Dart vs AFR heads on HP 500
05-20-2008, 11:39 AM
#112
Registered User
By the way, Jeg's house-brand head is the Canfield with no logo milled into the end.
05-20-2008, 12:22 PM
#113
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Thats the first bad thing I have heard on the canfield? or did I miss something.
I know horsepower is not cheap but I am looking for the best bang 4 the buck in an aluminum head that flows good on exhaust side. Intake is not as critical due the supercharger.
I know horsepower is not cheap but I am looking for the best bang 4 the buck in an aluminum head that flows good on exhaust side. Intake is not as critical due the supercharger.
05-21-2008, 08:16 PM
#116
Registered User
05-24-2008, 01:48 AM
#117
Here's the facts you have many choices when it comes to cylinder head choices and how they are compared is critical. The "Old" antique method of cylinder head comparison is done with what is known as "Dry Flow" technology this measures air flow only. Well we all know your engine has air&fuel mixed running through it. So while air flow only numbers can easily be distorted (Similar to Dyno results) The real measurement for how well a cylinder head performs is not based on air flow alone it is accomplished on a "Wet Flow" testing system. This method measures air&fuel like mixture as it travels through the cylinder heads. Anybody can get good dry flow #'s but Wet flow numbers indicate the truth.
[F]No offence, but I have a hard time buying into this "Wet Flow" testing system. I had the opportunity to flow a Dart WFT opportunity head on my 600 superflow. At first sight the intake ports looked impressive. If my info is correct the I port volume is 380 cc respectively. The visual difference was the short turn was bellied down at the width with sharp edges at the valve seat. The airflow results were nowhere near what Dart claimed which is 420cfm ish. on the intakes and 330 on the exhaust side. The exhaust ports flowed less than the CNC'd pro one heads even though they are raised more than the pro ones. I called Dart to ask why my numbers didn't corelate with theirs. They said that they use a different flow bench to flow there heads on and the wet flow numbers will be different. I then asked him if they wet flow the exhaust too because the numbers are are way down as well. I then asked him for a correction number so at least we can be on the same page. He took my number and said the engineer would call me back. That was in February.
I did see some dyno numbers that showed a dyne hp gain but being a 380 cc port I don't know what head they compared it with.
I believe WFT is something worth looking into but has a way to go. From the pictures I've seen there is a straight pipe off the port and a supply tube for the liquid. It would only make sense to use a carb/manifold in running conditions with variating pressure. Also the valve cycling should be a factor. My opnion [/FONT]
I can tell you that in a comparison like this the Dart PRO-1 cylinder head is a hands down winner. But this is just the start here's where the real value comes in. First consider the folks that use the heads. Our company history is rich with over 37 World and National championships. Ourselves, Chief Engines, Tyler Crocket, Paul Pfaff, Sterling Performance, Scott Shafiroff, and Reher Morrison just to name a few professional engine builders that use and demand Dart cylinder heads on their engine packages, all of us have come up with the same conclusion. The Dart Pro1 "as cast" cylinder head has out performed the AFR cnc cylinder head on the dyno by 10-20hp...Horsepower is what you want correct? Not to mention that there were big machining savings to you the consumer. On the Pro1 heads we as well as the other engine builders take them out of the box, machine the head down to the chamber cc that we wanted and simply put the heads together. The AFR heads had to have the valve guides honed, valve job, surfaced and then put together. At the end of the day the head that produces the most power and is the best finished product for your application, "WE" believe is the Dart PRO-1.[/QUOTE]
I would agree
[F]No offence, but I have a hard time buying into this "Wet Flow" testing system. I had the opportunity to flow a Dart WFT opportunity head on my 600 superflow. At first sight the intake ports looked impressive. If my info is correct the I port volume is 380 cc respectively. The visual difference was the short turn was bellied down at the width with sharp edges at the valve seat. The airflow results were nowhere near what Dart claimed which is 420cfm ish. on the intakes and 330 on the exhaust side. The exhaust ports flowed less than the CNC'd pro one heads even though they are raised more than the pro ones. I called Dart to ask why my numbers didn't corelate with theirs. They said that they use a different flow bench to flow there heads on and the wet flow numbers will be different. I then asked him if they wet flow the exhaust too because the numbers are are way down as well. I then asked him for a correction number so at least we can be on the same page. He took my number and said the engineer would call me back. That was in February.
I did see some dyno numbers that showed a dyne hp gain but being a 380 cc port I don't know what head they compared it with.
I believe WFT is something worth looking into but has a way to go. From the pictures I've seen there is a straight pipe off the port and a supply tube for the liquid. It would only make sense to use a carb/manifold in running conditions with variating pressure. Also the valve cycling should be a factor. My opnion [/FONT]
I can tell you that in a comparison like this the Dart PRO-1 cylinder head is a hands down winner. But this is just the start here's where the real value comes in. First consider the folks that use the heads. Our company history is rich with over 37 World and National championships. Ourselves, Chief Engines, Tyler Crocket, Paul Pfaff, Sterling Performance, Scott Shafiroff, and Reher Morrison just to name a few professional engine builders that use and demand Dart cylinder heads on their engine packages, all of us have come up with the same conclusion. The Dart Pro1 "as cast" cylinder head has out performed the AFR cnc cylinder head on the dyno by 10-20hp...Horsepower is what you want correct? Not to mention that there were big machining savings to you the consumer. On the Pro1 heads we as well as the other engine builders take them out of the box, machine the head down to the chamber cc that we wanted and simply put the heads together. The AFR heads had to have the valve guides honed, valve job, surfaced and then put together. At the end of the day the head that produces the most power and is the best finished product for your application, "WE" believe is the Dart PRO-1.[/QUOTE]
I would agree
Platinum Member
