How about an AFR TECH THREAD...
I thought we all needed a "diversion" here.
Let me share with you some facts I have previously mentioned but might have gone un-noticed or simply forgotten in the past.
We have already done an A-B test with a pair of stock LS1 heads versus our "out of the box" CNC ported 205's (un-milled) on an engine dyno during the development of our 205 program. In fact, our current "production" pieces are actually a few cc's smaller and flow a few CFM more, but the results if done today would certainly be similar if not better.
We had a bonestock LS1 engine on a SuperFlow 901 Engine dyno (not a chassis dyno) with the only "mods" being long tube headers. The motor had a stock LS1 manifold and throttle body. I don't remember the exact numbers (I believe the "stock" configuration actually put down 420's...don't forget the motor had ZERO accessories and had the benifit of long tube headers and 3" Flowmasters). We baselined and "tuned" the stock configuration so we weren't evaluating anything except the AFR heads....a TRUE A/B heads comparison. With the same exact head gasket and un-milled AFR 205's we saw a "peak to peak" gain of exactly 37 HP after we also "tuned" and optimized the A/F ratio. Better than even that was the fact that the stock headed motor was "all done" by 6000 RPM's and by 6500, the AFR 205 power advantage climbed to 58 HP!! (Don't forget that this is a BONESTOCK engine with just a headswap and no bump in compression ratio). Also, the AFR headed combination was up immediatly in torque and power output from the moment the engine started its climb (2500 RPM's)....the gap in power just kept getting wider as engine speed increased and the demand for more air become more important. Even with the "baby" stock LS1 cam, by 6500 RPM's the AFR headed engine was only down 7 HP off of its much higher peak, while the stock headed motor had given up nearly 30 HP (from a lower starting point). It's clear that the more efficient, higher flowing cylinder head was still getting the job done with no other "complimenting components" coming to it's aid (better intake, cam, TB etc.).
The other information I would like to share with you is much more recent. This information revolves around our recent "emissions" testing performed independantly (obviously) at the C.A.R.B. (California Air Research Board). We had to use a bonestock Z06 (due to it being "dirtier" than a lower output LS1 engine) to get the state to ultimately approve our heads and give us a CARB # so they would be emissions legal. After 3 days of testing we were notified by the state that the AFR heads provided a decrease in total emissions AND an increase in fuel economy by 2-3 MPG!! Also, the peak power output of the vehicle had increased by 20 RWHP compared to the stock LS6 engine configuration. Don't forget that these are just "peak to peak" gains, and much like the previous test, there were additional gains higher up past the peak HP figures. Whats important to note here is that we went up against the higher flowing LS6 head in this comparison and this test was conducted thru the factory exhaust manifolds and the factory airbox....the true potential of the AFR heads were certainly going to be "stifled" in this type of situation.
Two more quick things....during our SuperFlow Engine Dyno testing mentioned earlier, we also had the oppurtunity to test a popular Stg 2 factory ported cylinder head that we secretly purchased brand new specifically for this test....It had a 228 cc intake port and flowed in the low 290's on our test equipment (claimed figures were of course MUCH higher, not to mention the low and midlift #'s were quite abit "softer" than the AFR 205)....On the same day, with the same dyno and the exact same conditions and parameters, that head provided an increase of 23 HP (tuned and optimized) over the stock headed baseline (peak to peak numbers). That would be exactly 14 less HP than the AFR 205 headed combination, and much like you would expect, the bottom and middle of the curve looked MUCH different than the AFR 205 gragh, showing a decrease in power and torque from the "baseline" stock headed numbers until the engine was revving past 3200 RPM's. The "average" power and torque gains the AFR headed engine showed over the ported factory casting was more than just 14 HP but unfortunately I don't have those figures....there was alot going on at the time and I didn't record that information.
If you would like to see more information pertaining to this dyno test, feel free to visit AFR's website....I will try and edit this post soon and provide a link to the article on our site if I can.
