Tooley TFS 220's vs 235's on 408
01-09-2019, 09:08 AM
#1
Tooley TFS 220's vs 235's on 408 Quick background. Ordered BTR4 cam, TFS220's and FAST 102 from Tooley a few months back to go on a stock cubed LS.
Change of plan recently and I purchased a 408 from TMS.
I am switching the cam over to Tooley's 239/254 .624"/.595" 114+3 cam.
I had BTR do some work on the TFS 220's originally when I bought them. Also had them port match to the intake.
Now they'll be opening up the chambers for the 4.0" bores.
It is my understanding that the TFS 220's can be opened up to match the 235's?
Additionally, by leaving them as they are right now, as TFS 220's touched by Tooley, how much would I be leaving on the table as compared to the TFS 235's? What is the cost generally for someone to do the port work necessary to bring them up to 235's?
Lastly, the new pistons will be flat tops with -2cc reliefs. I asked BTR about milling the heads to up the comp ratio on this motor and they advised against it on 92/93 octane fuel. I guess I didn't realize that the compression ratio would be that high?
Change of plan recently and I purchased a 408 from TMS.
I am switching the cam over to Tooley's 239/254 .624"/.595" 114+3 cam.
I had BTR do some work on the TFS 220's originally when I bought them. Also had them port match to the intake.
Now they'll be opening up the chambers for the 4.0" bores.
It is my understanding that the TFS 220's can be opened up to match the 235's?
Additionally, by leaving them as they are right now, as TFS 220's touched by Tooley, how much would I be leaving on the table as compared to the TFS 235's? What is the cost generally for someone to do the port work necessary to bring them up to 235's?
Lastly, the new pistons will be flat tops with -2cc reliefs. I asked BTR about milling the heads to up the comp ratio on this motor and they advised against it on 92/93 octane fuel. I guess I didn't realize that the compression ratio would be that high?
01-09-2019, 11:29 AM
#2
I'll be following this. I have TEA tfs220's on my ls6 now. I have been exploring the options on having them opened up as I am building a 6.0 based 370. TEA told me that they can not run their 235 program through my heads. Frankenstein will run their 237 program through them, but for $1500
01-09-2019, 01:03 PM
#4
I was under the same impression, and had heard it on here many times. That was a big factor in picking the tfs220s for me. But Gregg at TEA told me that they can't run the 235 program through these heads. I dont know why. Maybe Brian Tooley or some one else will chime in..
Trending Topics
01-10-2019, 06:06 AM
#9
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,446
Received 1,836 Likes
on
1,145 Posts
Build what you have and get the car running. Likely make something a bit unusual like 500/500. The 235 May net you another 20 or so HP mainly from rpm. Past peak is where the 235 will shine.
If you are planning to rev you will need the bigger ports. If not, save your money and get your car running
If you are planning to rev you will need the bigger ports. If not, save your money and get your car running
01-10-2019, 01:32 PM
#11
Called and spoke with TEA this afternoon. Was told they don't do anything with the TFS as cast. Just not worth developing a port is what they said.
They said that Frankenstein and AI both may do it.
Still wish someone had some empirical data on the difference between tooley worked 220's and the 235's. Are we talking 40 hp? 10? If it's significant then yeah, I suppose I'm interesting in looking down that path, if not, if it's 10-20 hp, then no, probably not.
They said that Frankenstein and AI both may do it.
Still wish someone had some empirical data on the difference between tooley worked 220's and the 235's. Are we talking 40 hp? 10? If it's significant then yeah, I suppose I'm interesting in looking down that path, if not, if it's 10-20 hp, then no, probably not.
01-10-2019, 03:44 PM
#12
Cant give exact # increases between those heads, but on my similar setup it was recommended by almost every single person to get the bigger heads.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...k-500rwhp.html
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...k-500rwhp.html
01-10-2019, 04:22 PM
#13
I don't think it'll be as much of a gain as you hope. Certainly not worth the extra cash.
That cam is not great. And your supporting mods don't look like you'd get a lot out of a 245 head (and it needs to be the 245 port program and 2.10" valve). Getting over 550 out of a 408 is tough (and really the only reason to try to do something bigger than the 220s). And that's only going to happen with a much larger cam, a lot of compression, MSD/FAST 102, very free flowing exhaust, and all the little tricks to nickel and dime 5HP here or there.
I think you'll be in the 500/500 range... but that cam is designed more for holding power past peak or an LS3 head (or even like an F1R on a 408). It does lose some midrange. But that's probably okay... the 408 makes up for it.
