As cast Trick Flow 190 heads with a 2.05 valve. Aiming for 550hp. Opinions?
2.02 or 2.05 Intake Valve?
- Thread starter srduster340
- Start date
-
Have them CNC ported.
Tom
Tom
So a 2.05 won't help much? After spending $2000 that's totally out of the question.
Last edited:
Shouldn't you be able ootb make 550 hp with the right cam ?
I'm pretty sure one of the other member that does heads said the valve seat won't go 2.05 hopefully he chimes in. Think it was pittsburghracer
Last edited:
Depends but I'd say your generally correct, but I'd say an average street strip type build will do 1.8-1.9 hp per cfm so 540-570 hp with 10-11:1 cr, around 240 @ 0.050" cam etc...
The TF 190 head is CNC ported from the factory. 550 hp is within reach with a TF 190 as cast.
cookietruck
Well-Known Member
IMM just posted a dyno run of a SB stroker with TF heads. I think it was an RPM i take and the cam sounded mild. 528hp i think it was…
Where can I find it?
cookietruck
Well-Known Member
Here's a 514 hp trick flow 408 just got to find 36hp
408-Inch Budget Mopar Stroker Makes Over 500 HP
408-Inch Budget Mopar Stroker Makes Over 500 HP
These aren't trick flow engine but might help coming up with a game plan
580hp 417
SKMFX Budget Small Block - Popular Hot Rodding Magazine
537hp 365
W-2 Offset-Rocker Heads Configuration - Mopar Muscle Magazine
580hp 417
SKMFX Budget Small Block - Popular Hot Rodding Magazine
537hp 365
W-2 Offset-Rocker Heads Configuration - Mopar Muscle Magazine
I would have to see dyno numbers showing how much more power a valve with a net diameter of .015" larger would net.
lead69
hopeless car junkie
You should make 550 with the right parts, I would leave the heads alone for that goal. If you are trying to stab a 230 @.050 hydraulic roller with an rpm intake than probably not, but a good single plane with a solid ft in the mid 250s @ .050 or better with .580 lift and you should be good.
I'm going roller. Whether solid or hydraulic. I'm hoping the Trick Flow single plane will be re-released. I saw an Australian website claim they expect it in June. Hoping we get it here.
Rat Bastid
Dunamis Metron
One can only hope TF starts making that intake again. I have little hope for that.
I‘d run a SFT long before I ever ran a HR. I was done with hydraulic rollers in the mid 2000’s and I was a huge advocate for them before that.
If I remember right @pittsburghracer checked the trick flows out and the intake seat did not have enough meat to go over the 2.02 valve size without requiring seat replacments.
The intake seat is pathetic in those heads. I may try a 2.055 because I have to change the seats anyway. Pretty sure even the 2.055 with be into the chamber. Such a stupid mistake on their part.
Rat Bastid
Dunamis Metron
Because I can make the same or more power with a SFT and not have to deal with the hydraulic lifter issues.
At one time there was some class that required hydraulic roller cams. The HR is so RPM limited we did everything we could to get them to RPM half assed reliably to 7200.
The we started looking at comparable builds with SFT cams and the HR was always no better than the SFT and sometimes it made less power.
When you get to the point that a SFT won’t make the power you want you just need to use a solid roller.
I have done a lot of HR lobes with solid lifters on them. Set the lash to .002 cold and send it.
At this point the money for the HR just doesn’t make sense in my world. And in the end you still have a shock absorber in the system and all the havoc that brings to the valve train.
@273 is correct to a degree. While he has a good point on how things generally go, I say No. It’s a CID thing, that’s all. But he’s on it! The rule of thumb is for a serious but still a nice powerful build that is still in the realm of streetable. While the cam shaft does get a little large for some people, it’s really not extreme. Of course, the smaller the engine the more challenging it becomes. So that right there can be the caveat to this all.
Here’s another point of view on it. The Edelbrock Victor head build that top well over 700 hp was done with a cam @255 intake duration. The CID was IIRC, 376.
The trick here was the heads were ported and the compression was maxed out for the competition @ 11.99.
It still ran on pump gas. You can run 11-1 on 93.
But the trick was superior flowing heads and a cam lift that took advantage of it. There was a lot of lift. What ever cam you run with, and knowing how the heads flow, for which trick flow provides there flow sheet, lift that valve at least up to the max air flow area the head offers. Get that baby breathing!
I’m running TF aluminum heads on a .030 over 360 with the flat top pistons at zero deck and a thin head gasket on 93 octane.
What size engine?
I suggest a solid roller for the rpm capability. Or a SFT.
On the intake, I am unaware of what the TF intake does or would flow. Pittsburghracer really likes the Edelbrock Victor a lot. He ports them often and has threads on them. I’ll call it the preferred intake manifold at this time. Then there is the Super Victor. It’ll need to be ported.
One intake did surprise him and wrote about it and how good he thought is was and ported it for me and that’s the MoPar M1 single plane. I had it ported with a spreadbore carb usage in mind so there was some left on the table with that intake and sticking with the spreadbore design. Others here have converters the M1 single plane into a square bore and they’re happy with the results.
-