Aren't "facts and figures" more interesting than silly bashing and bickering!
Amen...
Tony Mamo
AFR Sales / Product Design
(818)890-0616 Ext. 109
Last edited by Tony Mamo @ AFR; Jan 7, 2005 at 01:23 AM.
You guys make a great aftermarket head for the LS1 and provide many benefits to the LS1 community in your testing and products.
Keep up the good work and try not to worry about what everyone thinks.
P.S. I love my AFR 205's on my forged 346!
Cheers.
You guys make a great aftermarket head for the LS1 and provide many benefits to the LS1 community in your testing and products.
Keep up the good work and try not to worry about what everyone thinks.
My AFR205s will be installed in a month or so, can't wait!
Keep up the great work Tony
Based on LS1Tech.com research and talking with people whom I trust, I'm ordering "205" heads next week and will mate them with a custom Comp 220/224 XER 112 cam, QTP long tubes, and an LS6 intake.
I'm counting on you guys as well as all of the other aftermarket suppliers that I have selected.
PLease keep posting the results of your tests. Even though I have made my decision, your posts will help educate those, like me, who need objective results to aid in the decision making process.
Based on LS1Tech.com research and talking with people whom I trust, I'm ordering "205" heads next week and will mate them with a custom Comp 220/224 XER 112 cam, QTP long tubes, and an LS6 intake.
I'm counting on you guys as well as all of the other aftermarket suppliers that I have selected.
PLease keep posting the results of your tests. Even though I have made my decision, your posts will help educate those, like me, who need objective results to aid in the decision making process.
My only question to you is why not go with the AFR "street cam" we spent days on the dyno perfecting...your choice of cams is so close I would be thinking it makes more sense to go with a "proven" combination....That was one of the fundamentals and goals of all the testing we did....To offer you guys a few "packages" to help assure you got the most for your money by helping to provide you with the best results possible. In my opinion, your cam choice will have more low RPM torque (up to say 4000 RPM's), idle about the same (possibly worse), and give up at least 10 HP past 6000 RPM's....perhaps as much as 15 depending on what ICL you decide to install yours.
If your driving a heavy GTO and want to maximize the "around town" portion of your power band it might make sense....I'm just not sure of what your trying to accomplish....bottom line, feel free to contact me if I can offer you some advice or assistance
Good luck with the AFR's...
Regards,
Tony
Trending Topics
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
My only question to you is why not go with the AFR "street cam" we spent days on the dyno perfecting...your choice of cams is so close I would be thinking it makes more sense to go with a "proven" combination....That was one of the fundamentals and goals of all the testing we did....To offer you guys a few "packages" to help assure you got the most for your money by helping to provide you with the best results possible. In my opinion, your cam choice will have more low RPM torque (up to say 4000 RPM's), idle about the same (possibly worse), and give up at least 10 HP past 6000 RPM's....perhaps as much as 15 depending on what ICL you decide to install yours.
If your driving a heavy GTO and want to maximize the "around town" portion of your power band it might make sense....I'm just not sure of what your trying to accomplish....bottom line, feel free to contact me if I can offer you some advice or assistance
Good luck with the AFR's...
Regards,
Tony
I have actually been working with my H.R. guy to find a different carrier for our D&O life policies. He knows that he needs to find a high quality insurer that will allow me to race. If so, I will swap the cam for the 224/228 cam.
Those that know me well, know that I am of the opinion that it is worth it to pay for quality. That applies if one is buying racing components or if one is "buying" skilled employees. That is why we are recognized as being the 3rd fastest gowing business in our home state. Frankly, I could have gone with any combination that I wanted. I wanted what I believed to be the best and I went with a short list of products/vendors that meet my personal criteria for excellence.
