Tony Mamo @ AFR

iTrader: (13)

Guys...

I do my best at answering all your questions....time permitting....and the keys words here are...you guessed it...time permitting. Sometimes I happen to sit at my computer (be it home or work) and have a minute or two to write a reasonably quick response to something....I apologize if I don't get everyone handled in a more timely fashion but thats how it goes sometimes. Pick up the phone if you really need an answer quickly...if not, sit back and try to be a little patient.

I wil try to find some time this weekend to read over this entire thread quickly and touch bases on what I feel to be some of the more "significant" issues I haven't responded to or touched on yet.

Also, some questions have thoroghly been gone over in previous posts I've made concerning 205 versus 225 etc. etc.....As JRP would say...."for the love of god use the search button".....I know it went something like that!!

Thanks,
Tony Mamo

Brian Tooley Racing

iTrader: (13)

Tony, Can you believe we flowed your 205 head for the first time this week? It went 303 @ .600" on our bench with a 3.90 bore. One thing that I don't think people realize about your product is that these numbers are achieved with NO HAND FINISHING. Very impressive numbers considering that fact. And I'm with you on the competitors heads not flowing, I don't think we have seen a single head from anyone that flowed 300+ on a 3.90 bore. The same goes for the 4.00 bore stuff, we have seen some 315 or so numbers, but to deliver a head that will go 320+ on a consistent basis, with no hand finishing, I say congrats!!

BTW, what is the physical diameter of the chamber on the 225? We have seperate 3.90, 4.00 and 4.125 bore chamber programs because thats the only way we can get the max potential from the head. And if we flow our 4.00 or 4.125 chamber program on a 3.90 bore it kills the flow. Very interesting what you have achieved with the 225. Congrats again!

FASTONE

Those heads are going to be awsome!!I can see higher RWHP numbers coming soon.Is 600RWHP going to be the next benchmark for a street driven stroker?????This is SICK!!!Way to go AFR!!

TILEMAN

Good to see another competitor/sponser step up and give an honest assessment of another companies product...great job TEA!!!

gollum

iTrader: (1)

So these numbers show that the 225's are all around better heads than the 205's. Even for us 3.900 bore guys needing low end torque?

amwellls1

very nice information, keep it coming

masterdill

iTrader: (2)

I'm slightly disappointed in the intake numbers, the exhaust is very impressive.

TILEMAN

Why? These are out of the box numbers, no hand finishing...

Ed Curtis

Tony Mamo @ AFR

iTrader: (13)

Before I hit SEMA...

After quickly running thru this thread, it seems the same question keeps coming up regarding the 225 versus a 205 and how well it will work on a stock displacement shortblock. In a nutshell, the 225's were DESIGNED for a max effort stock displacement shortblock and I have stated this many times before in previous threads. It is the perfect compromise of a moderately sized intake runner combined with big airflow #'s from .100 valve lift all the way to .600 valve lift.

While on the subject of CFM and "airflow"....a comment was made in this thread stating the intake numbers were "disappointing". Thats pretty funny actually because no ported LS1 head that I have personally flowtested (regardless of volume) has even come close to the numbers posted from the 225 from .200 to .500 lift. And, in the last 18 months or so from the inception of the LS program, only ONE ported LS6 casting that I have flowtested on OUR testing equipment has put up a better number at .600 lift than the 225 (at 328-330 CFM it was 6-8 CFM better). BUT....that head had a finished port volume some 20 cc's larger (246 cc's), and also had the benefit of a larger 2.100 valve. But what is more important to note is that the AFR 225 showed 10-15 CFMS better from .200 - .400 (that a huge difference across that large a valvelift span), about 5-6 CFM better at .500, and the two heads were identical at .550 lift. As I also mentioned earlier in this thread....I made decisions in the design phase of this product that ultimately compromised peak flow to significantly increase the "area under the curve". So my question to you is which head would actually produce more HP on the same shortblock? Would the extra few CFM of peak lift flow be enough to cover a head that outflowed it everywhere else with a port that was 20 cc's smaller and therefore provided much higher airspeed? I don't think so....

Guys....DON'T get hung up on big "advertised" peak flow numbers....They are not the "end all" answer and in most cases they don't actually exist anyway. This is the reason I spent a lot of time earlier in this thread discussing how fruitless an exercise it is trying to compare flow information from different sources.

