i don't think you get it? you are saying that the TF heads are superior to every other head out there. but there is ZERO proof they are superior, is there? i'm still waiting to see proof and while i wait i'll still use old 1977 iron technology.
LOL. You’ve got to be shutting yourself if you think that antiquated “1977” “technology” can compare to what TF released are even in the same galaxy. Not even close.
That junk you are talking about was designed in the early 1960’s.
I’ve had my hands on the TF’s and they are the real deal. Are they going to make W2 power. Nope. But for OE architecture, nothing else even comes close. Not by a mile.
I’m pissed TF didn’t spend the money to copy the W5 head and fix its flaws. That’s what they should have done. With everyone wanting 4 inch or longer arms the available cylinder heads come up short. The minimum head for that stuff should be the W2. OE architecture and big inches don’t play well together. Not nearly enough cross section.
So the fact is, the TF is far and away a better head that any other head like it. Just because it’s numbers are down doesn’t mean the head is junk. Most stuff I see is an underachiever so you can’t go by that. Those heads are easily capable of 600 HP when done correctly. 9.5:1 won’t get it done, no matter how bad you want it, or what head you use. You can’t have a cam with .530 lift ( I run .620 lift on OE iron heads) or a 110 (or wider LSA) or 1.625 headers and expect the TF to make any more power than an iron OE head.
Arguing the TF isn’t the best OE configured head out there is like arguing what is better...chocolate ice cream or Marlboro cigarettes. You can’t even compare the two.