While I initially wrote this ridiculously long thread to reply to the above post, after finishing it and realizing how lengthy it actually was (and how mucked up with BS that thread already is), I decided to start a new thread with my response in hopes it will remain more technical in nature (I'm being optimistic....)
To really understand where I'm going with this thread however, I would encourage you guys to glance over the semi-painful thread I highlighted above in the event you haven't already done so.
So it seems some of you guys just don’t get it, or perhaps simply don’t want to get it because everyone sleeps better at night thinking they already own the best (and want to secretly justify their purchase decisions). I don't know what the reasons are that some of what I have been preaching hasn't sunken in but either way I am going to try and better explain the merits of our product one more time (I have been spending more time here trying to support you guys) in hopes some more of it will finally sink in or perhaps give you guys a better understanding of why it is so.
First things first however....JSUP (sorry to single you out), your constant "forked tongue" about our product is getting old and is the reason I got into it with you in another thread where (in the end) you apologized with some weak excuse as to your actions....basically admitting you like stirring the pot. At that time we had a conversation and that offered me the opportunity to get a little more insight into the depth of your knowledge, both engine and cylinder head related. No offense but from our conversation it was clear to me that you are not an expert in either field yet you’re the loudest guy on this board and the first to offer opinions of questionable substance. Why is it if you like our product and seem to be OK with me personally (after the conversation and few PM's we shared) do you have to get yourself in an uproar if other people want to endorse AFR product? I appreciate some of the positive things you said in this latest thread but I don't appreciate all the negative things you said just as loudly. Its the exact same situation that occurred in the last thread and in light of that I offered to help you with AFR’s in place of your current heads of choice to prove to you just how wrong you are about your assessment that a lot of other products can be “ just as good”….in the case of these LTx heads you couldn't’t be more wrong, especially if we are comparing OEM ported castings to the new AFR Eliminators. The difference is my argument comes with a lot more substance and technical expertise in the field we are discussing to back it up.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here....I'm convinced there isn't a better head on the market for you guys no matter how much money your willing to spend because if your willing to spend money I'm going to compare anything you bring to the table with a competition version of our product that's close to the same volume (or even smaller if I think the application would benefit from it).
Sure you can dismiss what I say because I work for AFR and of course I would defend the product but that is NOT why I'm saying it....while alot more guys on the C5 board know me personally, there are a handful of you on this board that may have met me and/or at least spoken with me at length on the telephone. I'm a straight shooter and I don't BS....my reputation is everything to me. I know whats out there....Ive seen whats out there, and the AFR Eliminators pound for pound (comparing similar sized ports) will outflow everything on the market currently.....period. Most of your other options don't even come close. A ported stock casting isn't even in the running. I'm willing to prove this with independent back to back flow testing and/or dyno testing as well if the right opportunity presents itself.
I will once again try to enlighten you (JSUP) and hopefully others as to “ why “ because right now I really need something to do....I am currently typing to you from 36,000 feet on a four hour flight across the country, heading home from a business trip with a few hours to kill.
BUT....before I even get into specifics I think it’s important to quantify what design criteria is involved in producing a truly efficient street /strip head, whether we are talking about a 20 year old OEM design that someone enlarges with a grinder (a ported factory casting), or whether we are referring to an aftermarket casting that would have the distinct benefit of a clean sheet of paper design before its port and combustion chamber shapes were determined.
The KEY to an extremely effective cylinder head in any racing application (but especially in one driven on the street) is to design a very efficient cylinder head…..not just one that’s hogged out to 230 cc’s and might get close to 300 CFM’s of peak flow (obviously discussing applications you guys are interested in). In fact that’s the last type of head you would want in a street car. What you want is an efficient cylinder head.....a head that moves a lot of air but does so with a conservative cross section….a head that does all of that but in addition has better low and mid-lift flow and an overall superior flow curve (not just a peak number....peak numbers mean ****). If you can accomplish this with a superior port shape (moving lots of air thru a small hole) you will have an extremely fast moving column of air which packs the cylinder on the intake cycle and helps better evacuate the cylinder on the exhaust (which also aids in the beginning of the next intake cycle). A higher velocity intake charge will also better fill the cylinder in those last few nano-seconds prior to the intake valve closing (with the piston actually already on its way up the bore on the compression stroke) because of the same reasons....more velocity which has more inertia and the fact there is more air available due to the better low lift flow a superior designed head offers. A high velocity port design also reduces overlap/reversion issues due to the fact it's harder to change the direction of a higher speed column of air (it has more energy)....this helps to generate more low speed torque and cleans up some of the negatives associated with a performance cam.
