NASTE_SS

Let state facts not .You brought me PRC ls7 heads. I told you they were not going to make good power compared to our heads. You asked if I could flow them and let you know. I did and the numbers were down. You asked if the I could make them flow what our stock LS7 heads flow. So I ported the bowls and they picked up 18 Cfm. But keep in mind the ports are 20cc larger than our stock Cnc ported heads so that means the PRC will be very lazy. I spec'd a cam for you that we have used several times and have made 590-610rwhp. So when the heads are not really mine to claim and the cam is a proven cam then yes I feel you have problems elsewhere. Quality did call me and they said it seemed like the car had no compression. I gave you the heads you asked for but no one checked compression. They also told me you needed better exhaust. I'm having a real hard time when you say my combo did not perform. They are not my damn heads. They are heads that I tried to fix but obviously it did not work. The cam is proven so I no that's not an issue. Yes, putting a larger cam in the motor might help but you wanted it to have good drivability. So I truly want to find out what the problem is. I can give ten people the same heads and sometimes only 6 make the power. There is a lot more to the combo than slapping a set of heads on. So I want some educated clarification. Also you conveniently forgot to mention that I took pictures of 5 intake valve seats that were not pressed in all the way. I told you this will become a problem. You said if they seal and can run then leave it. So did you even think that you have several valves not sealing. Hmm that would be a big problem if the seats are moving around. To be honest like I said before I can do 10 sets of the exact same heads and 6 guys make power and the other 4 miss the combo. So I completely Admit I can't please everyone. I ship 15-20 sets a week so if I have a few that apparently aren't happy I guess those guys might the ones that might be missing a small aspect of the combo. Majority of my business is not LS based heads, so I do the best I can. I have a good example for you guys . I shipped a set of Our TFS 237 heads a few weeks ago. The combo is a 408 and we've had guys making 560 rwhp with that head no problem. The guys calls to yell at me because it only made 520 rwhp. I go through his whole combo. I tell him you need new plug wires and truck coils. He proceeded to tell me that I was full of ****. He calls me last week and said it now makes 566rwhp with the new coils and wires.

I know there are a lot of really smart guys out there who have issues with there combos, but guys like myself, Brian Tooley ,etc we deal with these thing daily with tons of different customers. So we might just have so good suggestions to help out.

427zm

iTrader: (9)

Yes, you did stand behind your product, and yes the second set of heads performed better than the first set. I do recognize and commend you on this for sure. Very stand up.This said, during my build I was delayed 2 weeks waiting on my heads to be finished, when they had been sent to you some 6 weeks earlier.

The ERL and RHS bottom ends on the cars I speak of are all stout. Mine HS been been balanced to 10k and has .... count them 39 dyno pulls trying to figure this out. None of the 3 I know of are using oil, and none are giving any problems with their owners. The job of the bottom end is to seal and spin correct? If so, it's doing its job and doing it well. No knocking, no clattering, nothing abnormal.

So, I'm not the worlds most formidable head consur, but I have researched a ton and do understand theory and this is what both sets have had in common:

1) no matter what they don't detonate. At all. This seems to tell me the chambers have been softened an extreme amount. For instance, QMS threw 32* at them and still zero detonation. No extra power from extra timing either.

2) They don't make torque. And this presides even on pervious heads that have been installed. Mine have made 480ft-lbs no matter what. It's running 11.6:1 static CR and we have swapped 2" and 1 3/4" back and forth to no avail. Torque and HP both peak identically. Now, how do I know this presides on previous setups? The 1st set tested by QMS only delivered 507 and that was w/ a Fast. So, mine w/ a fast would be right in the same realm.

I have swapped cams from a mid sized street cam, to a huge street cam, and there was only a gain of 15 horse; from 554/480 to 570/480. From a 235/251 114 on LSL's (.657/.661) to a 251/267 on a 114+4 on QXX/HUC lobes (.701/.670) and only a small gain. We swapped headers since (from 2" down to 1 3/4") just to see if there would be an increase since the cam was specifically designed for 1 3/4" and nothing gained, nothing lost.

Just for all to know the specs of my build are:

- ERL resleeved LS2 434 Wiseco flat tops/Compstar rods and crank
- morel link bar lifters
- Frankenstein LS7 Heads 68cc 11.6:1
- comp pushrods
- Trunnion upgraded stock rockers
- Katech C5R timing chain
- ported stock intake and LS2 TB
- ARH Headers 1 3/4 and 2" both have been tested and used

Now mine is a mute point as it won't see a street again it's been totaled, but the others I know are looking other places for LS7 head replacements.

