Best aluminum heads out there??
12-01-2014, 09:08 PM
#41
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Won't change the velocity but the 320cc port is 'larger' in the eyes of the public.
So, furthermore,
'
say if we raise the 305cc port, thus giving it a straighter and better line of sight to the back of the valve, but doing so we make the port longer. Say it's now a 320cc port.
It picks up some airflow, is much more effecient, and it's 'velocity profile' improves.
Is the 'bigger' head at 320cc passed by for the 305cc head because the 305cc head 'is smaller' and thus have better velocity ?
Example:
How can an LS small block head at 250cc+ absolutley kill a 180cc 23* head on the same size 358cid motor ?
So...sometimes bigger size is just more length.
The intake manifold dictates what the final length is. So, that is used for 'wave length' tuning, not the length of the cyl head port.
So, furthermore,
'
say if we raise the 305cc port, thus giving it a straighter and better line of sight to the back of the valve, but doing so we make the port longer. Say it's now a 320cc port.
It picks up some airflow, is much more effecient, and it's 'velocity profile' improves.
Is the 'bigger' head at 320cc passed by for the 305cc head because the 305cc head 'is smaller' and thus have better velocity ?
Example:
How can an LS small block head at 250cc+ absolutley kill a 180cc 23* head on the same size 358cid motor ?
So...sometimes bigger size is just more length.
The intake manifold dictates what the final length is. So, that is used for 'wave length' tuning, not the length of the cyl head port.
12-01-2014, 09:09 PM
#42
Registered
iTrader: (1)
12-01-2014, 09:17 PM
#43
Registered
iTrader: (2)
Won't change the velocity but the 320cc port is 'larger' in the eyes of the public.
So, furthermore,
'
say if we raise the 305cc port, thus giving it a straighter and better line of sight to the back of the valve, but doing so we make the port longer. Say it's now a 320cc port.
It picks up some airflow, is much more effecient, and it's 'velocity profile' improves.
Is the 'bigger' head at 320cc passed by for the 305cc head because the 305cc head 'is smaller' and thus have better velocity ?
Example:
How can an LS small block head at 250cc+ absolutley kill a 180cc 23* head on the same size 358cid motor ?
So...sometimes bigger size is just more length.
The intake manifold dictates what the final length is. So, that is used for 'wave length' tuning, not the length of the cyl head port.
So, furthermore,
'
say if we raise the 305cc port, thus giving it a straighter and better line of sight to the back of the valve, but doing so we make the port longer. Say it's now a 320cc port.
It picks up some airflow, is much more effecient, and it's 'velocity profile' improves.
Is the 'bigger' head at 320cc passed by for the 305cc head because the 305cc head 'is smaller' and thus have better velocity ?
Example:
How can an LS small block head at 250cc+ absolutley kill a 180cc 23* head on the same size 358cid motor ?
So...sometimes bigger size is just more length.
The intake manifold dictates what the final length is. So, that is used for 'wave length' tuning, not the length of the cyl head port.
12-01-2014, 09:33 PM
#45
Registered
iTrader: (3)
Tony designed a lot of the small block castings, and I believe some of the big block ports as well. He isn't the owner, and actually isn't an employee anymore at AFR. He has his own business "Mamo Motorsports" where he'll still be doing custom porting, and other cool stuff, and will still be working with Bob M for sure. He is N incredibly talented individual, and a very down to earth guy.
To the OP, you could always start with the 305's and then if you do upgrade to the 540 down the road, you could send them in to Tony for a little "massage"..
To the OP, you could always start with the 305's and then if you do upgrade to the 540 down the road, you could send them in to Tony for a little "massage"..
12-01-2014, 09:40 PM
#46
Registered
iTrader: (3)
I think a lot of times we get caught up in runner size, and tend to use it as the end all decision in using a particular head. Everything must work together. The port size, shape, valve size , valve cut, valve seat cut, chamber design, and so forth.
We might say well a 320cc intake runner works best with a 540ci. But, a 320ish cc GM rectangle port head, would make less power than a 305 AFR, and prob a 357 AFR on that same engine, even though the runner size may not be the textbook size for the combo.
We might say well a 320cc intake runner works best with a 540ci. But, a 320ish cc GM rectangle port head, would make less power than a 305 AFR, and prob a 357 AFR on that same engine, even though the runner size may not be the textbook size for the combo.
12-01-2014, 09:48 PM
#47
Fast Singles Club
Gold Member
iTrader: (8)
I think a lot of times we get caught up in runner size, and tend to use it as the end all decision in using a particular head. Everything must work together. The port size, shape, valve size , valve cut, valve seat cut, chamber design, and so forth.
We might say well a 320cc intake runner works best with a 540ci. But, a 320ish cc GM rectangle port head, would make less power than a 305 AFR, and prob a 357 AFR on that same engine, even though the runner size may not be the textbook size for the combo.
We might say well a 320cc intake runner works best with a 540ci. But, a 320ish cc GM rectangle port head, would make less power than a 305 AFR, and prob a 357 AFR on that same engine, even though the runner size may not be the textbook size for the combo.
12-01-2014, 09:50 PM
#48
Registered
iTrader: (2)
I think a lot of times we get caught up in runner size, and tend to use it as the end all decision in using a particular head. Everything must work together. The port size, shape, valve size , valve cut, valve seat cut, chamber design, and so forth.
We might say well a 320cc intake runner works best with a 540ci. But, a 320ish cc GM rectangle port head, would make less power than a 305 AFR, and prob a 357 AFR on that same engine, even though the runner size may not be the textbook size for the combo.
We might say well a 320cc intake runner works best with a 540ci. But, a 320ish cc GM rectangle port head, would make less power than a 305 AFR, and prob a 357 AFR on that same engine, even though the runner size may not be the textbook size for the combo.
12-01-2014, 10:31 PM
#49
Here's the reader's digest version-----If I remember correctly, I was Bob Madara's 1st or 2nd customer when it came to buying AFR heads as he went into business about 10 years ago. I had to rebuild a pair of short deck 565cid engines that I had taken the wrong advice on----very long story. By that time, I was beginning to get kinda "gun shy" about who to trust anymore about cam grinds, heads sizes, port volumes, port velocity, etc, etc, etc. In the business of Hi-Performance offshore boating, there are many voices out there all wanting your money...and it can become very easy to become confused.
I finally found a person I truly believed I could trust in Bob Madara and his business "Marine Kinetics" and Dave Wesseldyk's engine craft building abilities----both extremely intelligent dudes. That was 10 years ago, and we're doing it again now on another different tall deck engine project-----this time, a pair of simple roots superchargers with carburetors.
Anyway, after consulting with Bob, he suggested AFR 315cc, cnc ported heads for the those N/A 565cid engines...he the did cams too---they were runners!
I finally found a person I truly believed I could trust in Bob Madara and his business "Marine Kinetics" and Dave Wesseldyk's engine craft building abilities----both extremely intelligent dudes. That was 10 years ago, and we're doing it again now on another different tall deck engine project-----this time, a pair of simple roots superchargers with carburetors.
Anyway, after consulting with Bob, he suggested AFR 315cc, cnc ported heads for the those N/A 565cid engines...he the did cams too---they were runners!
Last edited by KAAMA; 12-01-2014 at 10:37 PM.
