Generation IV Internal Engine 2005-2014 LS2 | LS3 | LS7 | L92 | LS9

Trick Flow 235/245 vs LS7 heads on 427?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-24-2008, 12:21 AM
  #21  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
transAm-98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA, Bay Area
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I know it's not a 427 but I've got a 408 with TFS 225's and they made the numbers in my sig with a mid sized cam 24x/25x and peak lift is .613. If I ever decide to build a bigger motor I'll be putting TFS on those too.
Old 05-24-2008, 09:36 AM
  #22  
TECH Enthusiast
 
needadvice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by transAm-98
I know it's not a 427 but I've got a 408 with TFS 225's and they made the numbers in my sig with a mid sized cam 24x/25x and peak lift is .613. If I ever decide to build a bigger motor I'll be putting TFS on those too.
what intake are you using?

I don't understand how the TFS heads can ever make more power than the better flowing LS7's, everything else being equal. What am I not seeing here?

Old 05-25-2008, 04:10 PM
  #23  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
transAm-98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA, Bay Area
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

ported fast
Old 05-26-2008, 06:27 PM
  #24  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (12)
 
SLowETz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Padded cell
Posts: 2,356
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by needadvice
what intake are you using?

I don't understand how the TFS heads can ever make more power than the better flowing LS7's, everything else being equal. What am I not seeing here?

Big CFM #'s are your friend..... velocity is your best friend-
Old 05-26-2008, 07:09 PM
  #25  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (6)
 
2001CamaroGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Phoenix, AZ USA
Posts: 4,766
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Question:

the Trick Flow heads state

235cc runners
Intake Valve Diameter (in): 2.080 in.
Exhaust Valve Diameter (in): 1.600 in.

the LS7 heads state

283cc runners
Intake Valve Diameter (in): 2.200 in.
Exhaust Valve Diameter (in): 1.610 in.


The Trick Flow heads are just another remake of the "old" 5.7L heads right (still small valves in original locations)? On a big (4.125" +) bore engine, why would anyone waste their time not going with the LS7 (honest question, no sarcasm here)?
Old 05-26-2008, 10:44 PM
  #26  
TECH Enthusiast
 
needadvice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 2001CamaroGuy
Question:

the Trick Flow heads state

235cc runners
Intake Valve Diameter (in): 2.080 in.
Exhaust Valve Diameter (in): 1.600 in.

the LS7 heads state

283cc runners
Intake Valve Diameter (in): 2.200 in.
Exhaust Valve Diameter (in): 1.610 in.


The Trick Flow heads are just another remake of the "old" 5.7L heads right (still small valves in original locations)? On a big (4.125" +) bore engine, why would anyone waste their time not going with the LS7 (honest question, no sarcasm here)?
Thats what I'm wondering. There's a bunch of Vettes (C6 Z06's) around here making between 580-615 RWHP after porting of the LS7 heads and a cam change from a local shop. Those Trick Flows would never get close to those numbers on the same C6 Z06 427ci engines.
Old 05-27-2008, 09:06 AM
  #27  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (22)
 
Stang's Bane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Mont Belvieu, TX
Posts: 2,649
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by needadvice
what intake are you using?

I don't understand how the TFS heads can ever make more power than the better flowing LS7's, everything else being equal. What am I not seeing here?


Everything else is not equal.

All I am saying here is that the manifolds are different as well as other things. Not saying one is better than the other, just saying that they are different.

Not trying to get into a which head is better discussion.

Flow numbers are not everything, neither is velocity.
Old 05-27-2008, 09:20 AM
  #28  
TECH Enthusiast
 
needadvice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Stang's Bane
Everything else is not equal.

All I am saying here is that the manifolds are different as well as other things. Not saying one is better than the other, just saying that they are different.

Not trying to get into a which head is better discussion.

Flow numbers are not everything, neither is velocity.
So given two 427ci engines, and cams to match the heads and intake on each engine. The Trick Flow 235 engine could never make more power then a properly matched LS7 set-up, agreed?
Old 05-27-2008, 10:34 AM
  #29  
Launching!
 