Guys....an efficient head is one that will not only help an engine generate good peak power (even more than a larger head that may be less efficient and has similar peak numbers) but offer loads of bottom end and midrange torque as well, yielding a curve with ALOT more average power (JSUP, this is also the”area under the curve” some people refer to which you questioned and I explained briefly in the phone conversation we had a week or two back). Also important to a street application is the fact an efficient head also offers the end user much more throttle response and increased part throttle torque which by the way is never measured on the dyno as the dyno only records WOT parameters. A small high flowing head offers the end user tons of what I like to call “tip in” response. Allow me to explain....your cruising down the freeway in top gear and want to pass someone but you’re not in a real hurry so you don’t downshift, you only “tip in” the throttle while remaining in top gear at low RPM. A large inefficient port design will offer you nothing there and be very lazy....it will require alot more throttle just to get the car to respond. A small high flowing efficient port design will reward you with instant acceleration and a much more lively throttle with razor sharp response at any RPM.
OK....lets get into more specifics
The problem inherent with anyone porting an OEM casting (no matter which OEM casting we are discussing) is no matter how talented you are with a grinder, UNLESS YOU WELD OR ADD EPOXY, it will never be a truly efficient piece. The key that some of you miss is that port shape (and the proper valve job and combustion chamber design to compliment that shape) is far more important than port size. I can’t stress that sentence enough and I should probably say it again so maybe it sinks in a little more. A stock OEM casting needs material added in the right places more than it needs material removed if your actually trying to design/produce an efficient port design when the smoke clears. You will likely remove 25+ cc’s from an LT4 casting (which starts close to 200 cc's) to get you close to the 300 CFM mark, however the low and midlift flow (as well as the velocity in the port) will never be as good as a well designed clean sheet of paper effort. That’s just talking about the intake port of a stock head and the compromises any porter will encounter embarking on a mission to try and get more flow. Lets talk about the exhaust side....in a nut shell you could never touch an AFR Eliminator when comparing exhaust flow data unless you were willing to grind clear into the water jacket of the head. Even a paper thin max’ed out ported stocker wont come close in exhaust flow and then the long term reliability of that cylinder head is seriously compromised. Could a really talented head porter with nothing to do for a month weld up the intake ports and exhaust water jacket area in key places (filling in the dead areas and allowing for more flow, higher efficiency, and greater velocity) and start carving away trying to create a more efficient port design….sure he could if an armored car rolled up to compensate him. Could he do that exact same work eight times in a row by hand?….highly unlikely. Would this be a ridiculously cost prohibitive venture? (answer obvious)...and are any of the ported heads you guys are considering fitting into this scenario….I don't think so. The only reason I bring it up is for the unreasonable people that say it can be done....anything can be done if you spend enough money.
Just for fun let’s compare some notes...
I am going to use the 195 Comp for comparison purposes as it represents arguably our most efficient 23’ product design and one that would fit the majority of your street/strip combinations….also if we are going to compare more elaborate ported OEM castings, the price would be similar with new guides, a valve job, hardware, and all the porting costs.
OEM ported casting versus clean sheet Eliminator 195 Comp design
LT4 starts out close to 200 cc’s in unported trim….flows in the vicinity of 240 CFM with weak low and mid-lift flow....exhaust flow very weak.
Ported the same head will usually be 220-230 cc’s (or larger), possibly see high 200’s to very low 300 CFM range if done properly with the big peak number happening at an unusable .700 lift. Ported exhaust is better but still weak and likely ending up in the low 200’s at best. Low and mid-lift flow is improved but nothing to write home about. Some ports will be stronger than others unless this was done with a CNC machine and a very dialed in CNC program (not likely).
AFR 195 Comp Eliminator
Finished port volume….196 cc’s (actual). Touches or slightly exceeds 300 CFM at a usable lift-point of .600…..even at .550 is flowing in the 295 range….and is already flowing over 260 CFM by .400 lift (destroying the peak flow of an LT1 casting and comfortably beating the peak flow of a stock or even lightly ported LT4 casting).
Exhaust flow....simply no contest. Flows more than the better factory ported heads on the exhaust side as early as .400 lift (210 CFM) and clears 230 CFM by a usable .600 lift (when your discussing street bound 23’ cylinder heads looking at .700 numbers is pure advertising BS). The AFR exhaust flows more on the exhaust side at .300 lift than most stock LT1/LT4 heads at their peak (170 CFM or so).
Valvetrain Parts….there is no comparison.
