Attention Moderators:
Pick heads and then let those guys help you pick a cam.
Not to mention every time someone has results to prove their opinion of the subject the other side will have a boat load of excuses to dismiss that proof.
Pretty much all the top companies make a cylinder head that will fit your needs? AFR, AI, TEA, Lloyd Elliot, the list goes on and on.... pick a head, flow it, then get on here with the results and you can pick a cam that best fits your needs and flow and power potential of your heads.... Don't get caught up in the numbers... My old LT1 casting heads ported by racenet flowed a measly (by somes standards) 258cfm at .550 and .600..... but those heads with a 236/242 hyd roller put down 422 RWHP all motor with zero tuning... 355 cubic inches of LT1 no less... so there is more than just flow #'s.... get a reputable company with proven port designs, get a reputable company with proven cam grinds that you can live with in your car and you'll be 89% there to a stout combo....
I am looking for a factual thread, not one that is opinion based.
That said, the car will spend much more time driving to and from work than to and from the drag strip. My goals are to put down about 450 to 475 without breaking a sweat. I was also thinking about going to a 396 stroker. edelbrock LT-1 manifold with 58mm TB. Obviously fuel delivery will need to be upgraded, but i didnt want to do too much else.
I have been looking at AFR, but it seems there are a lot of L.E. fans out there. I dont mind a little choppy idle, but dont want to worry about the car stalling coming up to a traffic light while braking.
Last edited by BLK,97,T/A,M-6; Jul 4, 2007 at 03:51 AM.
Trending Topics
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
There is way more to a good head then just port flow, and theoretically a head that flows less cfm on paper can make more power depending on many other factors.
Just picking the highest flow @ xxx lift from a list of heads isnt the smartest decision for your ET's or your wallet
There is way more to a good head then just port flow, and theoretically a head that flows less cfm on paper can make more power depending on many other factors.
I agree, a motor will only make as much power as the least capable component will allow it.
That is not where he was going with that.
A flow bench measures static valve flow, that is nothing like what a valve does in a running motor.
OVERALL
People get hungup on peak numbers which often occur at high lifts you can't keep the valve open too for very long and many heads that flow over say 300cfm do not flow anywhere near as well as a worked stock casting does .400 and below where the valve spends a lot of time.
I don't think any of us means to say flow numbers are meaningless just that they have less meaning than people believe they do, same with dyno numbers.
Big ports and big flow numbers often need BIG rpms to take advantage of them too, with the LT1 pcms hard 7200rpm limit, throw a set of AFR 227 on an NA 355 and you wont be able to use them effectively. In that case I would certainly take a set of ported stock castings flow 30-40cfm less at peak over the AFRs. I setup a grossly exagerated example here to avoid debating the exact threshold to were big or smaller is better. Now if you could spin to 9000rpms then the AFR 227s might work fine on a 355.





