AFR225's any one actaully flow tested them...
01-04-2012, 07:24 PM
#61
12 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still crazy how a cam swap turned into a discussion about flow numbers. What did the rest of the engine look like? Before a clean up? Just wondering. What led y'all to heads being the issue. Any recorded cylinder temp or EGTs during runs? Wondering if excessive heat could have played into this. And pressure.
01-04-2012, 07:36 PM
#63
Tony, we're going to have to agree to disagree on heads backing up being a bad thing, many very well known porters agree with me & I've seen the results of fixing a head that backs up on the dyno, so I'm not going to be convinced otherwise.
You CAN stop an LS cathedral port from backing up without hurting the mid lift flow & it definately does make a difference on a running engine, don't know if you saw this, but these are the figures off a set of ported factory 243 castings I did, 2.08" valve flowed on a 4" bore, these are the only 243 castings I've ever ported, a bit more tme with them & I could do better:
.1 - 73.4
.2 - 145.7
.3 - 212.6
.4 - 265.2
.5 - 303.3
.6 - 327.8
.65 - 334.5
.7 - 338.6
As you can see, they do not back up, wish I'd recorded flow at .750" & .800", at the time I didn't see the need, but they did not back up all the way to .800" lift (only gained a couple of CFM, but did not back up or go turbulent).
No, they are not as strong through the mid range as the figures for your 230's, but they are factory castings, not performance aftermarket castings.
Dale has performance & dyno figures for the 225's before the valve job was screwed up, we'll be able to compare how they perform after I've fixed them, should open a few eyes.
You CAN stop an LS cathedral port from backing up without hurting the mid lift flow & it definately does make a difference on a running engine, don't know if you saw this, but these are the figures off a set of ported factory 243 castings I did, 2.08" valve flowed on a 4" bore, these are the only 243 castings I've ever ported, a bit more tme with them & I could do better:
.1 - 73.4
.2 - 145.7
.3 - 212.6
.4 - 265.2
.5 - 303.3
.6 - 327.8
.65 - 334.5
.7 - 338.6
As you can see, they do not back up, wish I'd recorded flow at .750" & .800", at the time I didn't see the need, but they did not back up all the way to .800" lift (only gained a couple of CFM, but did not back up or go turbulent).
No, they are not as strong through the mid range as the figures for your 230's, but they are factory castings, not performance aftermarket castings.
Dale has performance & dyno figures for the 225's before the valve job was screwed up, we'll be able to compare how they perform after I've fixed them, should open a few eyes.
The numbers you supplied with the ported OEM castings are very good. If they flowed that on my equipment I would tell you it would probably be the highest flowing ported OEM cathedral head I have seen. I suspect it's a big port (240+) but even if that were the case it would still be a solid flowing head considering you started with an OEM casting.
Two things....bigger heads don't typically back up as easily (even in the LS world), and I would wager your curve would be alot different it flow tested on a larger bore (like a 4.155) that unshrouds the valve and opens up the curtain area a bunch more. I would guess it peaks at .650 or so (on the larger bore)....most of not all of the larger higher flowing cathedral heads I have tested tend to peak there (or very close to there). Some are flat after that and some back up a little but not nearly as bad as a small port head tested on the large bore. Once again....I am still looking at the usable curve more so than whether it backs up as long as it is flowing the right numbers thru the usable curve and not backing up at some ridiculously early lift point.
No attack on anyone here mainly a question to mr mamo. Why are head porters still supplying flow figures at 28 inches of depression, the 28 inch value came from Smokey Yunick in his testing of the internal combustion engine which was typical of the efficiency of a race cylinder head of his day. Todays 15 deg head is light years ahead of the heads in those days. Real tests have shown that the real running depression in an engine through a modern head peaks much less then that. In fact pro stock head developers test at 5 inches as this is a real world number. A good cylinder head will flow the same hp at 10 inches as it does 28. And a bad cyl head will infact go turbulent at the same lift regardless weather its 10 inches or 28 inches, So why are these 28 numbers still advertised? Tony Mamo I'm sure you are not the type of guy that lays all his cards out on a public forum but just goes to show how much influence some guys have on the industry.