All the Eliminator heads come with lightweight 8mm valves with beadlock grooves and lightweight 7' locks (a beadlock groove is superior to a stepped style conventional lock….this reduces the chance of keeper failure and the disastrous effects of dropping a valve shortly after).
We also install much lighter, smaller diameter springs and retainers. These springs are extremely high quality and I personally don’t know of a single failure in three years since we switched over to this proprietary spring in our Gen III product….bad news travels fast on the Internet so think about the power that statement has. Any of you familiar with all the deserved hype surrounding the beehive springs know why this is a huge benefit to the end user. Much higher RPM before the onset of valve float and the ability to therefore produce huge amounts of addition power because power is all about the ability to fill the cylinders at higher RPM when you have so little time to do so and accurate valve control is absolutely paramount if that is going to happen (much more difficult with hyd. roller valvetrains). The benefit of our spring package over the beehives is in the unlikely event a spring does break, a dual spring design can save your bacon concerning not dropping a valve. Our new Eliminator valve gear represents a mass reduction of 40% over our former product which very much mimics most of the valve gear you would likely be running in any other OEM ported casting as well as any of our competitors aftermarket 23' product as well.
Well….looks like we have begun our decent to the LA area and I need to be wrapping this up (I have to say this really helped the time fly by!). As a last effort to try an impart on you guys just how good the new Eliminator stuff is (what I genuinely believe to be the most efficient and most powerful bolt on style 23’ cylinder heads on the planet) and to TRY and reinforce that what I'm trying to convey and explain to you has real merit and is not alot of lip service, here is a dyno test that was done independently sharing the results from our former 195 street head versus our new Eliminator 195 street head. Note this is not the Competition 195 Eliminator which would have likely made 20-25 more horsepower. Some of you may have seen this comparison already but its a real eye opener so I wanted to share it for the benefit of those that haven't.
You guys have to also admit that even our former design was arguably the best or certainly one of the best heads available before the release of the all new Eliminator re-design. Look at the difference in power between these engines….note the added airflow and better valve control adding insane amounts of power to the top of the curve and also realize this is usable power as this combination (with the Eliminator head) would have likely have been shifted at 6700 RPM’s or so for best results.
Lastly, I want you guys to listen to what a truly efficient cylinder head design is capable of when surrounded by the right complimenting components. You can hear the engine just more alive and popping at an idle and as soon as I get into the throttle the engine is explosive and all over the rev limiter in spite of reasonably sticky tires (Nitto drag radials). This is a 91 octane pump gas small block (383 CID) and while it is a Gen III engine, I could have created exactly the same results with similar displacement and our 195 or 210 cc Comp heads.
Guys....I apologize about the fact that this is undeniably the longest post I have ever written, but I hope that some of what I had to say starts to sink in and gives you guys a better understanding of why the AFR's may be your best choice....not just because some of your buddy's told you they were (which I know is one of JSUP's biggest issues).
I encourage ANY of you considering our product to call or PM me directly if you have any questions or need any guidance....we also have some of the best customer service on the planet as well....making that decision to purchase our product even more of a no brainer.
Sincerely
Tony Mamo
AFR R&D/Product Design Mgr.
(661)257-8124 Ext. 109
Last edited by Tony Mamo @ AFR; 08-30-2008 at 04:03 AM.
I wanted to add that my previous head porter claimed 310 cfm out of my Lt4 castings with 2.08 valves... but my God what absolutely HORRIBLE throttle response it had !! And btw we had it flowed later and it wasn't near 300 cfm actually but that's another story...
Well said Tony.
** wanted to add also that that z06 sounds absolutely BadazZZ !!! Any info on the setup on that thing?
I have a older set of AFR 180's that I bought about 4 years ago. Last October I was in the LA area and blew a head gasket. Luck was with me in that the water was going directly into the cylinder rather than into the oil. I was able to nurse the car back from LA to the bay area 400 miles PLUS). It had overheated badly at one point where I was stuck in traffic, K-rail on both sides and no where to go or get off.
I transferred the heads to my ZZ4 short block, but first had them checked for flatness. With the miles I had put on them had a valve job done at the same time. For those of you that don't know about these heads, they have a VERY thick deck. My heads were FLAT! You hear stories for aluminum twisting with the heat, the AFR product is great.