That cam is not great. And your supporting mods don't look like you'd get a lot out of a 245 head (and it needs to be the 245 port program and 2.10" valve). Getting over 550 out of a 408 is tough (and really the only reason to try to do something bigger than the 220s). And that's only going to happen with a much larger cam, a lot of compression, MSD/FAST 102, very free flowing exhaust, and all the little tricks to nickel and dime 5HP here or there.
I think you'll be in the 500/500 range... but that cam is designed more for holding power past peak or an LS3 head (or even like an F1R on a 408). It does lose some midrange. But that's probably okay... the 408 makes up for it.
01-11-2019, 01:15 PM
#14
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,446
Received 1,836 Likes
on
1,145 Posts
Originally Posted by bthomas
Cant give exact # increases between those heads, but on my similar setup it was recommended by almost every single person to get the bigger heads.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...k-500rwhp.html
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...k-500rwhp.html
01-11-2019, 04:20 PM
#15
I don't think it'll be as much of a gain as you hope. Certainly not worth the extra cash.
That cam is not great. And your supporting mods don't look like you'd get a lot out of a 245 head (and it needs to be the 245 port program and 2.10" valve). Getting over 550 out of a 408 is tough (and really the only reason to try to do something bigger than the 220s). And that's only going to happen with a much larger cam, a lot of compression, MSD/FAST 102, very free flowing exhaust, and all the little tricks to nickel and dime 5HP here or there.
I think you'll be in the 500/500 range... but that cam is designed more for holding power past peak or an LS3 head (or even like an F1R on a 408). It does lose some midrange. But that's probably okay... the 408 makes up for it.
That cam is not great. And your supporting mods don't look like you'd get a lot out of a 245 head (and it needs to be the 245 port program and 2.10" valve). Getting over 550 out of a 408 is tough (and really the only reason to try to do something bigger than the 220s). And that's only going to happen with a much larger cam, a lot of compression, MSD/FAST 102, very free flowing exhaust, and all the little tricks to nickel and dime 5HP here or there.
I think you'll be in the 500/500 range... but that cam is designed more for holding power past peak or an LS3 head (or even like an F1R on a 408). It does lose some midrange. But that's probably okay... the 408 makes up for it.
My goals are to get into the 10's and trap mid 120's N/A. I'll be spraying, but wanting to get into those numbers without that.
What other supporting mods would I do? Genuinely asking here. I feel like I'm doing quite a bit.
Thanks man.
01-11-2019, 04:53 PM
#16
RedBird, I think our heads will show the biggest limitation when spraying. It may be down 20hp on motor, but I'm afraid of losing out on alot power while using heavy amounts of nitrous
01-11-2019, 05:12 PM
#18
That cam might be suited for a big shot of nitrous. How much are you spraying? If you're trying to spray 300, that cam would be good. But the exhaust port will need some work.
As far as the cam, it's designed for an LS3 head. And it's sort of a lot overlap for such an early IVC. Cathedral heads need overlap... but also need later intake closing points as they don't flow like an LS3 head. LS3 heads make power and are sensitive to overlap, so you usually undersize the intake duration and add exhaust duration to help them (generally speaking - exhaust flow sucks in comparison to cathedral with that big intake taking up so much space). But Blah blah. Cathedral heads make power with toasters for cams, so it'll work. I would have probably tried a 247/255 114+4 or so. But it's all in the ballpark. As I said, more exhaust duration carries the power higher and past peak. But it does flatten out the midrange gains. Tooley also sells an EPS 244/256 114 Cam... it makes big power too. And the valve events are closer to what I would want to see.
Other mods? ATI Balancer, EWP, 3" True Duals, 2" Headers, .036" quench, 12:1 CR (on 93... 12.5:1+ on E60/E85), short travel lifters, 3/8" pushrods etc. etc.
What I hate about NA Power is the cost to add 20HP. If you're trying to spray a lot, who even cares about NA power. Optimize it for the spray. You'll be running a tune with limited timing and cold plugs. It won't make huge power NA. But, if you don't plan to run it at the track and spray all the time, maybe don't worry about the spray as much.
What you'll find is that trying to get a lot of power out of an NA setup is frustrating. A 5.3L JY motor with a PT7675 would walk it for much much less money. And it would drive like stock. But there's other issues with turbo setups on these cars. Namely heat management. And retaining A/C and things like that.
As far as the cam, it's designed for an LS3 head. And it's sort of a lot overlap for such an early IVC. Cathedral heads need overlap... but also need later intake closing points as they don't flow like an LS3 head. LS3 heads make power and are sensitive to overlap, so you usually undersize the intake duration and add exhaust duration to help them (generally speaking - exhaust flow sucks in comparison to cathedral with that big intake taking up so much space). But Blah blah. Cathedral heads make power with toasters for cams, so it'll work. I would have probably tried a 247/255 114+4 or so. But it's all in the ballpark. As I said, more exhaust duration carries the power higher and past peak. But it does flatten out the midrange gains. Tooley also sells an EPS 244/256 114 Cam... it makes big power too. And the valve events are closer to what I would want to see.