Consider this....many of the "disbelievers" and "naysayers" 6 months ago continued to question AFR on why we even decided to produce such a "small" 205 head with only a "disappointing" 300 CFM intake port. Fast forward to today and look at the 205 results we are now starting to see as commonplace coming from the guys actually spending the time to get the combinations right....Certainly you must admit that they are some of the better numbers we have all seen from stock displacement shortblocks. Looking just at the AFR 205 numbers...port volume and total flow....who what have ever thought that to be possible? (The guys that truly know what to look for is the answer to that question). Don't forget these performance numbers are being generated from our "street" head aimed at increasing performance across the entire RPM band, as well as providing increases and benefits in efficiency and fuel economy.
Anyway....enough of this....lets move on.

For all of you questioning low speed torque output of 225's versus 205's, the answer to that question is what you defination of "low speed" is. For a drag race guy that sidesteps his clutch or hits the transbrake button at 4000 RPM's plus, the 225 headed combination will make more torque and power thru the entire range. (compared to the EXACT same shortblock in question). If I had to guess, I would say that the 225 would match the smaller 205 at close to 3000 and from there slowly pull away if you laid the two graghs over one another. BUT, it wouldn't be out of the question due to fuel infection being not dependant on a "signal strength" like a carb set-up, that at WOT a 225 might prove to be the same or better EVERYWHERE. We hope to have some time on the dyno in December, after the SEMA and PRI shows, to actually back to back the heads on the same shortblock....I will let you know what we find out. One more point however....I would have to give the "nod" to the 205 head for top gear, low RPM (1500-2000) pulling power at part throttle and for better a overall "part throttle" driving experience that takes place 90% of the time. Also, without question, the 205 head has proven to increase fuel economy, and I believe that benefit would not nearly be as great with the larger, more race oriented 225's.

Last but not least....one of you guys posted the need to have "335 CFM" to generate 500 RWHP with a 408 and a cam in the 240's. Take an out of the box 225 and bolt it on that shortblock....I would fall over if it DIDN'T make 500 plus RWHP (with attention to detail spent in the build-up and all the other complimenting components, FAST, 90mm, etc..)....I have a strong hunch with 10 degrees less cam timing than you plan on running, my stock bottom end 346 will see 500 plus with the 225's and a six speed. The extra 60 cubes should more than compensate for the 20 or so loss of an auto trans versus a manual trans on the chassis dyno.

THATS IT.....I'm off to SEMA

Please stop by and say hello if you happen to be attending the event...Both a 205 and a 225 will be on display for all to view.

Regards to all,
Tony Mamo

The Guy in MY 99TA

I like teh idea of the out of the box 225's making 500+ at the wheels. I may be trying a set of these out when they hit the market.

fyi..... it will be sporting a ls2 intake with a fast tb.

Josh s.

Grant B

Tony,

Why don't you do a before/after dyno with your car with the 205 and 225 heads? No changes except tuning. This would show people the effects of velocity. I think a lot of people have a hard time believing the smaller port will make more power because there is "number" or "dyno" for intake port velocity. If the 205 made better power under the car's gearing range then I think it would convince people.

Tony Mamo @ AFR

iTrader: (13)

Grant...

Read my post more carefully....What I state is that the 225 WILL make more power than a 205, even on the same shortblock but a dyno gragh doesn't tell the whole story....it only talks about power at WOT typically from 2500 and above. The 205 will shine at speeds even lower than this...engine speeds we typically spend most of our time driving...more in the 1400-2500 range. At those engine speeds, the smaller port has more airspeed which helps fill the cylinder better and increase it's overall effectiveness....thats why a 205 will actually enhance fuel economy in addition to making more power. The 225 is still VERY efficient as well, considering it's size....20 more cc's that carry an extra 10-15 CFM at every lift point is still very good. It's airspeed is still very high as the increase in cross-sectional area is allowing more air to pass thru it....not to mention flows more at EVERY lift point. A bad trade would be to increase the port another 20 cc's for little or no gains in airflow....In that hypethetical scenario you have just made the port less efficient. Considering that the only heads I have seen come close to the 225 flow figures (on AFR's testing equipment) have been significantly larger in volume and cross-sectional area means the "high velocity" concept we featured with our 205's is still in place...just on a slightly larger scale which is better taken advantage of at higher engine speeds.