Still crazy how a cam swap turned into a discussion about flow numbers. What did the rest of the engine look like? Before a clean up? Just wondering. What led y'all to heads being the issue. Any recorded cylinder temp or EGTs during runs? Wondering if excessive heat could have played into this. And pressure.
01-04-2012, 08:19 PM
#64
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those 243's from memory were around 225-230cc, not that big - ported for a 6L engine.
I may be pulling those heads some time this year to bump the comp up & fit a different cam, if that happens I'll CC them again to confirm port volume & I'll flow em on a 4.125" bore & see what happens.
The bench is an honest one, calibrated with tractorsport plates & compares pretty well with a lot of other benches, down a little at high lift compared to some more 'happy' benches.
I'm building a new fully digital bench ATM, plan to have it up & running within a couple of months.
I may be pulling those heads some time this year to bump the comp up & fit a different cam, if that happens I'll CC them again to confirm port volume & I'll flow em on a 4.125" bore & see what happens.
The bench is an honest one, calibrated with tractorsport plates & compares pretty well with a lot of other benches, down a little at high lift compared to some more 'happy' benches.
I'm building a new fully digital bench ATM, plan to have it up & running within a couple of months.
01-05-2012, 11:42 PM
#66
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Got these heads up to 330cfm @ .600", pretty much lineball with those 243's I posted figures on, but they still lay over after .600".
Much better than they were, but still not god enough.
Velocity profile tells the story, they are FAST over the centre of the turn, even after laying back the turn a bit & widening the window, hell the are even fast at the corners of the turn, not cool & no-one is going to tell me they were not even faster when they came out the box:
Roof
246 - 242 - 233
236 - 246 - 249
254 - 317 - 263
293 - 347 - 308
352 - 417 - 356 <- short turn here
Floor
By comparison they are nice through the pinch:
Roof
264 - 276 - 303
285 - 291 - 297
275 - 282 - 298
258 - 284 - 279
249 - 260 - 270
Floor
So they need the turn layed back even more (I actually thought they would, but didn't want to overcook it before confirming), they also need the chamber layed back some more, not an AFR problem tho, sinking the seat as much as I had to to salvage them has caused mid lift to suffer, can be fixed.
May end up having to straighten the wall behind the pinch a bit more as well to get the air out to the side of the window, although the side to side velocity variation is actually quite good, so not sure how much that'd help. I'm thinking it mostly needs more lay back on the turn & more lay back on the chamber.
Much better than they were, but still not god enough.
Velocity profile tells the story, they are FAST over the centre of the turn, even after laying back the turn a bit & widening the window, hell the are even fast at the corners of the turn, not cool & no-one is going to tell me they were not even faster when they came out the box:
Roof
246 - 242 - 233
236 - 246 - 249
254 - 317 - 263
293 - 347 - 308
352 - 417 - 356 <- short turn here
Floor
By comparison they are nice through the pinch:
Roof
264 - 276 - 303
285 - 291 - 297
275 - 282 - 298
258 - 284 - 279
249 - 260 - 270
Floor
So they need the turn layed back even more (I actually thought they would, but didn't want to overcook it before confirming), they also need the chamber layed back some more, not an AFR problem tho, sinking the seat as much as I had to to salvage them has caused mid lift to suffer, can be fixed.
May end up having to straighten the wall behind the pinch a bit more as well to get the air out to the side of the window, although the side to side velocity variation is actually quite good, so not sure how much that'd help. I'm thinking it mostly needs more lay back on the turn & more lay back on the chamber.
01-05-2012, 11:58 PM
#67
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know, I reckon I know what AFR were doing with these heads, bung a stock LS6 intake on em & flow will be cut to about 270cfm & along with that the velocity over the turn will drop a lot, back to acceptable levels.
So most guys using a stock or fast 90 type intake would never hit the brick wall, it'd only be when you stick a real intake on it that it'll get too fast over the turn.
Tony can probably confirm, in which case I guess it's job well done(ish), they'd work pretty dang good if flow demand never went above 270odd cfm (capped by the intake), so for the majority of guys that bought these heads they'd work pretty good.
But AFR should not have been advertising flow figures that the head could not produce - there is no way this head ever flowed the claimed #'s out the box, with a turn that fast it's just not possible & the valve job being dodgy ain't gonna change that much.
So most guys using a stock or fast 90 type intake would never hit the brick wall, it'd only be when you stick a real intake on it that it'll get too fast over the turn.