Other mods? ATI Balancer, EWP, 3" True Duals, 2" Headers, .036" quench, 12:1 CR (on 93... 12.5:1+ on E60/E85), short travel lifters, 3/8" pushrods etc. etc.
What I hate about NA Power is the cost to add 20HP. If you're trying to spray a lot, who even cares about NA power. Optimize it for the spray. You'll be running a tune with limited timing and cold plugs. It won't make huge power NA. But, if you don't plan to run it at the track and spray all the time, maybe don't worry about the spray as much.
What you'll find is that trying to get a lot of power out of an NA setup is frustrating. A 5.3L JY motor with a PT7675 would walk it for much much less money. And it would drive like stock. But there's other issues with turbo setups on these cars. Namely heat management. And retaining A/C and things like that.
01-11-2019, 05:35 PM
#19
That cam might be suited for a big shot of nitrous. How much are you spraying? If you're trying to spray 300, that cam would be good. But the exhaust port will need some work.
As far as the cam, it's designed for an LS3 head. And it's sort of a lot overlap for such an early IVC. Cathedral heads need overlap... but also need later intake closing points as they don't flow like an LS3 head. LS3 heads make power and are sensitive to overlap, so you usually undersize the intake duration and add exhaust duration to help them (generally speaking - exhaust flow sucks in comparison to cathedral with that big intake taking up so much space). But Blah blah. Cathedral heads make power with toasters for cams, so it'll work. I would have probably tried a 247/255 114+4 or so. But it's all in the ballpark. As I said, more exhaust duration carries the power higher and past peak. But it does flatten out the midrange gains. Tooley also sells an EPS 244/256 114 Cam... it makes big power too. And the valve events are closer to what I would want to see.
Other mods? ATI Balancer, EWP, 3" True Duals, 2" Headers, .036" quench, 12:1 CR (on 93... 12.5:1+ on E60/E85), short travel lifters, 3/8" pushrods etc. etc.
What I hate about NA Power is the cost to add 20HP. If you're trying to spray a lot, who even cares about NA power. Optimize it for the spray. You'll be running a tune with limited timing and cold plugs. It won't make huge power NA. But, if you don't plan to run it at the track and spray all the time, maybe don't worry about the spray as much.
What you'll find is that trying to get a lot of power out of an NA setup is frustrating. A 5.3L JY motor with a PT7675 would walk it for much much less money. And it would drive like stock. But there's other issues with turbo setups on these cars. Namely heat management. And retaining A/C and things like that.
As far as the cam, it's designed for an LS3 head. And it's sort of a lot overlap for such an early IVC. Cathedral heads need overlap... but also need later intake closing points as they don't flow like an LS3 head. LS3 heads make power and are sensitive to overlap, so you usually undersize the intake duration and add exhaust duration to help them (generally speaking - exhaust flow sucks in comparison to cathedral with that big intake taking up so much space). But Blah blah. Cathedral heads make power with toasters for cams, so it'll work. I would have probably tried a 247/255 114+4 or so. But it's all in the ballpark. As I said, more exhaust duration carries the power higher and past peak. But it does flatten out the midrange gains. Tooley also sells an EPS 244/256 114 Cam... it makes big power too. And the valve events are closer to what I would want to see.
Other mods? ATI Balancer, EWP, 3" True Duals, 2" Headers, .036" quench, 12:1 CR (on 93... 12.5:1+ on E60/E85), short travel lifters, 3/8" pushrods etc. etc.
What I hate about NA Power is the cost to add 20HP. If you're trying to spray a lot, who even cares about NA power. Optimize it for the spray. You'll be running a tune with limited timing and cold plugs. It won't make huge power NA. But, if you don't plan to run it at the track and spray all the time, maybe don't worry about the spray as much.
What you'll find is that trying to get a lot of power out of an NA setup is frustrating. A 5.3L JY motor with a PT7675 would walk it for much much less money. And it would drive like stock. But there's other issues with turbo setups on these cars. Namely heat management. And retaining A/C and things like that.
Agreed. The 2k or so spent to open up those heads/get out of them and go larger heads to get 20 or so past peak only, maybe up to 30 ish up at the very top.. is insane. You could do a crank scraper and a electric water pump for half that cost and get that power, and have it everywhere. Delete power steering or do a low drag PS pump too and you're making more power for less money and making it over a broader range without sacrifice to low end. And the 220 heads will still make numbers as is.