Massive dyno testing session.....revealed
Hmm, something to ponder for sure!
I'd also LOVE to see someone toss a set of MAC headers on a comparison test. MANY people run these and there is hardly any info out there on them.
Hmm, something to ponder for sure!
I'd also LOVE to see someone toss a set of MAC headers on a comparison test. MANY people run these and there is hardly any info out there on them.
I think that this thread is reinforcing the fact that you should pick what is "better" for your wallet. As said, if you want that last bit of edge, you are going to pay for the premium. Isn't this true for anything you buy?
Well, you've got me there. The TEA products were true production pieces. The TFS were early prototypes that have gone through 2 revisions since and have not been retested, the newest design is the best of course. An independent third party did test the TFS heads at the same facility you use, Westech. They made 52 HP at the crank, the single largest gain they have ever seen by simply switching from stock LS1 heads to any aftermarket LS1 head. And remember, those gains were with the stock unmilled TFS chamber, not milled to 59cc as is typically done with many other heads. Also don't forget our 5.3 heads were also tested at Westech in 2003 and made 540 at the crank, the most overall power they have seen to this day with a bolt-on stock shortblock, so there is no swaying of numbers in this test, it can be backed up anywhere.
Well, your chamber is advertised at 67cc, it measured 66cc. I will recheck the exhaust port, but last time we checked it, it measured 88cc
Granted, but we have both seen guys with unmilled heads with average power output and wonder why. They think their combo should be 30 RWHP better then a good ported head and it's simply not. The low speed throttle response is hard to qualify and we haven't seen the small ports make more torque down low at WOT.
Very well said Tony, I agree, and thanks.
I have a Question for Brian.
In your statement about the Trick flow heads, and the third party testing,
If the cc is the same on the trick flow and ls1 head, and so is compression, How do they get 52 more hp? Bigger valves and porting ? I am referring to a article in GM Hightech performance, the heads they were using were Edelbrock that are designed by Lingenfelter.
thanks Warren
Last edited by wildta; Jun 22, 2006 at 06:55 AM.
i want to see the data of the other 5 heads, the 10 cams, the comparisons between the 1 3/4 hookers vs the 1 7/8 kooks, ect. this thread could of been a gold mine of information but im a bit disapointed considering the circumstances.
Last edited by jrp; Jun 21, 2006 at 09:28 PM.
Great test though, and tons of valuable information for sure. I think Tony made some great points as well, especially with the "average Joe" point. Numerous cases of real world evidence is the best way to test these various combos, especially considering the insane amount of variables involved in each individual set-up. Anyone who visits the dyno section frequently knows why AFR's are the leading competitor.
stang90gt50 has made a nice history of bashing AFR every chance he got a few months ago. Sadly, he could not back up his claims with any dyno sheets, nor a story that held any water. Give it up man!
please keep your flames to yourself.
Damn, you beat me to it.
Nice test Brian.
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
My 427 N/A made 500 rwhp/500 rwtorque at only 6,000,
The best heads are still limited by the MAF, TB, intake and exhaust which is why I just kept my well ported LQ9's that flow well across the board and I just ran some turbo's.
My sincerest apologies for hi jacking:
When did your 427 make 500/500 Brent........ (I'm actually looking at your dyno graph as I type: care for me to scan it
) ............. and WHEN did a set of ported LQ9's that don't even flow as good as a patriot head be considered a good head? (I've seen the "great" numbers that came from WCCH, as well as the numbers from when they we're flowed locally
)Back to the topic at hand..... Thanks TEA for the R&D
I saw one local test where a low dollar brand did just as well as high dollar brand as well.
.
Brent- what test was this..... would you care to share specific details or is that " proprietory information" also
I have both TEA(girlfriends car) and AFR products and I am very happy with both!
From left to right, sig pic, TEA 5.7's milled .030, 3 years old, TEA 5.3 1.5's, , AFR 205's box stock, and Stock, lol.
It's not a heads up test but then you post superimposed dyno graphs between the TEA and 205 head. All the TEA dynos end 200-300 rpm sooner than the 205 dynos.
So which was the best head? I see it mentioned as the best head but I'm not clear which one it is.
Were the Dart heads tested?
The headers were a set of Hooker 1 3/4" and a set of Kooks 1 7/8", the intakes were a LS6 and a Fast 90/90
The TEA heads with the smaller 1.55 exhaust valves liked the bigger headers and made more power everywhere, the TFS heads with their 1.57 exhaust valves didn't care and the 205 head with the 1.60 valves did not like the big headers, which also carried the biggest exhaust port volume at 88cc.
J rod if this happened almost nobody could compete. You would have ET 215's, ET 225's, AFR 205's, AFR 225's, Dart 205's, Dart 225's, Elderbrock 215's, TSF 215's, TSF 225's, and about 2 or 3 ported GM heads.
It would end up being a aftermarket test because damn near every CnC GM casting head is easily over 225 cc's.
Maybe if we did 235 cc's it would work but even still quite a few vendors would be left out because of their larger CnC program. Hell TSP stage 1 LS6 is like 237cc's but I feel they should be tested against the rest.
Anyways this will more then likely never happen but just figured I would add something to your post.
JZ
This would be easy to do using the LSx engine if you could get enough venders to volunteer their heads for the test. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN !!!





Really great info and worth while read!!!!!! Thanks Brian for all your R&D time, makes me think my future goals are closer ($$$ wise) than i previously thought!!