Pwmax

No, it WAS sponsored by Afr, and Pace. The cylinder heads were also CAREFULLY chosen, so the AFR's looked better. There is a long list of heads I can think of, that weren;t on there, along with tons of "custom" modified heads by any numerous engine or head shop, and, a lot of those heads, with minimal work, could have easily made the most power. Put a real cam in that engine, something in the mid 260 range at .050, with around .700 lift, and bump the compression 2 points to 11.5:1, and you would see the results being much different. Then, the Dart 335's would have taken off, and made considerably more power. Why? Because then, the available cross section, and flow potential of those heads would have been utilized and taken advantage of. Thats why they used that head, to in my opinion, make it look bad, or, better yet, make the AFR head with the cnc chamber, and as cast ports look better. Hey, why buy an expensive Dart fully cnc'd head, when our as cast heads make more power. Dyno's don'y lie!! In this case, the dyno just didn;t tell the complete story.

Magazines guys, are there for one purpose. To make money, and to sell parts for their advertisers, or, the people that pay them, hence, how they make their money. Keep that in mind.

Not to say the AFR's didn;t perform well, they did, so did all the others really. And, your not comparing apples to apples, so, its really a dumb test. heck, you could have run a 18 degree Big Chief head on that short block, and they would have looked terrible in comparison, in the rpm range this test was run at, and with the cam used. People would say, wow, look at that AFR's made more power than even Big Chief heads!! And it would have been likely, they wouldn;t look good at all on that short block. Thats the same with the Pro-1 heads, not utilizing like I said above, the potential horsepower that was available.

Another thing, like I said, numerous heads weren;t used, probably by design, and probably because of magazine space, and time constraints, thats why the article is just something to read, and needs to be taken with a grain of salt, not to mention, that how were the tests done? I doubt they were all that scientific, to make absolutely sure that the running temps were identical, along with a bunch of other factors. Its very possible, there is 20+hp, from just how the tests are conducted. One engine totaly heat soaked, ( The Dart head) the other cooled off ( The AFR), will dramaticaly alter the results. I know for a FACT thats why the guy who won the very first Engine Masters challange won, because they didn;t follow the "rules". Pulled his engine at a much lower temp, than the second place finisher, even though the second place guys engine actualy made more peak horsepower, and more peak lb/ft of tqurge, but, because the wining engine made slightly more ft/lbs below 3000, that added 2 points to his score, and he won. Thats another stupid magazine stunt. That whole engine masters deal. Who, with an engine of that caliber, worry's about the power it makes at 2500? NO ONE. The converter behind something like that will be much higher than that anyhow. And, anyone building an engine like that, who puts a 6500 limit on them? NO ONE. So, its sorta pointless.

Anyhow, now I am rambling, but, that was a stupid article. Let me build the short block, and choose the heads, and I gaurentee the results would be WAAAY different

Frank
Advanced Performance
www.get-ap.com

OneBadGMC

Pwmax just did a very good job at it.

You prove you and your magazine are right.

Tod74

You are telling Curtis Boggs to prove You wrong about cylinder heads. LOFL!! :lol:

triniemi

Thanks for the reply Pwmax, you explained it really well.

BTW, what head you would recommend for this:

-Drag only, bracket racing, race fuel
-12.5:1 comp (with 119cc chambers), 509cid (4.5x4.0) shortblock
-I want to keep this between below 7400rpm, stock 502cid 1053 crank
-8" converter, 5000+ stallspeed
-Cam that I have is 272/278 @ 0.050, .700lift,
-Big Dart single plane, 1050cfm Dominator

My car has now parts above, Merlin iron heads, 2.19 intake, 1.88 exhaust, ported. Runs 8.9x at 150+ in 2400lb tube chassis car with a Glide, 4.11 or 4.33 gear, 32x14x15 GY. So maybe 700hp at the crank?

I was thinking AFR 345 or Dart 345. Maybe something from Brodix? Any others? Or should I go with the Dart 355/AFR 357 CNC head, is the extra 1000$ worth it? It would be nice to run deeper in the eights (my car has the 8.5 chassis tag) or tame it down to Super Comp with a throttle stop.

jmarksdragster

Curtis Boggs/RFD 8)

bbchevy

Well,I"M N O EXPERT!!!! But,Heres my Opinion..........?
Brodix BB-2 Extras.Out of the Box,OR?Send them to Curtis!
Put the Box Stockers on 1st,Tune It!Then Send them to Curtis.........!
Later
G 8)

cboggs

OK, .. buy an RFD / Victor 24* head, it'll make more power on
a properly built engine they any other head you can get including
most customs, ..

it's very true about magazines being advertising whores, ..
I buy ads, write articles, .. and can tell you all about the "behind the curtain"
stuff that goes on.

Simple things like they won't publish new product release info if you're
not an advertiser in their magazine. It's mostly BS, ..

Curtis

olds48

:?: :? Is that anything like Mayberry RFD?Rural Freight Delivery :?: Damn,fella comes on here trying to help share some info he thought would save guys money and he got laughed at and ridiculed for reading a magazine????Hmmm.......rude.

triniemi

I stayed alive. Could Curtis or any other give me head recommendation for my 509? Looking for most bang for the buck, but also more power. I think aluminum heads alone are going to cut .1 out of my ET if they flow as much as the ported original Merlins. I think they are now with about 320cc intake runner.

hammertime

Brodix bb2extra