SLP4CamaroSS

iTrader: (16)

which heads be best for a x2 , x3 x4 i have decided on the cam yet

N4cer

iTrader: (11)

The reason I decided on the Livernois with my X3:
1 - I have seen the Livernois Stage 1 and a G5X2 work GREAT together.
2 - I like their smaller intake runner size better than some other options.
3 - I wanted the Darts but they don't have enough people using them and posting experience to convince me that it's worth taking the chance.
4 - I haven't heard horror stories about the rocker mounts breaking like with some competitors.

Honestly, I'd like to see you do the G5X2 and some Dart 205s. I almost got that setup, and I think it'd be sweet. But I think any of the above 3 heads will do a great job for you after we've talked about your goals. But I voted for the Livernois because I've seen that setup work for sure.

Zach@Texas-Speed

iTrader: (7)

Go with what is known to make power, don't go by internet hype or people who sit behind a computer and act like they know what they are talking about. The PRC stage 1 head cannot be beaten for the money, it is proven to make great power. Go with what has been proven to make power!! Pick up this month's GM High Tech Performance and see what the PRC heads did during dyno testing. Don't spend more money for a product that is NOT going to perform as well.

If you need any pricing or info let me know and I'll be glad to help!

Zach

N4cer

iTrader: (11)

There ya go. My sentiments exactly. You can't go wrong with the PRCs or the Livernois. There's tons of happy PRC 243 users on here. And I've personally witnessed happy customers with the PRCs (well the only set I've seen a local have) and the Livernois. I actually don't know anyone who wishes they hadn't bought either of those 2 heads.

SLP4CamaroSS

iTrader: (16)

Livernois sound simlar to the patriot heads

N4cer

iTrader: (11)

Nah. They're a 243 similar to the PRCs. I'm not for or against either head. I think both are great. I've just personally witnessed more great combos with the Liv's because that's what people bought.

Xtnct00WS6

iTrader: (8)

You're comparing apples to oranges here. Aftermarket casting vs GM casting? The dart has more potential in it, but a 243 budget head is pretty hard to beat for the price.

SLP4CamaroSS

iTrader: (16)

there all around 1100-1300

N4cer

iTrader: (11)

Yeah, considering price it's apples to apples, if price is the constant that you're comparing.

Sigforty

I say go with the Darts. I used them with a Futral cam and msde 452 rwhp and 423 rwtq. I have the 205s, but would suggest the 225s for later growth. There are numerous people using the Darts here in Louisiana and making great power.

Zach@Texas-Speed

iTrader: (7)

BTW, a dart 205 out of the box does not even compare to either PRC or Livernois stage 1 heads. The last out of the box 205 we put on the flowbench went 265 or something like that, it does not flow well whatsoever. Go pick up the new GM High Tech magazine and look at what they flowed the Dart at, a whopping 261 @ .600

N4cer

iTrader: (11)

For what reason would you use the 225's? I was under the impression that 225's were only good for an all-top end max effort motor, or for a larger cubed motor.

N4cer

iTrader: (11)

Hey Zach, wouldn't the smaller intake runner of the Darts offset the slightly lower flowbench numbers, since in reality flowbench numbers are not the only important number? Or do you think the flow numbers really are too low for anything to offset them?

after dark

iTrader: (5)

The November issue titled "Worlds Baddest LSX's"?

Studytime

iTrader: (15)

Zach, I know you have faith in your product, but so do other vendors. You're claiming your heads flow FIFTY MORE cfm than the Dart 205s? That's absurd. Every flowbech is different, but when my Dart 205s went on the bench they flowed THREE cfm less than the vulnerable AFR 205s. Saying the port "does not flow well whatsoever" is ludacris. Take an extra 20cc of material out of a Dart 205 and it'll flow every bit of what a CNC LS6 head does (again, on the same bench). I know peak flow numbers are what sells heads, but it's not the full story. 280cfm out of a 205cc port could very well make the same power as a 300 cfm 23xcc port. As for torque (air speed through the smaller port) I won't even bother...

If the Dart heads flow so poorly, why is Allen Futral continuing to order set after set for customer cars? Probably because they don't flow quite so poorly.

For the record my Dart 205s flowed 280 cfm. On the same bench your heads went 30x cfm.

Ben T.

N4cer

iTrader: (11)

I'm curious about the same thing, Ben. Maybe TSP will show their faith by allowing some independent flowbenching, and showing something like CFM per cc of intake runner volume. That would help sell their products to people who know more than just follow the advertising.

KingSS

iTrader: (1)

I dont' think GM High tech got thier flow numbers from Texas Speed's flow bench, so wouldnt that make 2 different flow benches flowing pretty close to the same numbers?

Zach@Texas-Speed

iTrader: (7)

yes sir

Brian @ Texas Speed & Performance

iTrader: (1)

The Dart heads we flowed(that went 265 on our bench) were out of the box Darts. If you have seen this months GMHTP article, then you know that they flowed 261CFM(on an independent bench). Our stage 1 CNC head flows 308CFM at .600" on our bench. Absurd? No. With numbers from 2 different benches flowing this low, it wouldn't be a hard decision on which head to go with. I'm not saying they don't have the potential to flow well with a good port, but out of the box Darts aren't that impressive. In fact, the Darts that we used to port flowed very well.
No bother, my car made 409-410RWtq with a 237cc runner, so if you're going with the theory that big runner heads don't make torque then...
You're right, we do have faith in our products. We are willing to put any of our heads up against any other head. If I remember correctly, we tried to do that once...somehow we had some heads ready but it turned out the "other" company couldn't send heads (We were going to dyno test heads back to back on an independent dyno). We won't speak for what other companies do or do not use. We always post honest results. Customers verify whatever shops advertise for flow numbers, so why would we lie? Our heads were flow-tested at the School of Automotive Machinists in Houston, and they flowed MORE than what we advertise on their bench! Thunder Racing has also flow-tested our cylinder heads. The last thing we lack is credibility. The heads are more than proven, and time and time again people want to think that more money has to translate to a better product. Just because our cylinder heads cost less does NOT mean that it's an inferior head. It's nothing more than mind over matter in a numbers game. We're well aware that peak numbers aren't everything. Remember, we're the ones with a cylinder head company. Assuming peak numbers are everything is just as bad as assuming that you won't make any torque with a larger runner port. I doubt that the flow numbers that GMHTP published are bogus. If they are, I would expect there to be HUGE liability for them.

Brian

N4cer

iTrader: (11)

They usually use the manufacturer's claimed numbers for products, but maybe they did it differently this time. I'm not saying either way.