Dyno #'s with Trickflow Heads

-
You bought a head with similar flow #'s at 500 lift.
A camshaft in .600 range may gain a few horsepower, but I wouldn't expect a substantial gain.
 
mbaird said:
Pretty sure the OP didnt make the purchase thinking 20hp was all he would get.

I also believe with the right cam and tune he can see a substantial gain over his EQs .

I think we have all made a purchase like this at one time or another.
Click to expand...

Read his post # 6. He said he figured it would at least pick up 16-20 horsepower
I will stand by what i said.
Agree he will gain more with different cam, etc.
I already said that above.
Sometimes i wonder if people actually read the thread before they comment
 
B3422w5 said:
Read his post # 6. He said he figured it would at least pick up 16-20 horsepower
I will stand by what i said.
Agree he will gain more with different cam, etc.
I already said that above.
Sometimes i wonder if people actually read the thread before they comment
Click to expand...

Well then I digress ... lol
 
jos51700 said:
When I hear "it only made X more horsepower and Y more torque", I instantly think you don't know what you're talking about (I ain't saying that's true, that is just the first conclusion that I jump to).

Heads can make an 50 HP clear across the curve, except that ONE spot where the original heads peaked, and your statement would be true, yet untrue.
The question is: How much power over the previous setup did it make, and where? Got any way to post your before and after dyno curves?
Click to expand...

OP clearly states that the curves looks almost identical. This means there is no meaningful change in the avg power which means the small peak changes are even less. This = a wash. This also means at the strip zero gains will be realized--maybe--but unlikely. J.Rob
 
well the TF's leave room for growth whereas the EQ's were at the end of the road
btw what fishmns67 just said
without going to more duration and loosing low end and getting on the lower gear looser converter tredmill
you might ask for converter suggestions-
 
RAMM said:
OP clearly states that the curves looks almost identical. This means there is no meaningful change in the avg power which means the small peak changes are even less. This = a wash. This also means at the strip zero gains will be realized--maybe--but unlikely. J.Rob
Click to expand...

Until you see the curve, you don't know a damn thing, and it's not very often that I would say that to you, in particular.

The two curves look almost identical to me, and there's not much of an increase. Especially that torque. But I know better.
2015-Mustang-horsepower-and-torque-curves-1.jpg


If fact, I'm shocked I had to say it at all. Happy Valentine's day.
 
Throw a set of 2.08 valves,(set bowl dimensions) 600 lift cam, (at least) and more convertor and gear in that car and hold on. Don’t say it can’t be done on the street.
 
jos51700 said:
Until you see the curve, you don't know a damn thing, and it's not very often that I would say that to you, in particular.

The two curves look almost identical to me, and there's not much of an increase. Especially that torque. But I know better.
View attachment 1715470035

If fact, I'm shocked I had to say it at all. Happy Valentine's day.
Click to expand...



the op states there was only 3 hp increase and 6 ft of torque over the whole rpm range so that would be nearly identical to me .
 
As far as total timing requirements. Unless it's on a dyno or in a fully dialed in chassis at the strip that goes back to back hundredths you are guessing at best.
 
Id verify how much lift you can run, and call a few of the better regarded cam companies. Don’t bother e-mailing them as only a couple of them will ever get back to you (Jones & Howard’s at least) And you asked whether Air Gap or single plane. I’ll say Air Gap. Sell the LD340 to some starry eyed vintage freak who’s just gotta have it..... will help pay for the new cam and intake!:eek:
 
flyfish said:
Eh....was this satire?? Its hard to read tone over the internet...but those 2 power curves show a MASSIVE increase in power.
Click to expand...

That is my point. If you can't read the scale of the graph, that might be 5 hp or 50. But the torque is nearly identical, it's 'just a little higher and about the same curve'.

jimjimjimmy said:
the op states there was only 3 hp increase and 6 ft of torque over the whole rpm range so that would be nearly identical to me .
Click to expand...

OP states:

brsmustng99 said:
So I finally got my trickflow 190 powerport heads installed & got the car on the dyno. My previous heads were a set of EQ magnum heads that were done up by IMM. Very disappointing results, car only gained 2 rwhp and 6 rwtq. Guess the EQ heads were the real deal, should have left well enough alone. Car made 292 rwhp and 311 rwtq @ 5500rpm 36 degree total timing & AFR 12.85.
Click to expand...

