Blue Pill 6.0 224 combo
Blue pill combo....LOL
Nice results Pred.....thanks for sharing.
As I mentioned in my recent 383 thread....alot of people assume because a product is newer it must be better....trust me that is not always the case. I have said this before (numerous times) and I will say it again....if your choosing among the aftermarket "big three", your results will likely be extremely close and it almost comes down to who did a better job setting up and designing a better "package" more than anything else (every AFR headed set up with the right complimenting parts has delivered results that far exceed what you would consider to be "average"). Some products may offer advantages over the others....our 205 shines being a direct bolt on (emissions legal) and also due to the nature of its design (small extremely efficient runners), always produces solid part throttle/low speed results (and good WOT results as well down low), making the care more responsive as well as obviously a lot faster. On the street that is king and most people that don't value that advantage have likely never experienced it.
BTW....if this car was in the States I would have sent you one of my ported FAST intakes with a no questions asked return policy. I guarantee you would see an improvement in peak torque and a big improvement in high RPM HP (I'm talking 15, maybe even 20 RWHP over your ported LS2 intake . In two previous tests a ported FAST I did made 30+ more HP and 20+ ft/lbs over a stock LS2 intake which most of us already know is the weakest LS intake ever offered (arguably tied with the LS1 or worse).
Thanks again for the post....look forward to the dyno graph assuming you guys are working on posting one
Regards,
Tony
Nice results Pred.....thanks for sharing.
As I mentioned in my recent 383 thread....alot of people assume because a product is newer it must be better....trust me that is not always the case. I have said this before (numerous times) and I will say it again....if your choosing among the aftermarket "big three", your results will likely be extremely close and it almost comes down to who did a better job setting up and designing a better "package" more than anything else (every AFR headed set up with the right complimenting parts has delivered results that far exceed what you would consider to be "average"). Some products may offer advantages over the others....our 205 shines being a direct bolt on (emissions legal) and also due to the nature of its design (small extremely efficient runners), always produces solid part throttle/low speed results (and good WOT results as well down low), making the care more responsive as well as obviously a lot faster. On the street that is king and most people that don't value that advantage have likely never experienced it.
BTW....if this car was in the States I would have sent you one of my ported FAST intakes with a no questions asked return policy. I guarantee you would see an improvement in peak torque and a big improvement in high RPM HP (I'm talking 15, maybe even 20 RWHP over your ported LS2 intake . In two previous tests a ported FAST I did made 30+ more HP and 20+ ft/lbs over a stock LS2 intake which most of us already know is the weakest LS intake ever offered (arguably tied with the LS1 or worse).
Thanks again for the post....look forward to the dyno graph assuming you guys are working on posting one
Regards,
Tony
Last edited by Tony Mamo @ AFR; Sep 17, 2008 at 01:46 PM.
Most of the old timers get it (because they were here when the entertaining similarities of both situations were brought up), but for the benefit of some of the newer members....
In 2004, we were the first major player in the LS Gen III market (the first actually to produce an aftermarket LS product) and when we got here all I can say is some of the flow numbers being thrown around these boards were insane....it was like one shop lied a bit to generate sales and got one-upped by the next shop (a fatter lie), and so on, and so on. You would have believed years ago that every ported stock casting flowed well over 300 CFM when the reality was based on all the actual (real world) data I accumulated (and there was alot of it), most fell short of 300 CFM and some quite a bit short. When we first started advertising our new 205's everyone thought we were crazy for bringing to market "such a small port"....and one that flowed "only 300 CFM"....LOL (When I had personally tested numerous 220-240 cc ports that would have been proud to have gotten there....one of the worst was a 246 cc port that flowed 287 CFM and this was a big name popular head).
So....the whole "blue pill" comes from the direct parallel to the Matrix where on the red pill, you can aimlessly walk the earth and think that everything is fine OR, take the blue pill and endure the harsh reality that you just came out of a coma of sorts and only a very small percentage of the earths population is left fighting the machine world which is trying to take over (at least that's my quick and semi-accurate description of the movie plot!).
