Afr Ls7 Heads
Why would you use a head that can flow 401 cfm on a bench but can only go 360 through the manifold? the current manifolds cannot keep up with the airflow demand, unless you go with a sheetmetal and now we are talking race car build with a larger budget and a need for 400+ cfm.
I have done a dozen or so sets of ETP heads, and have used the 215's-245's. In comparison the ETP LS7 4" bore head easily out flows the 245's and especially once the manifold is bolted on.
I thought the main point of this thread was if AFR was coming out with a LS7 style head, and assumed the thread started was asking for something similar to what ETP has. Also assumed he was sticking with a stock intake manifold. So when I made my post I was also taking into consideration a manifold on top of the head, and figured a ported Fast 92 vs. a stock GM LS7 or ported LS7 manifold. This is where the LS7 style head can make a lot more power because it flows much better through the manifold.
I am talking about heads that have to use plastic manifolds, not heads that are going to benefit from a manifold that costs almost as much as the head.
The reason the ford market have a successful line of high ports and other such heads is because there are more hard core races that race ford's. In our market it would be tough to sell a ton of canted valve or high port heads for a LSX because not as many people have taken their LSX power car and turned it into a race car. Plus just now are the costs of the F body’s coming down in price to where people don't mind buying one and turning it into a full trim race car. For a long time it was hard for people to spend 15K on a TA or Camaro only to tear it apart to compete with the ford market.
Why would you use a head that can flow 401 cfm on a bench but can only go 360 through the manifold? the current manifolds cannot keep up with the airflow demand, unless you go with a sheetmetal and now we are talking race car build with a larger budget and a need for 400+ cfm.
Thats what I was saying. Canted Valve heads are to expensive for 99% or our F body owners.
GM's head is build for a bigger bore.
OR, if you want to do a head that can take a **** ton of air through FI.
I would much rather have a ETP LS7 head on my motor with the thick deck then a stock GM LS7 head.
Can you make great power in a 408 combo with a AFR 225 trick flow, ETP etc head? sure. But again you have the restriction of the 92mm fast still.
I would prefer to go with the ETP LS7 head and a stock ported LS7 intake manifold myself. More potential in that combo and for the same or nearly the same cost.
That is where the LS7 aftermarket head can work.
And yes I understand the LS7 manifold still can't keep up with the LS7 head, but it does a better job then a really nice set of LS1 heads and a ported Fast 92.
It makes more sense for them to stick to what is proven to work and sell than start from scratch, just look at how long it took afr to release ther first set of 205's and how long before anyone else got into the aftermarket casting.
To this day no one except for ET has stepped it up for the racers, and it's a great start. First company to copy a sb2.2, little chief, or Victor proport and present ti to the ls community will have plenty of customers.
Also the thing keeping hardcore racers from going LSX is that they cant compete with the old technology on the track. it's easier and you go faster running SBC and SBF stuff.
Why would you use a head that can flow 401 cfm on a bench but can only go 360 through the manifold? the current manifolds cannot keep up with the airflow demand, unless you go with a sheetmetal and now we are talking race car build with a larger budget and a need for 400+ cfm.
Anytime you add length to the runner of a cylinder head flow will go down, that is essentially what an intake manifold is.
Besides, there is way more to how good a head is than f'in flow numbers.
The things that really matter are never discussed on this board.
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
not trying to come off as a dick, but would you care to enlighten us?
It makes more sense for them to stick to what is proven to work and sell than start from scratch, just look at how long it took afr to release ther first set of 205's and how long before anyone else got into the aftermarket casting.
To this day no one except for ET has stepped it up for the racers, and it's a great start. First company to copy a sb2.2, little chief, or Victor proport and present ti to the ls community will have plenty of customers.
Also the thing keeping hardcore racers from going LSX is that they cant compete with the old technology on the track. it's easier and you go faster running SBC and SBF stuff.
also stop crying about manifolds. theres no reason why you cant port a cast 4bbl manifold to help match the flow numbers. ive seen manifold port work that would spin your head
you have to remember that the lsx engine is still relatively new, 10 years and counting. in the last few years the market has picked up because companies are now finding out that this engine isnt a fluke like an lt1/lt4. not saying that those are bad engines but you really have to admit that it was a new approach to the small block and really is one of chevys bastard engines. if i were in the aftermarket head bizz id be a little hesitant to dump R&D funds into something that might not last. only time will tell the future of the LSX engine. you never know the aftermarket might outsell the traditional 23* sbc.
"Alot of these guys dont know that a conventional 23* head is lucky to go high 280 unless you go with a raised runner or 18*/15* setup."
AND i dont know about that one
.....seen regular old track ones flow way better then that! All this is stuff many people have said before, but yet most people refuse to see anything but cfm and port size. While these things do matter, they are down on the list in terms of priority.
also stop crying about manifolds. theres no reason why you cant port a cast 4bbl manifold to help match the flow numbers. ive seen manifold port work that would spin your head
you have to remember that the lsx engine is still relatively new, 10 years and counting. in the last few years the market has picked up because companies are now finding out that this engine isnt a fluke like an lt1/lt4. not saying that those are bad engines but you really have to admit that it was a new approach to the small block and really is one of chevys bastard engines. if i were in the aftermarket head bizz id be a little hesitant to dump R&D funds into something that might not last. only time will tell the future of the LSX engine. you never know the aftermarket might outsell the traditional 23* sbc.
"Alot of these guys dont know that a conventional 23* head is lucky to go high 280 unless you go with a raised runner or 18*/15* setup."
AND i dont know about that one
.....seen regular old track ones flow way better then that!More and more people are going to the LS series where the rules allow. As far as the future of the LS series, it will be around for a long time.....



