OUCH!!!!!!

 

Yeah head "d" does have good solid flow numbers but 240 cfm exhaust flow is a far cry from 270 cfm that we have been told. I agree with Patrick G, I won't be changing my AFR 225 heads anytime soon.

 

There is so much about flowing heads that I could write a book on it. Bottom line is we use a Flowdata flow bench, we also have a Superflow, we have flowed heads on both benches back to back and sometimes they are the same, sometimes there is a small difference and sometimes there is a large difference. The bottom line is a flow bench is a measuring tool, and we feel the Flowdata is superior to the Superflow simply because the heads that flow best on the Flowdata, make the most power on the dyno, and seem to run fastest at the track. The Flowdata flow bench uses a Meriam Instruments laminar flow element to measure airflow. A Superflow uses an edge orifice plate, which is a very crude way of measuring airflow. Meriam is the world leader in gas flow measuring, they will tell you the only way to get close to accurate results with an edge orifice airflow measuring device is to have 10 diameters of piping before the plate and 4 diameters of piping after the plate. So if you are flowing a 4” bore head you would need 40” of piping before the orifice plate and 16” of piping after the orifice plate, the Superflow has NO piping before or after the orifice plate. Some of our competition in the Ford world used to bash us on flow numbers, but then would turn around and say “but the stuff does make power” so the bottom line is if it makes power, then who cares what it flows on a crude flowbench?

 

I would expect the best way to flow a head is with the intake manifold/header attached to it that the racer will be uitilizing. This way, they'll know how the combination works in completed form.

Of course, this approach is not practical for many benches because of space/size constraints.

 

With all this... I'll be keeping my ETP 215s in place.

 

Regarding my recently posted results which I knew would stir alot of controversy, they are what they are and I spent the time to evaluate these heads on both bore sizes so as not to miss any potential data regarding that.

If your a fan of a different product its easy to dismiss what I have said and posted in this thread as BS or tainted or that we have an agenda (which of course is true), but the main focus of this thread has always been (and still is) to show what a large cross section of heads will show on the same equipment with the same operator and all the same inlet fixtures, exhaust tube, bore fixtures, etc. etc. with the largest emphasis being placed on letting the public know that 320+ CFM Gen III heads aren't as commonly available as the numbers thrown around the Internet would lead you to believe, AND that a properly sized/shaped head with less flow just might surprise you time and time again. No the flowbench is not the end all answer regarding ultimate power output as I have touched on numerous times myself, but it is a tool, and a powerful one, that will help someone who knows how to disemminate all the data probably make a good choice.

Note a few other key facts to those trying to discredit the information presented here....the AFR's are NOT the highest flowing heads included here (purely looking at peak #'s) and it would have been all too easy to omit some of the larger flowing heads data as Im sure others in my position might have considered. I even decided to share results of a clearly superior intake port referring to the LS7 head tested and while thats expected due to its superior geometry and port location, I decided to share the results with you to show you guys that a 370 CFM head will flow 370 CFM on my/our equipment.

Another point of interest easily pulled from this thread (my secondary "agenda") is that our emissions legal Gen III offerings (205 and 225's) are still solid contenders in a much larger playing field in light of the fact they were designed almost 3 years ago and have conventional valve train geometry, valve cover rails, and are basically a stock replacement plug and play cylinder head. That is a powerful statement all things considered.

Unlike many other companies that blame poor performance conveniently on "older programs" (ultimately leaving those unfortunate customers holding the bag), a customer that purchased our 205's or 225's two years ago can still appreciate and ultimately have the same power potential as a customer ordering a set of our heads today. Independent results both then and now prove that to be the case.

Those that really know me also know my integrity and while some of the info presented here might not make me the most popular guy on the board I really dont care....Im not looking for popularity....I'm looking to wake people up enough to realize not to take everything they read on the Internet at face value. Our heads flow well and have very strong low and midlift flow thru conservative cross sections (volume)....its a recipe for us that has been working and working well. Other heads out there also flow well....some a little more....some a little less....some a lot less. Take what I have provided and allow it to help you make some decisions or call it BS....I really dont care. Anyone with a level head and a good BS meter will probably benefit from the insight I have provided....as well as others that truly know myself, AFR, and the people involved in this company. When you produce a quality product (no matter what it might be) you will always find yourself in the cross hairs of the competition and inevitably some accusations on this thread other drama like it will always be "par" for the course...

Tony M.

 

Thanks Tony!

Interesting results on the Trickflow's considering all the hype by Brian Tooley.

It looks like the Trickflow heads produce solid numbers and are a quality piece, but for Brian to say that they are the most powerful heads out there and will outperform all comers is more like marketing BS!

Also, Tony don't forget to add the AFR 225 small-bore numbers to your list.

 

You should be thanking Tony, not bashing him. We love Tony on this site, he has tons of good info.
BTW, out of all these heads tested. AFRs are the ones that are consistant in their numbers no matter what flowbench you use. That alone says something.

 

You can't tell what ones the best ones are?
The valve degrees give the 2 better ones away.

 

I think the list is a good thing. It shines light on the head flow numbers and in my opinion it has helped to keep BS head flow data at a minimum. I agree with PatrickG in that this thread as done more to educate the consumer than to sell AFR heads although it has helped.

I use TEA and Trick Flow heads and am very pleased with their performance. The TEA stage 1.5 heads were great and the new TEA/Trick Flow heads are even better. I do not know for sure which heads on Tony’s list are TEA’s and honestly I really do not care (well I am a little curious) because TEA heads perform period. As it has been said many times in the past, flow numbers are just part on the puzzle, they give the consumer a measuring stick to grade the heads against.