My own experience with this product has been good. Each minor modification has allowed these heads to increase performance. I don't think I have really exceeded their potential yet. And this is a product taken right out of the box and bolted on. At the time I was looking into purchasing heads I had the chance to talk to a young lady (known for being the best head porter in my area) about heads. I was thinking at that time of getting a good set of iron heads and having her port them. She point blank told me that she could port the iron heads, but for the money the AFR's were the way to go and would flow better than what I had in mind and would be a good combination with planed future modifications. Damn if she hasn't been 100% on the mark.
Tony, I think we all know that there are other products out there that move air and fuel into and out of the cylinders. As a comsumer we make our choice based on what our ideal motor would be and then add the constraints of money and other obligations. We look at flow number comparisons and how they fit into our engine builds. A young kid with his first car can buy "the other product" on a limited budget and it will be better than the stock cast iron. Us older guys have a slightly larger budget and put a little more thought into our purchases. Your wisdom has reached some of us.
Thank you for your personal support of our madness
__________________
1985 Coup -ZZ4 balanced, LPE 74211 cam, AFR 180 heads, SuperRam base, runners & plenum, cut out air box, K & N filter, power coupler, 52MM TB, March pulleys, AFPR, Accel injectors, Walbro FP, 1.6 RR, chip by TJWONG, 160 stat, cut back plugs, 8.5MM MSD wires, Brute Thunder Coil, custom camber-brace,TRANSGO shift kit, 2400 stall converter, cross drilled rotors, SS brake lines, VBP camber rods, IAS Edelbrock shocks, custom crossover on exhaust, Magnflow cat, 3.07 gears, 13.2 @107.2 MPH in 1/4
Great post. I am one that does not know a whole lot but am in the learning process. I loved the read and helps me to be able to decide on the future purchase for my vette. I was already going to save for the AFRs just on everything i have read in the past. This just is icing on the cake. Write some more late at night it just gave me something to do, good stuff
Thank you for taking the time for the write up. I also read your article in the latest ChevyHighPerformance magazine. I can see why so many people put AFR's on their c4's. The concept of air velocity over air mass makes perfect sense. Especially as the air intakes, aftermarket or otherwise are extremely limited considering the potential of these engines, the LT4 in particular. These intakes are only going to get so much air mass, and that's it. A higher velocity head seems to be the only true solution. I liken it to filling a bucket with a garden hose. If I want to fill the bucket faster, old logic would say get a bigger hose. But I would still only get the amount of water per second that the water line permits. So, if I want to fill the bucket faster, i need to make the water come out faster. So I pinch the end of the hose, greater velocity, creates more vacuum on the water line, more water per second, the bucket fills faster. (We wash our cars alot, so I thought the water bucket anology would help make the point)
What a post Tony. It is obvious that you really do care!
Tony, I am hoping that Jsup stays with his Dart 215cc's, and gets them ported out to a 225cc or whichever. If him and I met down the road, I will take him for a spin, and he will see what a smaller cylinder head it capable. I have been pm'ing him telling him about port velocity, and mentioning it in my posts for weeks now, and he just doesnt get it, so I have stopped the enlighting process.
I hope Jsup's 427 simple kicks ass, and it's a joy to drive. On the other hand Tony, I dont know what his issue with AFR is, and as you mentioned his apology was rather weak, and yes he does like stirring the pot.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show....php?t=2117444 In regards to this thread, I have kept my thoughts to myself unlike our famour AFR disliker. If you didnt know any better, you would think he knew what he was talking about, but in reality he has no experience in the field, and has probably never even seen a head being flowed in person or been to a dyno to see what cars are being dynoed with what cylinder head. I on the other hand have spend hours, and hours hanging out at a dyno in the past 5 years, and have seen in person what heads flow like, and the relation to port velocity/cfm to dyno numbers and real world power when the vehicle hits the pavement. However I am no expect about cylinder heads, but I do my research.
Thanks for that thread Tony. I dont want to ask how long that took you to type it out. After reading it, I am glad I am going with your product, and I know with all the sweat and tears you put into it, it will indeed perform like I expect it too.
A SBC1 cylinder head that is 196cc that flows in the area of 300/230 cfm respectfully is unheard of until now. Is there really much more to say?
On another note Tony. You know this point better then me. This is the internet as we know, and there is alot of guys that talk out of there asses. I think one of the issues is there engine builder recommends product 1 because he will make more profit on them then product 2. I know you don't take it to heart, but I would assume that some guys would grow old after sometime.
Even this has turned into somewhat of a lengthy reply. Time to go!
Last edited by 88BlackZ-51; 08-30-2008 at 07:33 AM.
very nice post.
