?????

Quit posting, and ship my damned heads to LME.. :burn: I talked to Bryan today, and he still doesnt have them...Tic Toc Tic Toc... :) :D

They are in the UPS truck :cheers:

WoooHooo.. :burn:

Within 2 weeks, i'll be posting the results of my new LSX 454, TFS 245's, Ported FAST, Ported LS2, and a 200-300shot direct port in my 6spd C5..

Hopefully we'll see some STRONG #'s..
They are in the UPS truck :cheers:

WoooHooo.. :burn:

Within 2 weeks, i'll be posting the results of my new LSX 454, TFS 245's, Ported FAST, Ported LS2, and a 200-300shot direct port in my 6spd C5..

Hopefully we'll see some STRONG #'s..


what output u looking for?

Realisticly, about 580-600rwhp NA, and 850ish with the bottle..
what output u looking for?

Your running a plastic plenum ram intake ? Wow 454 ci, me thinks your peak power is gonna be right around 5600 rpm or so.


WoooHooo.. :burn:

Within 2 weeks, i'll be posting the results of my new LSX 454, TFS 245's, Ported FAST, Ported LS2, and a 200-300shot direct port in my 6spd C5..

Hopefully we'll see some STRONG #'s..

Your running a plastic plenum ram intake ? Wow 454 ci, me thinks your peak power is gonna be right around 5600 rpm or so.

Wrong. I run a 454 with a ported FAST and peak Horsepower is 6,800 RPM. Peak Torque is 5,400 RPM.

People seriously underestimate what a ported FAST can do. Sheetmetal on the street is not the best way. On the track, spinning 7,000 to 9,000 RPM sheetmetal rules. However, if you are running boost, sheetmetal will work just fine on the street.

American_HP, congrats on your build. I look forward to hearing more when it's finished.

retest on a different dynomometer. Ported fast or not you have 18 inchs of runner with 454 ci. your tunning RPM is roughly 5600-5800 rpm.


Wrong. I run a 454 with a ported FAST and peak Horsepower is 6,800 RPM. Peak Torque is 5,400 RPM.

People seriously underestimate what a ported FAST can do. Sheetmetal on the street is not the best way. On the track, spinning 7,000 to 9,000 RPM sheetmetal rules. However, if you are running boost, sheetmetal will work just fine on the street.