xfactor_pitbulls

iTrader: (16)

I really didnt mean for things to get ugly, however my thoughts havent changed. You need to realize that the numbers you are talking about, down low mainly, are untouched by everyone on here; TEA, PRC, All Pro, AFR, ET, WCCH, and I mean everyone. I guess they are not up to snuff. With stock valves, small bore, and very low volume, its 100% unheard of from anyone, anywhere, period. To be so short sided to think you know everything about the head market is childish. I dont know one shop that has a flow bench that wouldnt call bullshit about the numbers. Besides why does it matter? I am just some lacky on the internet.

Brandon

Tony Mamo @ AFR

iTrader: (13)

Wow....this thread turned into a trainwreck....LOL

Brandon....The numbers were bogus and you were right in your assumptions that they were.

Chris/Ryne....cut DDN some slack....LOL....His intentions were good.

And the point I was trying to make much earlier (that Chris was trying to make as well....with a little more flair I think...) was that flow numbers that are gotten from different sources should never be put together in any type of a spreadsheet or comparison....that could be potentially more misleading than no information at all (and could do more harm than good assuming they influenece someone to make a purchase based on unverified information).

Chris and Ryne made up some BS numbers and had they not been a little overinflated (which Brandon picked up on), they might have made the spreadsheet skewing the results in a way....they did it to make the point that without the same test equipment, the numbers are just numbers and really just make for a worthless comparison.

I decided to start that flow thread along time ago because I was frustrated how everyone claimed to own a pair of cylinder heads that flowed 320 CFM's (and the guys that dropped some coin of course all had 340 CFM heads ) when the reality was that most heads I had the opportunity to see where lucky to break 300 CFM. Keep in mind the flow thread only represents the larger, better flowing heads in the countless dozens I have had the opportunity to test over the last 3 years and as you can clearly see the "320 club" is pretty elite (unlike the Internet would leave you to believe), and the heads that went more than that are even farther and fewer between. The main reason for my posting all that info was to try and bring people back down to earth about cylinder head flow and whats really out there (try to show them the "real world"....LOL). Consider the power we have seen from many of the 205 AFR combo's and the fact that it flows 295-300 CFM @ .600 on a small 3.900 bore. Read between the lines....an honest 300 CFM's can make more power than you think and there's more to making power than just big peak flow numbers (a strong curve in the low and midlift region, quality" of flow, airspeed, cross section, etc.)

Anyway....this was suppose to be a quick reply to clear a few things up. As usual, I got sucked in.....LOL

Catch you guys later....

Tony

J-Rod

Here is an html version to look at.

http://users3.ev1.net/~black_ops/hea...2009-09-03.htm

I'd only pay attention to the numbers which are from TR, as they are independant numbers.

Some of the other "inflated" numbers are IMHO B.S., you have to look at them as a "trend" for the heads, and as an example. Once you subtract the reality factor in the heads you can see where the low and midlift numbers stack up.

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

Jrod why is there only intake numbers on that?

Cobraeater

Patrick, Did you hit 316 on AFR's bench and 310 on Thunder's bench at .600 lift or were the heads flowed to .650 lift?

Patrick G

iTrader: (14)

My heads flowed 306.4 cfm at .600" and 310 cfm at .650" on Thunder's bench. This was in the milled 59cc form. Unmilled, they flowed about 4 numbers better at .550" up.

jlrz28

iTrader: (7)

Here is the data on my Stg 1 5.7 from TEA


https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...&highlight=tea