Tony can probably confirm, in which case I guess it's job well done(ish), they'd work pretty dang good if flow demand never went above 270odd cfm (capped by the intake), so for the majority of guys that bought these heads they'd work pretty good.
But AFR should not have been advertising flow figures that the head could not produce - there is no way this head ever flowed the claimed #'s out the box, with a turn that fast it's just not possible & the valve job being dodgy ain't gonna change that much.
01-06-2012, 12:39 AM
#68
Get bent Knight...
Most people won't hit that wall because their heads weren't butchered by someone.
YOU HAVE A FUCKED SET OF HEADS. NOTHING AFR IS AT FAULT FOR. But a new set of heads, if your porting skills are anything what you seem to think they are, you should have one nasty set of heads on your hand. Maybe you aren't the porter Tony Mamo is. (notice the period and not a question mark)
From what I have seen, AFR heads ALWAYS hit the expected mark and then usually plus a little bit on the side.
So most guys using a stock or fast 90 type intake would never hit the brick wall,
YOU HAVE A FUCKED SET OF HEADS. NOTHING AFR IS AT FAULT FOR. But a new set of heads, if your porting skills are anything what you seem to think they are, you should have one nasty set of heads on your hand. Maybe you aren't the porter Tony Mamo is. (notice the period and not a question mark)
From what I have seen, AFR heads ALWAYS hit the expected mark and then usually plus a little bit on the side.
01-06-2012, 12:58 AM
#69
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice, good to hear an unbiased viewpoint.
If the heads were fucked they came that way out of the factory, no dodgy valve job will make a turn that fast & the rest of the heads were untouched.
These heads are a love job for a friend, I have nothing to gain by discrediting them as I'm not making any $$ on them, nor do I do enough LS stuff to be any kind of threat to the established LS shops, my mainstays are turbo'd multi valve engines & NA holden engines.
I've done my share of LS heads, but very few for street engines, all bar a few sit on pure competition engines - & yes, they win races.
PS - they are a nasty set of heads now, they flow a real 330cfm, but I'm not happy enough to stop at that. (well, one cylinder is nasty anyway, the rest still suck).
If the heads were fucked they came that way out of the factory, no dodgy valve job will make a turn that fast & the rest of the heads were untouched.
These heads are a love job for a friend, I have nothing to gain by discrediting them as I'm not making any $$ on them, nor do I do enough LS stuff to be any kind of threat to the established LS shops, my mainstays are turbo'd multi valve engines & NA holden engines.
I've done my share of LS heads, but very few for street engines, all bar a few sit on pure competition engines - & yes, they win races.
PS - they are a nasty set of heads now, they flow a real 330cfm, but I'm not happy enough to stop at that. (well, one cylinder is nasty anyway, the rest still suck).
01-06-2012, 01:06 AM
#70
Nice, good to hear an unbiased viewpoint.
If the heads were fucked they came that way out of the factory, no dodgy valve job will make a turn that fast & the rest of the heads were untouched.
These heads are a love job for a friend, I have nothing to gain by discrediting them as I'm not making any $$ on them, nor do I do enough LS stuff to be any kind of threat to the established LS shops, my mainstays are turbo'd multi valve engines & NA holden engines.
I've done my share of LS heads, but very few for street engines, all bar a few sit on pure competition engines - & yes, they win races.
PS - they are a nasty set of heads now, they flow a real 330cfm, but I'm not happy enough to stop at that. (well, one cylinder is nasty anyway, the rest still suck).
If the heads were fucked they came that way out of the factory, no dodgy valve job will make a turn that fast & the rest of the heads were untouched.
These heads are a love job for a friend, I have nothing to gain by discrediting them as I'm not making any $$ on them, nor do I do enough LS stuff to be any kind of threat to the established LS shops, my mainstays are turbo'd multi valve engines & NA holden engines.
I've done my share of LS heads, but very few for street engines, all bar a few sit on pure competition engines - & yes, they win races.
PS - they are a nasty set of heads now, they flow a real 330cfm, but I'm not happy enough to stop at that. (well, one cylinder is nasty anyway, the rest still suck).