71CamaroLS1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Portland OR
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by needadvice
So given two 427ci engines, and cams to match the heads and intake on each engine. The Trick Flow 235 engine could never make more power then a properly matched LS7 set-up, agreed?
Well, it depends on what you mean by "properly matched". A number of vendors are claiming around 400 CFM intake flow for their ported LS7 heads. That's enough flow to support over 800 flywheel HP. To make 800+ flywheel HP from a 427, you'd have to spin it to around 8000 RPM. This would require the rest of the combination - particularly the intake and headers - to be designed to tune for optimum efficiency at higher RPMs than any off-the-shelf pieces out there. And the resulting motor would not meet most people's definition of "streetable".

With more "normal" constraints of candy-cane plastic intake, off-the-shelf headers, streetable low-RPM manners, and desire for strong midrange as well as top-end, it's much less clear which design will yield optimum results, since both designs can flow enough to support a 6500 RPM peak. All you can say for sure at this point is that people have gotten great real-world results with both designs.

BTW, if you change one of your assumptions - displacement - the equation would be different. On a max-effort street 481, I'd think the LS7 heads would have a clear edge.
Old 05-27-2008, 11:28 AM
  #30  
TECH Enthusiast
 
needadvice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 71CamaroLS1
Well, it depends on what you mean by "properly matched". A number of vendors are claiming around 400 CFM intake flow for their ported LS7 heads. That's enough flow to support over 800 flywheel HP. To make 800+ flywheel HP from a 427, you'd have to spin it to around 8000 RPM. This would require the rest of the combination - particularly the intake and headers - to be designed to tune for optimum efficiency at higher RPMs than any off-the-shelf pieces out there. And the resulting motor would not meet most people's definition of "streetable".
Well, not talking about that type of engine which would require huge compression, race gas and definitely a sheet metal intake as well as some very expensive high-revving head components. I'm talking about a max effort, pump gas (91 or 93 octane) using the LS7 or Fast intake and a cam that is aggressive but will not cause stalling at a street light. Most people are going for around 600 RWHP and still be streetable and reliable.

Basically, two engines, 427ci each, same compression, both using the LS7 intake and one has the Trick Flow 235 heads and the other with the LS7 heads, both with max porting jobs. Then choose the best cam for each to best suit each head, remain pump gas, streetable and going for the most power.

Which engine will make more power? Keeping the cams out of the 260's.
Old 05-27-2008, 11:39 AM
  #31  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (22)
 
Stang's Bane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Mont Belvieu, TX
Posts: 2,649
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by needadvice
Well, not talking about that type of engine which would require huge compression, race gas and definitely a sheet metal intake as well as some very expensive high-revving head components. I'm talking about a max effort, pump gas (91 or 93 octane) using the LS7 or Fast intake and a cam that is aggressive but will not cause stalling at a street light. Most people are going for around 600 RWHP and still be streetable and reliable.

Basically, two engines, 427ci each, same compression, both using the LS7 intake and one has the Trick Flow 235 heads and the other with the LS7 heads, both with max porting jobs. Then choose the best cam for each to best suit each head, remain pump gas, streetable and going for the most power.

Which engine will make more power? Keeping the cams out of the 260's.
FWIW I would leave the ls7 heads stock intake port alone. It will move enough air as it is.

My car fit the bill above. it would pull 1300 rpm in 6th and it had no problems idling. It made 548 rwhp with a hurt cylnder. I will have better results when I can get it back together..
Old 05-27-2008, 12:34 PM
  #32  
Launching!
 
71CamaroLS1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Portland OR
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by needadvice
Well, not talking about that type of engine which would require huge compression, race gas and definitely a sheet metal intake as well as some very expensive high-revving head components. I'm talking about a max effort, pump gas (91 or 93 octane) using the LS7 or Fast intake and a cam that is aggressive but will not cause stalling at a street light. Most people are going for around 600 RWHP and still be streetable and reliable.

Basically, two engines, 427ci each, same compression, both using the LS7 intake and one has the Trick Flow 235 heads and the other with the LS7 heads, both with max porting jobs. Then choose the best cam for each to best suit each head, remain pump gas, streetable and going for the most power.

