choppin-suey

iTrader: (6)

pm atvrcr, he went from a ported 90 to a spyder(not quite a sheetmetal intake but close) and he couldnt be happier also not to knock tea/tfs heads but I was told I would gain 25 horsepower over my afr's and a atvrcr was told 10-12 with the trickflows so we got a set and flowed them on the same bench as we have flowed 20 other sets and low and behold the cfm was not there so I take some of those flow numbers with a grain of salt

Beast96Z

iTrader: (21)

That's the point I was trying to make without being so bold. While the TFS heads do make the power, the diffrence between their flow data bench and a superflow are astounding to say the least. However, flow numbers sell heads on 90% of sales, so you do what you have to do. This is a perfect example of both sides of the table. If I told you your heads only flowed 300 cfm, you might not buy them based on that, but if 10 people made 500 rwhp with them, you'd probablly go ahead with the buy and overlook the numbers. It's funny, because based on the heads performance, I would buy them, but I also know how much error is in the flow numbers and it wouldn't scare me off, but it would others. Don't take it as bashing, because I praise the work/ power that's coming out of these heads, but when I see the threads were people say "my TEA/TFS flow this much", and everyone talks about how awesome that is, it cracks me up.

383ss

iTrader: (14)

but the fact that they flow this well with only a 235cc runner is pretty amazing. I made 550rwhp with the same runner volume on a head that only flowed 293cfm @ .600

Dave88z

I don't want to jack the thread but edelbrock has a new Super victor LSx intake on the way. The ports are quite a bit bigger then the victor jr. I am waiting to hear back on when they are expecting to release these new intakes. It might be a cheap alternative to a sheet metal intake.

Beast96Z

iTrader: (21)

The fact that they flow how well? You don't know what they would do on a Super Flow, but I have a good guess since I've been there. Compared to other heads out there, flow wise, I would call it "on par" to "sub par".




That's my point, I'm not bashing the heads power abilities, basically laughing at the numbers posted and the people that buy into it. The heads rule, they just don't flow the numbers listed on the "industry standard" bench. Not even remotly close.

jeremym

iTrader: (3)

So on a diff what would they flow? Are they 10 cfm off or more?

Stang's Bane

iTrader: (22)

See sig...

It really doesn't matter as long as they make the power..

choppin-suey

iTrader: (6)

nice sig but just as flow benches are off so are dyno's, there is only one way in determing the worth of a product in my opinion and that is the numbers it runs.

Brian Tooley Racing

iTrader: (13)

Is this is the same bench that showed the TFS 215's to flow more air through the midlift than the TFS 225's? If so then maybe you should take the data you got with a grain of salt, it's just not going to happen when properly flowed.

The problem with flowing heads is that there are many variables introduced by the person doing the test. The type of entry used, clay or fixed, if the person plugged the rocker bolt hole, etc. One of the biggest problems we see is not flowing the heads on a specific plate with DOWELS. For example, we have a 3.90" LS1 doweled flowplate with a 3.90" bore sleeve we use to flow the TFS 215 heads, this puts the chamber EXACTLY where it would be run on the engine, and this is VERY important. We have a 4.03" LS1 doweled flowplate we flow the TFS 225's on. We have a 4.125" LS1 plate we flow this new TFS 235 head on. Most shops are not going to spend the money on 3 or 4 flowplates just to properly flow ONE type of head that is made, but they should.

The next variable is flowing the exhaust port with a pipe or extension. We flow our exhaust ports with a pipe, usually 5" in length and this will add approximately 30 cfm to a good exhaust port. A poor exhaust port will actually flow less air with a pipe, this is why we use one.

The next variable you have is the difference in flow benches. I have been using this Flowdata flow bench for 14 years, it has probably had 10,000 heads run across it, and a good percentage of those get reflowed. We've had Superflow benches that flowed 1-2% higher than ours and some that were as far down as 7-8%, so that is a HUGE spread in just what Superflow benches show for flow. Our flow bench is plus or minus 1-2% of AFR's, so it seems to be right in the middle of their advertised flow numbers.

The next variable on a highly "tweaked" head is the fact that the airflow characteristics of the air flow stream inside the port will change with changes in air density, that being the barometric pressure AND temperature. We flow heads at 70 degrees, some ports will flow more air as density increases, some will flow less, and it all varies by type of head and port. We like a port that is not sensitive to density, like this new TFS 235 port.