Don't try to bull ****, you have plenty to gain putting them down. You think everyone on here is blind and dumb. Tony Mamo is known as THE MAN for a reason, and AFR is known as bad *** top of the line for a reason.
Or I could agree with you and be a lone wolf..... AFR heads are pieces of ****. We all know TSP makes a perfect out of the box head, they will even tell you that. And if you want a perfect head double perfect, send them to you.
01-06-2012, 01:10 AM
#71
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am well aware that more than likely TonyM is a better LS head porter than me, with the amount of experience he has he should be.
This is not about his skills, which I'm sure are ample.
But he is hobbled by working for a largish company, he will never be able to admit any shortcomings of the company that pays his wage's product - I can respect that, sticking by your company is not a bad thing.
I do have an issue with AFR's (& not Tony M's) marketing, these heads clearly never flowed what they were advertised as flowing - that is not Tony's fault, that is the guys that pull the strings at AFR's fault.
Personally I think Tony has made a big difference at AFR & that things are steadily improving, I'm sure if he called the shots as he saw fit threads like this would not exist, hell, to be honest I like the guy, face to face I reckon we'd get on well. But there is a corporate division that he cannot cross.
These are not the 1st set of AFR heads from that time period that I've flowed & have come up well under advertised, newer stuff is closer.
But, most heads from most manufacturers are the same, never let the truth get in the way of a good yarn!
This is not about his skills, which I'm sure are ample.
But he is hobbled by working for a largish company, he will never be able to admit any shortcomings of the company that pays his wage's product - I can respect that, sticking by your company is not a bad thing.
I do have an issue with AFR's (& not Tony M's) marketing, these heads clearly never flowed what they were advertised as flowing - that is not Tony's fault, that is the guys that pull the strings at AFR's fault.
Personally I think Tony has made a big difference at AFR & that things are steadily improving, I'm sure if he called the shots as he saw fit threads like this would not exist, hell, to be honest I like the guy, face to face I reckon we'd get on well. But there is a corporate division that he cannot cross.
These are not the 1st set of AFR heads from that time period that I've flowed & have come up well under advertised, newer stuff is closer.
But, most heads from most manufacturers are the same, never let the truth get in the way of a good yarn!
01-06-2012, 01:10 AM
#72
I have never received anything from Tony Mamo directly, parts or knowledge. I'm giving my opinion with what little I know.
Don't try to bull ****, you have plenty to gain putting them down. You think everyone on here is blind and dumb. Tony Mamo is known as THE MAN for a reason, and AFR is known as bad *** top of the line for a reason.
Or I could agree with you and be a lone wolf..... AFR heads are pieces of ****. We all know TSP makes a perfect out of the box head, they will even tell you that. And if you want a perfect head double perfect, send them to you.
Don't try to bull ****, you have plenty to gain putting them down. You think everyone on here is blind and dumb. Tony Mamo is known as THE MAN for a reason, and AFR is known as bad *** top of the line for a reason.
Or I could agree with you and be a lone wolf..... AFR heads are pieces of ****. We all know TSP makes a perfect out of the box head, they will even tell you that. And if you want a perfect head double perfect, send them to you.
01-06-2012, 03:16 AM
#73
TECH Regular
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Waxahachie, Tx
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So your saying that your heads that flow 338 at 700 will run better than my heads that stall at ~640" with 338 cfm and also flow 287 at .400?
Note- the intake won't be a factor in my case.
And I understand that your 330cfm is just as real as my 330 cfm.....
Note- the intake won't be a factor in my case.
And I understand that your 330cfm is just as real as my 330 cfm.....
01-06-2012, 06:42 AM
#74
9 Second Club
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why argue anymore? This guy produces record setting head flow on record setting turbo and n/a appliications. Look at all his records he's posted. Totally stock ls1 heads will get a car in the lo 10's on motor. I know a friend of mine ran 10.38 on a stock headed motor. Chromemoloy cage lightweight and turbo 400 and good rearend. Throw a turbo on it and wow. No port work done on the heads. This guy blows his own horn which is not a good thing. I would say everyone should ship their stock heads to him and get on the bandwagon.
01-06-2012, 07:48 AM
#75
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Insults? - really?
You generally know that you're right when the best anyone opposed to your point of view can do is hurl childish insults, probably better not to debase yourselves like that, it's not a good look & just proves my point.
