Thanks for the info, I considered the larger version of that for my 502 torque motor, but I used the flowtek oval ports that you flowed in an earlier video instead.
Great video I bought these heads a few years back and never had to chance to flow them. I made 572 hp and 605 tq on the dyno with them and a small camshaft. I look forward to seeing how they do with your porting.
I like that cylinder head a lot. A 496 with a reasonable cam, like a 232/240 on a 112 will be a lot of fun. Shift at 5800. Tilton clutch on a factory flexplate. Liberty faceplated Tremec TKX. Run the airbox into the windshield wiper cowl.
I'll clean up all the sweet spots! After porting for 38 years....i still enjoy the CNC as a great clean up tool!!! Bc you can still make improvements by hand!
awesomeI I just emailed you about these on a gen6 454. You recommended these for my goals 450 on 87 pump gas. after watching this video and realizing i left out ease of install as a factor. Im thinking the brodix 270s might be better. the added cost of the AFRs plus having to port match my intake which i dont want to do. sounds like the ease of install will be better with the brodix. will i be able to my goal of 450hp around 4500? Thanks again love your videos
What are your thoughts on George Bryce’s theroy that velocity is irrelevant? It seems that with fuel injection that holds true but with a carb you will need that velocity to have signal to pull fuel. If this theory is correct does fuel injection stand to make a lot more horsepower than a carburetor? How do you port differently carb vs injection?
Hiw would this head stack up against the Flotek 290 head on a 496. Top RPM is probably 5500.....I know the Flotek had a bigger intake valve. Which head would be the better head for the 496?
I bought these heads for my 427 that is 60 over I seen them used on a video richard holdener did at west tech when they dynoed a 468 and these heads did the best I think the brodix was really close I hope I made the right choice it's a mild street motor with a howards 235x241 duration and 618 lift I was hoping to make 550 hp but I think I'm a little shy on camshaft the motor has around 10.7 to 1 compression I guess it should make around 480 to 500 hp I guess I'll have to waite and see when we dyno it. Thanks for the video Eric you do a great job.
That cam has a 112 degree lobe separation if you go back to the holdner test he used a comp xr294 has less lift more duration and a 110 lsa I had seen another test using the next size up comp cam and it traded a ton of low end for a little high end
With the right carb,intake and headers you should be very close to your 550 goal. But yes, that cam is a little on the small side.. for 550 guaranteed, intake duration in the mid 240's would probably help.
IMO, with all out drag racing falling off a cliff, we're seeing less... and less... and less demand... for the 'Aluminum' Headed Engines being built every year ? And with the coming emissions regulations, price of fuel, insurance, etc., etc., we're seeing more and more demand for well done 'resto' style Iron stuff and resurgence by those restoring them for street usages or going FAST Racing ? Last 2 sets of Heads I was getting paid very well to do R & D with on my SF750 Bench were BB Mopar Irons ? Seems what was once OLD and forgotten..... is now NEW again ?
I don’t know what you are talking about demand for aluminum heads is through the roof. That’s why nobody has aluminum heads in stock. I have never seen it this high. Nobody does iron unless it’s to meet rules.
@Benjamin Rizzo - the short runner does not flow better because you can see ( at 2:28 ) the short runner is pointed at the cylinder wall where the long port dumps toward the center of the cylinder. has nothing to do with the length
Gm designed it that way. Since then people/companies have kept the same architectural design for the most part. To make them the same requires many specialized parts and consumers don’t want to spend that money.
@@WeingartnerRacing Yea I Understand that's how it is from the beginning but I'm wondering why GM designed it that way from the start, there had to be a reason why they did what they did. it just doesn't make a lot of sense when thinking about how to design a head a high perf head at that that this would be an ideal design for power, Did they design the head for a broader torque curve when adding the longer runner? that's all I was wondering just trying to find an answer that makes sense. Thanks for your insight Eric
@@larrycraven7787 - i think he assumed (as did i) that you were referencing "2 ports" as rectangle and oval. you are talking about the "long and short" runner set up? Its just architecture.
just plain fraud, mfg's including AFR must think using the term oval port helps sales, obviously the port roof is lower than GM rec port heads but calling them "oval port" is just misinformation, as said in the video no unmodified intake manifold matches the port entrance
Yep, you should see the flotek 290's my dad just bought. They're labed "oval port".. but they're frigging HUGE !! It's literally gonna take 10 hrs of grinding to match his tunnel ram to those ports. 😡
Thanks for the info, I considered the larger version of that for my 502 torque motor, but I used the flowtek oval ports that you flowed in an earlier video instead.
Great video I bought these heads a few years back and never had to chance to flow them. I made 572 hp and 605 tq on the dyno with them and a small camshaft. I look forward to seeing how they do with your porting.
Very informative video. Hope AFR makes their Dual Plane 'roval" intake available soon
I like that cylinder head a lot. A 496 with a reasonable cam, like a 232/240 on a 112 will be a lot of fun. Shift at 5800. Tilton clutch on a factory flexplate. Liberty faceplated Tremec TKX. Run the airbox into the windshield wiper cowl.
I'll clean up all the sweet spots! After porting for 38 years....i still enjoy the CNC as a great clean up tool!!! Bc you can still make improvements by hand!
