Tony @ Mamo Motorsports

Guys,

The next product in the MMS line of cathedral heads is finished and Im just as excited about this product as I was the 220 heads I officially shared with you about a month or so ago.

https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...on-inside.html

The 235's are naturally aimed at larger displacement (a perfect choice for a street/strip 416 build), but this head would also be right at home in an aggressive 6.0 liter build if the focus was on max power. A 220 is still a better head on a max effort 5.7 liter having enough size and CSA to feed it, but the larger bore of the 6.0 and the additional cubes would make the 235 a workable situation in an aggressive build. Honestly the right head on a 6.0 (220 vs 235) is really the nature of the build and how aggressive a build you plan on because you could make an argument for one or the other purely based on application and the way you drive it. I would say the 220 is really a better head on that displacement 75% of the time but if your flycutting or going aftermarket pistons, pushing the compression limit on pump fuel, and getting aggressive with the camshaft, the 235 would be the right call for a stronger 4500 to redline pull on a 6.0 or larger combo.

The MMS 235 will prove to be very versatile because while close to the size most ported OEM heads finish at, they flow a solid 20 - 40 CFM better so the airspeed is good and that's what will help it to work well on the smaller displacement stuff while the 340+ CFM's of peak flow will comfortably feed a 400+ CFM stroker and on that size engine, a 235 is modestly sized and will produce incredible throttle response while still providing enough airflow to comfortably make over 550 RWHP (more in a well sorted out optimized combo).

The rundown of the specs....

Intake diameter 2.100
Exhaust diameter 1.600

Flow @ 28" of water

Lift.....Int.....Exh

.200....156....128
.300....225....192
.400....276....230
.500....314....248
.550....328....252 (Big #'s this early)
.600....340....256
.650....342....260

I also plan to release a Nitrous/Forced Induction version of this head with a larger exhaust valve and even more exhaust flow (the exhaust port of the standard version is stellar.....especially the lows and mids). The standard version would work well N/A and with moderate spray and boost but if your looking to get a little bit more aggressive with either, the "NFI" version would be the ticket (Email/call for more details).

Some pics of the new head....quality oozing everywhere.....you guys with an eye for airflow can appreciate how detailed and optimized this product is right out of the box! Once again my bogey was an out of the box MMS 235 to meet or exceed a "Mamofied" hand finished AFR 230 which was/is alot more expensive. That head flowed 337 CFM on my equipment and powered numerous LS2/LS3 based strokers to 650+ at the crank.....550+ at the tire.

This head out of the box is about 5 CFM better and my CNC+ version (aka "Mamofied") 235 is approaching 350 CFM which is phenomenal for a head this size but the additional cost is barely warranted unless you have a spare no expense type of build. This head is ready to rumble as soon as you pull it from the overkill box I ship them in















Pricing is $2750.....includes the upgrade 8019 AFR valve springs as well as Ti retainers.....fully assembled....every spring height individually checked....a blueprinted piece ready to make some serious power.

PM, email, or call for further details (emails preferred over PM!).....heads are available NOW and I'm shipping the first wave of them starting tomorrow! Two chamber versions btw.....62 or 72 cc and I can mill anywhere in the middle and as low as 55 cc.

Cheers,
Tony

Undertow74

iTrader: (45)

Damn Tony, that's some amazing work right there. I have your AFR 215's now you got me wanting these for my 427 build.... But I think I'm gonna have to stick with the 215's for a while longer, only if I had the cash!!

NAVYBLUE210

Awesome!
Can't wait to see the first 416" making 600+ RWHP with these
Heads and a CAMMOTION LLSR!

JaSSon

iTrader: (11)

Nice work another job well done wish you needed a guniea pig for those 220's I'd put them to the test but then again you got plenty of test mules

Tuskyz28

Doesn't look like no cylinder heads to me... look more like pieces of jewelry

squalor

iTrader: (3)

Thought and planning also. When a person with your knowledge and experience in matters of cylinder head flow can design with a clean slate and a specific goal, the results are without rival.
Having the 2.1 intake valve is just as good as having a fast ramp cam, as far as low lift curtain area. Having the swirl ramp opposite the fast wall is something GM should have done. I see plenty of area in the chamber around the exhaust valve, no shrouding issues there.
It looks like this head could accept large pushrods, how big could the builder go ?

Rise of the Phoenix

iTrader: (27)

I need more money.

