SPS LS3 Cylinder Heads
04-14-2017, 05:58 AM
#41
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Naw: not just doing what's been done or the same Factory Stuff with a NEW name with this or that. Creative artist. I can send some factory LS3 heads anytime when anyone goes to the Dyno vs the facory. You Can not and will not beat $1600 for a Pair for a N/a build with CNC. A name don't mean JACK. Who done them is the key and I only bother the best.
Check your mail KW Baraka.
Check your mail KW Baraka.
Last edited by Wiliam Munny; 04-14-2017 at 06:34 AM.
04-14-2017, 09:04 AM
#43
I did some C/D comparisons... from .200 to .600 (since TEA doesn't list TFS 245 above 600). Of course, I'd rather they were all flowed on the same bench, but eh. So a happier bench makes for a higher C/D.
Also, recall, the formula for coefficient of discharge is as follows: C/D=airflow/curtain area. Curtain area=valve diameter x Pi x Lift.
Avg from .200-.600:
TFS 245.....SPS Haymaker.....TFS 255.....MMS235
104.79......104.94................100.07.......101 .33
And for the hell of it, my TEA Stage 2 LS6 heads were a 99.46.
Also, recall, the formula for coefficient of discharge is as follows: C/D=airflow/curtain area. Curtain area=valve diameter x Pi x Lift.
Avg from .200-.600:
TFS 245.....SPS Haymaker.....TFS 255.....MMS235
104.79......104.94................100.07.......101 .33
And for the hell of it, my TEA Stage 2 LS6 heads were a 99.46.
04-14-2017, 09:13 AM
#44
TECH Senior Member
04-14-2017, 09:25 AM
#45
And I was more curious...
Based on published flow numbers. So inflated cfm ratings can alter this. But you can see something here. All these heads are pretty close on avg. So they are all similarly efficient in terms of valve to flow. Which matters more than port size. If you have to stick a huge valve in the head to flow... you end up with softer numbers despite a huge flow advantage - see LS3 heads.
However, this is just .200-.600. When you start looking at .700 numbers the larger heads with larger runners and larger valves start to flex their muscle. Because they are flowing more air and are starting to become more efficient at that point. You just have to run a cam to take advantage of the added curtain area and airflow potential.
Avg C/D
101.48 TEA 255
106.42 TFS 235
106.57 TFS 245
101.48 TEA St2
103.52 MMS 235
104.94 SPS Hay
101.01 MAST 255
102.61 MAST 240
Made an edit - had the .55 numbers in there for some, which brought down the overall efficiency as it was another data point that others didn't have. So not a true apples-to-apples comparison.
Based on published flow numbers. So inflated cfm ratings can alter this. But you can see something here. All these heads are pretty close on avg. So they are all similarly efficient in terms of valve to flow. Which matters more than port size. If you have to stick a huge valve in the head to flow... you end up with softer numbers despite a huge flow advantage - see LS3 heads.
However, this is just .200-.600. When you start looking at .700 numbers the larger heads with larger runners and larger valves start to flex their muscle. Because they are flowing more air and are starting to become more efficient at that point. You just have to run a cam to take advantage of the added curtain area and airflow potential.
Avg C/D
101.48 TEA 255
106.42 TFS 235
106.57 TFS 245
101.48 TEA St2
103.52 MMS 235
104.94 SPS Hay
101.01 MAST 255
102.61 MAST 240
Made an edit - had the .55 numbers in there for some, which brought down the overall efficiency as it was another data point that others didn't have. So not a true apples-to-apples comparison.
Last edited by JakeFusion; 04-14-2017 at 09:33 AM.
04-14-2017, 09:31 AM
#46
I did some C/D comparisons... from .200 to .600 (since TEA doesn't list TFS 245 above 600). Of course, I'd rather they were all flowed on the same bench, but eh. So a happier bench makes for a higher C/D.
Also, recall, the formula for coefficient of discharge is as follows: C/D=airflow/curtain area. Curtain area=valve diameter x Pi x Lift.
