AFR still the best LSX head on the market?
03-02-2008, 11:04 AM
#81
Combination IS what it is all about. AFR 205s 62cc and a 224/228 .600/.600 114 cam from Ed Curtis. Nice dyno numbers 445 rwhp 397.7 rwtq and nice results 11.7681 @ 118.12 on my NA A4 LS1. ...that being said I haven't seen another NA A4 LS1 GTO with Trick Flow or ETP heads beat either.
03-03-2008, 12:04 AM
#82
Originally Posted by hammertime
We've already seen that the AFR heads are worth 35-40rwhp over stockers, so I don't understand why 436 with a mild cam and bolt-ons is so hard to swallow...
Lesson learned, sackriders/nut swingers come in all flavors...
Lesson learned, sackriders/nut swingers come in all flavors...
Ive done a few 224 cam cars that made right near 400. Fresh 02 type healthier ex 6 speed cars with very good exh. FYI, some of those cars you linked to I did
And the guys that since put heads on their cars, are all right around 400-410 rwtq now, al with real exh system and intakes etc.This guys 432 lbs tq with a FAST, and real catback ( Ive seen ditching a Flowmaster), and headers and whatever else, hell be the first to make 460 lbs torque on 346! First 11:1 compression engine in history to make 1.55 lbs/cube on engine dyno. Jon Kaase, Joe Sherm, Bischoff and the last 5 guys bulding kamikazee Engine Masters mills are writing pms RIGHT NOW! I dont think SAMs made that on their 427 at 15.5:1
I guess he managed to bend the rules of physics? OR his dyno numbers are skewed Sarcasm aside, it just isnt happening. You can make hp (by moving aroudn your torque curve) but you cant fabricate extra torque out of thin air. You can limit torque because of subpar parts, but you arent going to figure out how to make 120% VE or whatever youd need to do that through a blowmaster!
There is a best cyl head, and there is also a best cylinder head for your application. May or may not be the same head.
By the way, hammertime was over when the pants went out of style! And to the original poster of this thread, listen to the people who have put running combinations together with your goals in mind, disregard the "I have this so these are best" junk and youll be alright.
03-03-2008, 12:07 AM
#83
Combination IS what it is all about. AFR 205s 62cc and a 224/228 .600/.600 114 cam from Ed Curtis. Nice dyno numbers 445 rwhp 397.7 rwtq and nice results 11.7681 @ 118.12 on my NA A4 LS1. ...that being said I haven't seen another NA A4 LS1 GTO with Trick Flow or ETP heads beat either.
03-03-2008, 02:21 PM
#84
Dont resort to namecalling that will end up with you being embarrased. Apparently the uneducated come in all flavors, as you cant distinguish between torque and hp. Im pretty sure your not a WD dealer for every head talked about in here... I am. Im pretty sure youve never A-B tested AFRs/ETs of the same port size, I have. WIth camshaft changes afterwards to best suite each as well.
Ive done a few 224 cam cars that made right near 400. Fresh 02 type healthier ex 6 speed cars with very good exh. FYI, some of those cars you linked to I did And the guys that since put heads on their cars, are all right around 400-410 rwtq now, al with real exh system and intakes etc.
This guys 432 lbs tq with a FAST, and real catback ( Ive seen ditching a Flowmaster), and headers and whatever else, hell be the first to make 460 lbs torque on 346! First 11:1 compression engine in history to make 1.55 lbs/cube on engine dyno. Jon Kaase, Joe Sherm, Bischoff and the last 5 guys bulding kamikazee Engine Masters mills are writing pms RIGHT NOW! I dont think SAMs made that on their 427 at 15.5:1
I guess he managed to bend the rules of physics? OR his dyno numbers are skewed Sarcasm aside, it just isnt happening. You can make hp (by moving aroudn your torque curve) but you cant fabricate extra torque out of thin air. You can limit torque because of subpar parts, but you arent going to figure out how to make 120% VE or whatever youd need to do that through a blowmaster!
There is a best cyl head, and there is also a best cylinder head for your application. May or may not be the same head.
By the way, hammertime was over when the pants went out of style! And to the original poster of this thread, listen to the people who have put running combinations together with your goals in mind, disregard the "I have this so these are best" junk and youll be alright.
Ive done a few 224 cam cars that made right near 400. Fresh 02 type healthier ex 6 speed cars with very good exh. FYI, some of those cars you linked to I did
And the guys that since put heads on their cars, are all right around 400-410 rwtq now, al with real exh system and intakes etc.This guys 432 lbs tq with a FAST, and real catback ( Ive seen ditching a Flowmaster), and headers and whatever else, hell be the first to make 460 lbs torque on 346! First 11:1 compression engine in history to make 1.55 lbs/cube on engine dyno. Jon Kaase, Joe Sherm, Bischoff and the last 5 guys bulding kamikazee Engine Masters mills are writing pms RIGHT NOW! I dont think SAMs made that on their 427 at 15.5:1
I guess he managed to bend the rules of physics? OR his dyno numbers are skewed Sarcasm aside, it just isnt happening. You can make hp (by moving aroudn your torque curve) but you cant fabricate extra torque out of thin air. You can limit torque because of subpar parts, but you arent going to figure out how to make 120% VE or whatever youd need to do that through a blowmaster!
There is a best cyl head, and there is also a best cylinder head for your application. May or may not be the same head.
By the way, hammertime was over when the pants went out of style! And to the original poster of this thread, listen to the people who have put running combinations together with your goals in mind, disregard the "I have this so these are best" junk and youll be alright.
Based upon that, I concurr that the numbers don't add up. My point was why doesn't 430hp add up, but I agree the torque numbers are off enough to question the validity of the numbers.
Apologies for the name calling, 'cause I clearly didn't read the graph right.
03-03-2008, 03:39 PM
#85
Ok, I gotta admit...I went back and looked at that graph again, and somehow I missed that it made 430tq (even though I quoted you stating that).
Based upon that, I concurr that the numbers don't add up. My point was why doesn't 430hp add up, but I agree the torque numbers are off enough to question the validity of the numbers.
Apologies for the name calling, 'cause I clearly didn't read the graph right.
Based upon that, I concurr that the numbers don't add up. My point was why doesn't 430hp add up, but I agree the torque numbers are off enough to question the validity of the numbers.
Apologies for the name calling, 'cause I clearly didn't read the graph right.