Tony @ Mamo Motorsports

LOL at the "I need more money!" post above

Pushrods....11/32 is the max without breaking out the grinder and I wouldn't advise that as the pushrod pinch wall is thin to improve the approach to the "hook wall" or outside wall. I normally run a custom 11/32 X .125 wall tube.....its twice as rigid as a 5/16 X .080 garden variety deal.

Appreciate your commentary....god knows how many hours I invested in the original design and this is more of a refinement than anything else.....some of it on the port shape....some of it on the VJ....some of it the digital side of things as well as more efficient tool paths to better recreate what I originally painstakingly designed by hand. At the end of the day its a sexy bitch....no two ways about it.....proud to have my name on the end pad!

If you don't make power with this head you really screwed the pooch somewhere else....LOL



Cheers,
Tony

sawblade99Z

iTrader: (1)

All I have to say is what I'm flying out there for in a month better not be a "pooch"!

1FastBrick

iTrader: (16)

Damn, I can't wait to see the small bore stuff!!!

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

That's beautiful work; pure art, IMO. I still marvel @ how you are able to produce the in bowl swirl wing while keeping the volume of each bowl equal. Is the wing an in-cast feature of this new head or does it remain an added feature?

Well done. Hope all is going relatively well as your company progresses.

carbuff

iTrader: (8)

Tony,

I have a couple of questions that may be of general interest, so I'm posting them here. I recognize that they are a bit general, but I'd love to hear your thoughts...

- Would you consider these for a 427-434ci build? I presume so, given certain conditions/limitations, so I'm curious what you think the 'limit' of these would be at that displacement? RPM limit, power limit, however you would define it...

- In a single-plane application, would you pair these with a Victor Jr or a SuperVic? Do you have much experience with those combinations? Most of the builds I see your involvement with have been composite intake based.

- Finally, at what level would you recommend a head 'bigger' than the MMS235? Bigger defined however you prefer: larger port, moving to a square port, larger valve, etc?

I am, of course, asking these related to my own application, but thought others might like to see some of this insight.

Thanx!

Detoxx03

iTrader: (14)

Wonder how they'd like boost.

Tony @ Mamo Motorsports

Its ALL good....really comes down to application....who's in the drivers seat....the type of power curve your in search of.

These heads flow alot of air....plenty even for a larger 427/434 you mention. If you were looking for big block low/midrange grunt and the ability to still generate respectable peak numbers, the MMS 235 would be the ticket. BUT.....once your into the larger 4.125 bore, you could also consider my MMS 250 cathedral as well. Its probably a worthy of an entire post of its own (and at some point I will make that happen), but the MMS 250 comes with a 2.165 valve and a 1.600 exhaust, flows 365+ CFM and 260+ exhaust, and is ideal for a 427 - 454 CID piece. If the emphasis was on peak power in a 427+ CID application, the 250 would be a better choice than the 235. And with that much displacement, a 250 cc port is still a moderate sized port and would deliver a good balanced power curve.....the 235 on the same engine would simply be insane off idle....part throttle extremely crisp, but it would fall short of the higher flowing larger 250 from 6000 RPM to redline....my guess it would be about 20 HP down at 6500 or so.....25 at 7K. BUT....we are still talking about a 575+ RWHP potential where the 250 would be in the 600 RWHP vicinity (or high 500's....lots of variables). Point is the 235 with its explosive low midrange and insane part throttle might still be a better choice....its a drivers/application choice.....and there are no bad decisions to be made.....the real question is where to you want to place the real emphasis of the power curve....a 235 would skew it to the lower middle RPM's and the 250 favoring the top end a bit more which in a traction limited car might be the perfect choice.....and on and on we go. There is no right or wrong answer....much like camshaft selection its more of a personal choice dictated by who you are and how you typically use the car.

That's the long winded answer to your question but I hope you see what I'm driving at with my response.

Single plane vs composite....see above.....LOL

A properly ported composite would be 30 ft/lbs stronger in the lower middle part of the curve....A ported super Vic (assuming you can fit it), would be better upstairs but you give up a lot to gain a little.....that's the problem with single plane intakes....runners are too short.....un equal length, etc. and if your running an elbow forget it. You wont even make more power.....just give up gobs of useful torque. Going with the carb and kickin it old school.....Im all about the single plane but that choice is purely functional and has the look your after. The ultimate manifold....a ported LSXRT....plastic for lightweight and it wont get hot.....long runners for torque.....straight shot with a bellmouth entry for ultimate flow effectiveness kicking the HP up there as well.....its has it all except the fact it doesn't fit most production hotrods (referring the Vettes, FBodies, GTO's and G8's etc.). But.....for the sake of this discussion I thought it made sense to throw it in there....its a bad azz piece with the only compromise (a big one), the fact it wont fit many applications

They are very boost friendly right out of the box (really good exhaust numbers), but did you see where I mention I have a nitrous/forced induction version as well.