Look at the velocity profile (if you can understand it) & tell me how a head with a profile like that is a good thing.
Remember, those 243's that flowed 338cfm were flowed on the same bench that said these 225's flowed 290 @ .600", so if it's a happy bench then the 225's are even worse.
PS - I don't generally do drag stuff, road race, hillclimb & dirt track are what I mostly do, a bit more challenging to build engines that make more than just big peak power for a few seconds, much more interesting.
You generally know that you're right when the best anyone opposed to your point of view can do is hurl childish insults, probably better not to debase yourselves like that, it's not a good look & just proves my point.
Look at the velocity profile (if you can understand it) & tell me how a head with a profile like that is a good thing.
Remember, those 243's that flowed 338cfm were flowed on the same bench that said these 225's flowed 290 @ .600", so if it's a happy bench then the 225's are even worse.
PS - I don't generally do drag stuff, road race, hillclimb & dirt track are what I mostly do, a bit more challenging to build engines that make more than just big peak power for a few seconds, much more interesting.
Last edited by KnightEngines; 01-06-2012 at 07:54 AM.
01-06-2012, 11:24 AM
#76
I am well aware that more than likely TonyM is a better LS head porter than me, with the amount of experience he has he should be.
This is not about his skills, which I'm sure are ample.
But he is hobbled by working for a largish company, he will never be able to admit any shortcomings of the company that pays his wage's product - I can respect that, sticking by your company is not a bad thing.
I do have an issue with AFR's (& not Tony M's) marketing, these heads clearly never flowed what they were advertised as flowing - that is not Tony's fault, that is the guys that pull the strings at AFR's fault.
Personally I think Tony has made a big difference at AFR & that things are steadily improving, I'm sure if he called the shots as he saw fit threads like this would not exist, hell, to be honest I like the guy, face to face I reckon we'd get on well. But there is a corporate division that he cannot cross.
These are not the 1st set of AFR heads from that time period that I've flowed & have come up well under advertised, newer stuff is closer.
But, most heads from most manufacturers are the same, never let the truth get in the way of a good yarn!
This is not about his skills, which I'm sure are ample.
But he is hobbled by working for a largish company, he will never be able to admit any shortcomings of the company that pays his wage's product - I can respect that, sticking by your company is not a bad thing.
I do have an issue with AFR's (& not Tony M's) marketing, these heads clearly never flowed what they were advertised as flowing - that is not Tony's fault, that is the guys that pull the strings at AFR's fault.
Personally I think Tony has made a big difference at AFR & that things are steadily improving, I'm sure if he called the shots as he saw fit threads like this would not exist, hell, to be honest I like the guy, face to face I reckon we'd get on well. But there is a corporate division that he cannot cross.
These are not the 1st set of AFR heads from that time period that I've flowed & have come up well under advertised, newer stuff is closer.
But, most heads from most manufacturers are the same, never let the truth get in the way of a good yarn!
I will say that I have seen him say AFRs need touched up out of the box if its worth anything.
01-06-2012, 12:12 PM
#77
WOW...Aussies v. Yankees...just kidding guys
I can't believe how much craziness is made over heads flowing AIR (which is
what a flowbench measures) yet engines always seem to need a fuel source.
Sooo my point is GM designed the cathedral port to promote tumble AND
turbulence (enough of each and not too much of either) to enhance mixture
distribution. The injector intruduces the spray midstream and the port needs
to effectively continue the atomization towards the cylinder using swirl. This
is just one of the many reasons the LS engine makes great power with less
timing, low emissions, better fuel economy, etc. Also people running crazy #s
on cam-only apps.
I remember reading that Ken Sperling (sp?) of AFR was intrigued back in the
day by watching exhaust flow out of a cars tailpipe at a stoplight and it had
a swirling motion. Just guessing they've incorporated that thought into runner
design since. Even NHRA prostock and many aftermarket head manufacturers
have gone to oval shaped intake runners...again N.A. and carbureted.
To me forced induction is a whole different ballgame since the valve just ends
up being in the way of a freight train of air and fuel insanity....**** gets atom-
ized by virtue of so much of it and the speed it's traveling. This could be why
the OPs car still ran the same E.T. with the horrendous valvejob.