Millenium Z06

Quality did not tell you I needed better exhaust, the car has LG Super pro 1 3/4" headers and RT cats along with LG big 3 exhaust.
I have not claimed the heads were yours, just ported/finished by you and there's been plenty of people make 600whp with these very heads.

I told you I wanted the compression as close to 12:1 as possible and provided you with the ERL build sheet with part numbers which you said "we have a way of calculating compression".
As for the seats, the heads are off and I havent been told that the seats have moved. As far as making power, the heads made within 5hp of JPs FRH heads.

Millenium Z06

1 more thing that deserves to be said, Quality had been more than gracious, helpful and eager to find the problem/solution. I have the utmost confidence in them.

Pwebbz28

iTrader: (31)

Your first mistake was Quality Performance! I wouldn't let Patrick tune my lawnmower! Moron couldn't even get a 232 duration cam to idle in my WS6. Said, "that's as good as it gets in a fbody". Sam miller spent 2 hours on the garbage tune and it idled perfect with AC on. Quality is a joke for corvette people with more dollars than cents!

Millenium Z06

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it, doesn't make it accurate though; I've recently heard negative comments about Sam along with positive comments. I don't know him or his work so I have no opinion on the validity of the comments made to me and don't really care, from what I've been told he's a good guy and a good tuner. As for Qualitys prices, they are in line with everyone else in the area give or take a few dollars.

My car has a 250/258 cam in it and there's no surging or bucking at low speeds.

NASTE_SS

- First I will say that yes your heads were delayed two weeks because you wanted the first set of our stg 2 heads, and we have a 6-8 week turn around time on custom jobs.

- Your first mistake was reading to much online about chambers. If you really don't understand the function then sometimes it is better to learn from hands on experience instead of hear say. I say this because the chambers were untouched on both sets of your heads, so your softening theory does not apply. Second of all you were running a 1 3/4 LS6 style header on a 1 7/8" LS7 exhaust port. We had this discussion before and the header was all wrong. I know you changed to a 2" but you also changed heads and never backed to back tested any single change at that time. I was worried about changing to many things at once, but i was ignored. The timing issue is due to exhaust gas contamination. It kills the fresh intake charge and makes the car unresponsive to timing changes.

- The short block has much more function then to just rotate and seal. As I said to you before you are comparing your dyno numbers to Stock short block LS7 engines. You have a complete forged and steel bottom end from ERL. The biggest difference is rotating weight. The stock LS7 has TITANIUM rods and your ERL short block has Steel. Also an average engine will gain HP and TQ once the rings completely break in and seal.

- I spoke to QMS and they found out that Tim's, Your's and Wes's motors were all off the compression mark by .6 of compression. The head gasket thickness and diameter was never figured into your builds. This being said QMS is very confident that if the heads would have milled to gain the compression that all three of you would have made your magic #. I'm very sorry about the new of you losing your car but I'm very glad you walked away from it. I guess we'll never know if .6 of a point of compression is worth 20-25hp. Also you guys are comparing your RWHP numbers to C6 Z06 cars and you guys have C5 Cars. I talked to the GM engineer last night and he said not only are the titanium rods worth 15-20 hp but the C6 has 4% less drive train loss then the C5. Every single factor plays a big role in making power, but sometimes the small details get over looked.

-Finally, if the heads were the problem explain this please. QMS bought a set of identical heads as yours two weeks ago. They installed on a stock short block with stock intake and there standard small cam. Car make over 580RWHP in 116degree Shop Temps. QMS can verify this all day long.So I 150% Stand behind my heads, because there are hundreds of customers out there making power and winning Championships. It just disappoints me when guys like Wes who have absolutely no engine knowledge start blaming parts with out having all the facts.

NASTE_SS

Wes, I talked to Quality this morning. They told you the car is down on compression by .6 and you need smaller chambers. So you buying a set of new heads with smaller chambers is not a real test. You should have just milled the first heads and re dynoed it. You did send me the ERL spec sheet and I asked if they figured everything in. You said yes except for the chamber volume. Come to find out QMS said ERL does not figure in the head gasket bore size or thickness. I would say that's a misunderstanding wouldn't you. We did nothing wrong on our part except what you asked for. The car should pick up with smaller chambers.