Taken in the context of cylinder heads and this hobby that we all know and love, I was relating the same type of thinking to the fact some people would rather take the "red pill" and think they have a really killer head (based on BS flow numbers) then realize in the REAL WORLD their very large intake port only flows 290 CFM (making it extremely in-efficient) and that a switch to our much more efficient and higher flowing AFR 205 would make a HUGE improvement in every aspect of performance.
Essentially the blue pill would provide clarity and truths to things cylinder head related as well as performance related (some truths hurt btw) where someone taking the red pill would sleep peacefully at night thinking they had the field covered based purely on falsified data that was completely out to lunch (inflated flow and/or dyno numbers).
Its a rude awakening though when someone with a smaller head, less cam, and perfect drivability walks em by four car lengths though....then the red pill starts tasting a little sour....LOL
Regards,
Tony
BTW....For all you Matrix purists, I KNOW its actually the other way around (the red pill provides the clarity and the blue pill is for people who like to live in a delusional state of mind), BUT Ive got too many years invested in promoting the blue pill to start changing things now!!
(Try to keep it on the D/L!)
In 2004, we were the first major player in the LS Gen III market (the first actually to produce an aftermarket LS product) and when we got here all I can say is some of the flow numbers being thrown around these boards were insane....it was like one shop lied a bit to generate sales and got one-upped by the next shop (a fatter lie), and so on, and so on. You would have believed years ago that every ported stock casting flowed well over 300 CFM when the reality was based on all the actual (real world) data I accumulated (and there was alot of it), most fell short of 300 CFM and some quite a bit short. When we first started advertising our new 205's everyone thought we were crazy for bringing to market "such a small port"....and one that flowed "only 300 CFM"....LOL (When I had personally tested numerous 220-240 cc ports that would have been proud to have gotten there....one of the worst was a 246 cc port that flowed 287 CFM and this was a big name popular head).
So....the whole "blue pill" comes from the direct parallel to the Matrix where on the red pill, you can aimlessly walk the earth and think that everything is fine OR, take the blue pill and endure the harsh reality that you just came out of a coma of sorts and only a very small percentage of the earths population is left fighting the machine world which is trying to take over (at least that's my quick and semi-accurate description of the movie plot!).
Taken in the context of cylinder heads and this hobby that we all know and love, I was relating the same type of thinking to the fact some people would rather take the "red pill" and think they have a really killer head (based on BS flow numbers) then realize in the REAL WORLD their very large intake port only flows 290 CFM (making it extremely in-efficient) and that a switch to our much more efficient and higher flowing AFR 205 would make a HUGE improvement in every aspect of performance.
Essentially the blue pill would provide clarity and truths to things cylinder head related as well as performance related (some truths hurt btw) where someone taking the red pill would sleep peacefully at night thinking they had the field covered based purely on falsified data that was completely out to lunch (inflated flow and/or dyno numbers).
Its a rude awakening though when someone with a smaller head, less cam, and perfect drivability walks em by four car lengths though....then the red pill starts tasting a little sour....LOL
Regards,
Tony
BTW....For all you Matrix purists, I KNOW its actually the other way around (the red pill provides the clarity and the blue pill is for people who like to live in a delusional state of mind), BUT Ive got too many years invested in promoting the blue pill to start changing things now!!
(Try to keep it on the D/L!)
Last edited by Tony Mamo @ AFR; Sep 17, 2008 at 07:25 PM.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,259
Likes: 0
From: Lexington, KY
When someone says blue pill I think of viagra.
Those heads never fail to deliver. What surprises me most these days though is the performance people are getting from what most consider "small" cams.
Those heads never fail to deliver. What surprises me most these days though is the performance people are getting from what most consider "small" cams.
Thread Starter
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 14,620
Likes: 17
From: BFE
So big cams which according to their specs should produce xxx power, are only dishing out xx.y because of those limitations. In short those huge cams are only using a partial amount of their true potential because they are not supported accordingly in the combo.
Exemple, to optimize cylinder pressure for a huge cam like T-Rex, you'd need 12.1:1 SCR and 55 cc chambers on a stock block. Not to mention this wouldn't fit and a small chamber on a stock casting is going to reduce flow and be counter productive.