It's been my experience over the last 247 years (
) that most people will defend to the death whatever their personal choice was, be it auto parts, a school, a career, a favorite bar, etc. simply to convince THEMSELVES that they made the right decision. In other words, if one can convince others to make a similar decision, those actions reinforce one's own decisions and sense of self worth. So much for arm chair thoughts.......I do appreciate AFR and some of the other vendors active on LS1Tech.com for sharing their knowledge and experience with those of us who lack the knowledge, wisdom, and experience that is gained in the trenches.
Last edited by Bo White; Jan 7, 2005 at 09:51 AM.
I'm impressed with the results...
but when will we hear about a test of the 225's on your Corvette (stock shortblock) and overlay that dyno graph against the 205's? That being the only change from its current combo and of course tuning it further to get the A/F ratios back in line.I want to buy some AFR's.... but want to get the right ones.... when will we hear news about the 225's and dyno results with a stock based shortblock? I'm dying over here...
-Mark
I sold the S2 heads and WILL be buying a set of the AFR 205's for my Z28. The gains the Z06 crowd has been getting from the AFR 205 heads is damn impressive. Torque is king and I think these AFR 205 heads will torque monsters for the street.
Tony, if you need an Indiana test mule, send me a set of your heads and I'll test them for free on my car.

I'd be happy to do some back to back testing for you.
I want to buy some AFR's.... but want to get the right ones.... when will we hear news about the 225's and dyno results with a stock based shortblock? I'm dying over here...
-Mark
First of all, thanks for the great info Tony.
I'm in the same boat as gnx7. I want a max effort stock bottom end H/C package, naturally aspirated. However, in the future I might want to increase the cubes to say 383 ci. My personal instincts are telling me to go with the AFR 62cc 225 heads but a well respected vendor has recommend some hand finished 205's for the stock bottom end effort.
However, I'm thinking if I went with the 62cc 225's, they would perform almost as well as some hand finished 205's on a stock bottom end LS1. Better yet, when I do increase displacement I wouldn't need a new set of heads because they would be perfect for a 383ci motor. Am I on track here?
225's ARE OK for stock cubes...perfect for a "more aggressive" H/C combination.
Also, to further clarify, the big cammed high HP 346 that LG ran 140 MPH in the quarter had a set of 205's!!.....NOT 225's.
I have posted numerous times about the benefits of a 225 on a stock displacement engine etc....I don't have the time now but if someone can search and perhaps post a link to the thread I speak in detail about which head is best...a 205 or a 225, I think it will answer alot of your questions. (I've hit this topic already in multiple threads....JRP....where are you when I need you!!....LOL)
In about a month I should have results from my car with the 225's and a slightly bigger bumpstick...that will show some of the larger 225's potential....sit tight for a little while longer.
Thanks,
Tony
PS The same "high velocity" principles have still been incorporated into the AFR 225 port design....Look at it like a 205 on steroids. The 225's will not make as much low RPM part throttle power like some of you guys are experiencing with the 205's, and probably will not help fuel economy as much, but the 225's will shine once the tach starts swinging past 4000 RPM's. At WOT, there might be very little difference between the same combination with a 205 under 4000 RPM's, but the higher the tach swings from there, the larger the delta in power will become with the larger, higher flowing, 225's. The 205 on a stock displacement shortblock is a GREAT street/strip head.....the 225 on a stock displacement shortblock will be a GREAT strip/street head. The question you have to ask yourself is where do you want to place YOUR emphasis on. If your looking at cams over 230' @ .050, my guess is you should be looking more closely at the 225's.
.
.
Phil
Phil...
AFR 205 come "standard" with 66 cc chambers only.
AFR 225 come "standard" with 72cc (currently available) or 62 cc (a month or so out).
Obviously any "standard" chambers can be milled accordingly for less volume to dial in your exact combination for the compression ratio you desire.
"PewterZ28"....call me at AFR and I can handle all your questions one on one and get you headed in the right direction.
Thanks Guys...
Tony M.
(818)890-0616 Ext. 109