I would have liked to hear about some other aspects as well. I/E ratios, and port cross sections etc., of not only afr's product line but others in the market place as comparison. I would suspect as part of the research and design that has been put into the product, that you/afr has probably purchased or attained product/s from ALL the mfg.s to do actual flow, cross section etc. for evaluation and analysis. Could this be elaborated on to some degree (as I know it can become thesis material), and obviously within professional parameters.
Regarding your build and larger ci. sbc's.
Yours obviously sounds big in every way (sounds like it can live in the big rpm/power range), is it proprietary info to discuss or mention your combo (cyl. head, cam etc.)?, if so no problem. With regards to street-able set-ups above 400ci., your thoughts/recommendations on cyl. head selection, springs, retainers (inc. maintenance spring life) etc. while maintaining a bigger H.Roller or possibly a small SR etc.
thanks
I've been running the TPIS/AFR heads on my car for 4 years and they are great so far....not a cylinder head expert, but from research I did, they seem to be the best.........hopefully this is a compliment since I did purchase my heads from TPIS as I assume these are your heads....they seemed to have the knowledge I needed making this 85 wake up into the 21st century.
__________________
85 Vette with many modifications: ZF6, TPIS/AFR alum. heads, TPIS LT's, TPIS ZZ9 roller cam, TPIS 52 mm throttle body, RT hi-flow cat., miniram, 355 ci. rebuilt engine, 3.73 gears; air pump delete, "1990 ZR1style" rear fascia w/admiral blue GS stripe, custom wheels
Location: Bergen County, NJ Democrats, doing for the country what they did for Michigan
Quote:
First things first however....JSUP (sorry to single you out), your constant "forked tongue" about our product is getting old and is the reason I got into it with you in another thread where (in the end) you apologized with some weak excuse as to your actions....basically admitting you like stirring the pot. At that time we had a conversation and that offered me the opportunity to get a little more insight into the depth of your knowledge, both engine and cylinder head related. No offense but from our conversation it was clear to me that you are not an expert in either field yet you’re the loudest guy on this board and the first to offer opinions of questionable substance. Why is it if you like our product and seem to be OK with me personally (after the conversation and few PM's we shared) do you have to get yourself in an uproar if other people want to endorse AFR product? I appreciate some of the positive things you said in this latest thread but I don't appreciate all the negative things you said just as loudly. Its the exact same situation that occurred in the last thread and in light of that I offered to help you with AFR’s in place of your current heads of choice to prove to you just how wrong you are about your assessment that a lot of other products can be “ just as good”….in the case of these LTx heads you couldn't’t be more wrong, especially if we are comparing OEM ported castings to the new AFR Eliminators. The difference is my argument comes with a lot more substance and technical expertise in the field we are discussing to back it up.
I will only address this paragraph.
I am not making a technical argument. I have said that before. I do not have the experience to make a technical argument. I leave that to guys like Deakins who have the paper and experience to back it up. And the fact that I don't have the experience further provides reason that I SHOULD ask questions. And excuse fkn me if I don't buy every marketing line put out by a manufacturer. That is part of my frustration too. Had I NOT taken the research upon myself, I never would have known that Dart, Brodix, or any other brand existed if only based on this forum. How is that good for anyone doing research? IN fact, I would submit that people who come here and ask these questions are not experts, hence the questions. I don't need to be an engineer or engine builder to do consumer research, ask questions, and come to conclusions based on that. I don't have to understand fluid dynamics to weigh arguments, and I am not foolish enough to believe ANYONE's marketing at face value.
My frustration is the zealots. When people ask advice as to which product to purchase no one ever asks questions about application, budget, results, nothing. There is a knee jerk reaction. A-hole comments like "you're leaving power on the table"... when called no proof is offered, and to date, never has been.
I would submit that when asked for information it is far more useful to the person asking the question to point out there are a number of products available and here's the links to each including their pros and cons.
Many of the fan boys, as the term has been mentioned, don't want to discuss the pros and cons of any product except AFR. And not even the CONS, only pros. Buy this or your an idiot, that is the position. Period. A complete dis service to the person asking the question.
Perhaps it's a stock cam that has .450 lift, why do flow numbers at .650 even matter? Perhaps the cam, rocker, head budget is under $1000, maybe Patriot is a solution there. If the intake only flows 200CFM what is the point of having heads that flow 300? But let's not get into details.
These a-holes with their uncontrollable conditioned responses are not serving anyone any service because they react to marketing information, true or not, and refuse to consider there may be some better fit. They never dig down to what the OP may or may not want or use. I find that obnoxious and useless.