Avg from .200-.600:
TFS 245.....SPS Haymaker.....TFS 255.....MMS235
104.79......104.94................100.07.......101 .33
And for the hell of it, my TEA Stage 2 LS6 heads were a 99.46.
Also, recall, the formula for coefficient of discharge is as follows: C/D=airflow/curtain area. Curtain area=valve diameter x Pi x Lift.
Avg from .200-.600:
TFS 245.....SPS Haymaker.....TFS 255.....MMS235
104.79......104.94................100.07.......101 .33
And for the hell of it, my TEA Stage 2 LS6 heads were a 99.46.
Jake, can you figure mine for me. Here are the flow numbers:
04-14-2017, 09:36 AM
#47
Yep, added it here.
Avg C/D
101.48 TEA 255
106.42 TFS 235
106.57 TFS 245
101.48 TEA St2
103.52 MMS 235
104.94 SPS Hay
101.01 MAST 255
102.61 MAST 240
103.18 Ai Dart
.700 numbers
78.34 TEA 255
80.25 SPS Hay
78.13 MAST 255
77.17 MAST 240
71.39 Ai Dart
Avg C/D
101.48 TEA 255
106.42 TFS 235
106.57 TFS 245
101.48 TEA St2
103.52 MMS 235
104.94 SPS Hay
101.01 MAST 255
102.61 MAST 240
103.18 Ai Dart
.700 numbers
78.34 TEA 255
80.25 SPS Hay
78.13 MAST 255
77.17 MAST 240
71.39 Ai Dart
04-14-2017, 10:02 AM
#51
In terms of efficiency, yes. Which means the larger valve'd heads aren't flowing more air for a given curtain area compared to your heads. They flow more cfm tho, so they will make more power if you put them on a bigger engine. Put them on a smaller engine and your heads would make more power as the valve becomes shrouded and less efficient and ultimately, flows less. But we know that you size the head for the application. But what you can look at is the power per CID or some other measure of an engine's efficiency. And it should be fairly similar since the heads are flowing a certain amount of air with a certain curtain area in play.
But it's interesting to compare heads like an LS3 to a Cathedral where they would be flowed on a 4.125" bore. And the cfm numbers are fairly similar. But the cathedral port head is more efficient - doing it with less valve and probably less runner volume. So the velocity and airspeed are higher. So you get better cylinder fill. And thus, more power. And then you look at something like the MAST 285 LS7 heads... and they are more efficient and flow a lot more everywhere. And the larger runner supports a larger motor and more RPM. So for an NA motor, the LS7 head is still king. Then Cathedral. And then I think LS3s are somewhere below that. Though the new SPS heads look promising.
With an FI motor... go with the highest possible cfm rating and largest valve. It'll support more boosted power. And this is where an LS3 head makes some sense as it can flow more than the cathedral port. But for a motor that relies on pressure differential and intake velocity, the more efficient the head, the more real world power it makes.
The SPS Haymaker uses a smaller valve to create flow numbers similar to TFS 255s and MAST 255s... but does so with a little more CSA. I think that's probably a good trade off. Uptop it doesn't lose flow but down low, it creates more velocity with the smaller valve.
But it's interesting to compare heads like an LS3 to a Cathedral where they would be flowed on a 4.125" bore. And the cfm numbers are fairly similar. But the cathedral port head is more efficient - doing it with less valve and probably less runner volume. So the velocity and airspeed are higher. So you get better cylinder fill. And thus, more power. And then you look at something like the MAST 285 LS7 heads... and they are more efficient and flow a lot more everywhere. And the larger runner supports a larger motor and more RPM. So for an NA motor, the LS7 head is still king. Then Cathedral. And then I think LS3s are somewhere below that. Though the new SPS heads look promising.
With an FI motor... go with the highest possible cfm rating and largest valve. It'll support more boosted power. And this is where an LS3 head makes some sense as it can flow more than the cathedral port. But for a motor that relies on pressure differential and intake velocity, the more efficient the head, the more real world power it makes.
The SPS Haymaker uses a smaller valve to create flow numbers similar to TFS 255s and MAST 255s... but does so with a little more CSA. I think that's probably a good trade off. Uptop it doesn't lose flow but down low, it creates more velocity with the smaller valve.