Bottom line although the biggest, that is a pure drag cam and to use its potential fully, an expensive, forged, top of line motor with sheet metal intake would have to be built. For street it would be a dog.
All in all, it is not a good cam for stock block unless you are a dragaholic and even then, I've had smaller cams beat them regularly.
That is why well balanced and thought of combos like Tony's 224/228/AFR (346) or his 23x/23x 383ci are proof and fact of ultimate street combos.
For clearer picture, you might want to read some archives such as "cfm requirements" by J-Rod and the actual limitations of certain parts (mainly intakes).
So big cams which according to their specs should produce xxx power, are only dishing out xx.y because of those limitations. In short those huge cams are only using a partial amount of their true potential because they are not supported accordingly in the combo.
Exemple, to optimize cylinder pressure for a huge cam like T-Rex, you'd need 12.1:1 SCR and 55 cc chambers on a stock block. Not to mention this wouldn't fit and a small chamber on a stock casting is going to reduce flow and be counter productive.
Bottom line although the biggest, that is a pure drag cam and to use its potential fully, an expensive, forged, top of line motor with sheet metal intake would have to be built. For street it would be a dog.
All in all, it is not a good cam for stock block unless you are a dragaholic and even then, I've had smaller cams beat them regularly.
That is why well balanced and thought of combos like Tony's 224/228/AFR (346) or his 23x/23x 383ci are proof and fact of ultimate street combos.
So big cams which according to their specs should produce xxx power, are only dishing out xx.y because of those limitations. In short those huge cams are only using a partial amount of their true potential because they are not supported accordingly in the combo.
Exemple, to optimize cylinder pressure for a huge cam like T-Rex, you'd need 12.1:1 SCR and 55 cc chambers on a stock block. Not to mention this wouldn't fit and a small chamber on a stock casting is going to reduce flow and be counter productive.
Bottom line although the biggest, that is a pure drag cam and to use its potential fully, an expensive, forged, top of line motor with sheet metal intake would have to be built. For street it would be a dog.
All in all, it is not a good cam for stock block unless you are a dragaholic and even then, I've had smaller cams beat them regularly.
That is why well balanced and thought of combos like Tony's 224/228/AFR (346) or his 23x/23x 383ci are proof and fact of ultimate street combos.
Good post Pred as always
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,259
Likes: 0
From: Lexington, KY
For clearer picture, you might want to read some archives such as "cfm requirements" by J-Rod and the actual limitations of certain parts (mainly intakes).
So big cams which according to their specs should produce xxx power, are only dishing out xx.y because of those limitations. In short those huge cams are only using a partial amount of their true potential because they are not supported accordingly in the combo.
Exemple, to optimize cylinder pressure for a huge cam like T-Rex, you'd need 12.1:1 SCR and 55 cc chambers on a stock block. Not to mention this wouldn't fit and a small chamber on a stock casting is going to reduce flow and be counter productive.
Bottom line although the biggest, that is a pure drag cam and to use its potential fully, an expensive, forged, top of line motor with sheet metal intake would have to be built. For street it would be a dog.
All in all, it is not a good cam for stock block unless you are a dragaholic and even then, I've had smaller cams beat them regularly.
That is why well balanced and thought of combos like Tony's 224/228/AFR (346) or his 23x/23x 383ci are proof and fact of ultimate street combos.
So big cams which according to their specs should produce xxx power, are only dishing out xx.y because of those limitations. In short those huge cams are only using a partial amount of their true potential because they are not supported accordingly in the combo.
Exemple, to optimize cylinder pressure for a huge cam like T-Rex, you'd need 12.1:1 SCR and 55 cc chambers on a stock block. Not to mention this wouldn't fit and a small chamber on a stock casting is going to reduce flow and be counter productive.
Bottom line although the biggest, that is a pure drag cam and to use its potential fully, an expensive, forged, top of line motor with sheet metal intake would have to be built. For street it would be a dog.
All in all, it is not a good cam for stock block unless you are a dragaholic and even then, I've had smaller cams beat them regularly.
That is why well balanced and thought of combos like Tony's 224/228/AFR (346) or his 23x/23x 383ci are proof and fact of ultimate street combos.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