Now, as to the rest of the post, I am sure that if written by someone from Dart, Patriot, Trickflow, Brodix they would all highlight their strengths and come to a conclusion their product is better. I expect no one here wants to hear or admit that. Like I said, this is a marketing argument I am making, not a technical on. Why should I believe material put out by someone trying to sell a product? ANY product.
Lastly, I never said AFR was a second rate product. I merely had the unmitigated audacity to point out that there are alternatives. I have NEVER trashed a product. The trashing of products is coming from the Vehement AFR supporters. In one case I believe that another product was called a POS.
I feel like Solmon Rushdie or the comic strip writer from the Netherlands who had a price put on their head for insulting the great ISALM. This is an AFR Jihad....simple. I have had more hatred and vitriol directed at me for suggesting someone take a look at other products, not a SPECIFIC product, just OTHER products. If that is a crime, than I plead guilty.
I am sure that if written by someone from Dart, Patriot, Trickflow, Brodix they would all highlight their strengths and come to a conclusion their product is better. I expect no one here wants to hear or admit that.
I would.........here's a thought, since you stated in your motor build thread that both Dart and Edelbrock were: "interested, and watching your build", why not invite them to the party.
Location: Bergen County, NJ Democrats, doing for the country what they did for Michigan
Quote:
Originally Posted by mseven
I would.........here's a thought, since you stated in your motor build thread that both Dart and Edelbrock were: "interested, and watching your build", why not invite them to the party.
What, to post in this thread?
I think Brodix would point something out as noted in the other thread such as:
Quote:
Notice how he always uses the 195's... the 220's that have to use a shaft rocker set up don't flow any better than the fully worked T1's that use regular rockers. And what is his thing with exhaust flow? A good race head hits 250cfm, I don't think a slow street engine needs that...
why not, is it beneath them? or can't they make themselves available to the "regular guy" or consumer?
One of the things I appreciatte is that he makes himself and his company approachable. Tony does not need to post here or respond to any questions yet he does, why? I believe it to be because he is also an enthuisiast to hotrodding and sbc's. I can't imagine his effort to post as any outlook to huge sales gain based on this c-4 crowd.
[color="Red"][b]
Lastly, I want you guys to listen to what a truly efficient cylinder head design is capable of when surrounded by the right complimenting components. You can hear the engine just more alive and popping at an idle and as soon as I get into the throttle the engine is explosive and all over the rev limiter in spite of reasonably sticky tires (Nitto drag radials). This is a 91 octane pump gas small block (383 CID) and while it is a Gen III engine, I could have created exactly the same results with similar displacement and our 195 or 210 cc Comp heads.
Perhaps I'm just a cylinder head philistine, but what is it we are listening for? Sounds like a car with a cam, gears, and a lightweight flywheel, at least in terms of the burble and the wicked fast way the revs build?
Car seems badass though, no doubt. All I mean is, what part of what we saw was the heads?
Location: Bergen County, NJ Democrats, doing for the country what they did for Michigan
Quote:
Originally Posted by mseven
why not, is it beneath them? or can't they make themselves available to the "regular guy" or consumer?
One of the things I appreciatte is that he makes himself and his company approachable. Tony does not need to post here or respond to any questions yet he does, why? I believe it to be because he is also an enthuisiast to hotrodding and sbc's. I can't imagine his effort to post as any outlook to huge sales gain based on this c-4 crowd.
I have no special connections within either of those companies.
Again, my questions are not directed to AFR as a product. It was my understanding that this forum exists for the sole reason of the free and open exchange of ideas and opinions. I have seen lately a myopic view here that does that premise a dis service. That is my core problem. The "buy this or you're an idiot" crowd. The "buy this or you're leaving power on the table crowd". The "don't dare mention anything other than socially acceptable products becuase we'll tell you they all suck" crowd.
How about the idiots who for every dyno thread say things like "those AFR heads work great" or "what if you had AFR heads"....how obnoxious is that? Get over it.
So having a pissing match between manufacturer's doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
Again, my questions are not directed to AFR as a product.
Seems to me like your complaint is "there's a-holes on CF" and "some of the a-holes love AFR". Well, both are probably pretty true. And when these a-holes post up in every cylinder head thread about AFR's, you might find that annoying. But think for a minute about how that is different from you posting in every AFR thread just to point out some people are a-holes.
The thread that spawned this one seems a prime example. The OP asked specifically about AFR's vs ported LT4's. If you want to point out there are other options, go for it. But he clearly wasn't interested in them, so let it go at that point. Now it's just another cylinder head pissing match thread.