The last and most perplexing variable is the sheer difference we've seen in flowing a head back to back on our Flowdata bench versus our Superflow bench. We have ports that are within 1-2% on the two benches and some ports that are significantly different from one bench to the other. This is the least understood of all the variables, but one that I have a theory on. Our Flowdata bench pulls equally around the radius of the base plate and has a big reservoir at the base plate. A Superflow has the plexiglas plate immediately below the base plate and I believe there are eddy's induced in the small distance between the two plates causing these differences. The thing we like about the Flowdata is the heads that flow the most on that bench seem to make the most power, and that is the only reason we are flowing heads in the first place.

The bottom line is our best ported L92 heads with 2.16" intake valves flow in the 290-295cfm range @ .400", the couple of LS7 heads we have flowed went 300 @ .400", as they have on MANY benches, and this new TFS head is up there in terms of airflow with a much smaller 2.08 intake valve. So it seems to be a winner, but time will tell.

Stang's Bane

iTrader: (22)

I agree that the track is the ultimate test of power, but to be able to run a car after every tweak is not very feasible. Also the difference in cars would make a true apples to apples comparison impossible.
In fact it is all a progression
flow bench->dyno->in car at the track.

If run by an honest individual all of these tools will give a an accurate respresentation of the cylinder head. But we all know that flow does not always equal horsepower. True horsepower does equal better slips though.

I am in no means bashing TFS heads. They do seem to back up their flow numbers with HP.
BTW, the sig refers to an engine dyno, NOT a chassis dyno.

choppin-suey

iTrader: (6)

actually no and like I said before im not bashing and dont want to get into an argument and get banned again over overinflated flow numbers but i will say one thing about this and I have said it before and that is we have flowed over 20 different heads on local bench from a more then reputable big block head porter and out of that 20 there were only 2 brands that flowed where they said they would, matter of fact one brand was more then willing to send us a head and if we didnt like it we could send it back but somehow it never made it back

choppin-suey

iTrader: (6)

engine dyno's are the ****, I wish we had one local and available to us

Wnts2Go10O

iTrader: (12)

time to "expand" psi

choppin-suey

iTrader: (6)

that *** doesnt answer the phones now for the dyno, no way we get something pimp like that for him to use

jeremym

iTrader: (3)

The heads are here!!!!!!!!

Wnts2Go10O

iTrader: (12)

nono, youd probably get it but he wouldnt know about it for about a month.

LSmonster

iTrader: (2)

I have a set of these heads coming (Thanks Ron @ Vengeance) and will be doing some testing against other heads. This is not a "who's best" kinda test but it will be interesting none the less. I'm building three 404" LS2 block engine for this test and all three will be identical except for the heads. One will have the TFS 235's. One will have the E/T 245's and the last one will have the E/T 4.0" LS7 style heads. I'll use a Wilson billet bank intake manifold on all three with a 90mm T/B. C/R will be 10.25:1 running on 91 octane pump gas and the same hydraulic roller cam... All three engine will be run one after the other on a engine Dyno so there is no mistake... I'll post some pictures (if I can figure out how to shrink them) and provide a link to the Dyno runs once complete... I'm fitting in this test in between other jobs so give me some time to get them together... HP numbers should be around 600 for all three engines...

Brian Tooley Racing

iTrader: (13)

I think the TFS 225's would be a better choice for a 404, the results of the TFS 235's that are designed for a 4.125" bore has shown less than stellar results on 4.00" bore engines. Let me know when you get ready and I will try to send you a set of TFS 225's if you want.

What cam duration and why such low compression? Thanks.

LSmonster

iTrader: (2)

I have custom pistons that deals very well with the shrouding issues of the big valve heads in smaller bore engines. Of course that will not change the fact that the cylinder walls will still be close to the valves but the Dyno results can not be denied. 600 HP with a 10.25:1 compression and only 26 degrees of total timing is pretty darn good. And you can hit this engine with a 100/150 HP shot of nitrous and not have to change a thing... All on 91 octane pump gas ta-boot. Sure, I could add more compression to my pump gas engines if the customer "demands it"... But it's just not necessary.

JMHO