Which engine will make more power? Keeping the cams out of the 260's.
I'd say there isn't enough real-world data to conclude definitively one way or the other. The dyno data we're seeing on the 'net might suggest that the LS7 combos might make a little better peak power, while the cathedral port heads/intakes give a little more area under the curve, but you have to take into account that all of the data is created by interested parties, who do not necessarily have the expertise or incentive to optimize both combos and compare.

I'd also say that once you decide to restrict yourself to a plastic intake, the intake design is at least as big a factor as the head and probably more so.
Old 05-27-2008, 12:55 PM
  #33  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (22)
 
Stang's Bane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Mont Belvieu, TX
Posts: 2,649
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by 71CamaroLS1
I'd say there isn't enough real-world data to conclude definitively one way or the other. The dyno data we're seeing on the 'net might suggest that the LS7 combos might make a little better peak power, while the cathedral port heads/intakes give a little more area under the curve, but you have to take into account that all of the data is created by interested parties, who do not necessarily have the expertise or incentive to optimize both combos and compare.

I'd also say that once you decide to restrict yourself to a plastic intake, the intake design is at least as big a factor as the head and probably more so.

I would have to agree with you. Because the intake is bolted to the head and the engine doesn't know where one starts and the other ends. Most people seem to not remember this.
Old 05-27-2008, 08:17 PM
  #34  
Teching In
 
1SICKBIRD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Are these GM cnc'ed heads or standard ones in the trick flow tests?

Last edited by 1SICKBIRD; 05-27-2008 at 08:23 PM.
Old 05-29-2008, 09:34 AM
  #35  
LS1Tech Sponsor
 
TrickFlowTech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

The TFS heads heads are not on the same valve angle or the same spark plug location as a standard LS head.

Originally Posted by 2001CamaroGuy
Question:


The Trick Flow heads are just another remake of the "old" 5.7L heads right (still small valves in original locations)? On a big (4.125" +) bore engine, why would anyone waste their time not going with the LS7 (honest question, no sarcasm here)?
__________________
http://www.trickflow.com/emain.asp
Click Above for Product Information
Old 05-29-2008, 11:45 AM
  #36  
On The Tree
 
tcr98taws6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Click this link to my website to see and hear the Trickflow Heads on a LSX454 running thru closed exhaust (Dual Magnaflows w/X-Pipe).
Go to the 2 videos.
http://www.fquick.com/tcr98taws6
Old 05-29-2008, 01:06 PM
  #37  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (22)
 
Stang's Bane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Mont Belvieu, TX
Posts: 2,649
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by 1SICKBIRD
Are these GM cnc'ed heads or standard ones in the trick flow tests?
Factory ls7 heads are cnc'd already. You can buy some as cast ones, but the factory cnc job is outstanding as it is.
Old 06-01-2008, 08:33 PM
  #38  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
 
1BADAIR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: oxford, Michigan
Posts: 1,902
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

I would rather have the velocity from the smaller TFS ports
Old 06-01-2008, 09:19 PM
  #39  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
 
Azrael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Manteca, CA
Posts: 1,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by tcr98taws6
Click this link to my website to see and hear the Trickflow Heads on a LSX454 running thru closed exhaust (Dual Magnaflows w/X-Pipe).
Go to the 2 videos.
http://www.fquick.com/tcr98taws6

Questions for you: What cam are you running? What compression (are the TFS 235's milled)? LME shortblock I presume?
Old 06-01-2008, 09:34 PM
  #40  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (18)
 
jermzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay area, ca.
Posts: 1,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Azrael
Questions for you: What cam are you running? What compression (are the TFS 235's milled)? LME shortblock I presume?
Yes he's got our shortblock with TFS 235's milled to 68cc 11.81:1 compression.

He had our cam but changed it due to bucking issues under 3k rpm. Before it made 624 rwhp.

not sure on the cam size now but its still right at 600rwhp moth better drivability.


Quick Reply: Trick Flow 235/245 vs LS7 heads on 427?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:11 AM.