I feel that Knights skill set for porting is above 98% of all cylinder head gurus
and no doubt the heads should be improved IF all you're measuring is AIR flow.
I have no idea if that particular set of heads ever flowed the advertised #s
prior to VJ changes and as you stated sinking the seats (which has already
happened at least once B4 you) changes everything until you correct the
chamber and shortside to bowl transitions....just wanna stir more comotion
Ha Ha...next question: Exhaust to Intake flow ratio ??? only joking
I can't believe how much craziness is made over heads flowing AIR (which is
what a flowbench measures) yet engines always seem to need a fuel source.
Sooo my point is GM designed the cathedral port to promote tumble AND
turbulence (enough of each and not too much of either) to enhance mixture
distribution. The injector intruduces the spray midstream and the port needs
to effectively continue the atomization towards the cylinder using swirl. This
is just one of the many reasons the LS engine makes great power with less
timing, low emissions, better fuel economy, etc. Also people running crazy #s
on cam-only apps.
I remember reading that Ken Sperling (sp?) of AFR was intrigued back in the
day by watching exhaust flow out of a cars tailpipe at a stoplight and it had
a swirling motion. Just guessing they've incorporated that thought into runner
design since. Even NHRA prostock and many aftermarket head manufacturers
have gone to oval shaped intake runners...again N.A. and carbureted.
To me forced induction is a whole different ballgame since the valve just ends
up being in the way of a freight train of air and fuel insanity....**** gets atom-
ized by virtue of so much of it and the speed it's traveling. This could be why
the OPs car still ran the same E.T. with the horrendous valvejob.
I feel that Knights skill set for porting is above 98% of all cylinder head gurus
and no doubt the heads should be improved IF all you're measuring is AIR flow.
I have no idea if that particular set of heads ever flowed the advertised #s
prior to VJ changes and as you stated sinking the seats (which has already
happened at least once B4 you) changes everything until you correct the
chamber and shortside to bowl transitions....just wanna stir more comotion
Ha Ha...next question: Exhaust to Intake flow ratio ??? only joking
01-06-2012, 12:16 PM
#78
They are also climbing each season through the charts for the big engine and power-adder combo records as well.I can re-post the links if you'd like.
__________________
Largest Stocking Distributor of LS-x Engines / CHECK OUT OUR NEW WEBSITE!
COMP - FAST - PACESETTER - DIAMOND RACING - EAGLE SPECIALTY PRODUCTS - CALLIES - COMETIC GASKETS
RAM CLUTCHES - MOSER ENGINEERING - KOOK'S HEADERS - ARP - GM BOLTS AND GASKETS - MSD - NGK
POWERBOND - ASP - AND MORE!
Largest Stocking Distributor of LS-x Engines / CHECK OUT OUR NEW WEBSITE!
COMP - FAST - PACESETTER - DIAMOND RACING - EAGLE SPECIALTY PRODUCTS - CALLIES - COMETIC GASKETS
RAM CLUTCHES - MOSER ENGINEERING - KOOK'S HEADERS - ARP - GM BOLTS AND GASKETS - MSD - NGK
POWERBOND - ASP - AND MORE!
01-06-2012, 12:30 PM
#79
Is this thread still actually going?
Sigh........
Knight, the fact the your trying to claim our heads don't flow what we advertise because on your bench (note every flowbench reads differently) a used head, with a jacked up valvejob on the wrong sized test fixture isn't going the number does you and your credibility a greater dis-service than it does us.
How would you like it if the roles were reversed and I was jumping up and down making a blanket statement that your product doesn't do what you claim based on the fact I have this four year old used head here that some unknown shop put a really shoddy valvejob in that I'm flowing on a different sized text fixture!!
For me doing something like that is ludicrous to even think about and a waste of everyones time not to mention borders on slanderous and is just ethically and morally wrong. Its bad business and hopefully bad karma. You don't even have a new head from AFR yet you make these bold accusations about our product and how we conduct our business. Please.....I just have to shake my head in disbelief sometimes.
I don't have to defend our product because our RESULTS defend our product but for anyone still reading note that AFR stands behind the product we produce and we stand behind our published flow numbers. If any of you have reason to believe you have received something that does not flow what we claim I urge you to contact AFR or myself directly and we will arrange to have the heads looked at and evaluated free of charge.