427zm

iTrader: (9)

You are incorrect in your statement highlighted above. 1 3/4" header to 2" swap on the first set of heads found a 25whp/30ft-lbs of torque drop. Also, you were not ignored, I actually ONLY purchased the 2" headers based upon your recommendation. It was against my and QMS's better judgement, but I did it upon your recommendation. Once the heads were swapped, while the 2" headers were still on, power came back to the original 554/480. After this I swapped cams power cam up to 580/490 with no cat back. Once we added 3" LG big 3catback, this number dropped to 570/480. Now, just to check what the 1 3/4" headers would do we swapped back to them since the cam I was running was designed specifically for them. The result, was an identical peak (570/480) with a slight loss under the curve. The whole time detention never occurred, and never would. So, yes, back to back testing was done all at a high cost to me and my shop and all to make these things work. They didn't and that's the end of it. I have a cam in it that would produce the exact same # on stock heads IMO. As for down on compression, I'm not off .6 at all.

The specs are:

.006 out of the hole
68cc chamber heads
New style flat top Wiseco pistons w/ -3cc reliefs
Cometic .051 x 4.160 HG's

Resulting in 11.61 static CR on a 4.155" bore x 4" stroke

I should've cut them down to 66cc chambers and gone w/ .040 cometics for 12:1 CR and better quench; but even this wouldn't have resulted in 600 wheel. Static CR doesn't account for much extra Hp unless you're talking points different.

As for my first mistake being internet lure, I don't think that is at all the issue, in fact if anything it's help tremendously throughout. Helpful hands like Martin Smallwood and Darin Morgan are fantastic when it comes to this type of thing. I have truly appreciated their friendship and guidance during my build. Not to mention, the internet has made your name my friend. So before executing the internet, might want to take a step back. You obviously know this which is why you post new heads are big results on YB when they come across.

I will state I am not mad, I just know if/when I build again, ported stockers won't be in the mix. Mast or TF's will be the move for me.

NASTE_SS

Jp, I think you have gotten something wrong. I still have the original build sheet with the specs that were requested from QMS and you. I was told not to mill the heads excpet to get them flat. The chambers from the factory are 70-71cc. Then do a valve job = 71.5cc. I only took .003 off the heads which puts them at 71cc. Like I have said ten times someone missed the compression. I have tested my personal care with the effects of compression. The bigger the CI the more effect it'll have on HP. My little 347ci made 493RWHP with 11.1, then I milled the heads to get compression to 11.65. The car then maid 510RWHP. Once again it all goes back to real world testing not hear say.

You read my entire post and only seem to read the header section? What about the rest that i was trying to get you to understand? The thing that needs to be clarified in this thread is that you guys are comparing your dyno result to C6 Z06 numbers with my heads, but you all have C5 cars.So I will clarify that you are 30-35rwhp off your goal correct? So lets break this down so I can possible get you to understand where I'm coming from.

1. C6 has Dry sump worth about 4-6hp
2. C6 has titanium Rods and Lighter pistons. Worth 12-18hp
3. The compression ratio of the cars your comparing to were a solid 11.9-12.1, which if worth at least 10-18hp.
4.C6 has 4% less drivtrain loss worth 5-10hp.
5.Air Temp on that particular day might have sucked?

Even if you add the low side its worth 30hp and the high side is 52hp, so all i'm saying is that you guys are not comparing apples to apples. I'm not pissed because I know there was nothing wrong with the heads. Just like QMS said this morning, they said they told all you guys that my heads in there standard combos make better power than anything they have tested. If I need them to varify that feel free to ask Patrick or Doug. They did say that Tim, You and Wes all spec'd out your own builds, and those are the three cars that had problems.

427zm

iTrader: (9)

Yes, you are correct on the first set of heads, but the second set was requested to be at 68cc. I'm not concerned about the power of C6Z's have made, I do get that a 4# difference in rotating assembly is going to cost power, but this is why my second cam is much larger. It was spec'd that way to compensate. Also, I don't see where the 4% difference in drivetrain loss would be! the C6 and C5 have the same setup as far as motor, clutch, torque tube, t56 transmission, and diff. It didn't change until '08 and that was only a difference of the T6060 from the T56. Not to mention I'm running A C6ZR clutch, which should make rotating mass identical.

The only time specing on my own without guidance from the shop was after my first 554/480 pull with the mid sized cam. This is when I spoke straight w/ you. You told me 2" headers would be the best for power on my setup. This is when I lost 25/30. And this is when I did get pissed and said Heads have to be the issue due to your recommended 2" headers for your heads. Obviously, this wasn't the correct move.

And yes you are the main turn for them currently, but this is due to 1) Darin Morgan being too busy to get to any LS7 heads 2) WCCH issues on deliveries and a dropped valve from one of their customers.

