Visceral

iTrader: (1)

Man... I just don't understand why someone would spend $3200 on a 249 cc intake port AFR when you can spend $2200 (core included!) on an LQ9 Stage 3 from TEA that is 244 cc and flows:

(TEA supplied #s vs. local conservative Superflow #s vs. St3 AFR Ind #s ealier in this post))

-----TEA Intake--TEA Exhaust--1020 Intake--1020 Exhaust--Ind. AFR Int--Ind AFR Exh
.100------72--------52-------------72-----------58------------NA-----------NA
.200------151-------126-----------144----------127-----------144 (0)------116 (-11)
.300------224-------187-----------213----------183-----------205 (-8)-----163 (-20)
.400------274-------241-----------261----------226-----------259 (-2)-----211 (-15)
.500------318-------260-----------304----------242-----------299 (-5)-----236 (-6)
.550------335-------265-----------321----------246-----------316 (-5)-----NA
.600------346-------267-----------335----------248-----------330 (-5)-----241 (-7)

Numbers from my post: https://ls1tech.com/forums/showt...erflow+1020+600
and post 93 in this thread

about the Superflow benches, Flowdata benches, etc.
I wanted to get the most conservative numbers i could find, so I had my TEA 6.0 Stg 3 heads flowed on a Superflow 1020. TEA uses a big fancy Flowdata bench... so I knew the results were going to vary. The AFRs were flowed on a SF600 with a 4.125 Bore (same as mine) 1 7/8 pipe (same as mine).

So as Tony usually likes to point out... If the St3 AFRs have lower flow numbers, a bigger port, and they cost 50% more... Why would someone buy them instead of TEA's St3 LQ9?

BTW, I predict a truck head will come out in the next year or so that will allow TEA to blow all these numbers away without the LS7 price.

rons 00z

iTrader: (10)

i would assume because the AFR head has a thicker deck other than that thats a good point.

Wet 1

iTrader: (4)

Yeah, I need the thicker deck.

dragonZ28

iTrader: (32)

Here are some pics of TEA's stage 3 6.0L heads. These heads have the combustion chambers opened up to a 4.030" bore for my 408, and then they were milled to 72cc's to run my desired CR. Because they were milled, flow was slightly affected. Here are the flow numbers as well:

Flow specs:
@.1000 <-----> 68.30 <--> 55.3
@.2000 <-----> 143.3 <--> 124.7
@.3000 <-----> 225.3 <--> 178.4
@.4000 <-----> 270.4 <--> 233.8
@.5000 <-----> 307.3 <--> 259.6
@.5500 <-----> 319.2 <--> 266.1
@.6000 <-----> 324.2 <--> 270.0
@.7000 <-----> 330.0

dame

iTrader: (3)

So are you saying that the intake ports on TEA's S3 AFR head is 249cc's instead of 238cc's? not trying to start any $hit, i'm just confused,and would like some clarity. where exactly are you coming up with this 249cc intake port from

2c5s

iTrader: (11)

My stage 3 AFR core/TEA port was 249cc's.

Tony Mamo @ AFR

iTrader: (13)

And if I recall from a previous post you made, your independently tested "unplugged" flow numbers weren't quite the same as what routinely gets thrown around the Matrix.....oooops...I mean the Internet??

Uh-oh.....looks like agents

Link....get me out of here!

Beast96Z

iTrader: (21)

I believe there are a few things that can be pointed out here. First, the AFR's would be no diffrent than having LS-6's ported other than the thicker deck. Price between the 2 would be about the same. The first time you lift the heads, you'd have wished you got the AFR's. On to the flow numbers. Your putting up numbers from 3 diffrent people, but what some might not understand is that the port for the LQ9, LS-6, or AFR ALL carry the SAME port unless you get the optional No2 port on the exaust. The design is not diffrent. Why would the numbers between 3 diffrent people be so far off? Also, the AFR exaust numbers posted seem to be the N/A port, not the forced induction numbers that the other heads listed have. I would reccomend that the person who posted the AFR numbers to check with TEA because it looks like they ran the wrong port on his. They did the same on my AFR castings, but Brian caught it before they went out the door. For one to diminish the flow of the AFR casting, he would inturn be diminsh the casting that he uses also because the ports are the same. It's a CNC program, the end outcome is the same no matter which casting you get or how much you pay for the better casting. CFM should only alter by a few due to diffrent core shifts or slight diffrences in the castings.

Visceral

iTrader: (1)

I'm well aware these were three different flow benches. Three different days, three different barometric conditions, etc. etc. I even went so far as to point out that they are three different benches. If you know the different models of benches, you can glean something here too.

As far as lifting the head because of the deck... You are right. The first time I'd lift the deck I'd be sorry. I'd also wonder how TF I did it, since I dont run nitrous, FI, or anything like it. Everyone who runs more than 12psi of boost or 300 shot of nitrous should get the AFRs. Given that the heads are already 4.125" bore, if you are pushing that kind of power... You are probably running one of the ten fastest cars on this board.
That brings me to the last disagreement. I did not flow the FI exhaust port on the numbers above. Its the NA port with a stock exhaust valve still in it.

As for the TEA flow numbers being the wrong head entirely... well, I certainly can't speak to that.

But for now, I'm enjoying those $1000 I saved.