GOOD HEAD!!?help
That's why I mention the TFS As-Cast. Vs the price of the TFS 215, they are much more reasonable and only give up a few HP. With the hand touch-up done by Tooley, they are equal to the TFS 215... for a much lower price. Plus with the PM guides, you can run the stock rockers. The added bonus is he will toss LS3 valves in there, saving something over 25g over the TFS/Ferrea valves. 84g vs 110g.
The price of the TEA heads were the same with new 243 cores as the TFS As Cast with the aforementioned upgrades. The difference was the weight (GM castings are lighter) and the stock valve angle introduces no valvetrain geometry issues. With the PM guides, it's a moot point on the TFS head, but even with roller rockers and the bronze guides, there have been issues there. Some will say it's the valvetrain geometry is slightly off with TFS heads. Others say it's just the nature of bronze guides with an improper wipe pattern. Whatever the case, I felt better with GM castings.
As I move to a 440 for my next motor, I will be going with LS7 heads or an aftermarket cathedral port. But for anything below a 4" bore, the stock GM cathedral port castings are very tough to beat.
The price of the TEA heads were the same with new 243 cores as the TFS As Cast with the aforementioned upgrades. The difference was the weight (GM castings are lighter) and the stock valve angle introduces no valvetrain geometry issues. With the PM guides, it's a moot point on the TFS head, but even with roller rockers and the bronze guides, there have been issues there. Some will say it's the valvetrain geometry is slightly off with TFS heads. Others say it's just the nature of bronze guides with an improper wipe pattern. Whatever the case, I felt better with GM castings.
As I move to a 440 for my next motor, I will be going with LS7 heads or an aftermarket cathedral port. But for anything below a 4" bore, the stock GM cathedral port castings are very tough to beat.
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: reading, pa
after researching all day and talking with you guys, ive decided to go with texas speed prc as cast 225s for $1700..It just doesnt seem to be worth paying $2500 for TEA trick flows and then need to also buy aftermarket rockers, also i dont have ls6 cores so my stage2 TEA heads would cost over $2000 for me and even if i did have 243 cores i still wouldnt go through the hastle of sending them out and still pay $1400 to have them worked by TEA...Even to send my 241s to AI will cost me $1700 so it makes to most sense to go with PRC as cast 225s for $1700 and sell my rebuilt 241s to someone local for $500, the only cons are that i will have to buy the pushrod measuring tool and figure what my new pushrod length will be then reorder pushrods for the talled decked 225s, and the fact that the as cast heads are still a fairly new product and there arent many dyno numbers and cam/head combos out yet to know how my cam will pair up...hopefully this helps someone else out there with the same question, ill keep you guys updated when i get the car to the dyno...anyone wanna make a prediction HP# ? the build is slp box,slp maf, fast 92,92, prc as cast 225s, ms3 cam 238/242 605/610 110LSA, ls2 water pump, ls2 timing chain, ls6 ported oil pump, 160 stat, a/c delete, hooker long tubes into 3'' borla muffler (dual electric cutouts after the header collectors), monster stg2 clutch w/ 18lb flywheel, tick master cylinder, Moser 9'' w/ 411 gears
I think you made a good choice with those heads. Like stated earlier, you aren't going to see significant gains between any of the heads you mentioned. Just curious though, did you e-mail Tooley? Just curious if the price he quoted me a year ago is around the same as it is now.
I would highly recommend TEA TFS As Cast cylinder heads with PM guides. 2.04/1.575 valves.
I sell these with PAC springs, Ti retainers shimmed specifically to your cam specs for 1975 shipped.
I sell these with PAC springs, Ti retainers shimmed specifically to your cam specs for 1975 shipped.
The PRC heads are fine OP. The cost difference between all of them is moot. And if you think sending parts out or measuring pushrod length is a hassle, then you have taken on the wrong hobby. The TEA TFS heads are 2500 for the CNC. But as Martin says above, the "As-Cast" are much cheaper. Also, AI can port your 241s and it would be 995+springs. That would be the cheapest route of all...
I will say this: one place worth spending the money is on the valvetrain. Valvetrain weight is the enemy. It robs power and longevity. I've spoken about it numerous times here. And I would gladly pay the extra money for hollow-stem valves. I would not run roller rockers because of the weight penalty.
That's a good deal.
The PRC heads are fine OP. The cost difference between all of them is moot. And if you think sending parts out or measuring pushrod length is a hassle, then you have taken on the wrong hobby. The TEA TFS heads are 2500 for the CNC. But as Martin says above, the "As-Cast" are much cheaper. Also, AI can port your 241s and it would be 995+springs. That would be the cheapest route of all...
I will say this: one place worth spending the money is on the valvetrain. Valvetrain weight is the enemy. It robs power and longevity. I've spoken about it numerous times here. And I would gladly pay the extra money for hollow-stem valves. I would not run roller rockers because of the weight penalty.
The PRC heads are fine OP. The cost difference between all of them is moot. And if you think sending parts out or measuring pushrod length is a hassle, then you have taken on the wrong hobby. The TEA TFS heads are 2500 for the CNC. But as Martin says above, the "As-Cast" are much cheaper. Also, AI can port your 241s and it would be 995+springs. That would be the cheapest route of all...
I will say this: one place worth spending the money is on the valvetrain. Valvetrain weight is the enemy. It robs power and longevity. I've spoken about it numerous times here. And I would gladly pay the extra money for hollow-stem valves. I would not run roller rockers because of the weight penalty.