As stated earlier, all I know is Mast or TF is the only moves for me on future builds. This experience has been a good learning experience. We will see what Briou's makes here soon, and that'll give again a little more insight, since results will most likely actually be posted. Deal is most of the number spoken of never seem to make it out to the public. I do know the first set used by QMS put down 588/507, but this was with a ported Fast 102/102 on a C6Z. Still, being that Fast 102's on LS7's consistently add 20ft#, it still shows that making torque is not as prevalent as in other LS7 heads.

One last thing, if it's only C5's down on power, Tim's RHS block'd 454 is a dry sump that is also below his goal. And it's only 4% off of mine with 20 additional cubes.

Chris, you have been stand up to me in working over 2 sets of heads, but I challenge you to go back and look at your programs. Others are out there producing more torque and more HP. Look in the C6Z section on the CF and you'll see it consistently. You can say it's us 3 that are the only ones out there, but I can tell you as a guy who's made a living for a long time in product support that is the wrong response if you want to get better. If you truly want to make your program better, and satisfy customers continuous improvement is paramount. Meeting lead times is crucial also when you give customers ETA's.

Millenium Z06

You're wrong. The C5 and C6 have the same drive line until 08 when the TR6060 trans was introduced which has a thicker/heavier main shaft which would make it use more power than the T56.
Also, I spec'd a 440 or 454 build but after consulting with Patrick at Quality I was advised to go with the 434 for rebuild-ability (1 re-bores to 4.185) so I did consult the experts and didn't just pull something out of the air.

The rotating mass difference and the benefits of the dry sump vs a wet sump and a steel bottom end were already known and factored into the equation and as I told you in your shop, I'd be OK with 580, 600 was icing and if it could be achieved then great.

I'd really like to know how a C6(Z) with the same drive line as a C5 has a 4% less loss than the C5 drive train though; if anything the 2008 and newer cars with the stronger trans should have more parasitic loss.
Like JP, I'm not mad about the situation, disappointed, yes mad no. Someone posed a question about head porters in NTX, I simply gave my experience and If I had asked the question, I'd hope to get feedback like this to make a better informed decision. At the end of the day its just money and not much in the grand scheme of things.

Pwebbz28

iTrader: (31)

Ill never understand corvette owners and dyno numbers.

texasglock23

iTrader: (1)

well then...glad I sub'd this thread

Millenium Z06

Yes because no other owners are interested in the amount of power their combo makes.

If you don't have anything constructive to add then don't. Both JP and I race a lot so what the car is doing is important and whether or not a part or a combination of parts work should be important to all of us, that is what this forum is for.

Millenium Z06

Yes. The only way to find out if something works is thru experience or asked those whom have done it. I'd do a search and find who uses what and if they met their (or you would meet yours) with the combo. As JP mentioned, there's plenty of head choices out there but when you do a search, only a few have posted results in the form of ET, mph or dyno, JP was trapping 138+ in the mile so he had two units of measure.

427zm

iTrader: (9)

2 things:

1) My track experience at my local roll race event backs up the numbers.

2) Spending big money on a build makes you care about results.

Mcscarab

Frankenstein heads hands down!!! LS7 heads and cam only 601 RWHP on a Mustang Dyno!!! Stock intake and TB, pump gas. Brian Tooley Stage 4 cam!!! All the work was done by KP Racing in Houston. Chris at Frankenstein has done 3 other factory LS7 heads same combination all made over 595 RWHP. What more could you ask for!! People shouldn't bad mouth shops unless you are comparing apples to apples just saying.

Millenium Z06

Nobody bad mouthed the shop, what was said was that OUR FRH combo whether it was his heads or heads he ported, did not perform. Yours did, good for you. That fact that yours did and ours didn't doesn't make you or him any more wrong or right than those whom his combo didn't work.

Every shop at one time or another has a combo that just doesn't perform.
I'm sure Chris sent you here and that's fine but again for both you and Chris, show me where anyone bad mouthed FRH vs simply said their combo didn't work; matter of fact, the only person that has bad mouthed a shop in this thread is Pwebbz28.

texasglock23

iTrader: (1)

I've seen bad things posted about Frankenstien before. Doesn't mean they are trash, could always be a shitty deal and someone venting and bashing. I love reading these threads so that I know what I am getting myself into!

I had a horrible experience with a fab shop with my Sierra, I made sure to blast them on all the forums including here. These threads deliver!

I have no clue when or who will do my head work. But I do know that I enjoy reading these threads, and hate when they get cluttered up with bullshit.