Knight, good luck with your new flowbench and your LS porting endeavors and the next time you have an AFR head new from our factory than we can have an intelligent conversation on the subject and try to compare notes from our respective equipment.
-Tony
Sigh........
Knight, the fact the your trying to claim our heads don't flow what we advertise because on your bench (note every flowbench reads differently) a used head, with a jacked up valvejob on the wrong sized test fixture isn't going the number does you and your credibility a greater dis-service than it does us.
How would you like it if the roles were reversed and I was jumping up and down making a blanket statement that your product doesn't do what you claim based on the fact I have this four year old used head here that some unknown shop put a really shoddy valvejob in that I'm flowing on a different sized text fixture!!
For me doing something like that is ludicrous to even think about and a waste of everyones time not to mention borders on slanderous and is just ethically and morally wrong. Its bad business and hopefully bad karma. You don't even have a new head from AFR yet you make these bold accusations about our product and how we conduct our business. Please.....I just have to shake my head in disbelief sometimes.
I don't have to defend our product because our RESULTS defend our product but for anyone still reading note that AFR stands behind the product we produce and we stand behind our published flow numbers. If any of you have reason to believe you have received something that does not flow what we claim I urge you to contact AFR or myself directly and we will arrange to have the heads looked at and evaluated free of charge.
Knight, good luck with your new flowbench and your LS porting endeavors and the next time you have an AFR head new from our factory than we can have an intelligent conversation on the subject and try to compare notes from our respective equipment.
-Tony
01-06-2012, 04:36 PM
#80
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll flow a new one soon enough.
Sorry this has gone bad, it was not my intention, just kinda happened.
I would have quietly fixed these heads & moved on, but the nutswingers on here kinda pissed me off.
I know where you're coming from, it's all cool, maybe these heads are just 'friday arvo' heads, a set that slipped through QC - I doubt it tho, the CNC'ing meets up nicely with the seat & the convergance point where the CNC'ing from the port side & the bowl side meet is good (something you guys definately do better than most).
Have a look at the velocity profile I posted for the turn/window - is that a typical profile for a 225 head? & maybe you could explain how a crappy valve job is going to affect the velocity profile upsteam - even after the valve job is fixed (recut to something very, very similar to the factory AFR valve job, which I had to look up myself from my notes on previous heads).
I'll say again - you said the numbers off those 243's are close to the best you've seen, they were tested on a 4" bore on the very same bench, calibrated with the very same plates as these 225's, now I know the valve job is not going to hurt them that much & that the velocity profile over the turn is for the most part independant of the valve job, why then do they flow so poorly & are so fast over the turn if the bench is a happy one?
I'm over this pissing contest, got better things to do, I'll report back briefly when I'm done with the heads & again when the car hits the strip again, if it doesn't go from 8.2's down into the 7's I'll eat my boots.
& it'll do it with a cam with almost 20 deg less duration & a fair chunk less lift - better heads don't need as much cam.
Sorry this has gone bad, it was not my intention, just kinda happened.
I would have quietly fixed these heads & moved on, but the nutswingers on here kinda pissed me off.
I know where you're coming from, it's all cool, maybe these heads are just 'friday arvo' heads, a set that slipped through QC - I doubt it tho, the CNC'ing meets up nicely with the seat & the convergance point where the CNC'ing from the port side & the bowl side meet is good (something you guys definately do better than most).
Have a look at the velocity profile I posted for the turn/window - is that a typical profile for a 225 head? & maybe you could explain how a crappy valve job is going to affect the velocity profile upsteam - even after the valve job is fixed (recut to something very, very similar to the factory AFR valve job, which I had to look up myself from my notes on previous heads).
I'll say again - you said the numbers off those 243's are close to the best you've seen, they were tested on a 4" bore on the very same bench, calibrated with the very same plates as these 225's, now I know the valve job is not going to hurt them that much & that the velocity profile over the turn is for the most part independant of the valve job, why then do they flow so poorly & are so fast over the turn if the bench is a happy one?
I'm over this pissing contest, got better things to do, I'll report back briefly when I'm done with the heads & again when the car hits the strip again, if it doesn't go from 8.2's down into the 7's I'll eat my boots.
& it'll do it with a cam with almost 20 deg less duration & a fair chunk less lift - better heads don't need as much cam.