Last edited by JakeFusion; 04-14-2017 at 10:16 AM.
04-14-2017, 10:51 PM
#52
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just saw this thread, figured I'd chime in here with my Gavin/SPS experience. It was ****.
he hosted a raffle for CNC Port service on a set of 243 heads, I entered, won. I opted for 1100 in extras (valves, BTR cam kit through him, lifters, lifter trays etc), was told 3 weeks after he got my heads. took in reality 5 weeks to get heads back, one was mine, was was not. One head had 3 2.02 intake valves, and a 2.04 intake valve. none of the valve seats were cut even close to properly, 55% leakdown when bolted to my block. took 2 more weeks to figure out the rest of the bullshit. (never did get my original head back). in the end he refunded me only $120 to have a local shop cut the seats again, sent me 8 valve stem seals, and one head gasket. I'd not do business with him ever again.
I have video, Pictures, and copy of the entire conversations for proof.
he hosted a raffle for CNC Port service on a set of 243 heads, I entered, won. I opted for 1100 in extras (valves, BTR cam kit through him, lifters, lifter trays etc), was told 3 weeks after he got my heads. took in reality 5 weeks to get heads back, one was mine, was was not. One head had 3 2.02 intake valves, and a 2.04 intake valve. none of the valve seats were cut even close to properly, 55% leakdown when bolted to my block. took 2 more weeks to figure out the rest of the bullshit. (never did get my original head back). in the end he refunded me only $120 to have a local shop cut the seats again, sent me 8 valve stem seals, and one head gasket. I'd not do business with him ever again.
I have video, Pictures, and copy of the entire conversations for proof.
Last edited by Ironhydroxide; 04-14-2017 at 10:53 PM. Reason: Clarification.
04-15-2017, 11:38 AM
#54
If you are interested in adding some data to your list, I have 2 data points you can add... Not commenting on these good or bad, just more data for you. 
My current LS3 heads are from Frankenstein. I had them do a somewhat custom combination for me which created a 'smaller' (compared to his normal program) intake port size and valve size, all based on a TFS GenX casting. The runner is 275cc and the intake valve is 2.175".
The average as you generated it from 0.2" to 0.6" is 103.157. At 0.7" the number is 81.538.
I have data for another set of heads from MMS, his new LS7 port using the TFS castings. These ports are 265cc, and I think these numbers are based on using a 2.20" intake valve.
The 0.2" to 0.6" average for that head is 106.210. At 0.7" the number is 83.505.
I don't know how LS7 heads in general compare to LS3 heads in this metric, but that's the data that I have...
My current LS3 heads are from Frankenstein. I had them do a somewhat custom combination for me which created a 'smaller' (compared to his normal program) intake port size and valve size, all based on a TFS GenX casting. The runner is 275cc and the intake valve is 2.175".
The average as you generated it from 0.2" to 0.6" is 103.157. At 0.7" the number is 81.538.
I have data for another set of heads from MMS, his new LS7 port using the TFS castings. These ports are 265cc, and I think these numbers are based on using a 2.20" intake valve.
The 0.2" to 0.6" average for that head is 106.210. At 0.7" the number is 83.505.
I don't know how LS7 heads in general compare to LS3 heads in this metric, but that's the data that I have...
04-15-2017, 11:57 AM
#55
Launching!
is flow numbers don't always paint the full picture.
lots of hogged out crap that looks pretty makesa big peak # and either turns into a sprinkler system or the car runs lke a pooch
then guys crutch it even further with too big a cam goes even slower
Unfortunately the web geeks worship #s
Own a set of heads that Mamo did yrs ago he could got way more # but it would have been too big for example....most porters just figure you wont know any better and do what they got to in order to pay bills.
04-15-2017, 12:55 PM
#56
If you are interested in adding some data to your list, I have 2 data points you can add... Not commenting on these good or bad, just more data for you.