I also plan to release a Nitrous/Forced Induction version of this head with a larger exhaust valve and even more exhaust flow (the exhaust port of the standard version is stellar.....especially the lows and mids). The standard version would work well N/A and with moderate spray and boost but if your looking to get a little bit more aggressive with either, the "NFI" version would be the ticket (Email/call for more details).

I'm calling it my NFI version of the 235 and it has a larger higher flowing exhaust port and a larger exhaust valve as well.....it would over scavenge in a normally aspirated combination but for a serious spray or boosted application it would make crazy power because the engine thinks it has a 450+ CFM intake port and cant properly evacuate the cylinder to make room for the next gulp of oxygen and atomized fuel. A stronger exhaust to intake ratio becomes more important and can make a significant difference in power output. Boosted combos are greatly effected by intake charge temps, how much timing they will tolerate, and how good the exhaust is looking at the complete system which all starts at the exhaust port of the cylinder head.

If you have a boosted project your thinking about shoot me a call or email and we can discuss it

Cheers,
Tony

Zmg00camaross

iTrader: (11)

What do you have to offer for the max effort 346 to 416 CI guys? Myself right now stock 241 heads stock bottom end, but super Vic and loads of nitrous, and when the 346 melts down I will be stepping it up in the cubes, am a catherdal port guy for life haha.

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

Hmm a 427 or 441 LS7 with the 250s... At that point though, you're comparing to the LS7 heads. I've seen the TFS 245s pull 600/560 on a 441. I don't typically see that kind of torque out of an LS7... but you might see 630+hp with the LS7 head.

Given that, Tony do you have any insights as to how the 250 would compare to the LS7 head on that type of motor in terms of drivability or throttle response? I know flow doesn't tell the story, but ported LS7 heads or aftermarket castings are in the 380-400cfm range with a 280 to 300cc port. But because it's shaped differently, the CSA is not apples to apples. I'm just wondering how a cathedral port compares.

Tuskyz28

Pretty much a 427-434 engine that mostly live 90 percent on the street will be better off with the 235cc heads from the sound of your post.

250cc heads would be better off for a all out drag car or a street car that's always at the track..

Good questions being asked

NAVYBLUE210

On the other hand on a Bore 4.155 and larger I would use the 250
To take advantage of the larger Intake Valve and use a smaller
Cam if it was primarily a street car. 250 CC is still still relatively
small, lol (compared to 280-300 CC) for a 434 CI up to
6500-7000 RPM with HR and 11.5:1 comp or less. Good thing we
Should have more Composite Intake Options in the next 1-3
Months hopefully to take advantage of all these incredible
Cylinder Heads!

KCS

iTrader: (20)

Is that with the 1.91" valve spacing?

carbuff

iTrader: (8)

Thanx Tony. As I expected, I fall squarely in the middle of that range which probably keeps this from being an obvious selection.

For me, I'm sticking with the single-plane due to my vehicle (Pro-Touring 1971 Trans Am with the functional shaker). When I went through my recent round of rebuild, I chose to stick with the square port heads to reduce the possibility of screwing up the shaker which I have a ton of work into to make work. Now, I realize that I could make it work with a cathedral SuperVic as it's about the same height at my L92 Vic Jr (close enough anyway to make work).

I drive this car a good bit: I put 2000 miles on it over a month driving to and running at events in March and April. I autocross on courses that use my whole RPM range (and sometimes want a little more), I do track days at a couple of local tracks, and I drive it to work too (not a DD by any means though). I haven't been to a drag strip in 10+ years and probably won't with this car.

T-56 transmission with 3.89 gears and a short tire all land me at 2100-2200 rpm at 70MPH, 2600-2700 at 80MPH on the highway. I spend a lot of time between 3000 and 6000 on the courses I run, and I have the rev limiter set at 7200 currently.

Pulling all of this together, I'm surmising that the 235's may be the better choice, possibly having you massage a set and port matching a SuperVic to it. I'm intrigued with Kip's LLSR cams, so I'm betting with the right cam definition and these heads I would end up with a potent package for my goals...

Given that I just dumped a big chunk of change into this motor, I'm not sure this makes much sense to consider, but I'd really like to optimize my setup given the constraints I'm working in.