If I were choosing a set of heads I would look for good flow numbers, consistently good dyno numbers, and consistently good track numbers that are inline with the dyno numbers, and good customer support because things can go wrong.
I do not see that you can go wrong with TEA/Trick Flow, AFR, or ETP.


John

 

Well said. To me, this shows that even a customer using someone elses cylinder head, can show some good info in this thread.

I like this thread because I was one of those shops that bought into "Hype" of someone elses cylinder head. Little did I know I got hosed. For what I got, I could have paid the local crack head to port these heads and ended up cheaper. But thats not the point.

The point of this thread is to help everyone. Yes, Tony works for AFR and he is doing all the flow testing. Yes its on his bench. But in the end, I dont see him as the type of person to throw some silly putting the competitors port job to mess with the numbers. Not his style. So lets just look at this thread for info, and good info it is.

Rick

 

I have to agree with Patrick and others. Too many folks have been swayed by misleading flowbench numbers. Folks would be in an uproar if shops names were associated with a certain set of heads. So I don't disagree with Tony not publishing numbers. If he did, this thread would get locked in literally minutes when the various cheerleader showed up to call B.S.

What this shows is a trend. Besides all the hype, under a controlled bench here is what the numbers for a wide cross section of us are.

The ported LS6 heads we ran are on that list. Our ported Ls6 heads are some of the best heads on that list. The heads were originally done by Jay from Absolute speed, but, the valve job, valve seats and exhaust side on them were re-done by Greg Good.

In our own case, the heads were SUPPOSED to flow 330-335 and be 220-225 cc's. In our case they were 10cfm down and 10 cc's bigger. The exhaust flow was soft also, Greg fixed the exhaust side.

There are some heads out there that folks have just been plain screwed on. They been sold by mis-leading flow numbers which aren't apples to apples comparison. In other cases, folks are doing "creative flowing" like leaving a weak spring on the exhaust so it gets pulled open slightly. You get higher flow, but it isn't real numbers. Folks will shift heads around on the fixture to unshroud valves.

What I'm trying to say is flowbench numbers sell heads. So, there has always been a move to push optimistic numbers. Many, many shops have participated in this (some knowingly, others unknowingly). Folks can stand up and thump their chest and swear their bench is accurate, etc... but I and others have seen numbers on independant benches besides Tony's which also corroborate how fictitious some of these "generous" numbers are.

Its amazing how some folks like to be cheerleader for Brand X, but the only way they can run a number is to spray the car. But there is a key problem. Folks want to justify their purchasing decision. So, if you come out and show them they made the "wrong" decision for buying a head that isn't what they thought it is, their natural reaction is to attack the messenger.

In this way, Tony can show how much B.S. there is without turing this into a cheeleader flame fest. On any head that outflows an AFR, Tony has been gracious in my opinion about the competition and has provided factual information about those products.

All I can say is wake up and open your eyes.

 

Well said. I know I didnt shoot the messenger when I had a set of Brand X flowed to see what they did. I did however crap my pants. Just kidding.

I will also agree that Tony has been more than supporting with his competitors if the head flowed well as a whole. Not just peak numbers, but all around good numbers. He has no problem telling you a head is good or not.

Rick

 

I've heard Tony compliment Cary's work at ETP and also Cary on Tony's work at AFR. Can't say the same for that other guy.

 

rubadubdub - Jay's intake port was good, I'm not saying it wasn't a good head. I agree it was one of the better ones I'd seen. Greg just fixed some issues with the head, and most likely made it probably the best AS speed head you're going to find....

Again, its one of the best ported Ls6 heads on that list Tony put out. Point is, it wasn't what was quoted. It wasn't grossly far off like other heads I've seen. So, I'm just using it as one example.

The ported ls6 heads from just a peak flow perspective outflowed the AFRs. We replaced them with AFRs 205's (225's weren't out yet). Guess what happened? We lost a couple of peak HP @ 7000. Its was only right at the very peak. Otherwise the graphs overlay one another. The car went faster (MPH wise) 129MPH in +3000 DA up from 127 in +400 DA.

The drivability improved noticably with a smaller port and better cylinder filling at low rpm. We hope to see 132-133 MPH in the cool weather this winter.

 

 

I went with the TFS heads because Brian Tooley told me that they were great heads. Brian did not steer me wrong with their Stage 1.5 5.3l heads and I knew he would not steer me wrong with the TFS heads. The short answer is I trust Brian.

I should have included the Dart heads but when I made my post but I just did not think about them. In addition the Dart heads are not available with a CNC port from the manufacture. The other heads I listed are shipped with a CNC port job.

I have no idea which 3 heads on Tony’s list are TEA heads. I as well as everyone else know exactly which heads are the TFS heads. I should have been a little clearer.

John

 

The "Z" head is a ETP 240cc head, the size 240 and the best peak numbers, before the LS7 head , kinda gave it away, but it might have also been Patrick G mentioning what head it was in another thread.

Here's the thread.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...&highlight=ETP

In the thread Fireball mentions that he saw the ETP 240's flow the same numbers on a different bench than Tony Mamo's bench.

For the "c" head if it didn't have the 11* next to the runner size of 215cc I would have posted in this thread that it had to be a ETP or Trickflow head since the're the only two heads at that intake runner size, but Tony saved me the trouble.

 

Some of you guys just don't get it, the heads ON OUR FLOWBENCH do outflow the competition, and in dyno testing also have outpowered the competition.

If head "T" outflows head "A" on a Flowdata, and head "A" outflows head "T" on a Superflow, and head "T" OUTPOWERS head "A" ON THE DYNO, then which flowbench IS BETTER??? Or has more relevent information?? Is more related to what we are trying to do which is to MAKE MORE POWER, not win a flow contest on an inferior flowbench.

I will have flow data from the 225 heads from 2 different benches as well as back to back dyno data, so stay tuned.

 

Subscribing...