Some people obviously want to discuss AFR as a product. But all those threads go south (not all due to you, but not all unrelated either).
I can vouche for the "tip in effect" on the 195s. Even on my hurt bottem end, which is being repaired right now, it felt like I didn't even have to down shift anymore.
Sure as hell didn't feel like that with the "hogged out" 210s I use to have that were more like 230s after all was said and done.
I'm sorry but I thought we had rules (or maybe I'm thinking of another board) that prohibited public attacks. As I've said repeatedly, if we want to discuss the performance of your cylinder heads it has to be technical (and then we can get into some in depth discussion off all the product lines and all applications). Coming on here and making statement of superiority about one product will not do much to sway those of us who don't agree with some of what you're saying.
Now I'm sorry, I don't know you personally or professionally, but coming up with that kind of response to a thread in a public forum is ridiculous. If you must intervene, do so in the thread and do so with facts. You do yourself and your reputation amongst many readers that do not have an opinion on the subject a great disservice when you start calling people out and attempting to show how much more you know (and that surely may be the case). With my background I can pull out a lot heavy math that I once used to design blended wing body aircraft and make most here feel inadequate; but what does that do other than bring them down? They surely won't take anything away from the post, and in most cases they will just "turn off".
Now I don't see how you can make the statement that your products are the "best, most efficient heads" out there (and that’s on about every page of the AFR website). From a guy that at one time worked on designing aircraft I feel that you need to do what I do when I start working on a build for someone. You have to set operational parameters! These dictate what you need and it also dictates the sacrifices you may or may not be willing to make in an attempt to further optimize the package. For example, when working on a 410 sprint car engine I start the conversation by asking what the lowest and highest RPM the engine is going see throughout the lap (on a good one that’s 7500 to somewhere around 8750-9000 depending on the driver and budget). Then we get into expectations about power, delivery, so on and so forth. What’s good for one car/drive combination is not what’s considered ideal for another driver in the same car.
Now I can already anticipate the response to that; "but my car's a street car so I don't need that level of development". If you feel that way, that's fine; but the guys that come to me want that level of development. They realize that for example, a street/strip car is really about getting down the strip and being able to cruise around (and blow some doors off), same for a road race/driver; it's all about performance at the track and still having the ability to get around town (with a little grace). So let's lay down a parameter or two for the street/strip car (one that I actually own and operate regularly). During a 1/4 mile pass the car stalls to 3300, leaves the line at 4000, and never drops below 6900 while reaching 8000 RPM. So to get these R's we have solid roller with 280*duration@50 and a total lift at the rocker of about 0.730 so on and so forth.
Now before you say anything, this engine logs 4-5K miles a year (mostly due to gas mileage) and has zero issues cruising around town (even on cold 30 winter days).
So I'll share my thought process on selecting a cylinder head for this engine;
1. The max RPM achieved requires that there be sufficient volume and cross sectional area to enable me to control the velocity going through the port. Something in the 195 realm will simply not do, due to physics.
2. The fairly aggressive camshaft and rocker combination reaches the 0.500 lift measure extremely quickly, i.e. I'm much better off having higher flow numbers from 0.400+ (where the valve spends a large percentage of it’s time) even if it means that I must give up a little flow at 0.400-.
3. With over 0.700 life and 800lbs open pressure I have to have very stout valves, seats, and retainer hardware (they take a lot of abuse just running, tons of abuse at 8000RPM). The springs also must be readily available (we go through them on average every other year depending on the ratio of passes to miles cruised). 4 It goes on and on…
Now, this is just a sample of what we start going through when selecting components for any build, and a ton of math goes into the cylinder head selection and modification process. I hope it's apparent (maybe it is and maybe I'm just in my own little performance world here) that a cylinder head is as unique to the engine package as the camshaft, and for that reason can't be selected simply on flow numbers and runner size (and any one head can’t be stated as “best” either). If it were that easy we wouldn't have fast engines and slow engines in racing. Just my .02;
Tony, I do appreciate that you take the time to represent your product here (not many professionals do); I would, however, prefer that it didn't include the names of people that disagree, or include mention of private communication between you (address their statements and beat them with facts) as this opens Pandora’s Box so to speak.
Contrary to what most think, this board is for the sharing of experiences and ideas; if you are not here to listen and learn (not directed at Tony; the rest of the forum members here) stop giving away your performance secrets. I have witnessed people who have built two or three engines disagree with professionals that have 30+ years of hardcore racing experience. It's not an issue that you disagree, that's perfectly fine, it's that you did it purely on opinion and never had either the want, or the technical ability to do so properly. I'm out of time for this morning (I’ll go down as the longest post in history I think), I'll check back later. Have a good weekend everybody.
