My latest 408 dyno results
09-04-2008, 10:36 PM
#43
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the amazing thing is how much power you are making through the cats! Regardless of the dyno type or gains. That is crazy! I am getting sick of the fumes myself. Now I just need $5000 for a new top end...
-Geoff
-Geoff
09-05-2008, 08:27 AM
#44
Furthermore, how can you say the heads are better than ETPs? ETPs are regarded as the best heads available for the LS motors by some of the best engine builders out there.
Let see. Stock heads are 15 degree valve angle. TFSs are 13.5. LS7 heads are 12 degree. ETPs are 11. HHHMMMM, Think they're on to something?
BTW, if you wanna sell the ETPs, lemme know. I'd be glad to take them off your hands.
Let see. Stock heads are 15 degree valve angle. TFSs are 13.5. LS7 heads are 12 degree. ETPs are 11. HHHMMMM, Think they're on to something?
BTW, if you wanna sell the ETPs, lemme know. I'd be glad to take them off your hands.
I have some 2.5 year old engine dyno data from the top 3 aftermarket heads on a stock shortblock all tested back to back, and the TFS 215's outpowered the ET 215's. Both heads flowed very similar, but issues (such as exhaust ports that don't line up and heavy valve train) with the ET heads kept them from making the power. I think the guys at TFS have a good handle on making power.
BTW, Congrats on your new found power!
Last edited by Brian Tooley Racing; 09-05-2008 at 09:49 AM.
09-05-2008, 10:11 AM
#45
The total head "package" in terms of port shape, chamber shape, valve and valve job is what determines how much power a head can make, not total valve angle. All of these things work together to make the port flow air and make power. If it were as simple as rolling the valve over to make power, well, then everything would be 0 degrees. I well done 13.5 degree head can and will outpower a 11 degree head if the 13.5 degree head flows more air everywhere, which case in point, the TFS 235 does outflow a ET 225 everywhere, at least on our flowbench. The much shorter (stock length) valves in the TFS heads weigh less and suffer less valve float than the .550" longer than stock valves in a ET head.
I have some 2.5 year old engine dyno data from the top 3 aftermarket heads on a stock shortblock all tested back to back, and the TFS 215's outpowered the ET 215's. Both heads flowed very similar, but issues (such as exhaust ports that don't line up and heavy valve train) with the ET heads kept them from making the power. I think the guys at TFS have a good handle on making power.
BTW, Congrats on your new found power!
I have some 2.5 year old engine dyno data from the top 3 aftermarket heads on a stock shortblock all tested back to back, and the TFS 215's outpowered the ET 215's. Both heads flowed very similar, but issues (such as exhaust ports that don't line up and heavy valve train) with the ET heads kept them from making the power. I think the guys at TFS have a good handle on making power.
BTW, Congrats on your new found power!
But, fact is, as technology has progressed, everyone has been seeking shallower valve angles in every conceivable type of cyl head out there. SBCs, BBCs, LSXs, Fords, you name it.
I'll take the shallowest valve angle possible every time.
09-05-2008, 11:14 AM
#46
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Aztec, NM
Posts: 1,360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The much shorter (stock length) valves in the TFS heads weigh less and suffer less valve float than the .550" longer than stock valves in a ET head.
I have some 2.5 year old engine dyno data from the top 3 aftermarket heads on a stock shortblock all tested back to back, and the TFS 215's outpowered the ET 215's. Both heads flowed very similar, but issues (such as exhaust ports that don't line up and heavy valve train) with the ET heads kept them from making the power.
Don't get me wrong, bolth the TFS & ETP heads are great products, but your statements about why your products are superior have been a little slanted over the years. There were too many changes all at once, just to say that the cylinder heads were the reason he picked up XX amount more RWHP. I still believe that the camshaft change had more to do with things, rather than the cylinder heads!
09-05-2008, 02:26 PM
#48
Don't get me wrong, bolth the TFS & ETP heads are great products, but your statements about why your products are superior have been a little slanted over the years. There were too many changes all at once, just to say that the cylinder heads were the reason he picked up XX amount more RWHP. I still believe that the camshaft change had more to do with things, rather than the cylinder heads!
So you think 4 degrees more intake and exhaust duration will make more than 10 RWHP difference? Have you ever tried that type of cam duration change in this type of application? I have, we didn't get 10 RWHP.
I have about 10 shops that have made 540-550 RWHP with 402/408/416 combinations and TFS 225/235 heads, so what is so hard to believe this customer did so too?
Here is video of a TEA customer first time out, pump gas 402, hyd roller 242/248 cam, TFS 225 heads. On a local Superflow 600 their ET 225 heads flowed more air than the TFS 225 heads we sent him. The same exact heads flowed on our bench showed the opposite. I guess the "proof is in the pudding" as he's ran 9.80's on motor.
Right click, "save target as" http://www.quicktimeperformance.com/Media/RickVideo.wmv
Last edited by Brian Tooley Racing; 09-05-2008 at 02:49 PM.
09-05-2008, 05:18 PM
#50
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Aztec, NM
Posts: 1,360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think anyone in this entire post said he picked up XX more RWHP due to the heads, I know I didn't say that.
So you think 4 degrees more intake and exhaust duration will make more than 10 RWHP difference? Have you ever tried that type of cam duration change in this type of application? I have, we didn't get 10 RWHP.
09-07-2008, 08:00 AM
#52
It seems these guys have well documented claims as to how these dynos compare to one another, so to say what you said is to dispute their data, and how can you dispute their data? Do you have data from these same dynos that contridicts what they claim? To claim this Mustang dyno makes about the same number as a Dynojet doesn't seem like that much of a stretch.
My point is simply, how can you possibly claim any sort of gain going from one type of dyno to another?
I have no dog in this cyl head fight. I'm just sayin the claim of ANY gains going from one type of dyno to another is just BOGUS.
Go run it on a DJ and post your results, and I'll have not a damn thing to say.Idont care if it makes 550, at least it will be an apples to apples comparison.
09-07-2008, 10:24 PM
#55
10 Second Club
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: pittsburgh raceway park
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nice numbers i want to build a 408 for my z some day. i go to pittsburgh raceway almost every weekend, i havent seen your car run there unless i missed it but great ws6 man.
09-08-2008, 08:18 AM
#58
) of making gains claims, going from one kind of dyno to another. Not even THE SAME KIND, and TWO DIFFERENT ONES, but TWO DIFFERENT KINDS. I guess I'm the only one who thinks thats rediculous.
09-09-2008, 09:01 PM
#59
10 Second Club
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: pittsburgh raceway park
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
im gonna have my z out there wednesday night for test n tune, if your there stop by my z is sliver with a 4 inch white cowl hood. i'll more then likey mess up being my first time to the track.