Thank you sir
With stock, unported GM #781 casting heads, 2.06"in 1.72"exh got the rev limiter set 6500rpm.
Great head for 396 street engine with Vic Jr intake
Now if GM only made a TPI intake for the BBC and put it on trucks, you’d have a killer torque monster with these heads!
thanks
We use a small port....intake and match the intake to the head!!
awesomeI I just emailed you about these on a gen6 454. You recommended these for my goals 450 on 87 pump gas. after watching this video and realizing i left out ease of install as a factor. Im thinking the brodix 270s might be better. the added cost of the AFRs plus having to port match my intake which i dont want to do. sounds like the ease of install will be better with the brodix. will i be able to my goal of 450hp around 4500? Thanks again love your videos
Hi Eric, would these heads be a good candidate for larger valves, & major port work???
What are your thoughts on George Bryce’s theroy that velocity is irrelevant? It seems that with fuel injection that holds true but with a carb you will need that velocity to have signal to pull fuel. If this theory is correct does fuel injection stand to make a lot more horsepower than a carburetor? How do you port differently carb vs injection?
Does it help to smooth out the cnc lines but not change the shape of the ports on these heads?
Hiw would this head stack up against the Flotek 290 head on a 496. Top RPM is probably 5500.....I know the Flotek had a bigger intake valve. Which head would be the better head for the 496?
👍💪
Eric at a 45 Deg exhaust flange angle the header will only raise up .150 not .300.
I bought these heads for my 427 that is 60 over I seen them used on a video richard holdener did at west tech when they dynoed a 468 and these heads did the best I think the brodix was really close I hope I made the right choice it's a mild street motor with a howards 235x241 duration and 618 lift I was hoping to make 550 hp but I think I'm a little shy on camshaft the motor has around 10.7 to 1 compression I guess it should make around 480 to 500 hp I guess I'll have to waite and see when we dyno it. Thanks for the video Eric you do a great job.
That cam has a 112 degree lobe separation if you go back to the holdner test he used a comp xr294 has less lift more duration and a 110 lsa I had seen another test using the next size up comp cam and it traded a ton of low end for a little high end
With the right carb,intake and headers you should be very close to your 550 goal. But yes, that cam is a little on the small side.. for 550 guaranteed, intake duration in the mid 240's would probably help.
Honestly with the right intake I don’t see why you wouldn’t exceed 550 hp easily.
It will rip
I made 572 hp and 605 tq with these heads and a small 229/229 camshaft from Straub on a 468.
Would these heads work on a 402 bbc with no problems?
I know you wanted Eric to reply but IMO you probably wouldn’t find better heads than these for a 402 unless it is for all out racing.
@@edwardwood3622 Thank you
IMO, with all out drag racing falling off a cliff, we're seeing less... and less... and less demand... for the 'Aluminum' Headed Engines being built every year ? And with the coming emissions regulations, price of fuel, insurance, etc., etc., we're seeing more and more demand for well done 'resto' style Iron stuff and resurgence by those restoring them for street usages or going FAST Racing ?
Last 2 sets of Heads I was getting paid very well to do R & D with on my SF750 Bench were BB Mopar Irons ? Seems what was once OLD and forgotten..... is now NEW again ?
I don’t know what you are talking about demand for aluminum heads is through the roof. That’s why nobody has aluminum heads in stock. I have never seen it this high. Nobody does iron unless it’s to meet rules.
Hmmm.you would think the short runner would flow better!!
Why??
Have you seen an exhaust port flowed with & without a pipe
@Benjamin Rizzo - the short runner does not flow better because you can see ( at 2:28 ) the short runner is pointed at the cylinder wall where the long port dumps toward the center of the cylinder. has nothing to do with the length
Weird I don't hear any volume
Try again. Sometimes it takes awhile for full download of sound.
I've asked this question before with no answer, Why did they make a cylinder head with 2 different intake ports? doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Gm designed it that way. Since then people/companies have kept the same architectural design for the most part. To make them the same requires many specialized parts and consumers don’t want to spend that money.
@@WeingartnerRacing Yea I Understand that's how it is from the beginning but I'm wondering why GM designed it that way from the start, there had to be a reason why they did what they did. it just doesn't make a lot of sense when thinking about how to design a head a high perf head at that that this would be an ideal design for power, Did they design the head for a broader torque curve when adding the longer runner? that's all I was wondering just trying to find an answer that makes sense.
Thanks for your insight Eric
@@larrycraven7787 - i think he assumed (as did i) that you were referencing "2 ports" as rectangle and oval. you are talking about the "long and short" runner set up? Its just architecture.
@@robtdougherty Yea that's what i was referring too sorry should've been more clear in what I was asking,
Those.are not a.A.F.R normal standard level of heads ..what gives?
just plain fraud, mfg's including AFR must think using the term oval port helps sales, obviously the port roof is lower than GM rec port heads but calling them "oval port" is just misinformation, as said in the video no unmodified intake manifold matches the port entrance
Yep, you should see the flotek 290's my dad just bought. They're labed "oval port".. but they're frigging HUGE !! It's literally gonna take 10 hrs of grinding to match his tunnel ram to those ports. 😡