AFR Heads Or Port Stockers?
04-23-2006, 02:13 AM
#1
TECH Addict
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ft. Bragg, NC
Posts: 2,210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AFR Heads Or Port Stockers? Heads would be supporting a Tr224/224 - 112. Would AFR 205cc's be a wise choice to match that or should I get the stock heads ported?
04-23-2006, 01:49 PM
#4
This topic has been beat to death...
An AFR is a clean sheet of paper design....A ported stocker assuming a quality port job (which is an assumption not to be taken lightly) will always have considerably more volume to flow close to the same. That hurts velocity which hurts alot of things and typically the low and midlift flow numbers are softer as well..
The AFR design has been proven over and over again in the dyno section of this board and many others. You are simply starting with a handicap when porting a stocker because for it to be a really efficent high flowing piece, material would have to be added, not just removed, and then there is the benefit of the stronger aftermarket castings as well.
If you have the money to spend, the AFR's are well worth it in the long run....many have chosen to save a few bucks and after disappointing results had to spend alot more to achieve the overall power (and efficiency) they were hoping for in the first place. Ive said this in many other threads, but your cylinder head choice is the most important one you will make when it comes time to hit the dyno, track, and street. A really good cylinder head can make an average combination great....an average or below average cylinder head will make the most well thought out (and sometimes expensive) combination only mediocre in terms of power output.
Good luck....If you have any questions or need more info feel free to contact me at AFR.
Tony M.
(818)890-0616 Ext. 109
An AFR is a clean sheet of paper design....A ported stocker assuming a quality port job (which is an assumption not to be taken lightly) will always have considerably more volume to flow close to the same. That hurts velocity which hurts alot of things and typically the low and midlift flow numbers are softer as well..
The AFR design has been proven over and over again in the dyno section of this board and many others. You are simply starting with a handicap when porting a stocker because for it to be a really efficent high flowing piece, material would have to be added, not just removed, and then there is the benefit of the stronger aftermarket castings as well.
If you have the money to spend, the AFR's are well worth it in the long run....many have chosen to save a few bucks and after disappointing results had to spend alot more to achieve the overall power (and efficiency) they were hoping for in the first place. Ive said this in many other threads, but your cylinder head choice is the most important one you will make when it comes time to hit the dyno, track, and street. A really good cylinder head can make an average combination great....an average or below average cylinder head will make the most well thought out (and sometimes expensive) combination only mediocre in terms of power output.
Good luck....If you have any questions or need more info feel free to contact me at AFR.
Tony M.
(818)890-0616 Ext. 109
04-23-2006, 04:20 PM
#5
I'm running the TR224/224 114 with AFR 205's right out of the box myself.
The hawk just got re-tuned and dyno'ed at:
431 rwhp & 428 rear torque.
Keep in mind its the 383, that is pushing up my torque numbers, but rwhp is all from the head/cam combo!
The hawk just got re-tuned and dyno'ed at:
431 rwhp & 428 rear torque.
Keep in mind its the 383, that is pushing up my torque numbers, but rwhp is all from the head/cam combo!
Last edited by Michael02hawk; 04-23-2006 at 04:29 PM.
04-23-2006, 05:48 PM
#6
10 Second Club
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kansas City, KS
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Michael02hawk
I'm running the TR224/224 114 with AFR 205's right out of the box myself.
The hawk just got re-tuned and dyno'ed at:
431 rwhp & 428 rear torque.
Keep in mind its the 383, that is pushing up my torque numbers, but rwhp is all from the head/cam combo!
The hawk just got re-tuned and dyno'ed at:
431 rwhp & 428 rear torque.
Keep in mind its the 383, that is pushing up my torque numbers, but rwhp is all from the head/cam combo!
Trending Topics
04-23-2006, 06:05 PM
#8
10 Second Club
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kansas City, KS
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Michael02hawk
Yup - and I'm 100% happy with the way its running.
04-23-2006, 07:14 PM
#9
Originally Posted by 383ss
I had a 224/224 comp XE in my old 383 years ago, it was putting out 435rwhp back then. swapped to a 236/232 and picked up power everywhere. glad you are happy with it
I see the new found power in your sig line...very nice numbers!
I'll jot down your cam specs for future referance. :-)
04-23-2006, 08:36 PM
#10
Originally Posted by whiteLS1
with that cam i would not do either
Not gonna get into an argument with you because your obviously just being a tard. You think 440 rwhp and 420tq on 346 stock cu inches are small numbers?
This is a pure money question. If you can afford the afr's there is no question which head you should get. If I had the money I would have bought AFR's in a heart beat.