Also, one last thing I've been wanting to mention is that ANYONE considering a pair of 225's for their stock displacement shortblock had better understand they are building an engine that would need to turn at least 7000 RPM to fully utilize the larger, higher flowing 225's potential. If you don't want to turn your engine that high, you are probably better off with the smaller 205's which work great from idle to 6800 RPM's. Bigger engines are a different story as they will pull the same amount of air at lower RPM's due to their physical size, so you can still get away with the 225's on say a 383 that you only want to spin to say 6500 RPM's (A 383 uses approximately the same amount of air at 6300 RPM's as a 346 does at 7000).

In summary....If your building a "street/strip" engine combination and you want to place the emphasis on the "street" side of that equation (including improved fuel economy) go with the 205's....if your wanting to place the emhasis on the strip side of things and the higher engine speeds typically associated with them, the 225's are for you. Either one of the combinations can be driven on the street....its just making a decision which one of the two you are trying to maximize the most and then bolt on as many other go-fast parts that also help those goals become more of a reality. Match the entire combination....that is the key.

Off to SEMA....again

Tony M.

Grant B

Well, you can always start the dyno pull at 1000 rpm.

I, and I think some other people, are a little confused. If the 225s make more power at WOT at any RPMs above 2500, then they should be more effective for racing no matter what you are reving to. If you shift at 7000, 6500, or even 6000 the revs are never going to drop back to 2500 rpm.

Just because someone is shifting early doesn't mean they are less interested in WOT performance or less hard-core than someone shifting at 7000, it just means they want their shortblock to last! I'd imagine there are people shifting at 6500 that don't give a crap about part-throttle performance or MPG (or maybe I'm the only one!). Personally I don't think a 5.7L motor in a 3100lb car will ever have a problem having too little low end.

I just think it would be helpfull to see when the 225s start making more power, thats all.

Thanks for the info.

11 Bravo

iTrader: (3)

Tony, you say the 225's are designed for a max effort stock bore. Any future plans to design a head for larger bores? Something comparable to C5R heads that accept a LS* intake?

gollum

iTrader: (1)

Verygood info.

ScatStroker

[QUOTE=Grant B]Well, you can always start the dyno pull at 1000 rpm.

I, and I think some other people, are a little confused. If the 225s make more power at WOT at any RPMs above 2500, then they should be more effective for racing no matter what you are reving to. If you shift at 7000, 6500, or even 6000 the revs are never going to drop back to 2500 rpm.

Just because someone is shifting early doesn't mean they are less interested in WOT performance or less hard-core than someone shifting at 7000, it just means they want their shortblock to last! I'd imagine there are people shifting at 6500 that don't give a crap about part-throttle performance or MPG (or maybe I'm the only one!).[QUOTE]



Not to be a smart*ss but pulling an engine at 1000rpm doesn't really work for a race engine.


'Power' in the general sense is an ambiguous statement ... it depends who you're asking. Peak power? Greatest average power?

Magazines sell peak power. The real world races average power. It's the reason why Tony stresses average power, velocity, port size and mid lift.

The 205 is simply more street friendly. The 225 is made for someone who is going to operate in a higher RPM range. I don't know how accurate 2500 RPM is but we generally ask a simple question, Where do you want YOUR power? Idle to 4000 RPM? 4000-7000? If someone shifts at 6000 rpm then it's pointless to sell them a head that sacrifices power throughout the rest of the powerband for the small gain at the top end.

It comes down to driving style and preferences. If you want the MOST power, and you're going to drive the car to reflect that, then you (and people with your same interests) will purchase the 225.

$.02

Brian

P Mack

iTrader: (6)

Yep, I spend 95% of the time at 2000 rpms, which is why i bought the 205's.

Ed Curtis

Yup...

They are called the 245's...

Just leave Tony alone for a nanosecond so he can work on these things.
Not everyone spends all day on the internet...

Ed

SPANKY LS1

iTrader: (24)

He asked a question (as instructed to do in Tonys first post), plain and simple, no need to be a jackass.

Any actual examples of some of your cam designs in LSx based cars yet, or just hype?

Shawn