I'm sorry but I thought we had rules (or maybe I'm thinking of another board) that prohibited public attacks. As I've said repeatedly, if we want to discuss the performance of your cylinder heads it has to be technical (and then we can get into some in depth discussion off all the product lines and all applications). Coming on here and making statement of superiority about one product will not do much to sway those of us who don't agree with some of what you're saying.....
My thread was not a personal attack at all and my assessment of JSUP's background was/is purely my opinion and perhaps in hindsight it should or could have been omitted, but the reality is that no matter what recent AFR thread we are discussing he seems to always be the loudest voice on there (posting both positive and negative opinions) as if he were an expert in the field we are discussing. So much so that none of these threads end up with any tech whatsoever, only a bunch or arguing and BS such that anyone perhaps wanting to get a technical edge on whats happening doesn't even have the stomach to read anymore. The fact that you call me out about that and not address the number of threads destroyed by all the controversy he has created I find a little strange. I tried to be as professional as possible in my response but at some point enough is enough and some things need to be brought out into the open. I still feel what I wrote was not out of line considering the history here and I'm standing by it.
What I did try to impart is as much technical and real world reasoning and understanding as to why the new AFR Eliminator is an outstanding product....and tried to explain it in such a way more people might better grasp the concept. I also purposely kept it in the realm of what I believe to be most applicable to the types of builds people reading this stuff would consider and better relate to.
Not once I did not say our 195 head is the end all be all head right for every application....although IMO it is the right head for most of the applications people reading this post will probably need.
In your response you bring up aspects of building a basically dedicated drag race combination that of course would benefit from our larger 210 or possibly our 227 cylinder heads and IMO none of that applies to the bulk of the people reading this, but if any of you are building a more aggressive combination I would encourage you to obviously look into our larger offerings with additional volume and more flow higher in the curve that your more aggressive solid roller camshaft and higher RPM's can now take better advantage of. All of what I discussed about some of the attributes of our product still applys however in the sense that as far as a 210 cc runner or a 227 cc runner, the new Eliminators have a stronger flow curve than any other heads on the market (in their respective volume/catagory and price breakpoint) and offer you other advantages like the extra thick deck, 8mm lighter weight beadlock valves, etc. etc. Dont forget guys we designed this product line a year or so ago (and swung for the fences when we did), where some of the stuff it is being compared to dates back many years ago. We have infused all of the Eliminator products with our most recent advancements in port and chamber designs, more efficient valvejob profiles, the most up to date and efficient valvetrain components, and our abilities to accurately digitize and CNC replicate some of the most efficiient (and super sensitive) high speed port designs has never been better. Its the combination of these benefits that set the bar a new wrung or two higher.
Anyway....I have a ton of stuff to do today but I hopped on here quickly and this particular post caught me a little off guard so I decided to address it before I start my day. I will be revisiting this thread soon and trying to touch on some of the other good points that were brought up here....at least the ones I can expand on.
If my thread came across as an attack on JSUP it wasn't meant to be....in fact my main focus was really aimed on being informative and creating a better understanding of the new AFR product, but some of what has been going on with his posting in every AFR head thread had to be addressed as I personally was getting very tired of seeing everyone of them go quickly down hill (and I know for a fact I wasn't the only one that felt that way).
These are the automotive performance related message boards (the new soap opera's for men)....if you spend time on a handful of them you already know there is always a "cheerleader factor" if you want to call it that and if people want to say they like this product or they like that product they should certainly be allowed to do so without being continually harrassed every other post (ultimately derailing any informative aspect that may have come from it). If you like something else better than talk about it and explain why you think its better to the best of your ability....that is certainly anyone's right and no one would take offense to that assuming the info you provided was reasonably accurate...no one has a problem with that. No matter how good any one particular product may be there will always be fans of other products due to product loyalty and a host of other reasons.....thats just the way it is but everyone is entitled to his or her opinion and should be allowed to comfortably voice it.
Catch up with you guys later
Tony
Last edited by Tony Mamo @ AFR; 08-30-2008 at 01:11 PM.
I have purchased the AFR 195 Competition Eliminator heads and had them flowed. They exceeded the advertised numbers from AFR. At least with the new heads I would say AFR's numbers are conservative.
Regarding jsup. With all the attacks he has made on posters I think he has made himself increasingly irrelevant.
Corvette Store
The "AFR thread" to end all others....