My current LS3 heads are from Frankenstein. I had them do a somewhat custom combination for me which created a 'smaller' (compared to his normal program) intake port size and valve size, all based on a TFS GenX casting. The runner is 275cc and the intake valve is 2.175".
The average as you generated it from 0.2" to 0.6" is 103.157. At 0.7" the number is 81.538.
I have data for another set of heads from MMS, his new LS7 port using the TFS castings. These ports are 265cc, and I think these numbers are based on using a 2.20" intake valve.
The 0.2" to 0.6" average for that head is 106.210. At 0.7" the number is 83.505.
I don't know how LS7 heads in general compare to LS3 heads in this metric, but that's the data that I have...
My current LS3 heads are from Frankenstein. I had them do a somewhat custom combination for me which created a 'smaller' (compared to his normal program) intake port size and valve size, all based on a TFS GenX casting. The runner is 275cc and the intake valve is 2.175".
The average as you generated it from 0.2" to 0.6" is 103.157. At 0.7" the number is 81.538.
I have data for another set of heads from MMS, his new LS7 port using the TFS castings. These ports are 265cc, and I think these numbers are based on using a 2.20" intake valve.
The 0.2" to 0.6" average for that head is 106.210. At 0.7" the number is 83.505.
I don't know how LS7 heads in general compare to LS3 heads in this metric, but that's the data that I have...
The Mamo TFS LS7s are very nice. Being that they use the same valve and a smaller runner than the MAST 285s and make comparable numbers in terms of efficiency and flow is why you see a lot of Vette guys with 630+rwhp numbers from that head and relatively mild cams on the 427.
And to be honest, I trust Tony's flow numbers more than MAST. Whenever a magazine runs their flow numbers, they are always lower than the MAST advertised numbers (and we know how magazines can inflate things sometimes). But pumped up flow numbers impacts the C/D.
04-15-2017, 01:44 PM
#58
This sheds so much valve on the Cam and Flow profile of the heads being usable velocity & flow CFM for the vehicle, if those flow numbers don't always come with some velocity, then that car isn't going to be very responsive until its spinning some RPM, if you don't have torque somewhat early, you cannot have HP until its spinning... I'm sure there is math to back this up, I'm not as hip on the science... now at the track that high rpm runner might be fun, we just don't drive in that range not he streets enough.... Those high flowing heads can make good HP even with wider LSA, cause they simply have enough flow and don't rely on scavenging & overlap.
I agree that the LS3 heads with flow numbers on a 4.150 bore isn't fair since many never see that size bore without a block upgrade so that unshrouding of the chamber aids to the inflated numbers by SPS, what do they flow on a 4.070 bore or even a 4.125 bore? guessing that turbulence hurts their numbers, so they advertise numbers that NEVER really happen...
I could be off on my thoughts, always learning and thinking, even if its way out in left field....
I agree that the LS3 heads with flow numbers on a 4.150 bore isn't fair since many never see that size bore without a block upgrade so that unshrouding of the chamber aids to the inflated numbers by SPS, what do they flow on a 4.070 bore or even a 4.125 bore? guessing that turbulence hurts their numbers, so they advertise numbers that NEVER really happen...
I could be off on my thoughts, always learning and thinking, even if its way out in left field....
04-15-2017, 01:45 PM
#59
TECH Veteran
What really confuses me about the LS3 about the aftermarket. The intake runner aftermarket wise is all over the place. TFS is 255cc, SPS is 264cc, Dart is 280cc, Mast offer different size runners.... So do Frankenstein. Not to mention the factory runner is 260cc. Hard to understand and grab a hold on what size you would need to make your setup have a "milk and cookies" power/torque curve.
Too small of a runner you worry about leaving power on the table... Too big of a runner and your low end grunt will suffer and the power curve will look crap.
Too small of a runner you worry about leaving power on the table... Too big of a runner and your low end grunt will suffer and the power curve will look crap.
04-15-2017, 01:48 PM
#60
exactly what I was thinking, this customer who bolts his heads onto a 4.070 bore won't see anything close to the numbers they advertise, so much going on here, id say the heads won't flow until unshrouded, so how good are they really... now your into BR7 area with larger bore...