Says nothing about the curve....until:

brsmustng99 said:
No never got flow numbers from Brian on the heads. The car ran great, definitely regretting my 2400 head investment. Just figured the trickflow would be a better head. I guess the cam might be hurting performance but I figured I would have at least picked up 15 or 20rwhp with the trickflows. Looking at the dyno graphs from both setups, the power curve & pulls look almost identical.
Click to expand...

Which is precisely why I asked if he could post 'em. Y'all are guessing until he does so because he's using marginal wording like 'almost identical' and citing peak value figures exclusively which typically (no offense to OP) are things that people unfamiliar with dyno charts interpret them.

I remember people stabbing cams into their Twin Cam 88 Harley's and really 'feeling it come on the cam' at 4800, with a redline coming up quick. Uh, no. That cam made less peak power and torque, and they're just feeling it come out of the huge hole in the torque curve because the tuning sucks, which feels like a powerband at that point.

So, OP, post 'em up. With fuel curves if you got 'em.
 
Where did those power curves come from because they aren't representative of the OP's numbers. If that's desktop dyno, I bet the numbers for the EQ heads are the manufactures flow numbers.

IIRC, the flow numbers on Brians stuff was around 270 at .500

Valve lift Intake Exhaust w/1 3/4 pipe
.100 69 58
.200 141 119
.300 197 161
.400 241 184
.500 267 193
.550 271 195

With the cam in question the 400 flow rate is going to about where the window is likely going to be effective.
 
Wyrmrider said:
jos
are those your curves?
Click to expand...

Those are google image's curves. My curves are perfectly flat, at the moment. As in, 0. I'm trying to convert to EFI and being mighty slow about it.
 
I meant are those curves real or desktop dyno
or from some mag article
from those curves
I see 75 hp and no drop off at 6500
shift at 7000 and hold on
reminder of the posts about timing on the TF heads
30-32 due to more efficient chamber
you can hurt the motor at 36 maybe even 34
 
Well at least this post puts to rest the old debate...which head material makes more power between aluminum or iron if they both flow around the same.
 
Or should have had some Speedmaster heads sent to him on Black Friday for $703 and called up nitrous supply for their 150 shot $395 deal...
I wonder what he could have done with the $1,402 left over?..
 
If the op can’t post the sheets..... maybe he can relay what the biggest difference is in tq and hp between the two heads, and at what rpm those differences are.
 
Imo, the overall combo isn’t going to make enough hp/ci to really exploit the difference in potential between those two heads.

Just like swapping the TF’s to a complete Indy cnc245 top end on that same motor wouldn’t show the potential hp difference those heads offer.

All we’ve learned from this test so far is....... with the EQ head combo...... the heads weren’t really the thing holding it back.
 
PRH said:
Imo, the overall combo isn’t going to make enough hp/ci to really exploit the difference in potential between those two heads.

Just like swapping the TF’s to a complete Indy cnc245 top end on that same motor wouldn’t show the potential hp difference those heads offer.

All we’ve learned from this test so far is....... with the EQ head combo...... the heads weren’t really the thing holding it back.
Click to expand...
I think that groundbreaking Revelation has been beat to death already LOL...
 
Thanks for all the input, the OP really appreciates it!! Really just wanted to show that more expensive is not always better & aluminum is not always the way to go. Brian at IMM produces a great product with his EQ heads and I wish I had just left well enough alone. I have a 3.91 gear & 3500 stall dynamic converter. So I guess my next option to see if I can get some Bang for my buck is a bigger custom cam & a larger single plane intake. Hey at the very least I saved 100lbs in weight...lol
 
The car should be quicker due to the weight reduction off the front so there’s that...but so far I personally don’t see the trick flow heads as any kind of game changer in the small block world...the now defunct Air Wolf heads could have been a contender for that title.
 
I haven’t seen a set of the TF SB heads in person....... however, if I were putting something together where I was looking to make 500-600hp....... and didn’t feel like having to port some heads to get there...... that’s what I’d use.

On a milder 10:1 340/360(or stroker) hyd cam street motor???
I’d save some $$$ and use something like bowl blended SM’s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top