Cylinder Head Choices

dcurtis

dcurtis

10 Year Member
Jan 19, 2006
688
7
39
#1
Been a while since I posted here thought some of you could help me choose a good head for my 347 that has been sitting in my garage unfinished for over a year now, havn't had the time or the money to finish it up but I do now.

So anyways I have an assembled 347, anderson n51hr camshaft, performer rpmII intake, 70mm throttle body and egr, 75mm maf, 190lph pump, 30lb injectors, shorty headers, h-pipe, 1.6 scorpion roller rockers, etc etc, all I need are a good set of heads, off of what I have mentioned could you recommend a set?

I do want to keep my egr functional and that is the main reason I havn't made a decision, I would like to run trickflows, been looking at the 185cc cnc'd, but unsure if they will let me run egr.
 
#4
Jason 302 said:
"If you need the world´s finest street/strip small block Ford head, check out AFR´s all new 185cc intake port emissions legal (CARB EO #250-3) performance cylinder heads."

http://www.airflowresearch.com/index.php?cPath=21_22
Click to expand...
I actually have looked at those, them vs. the trickflow 185 cnc'd are my main choices.
When a head carries that carb eo # do they have egr port and smog holes or what, I have noticed some heads carry a different carb eo #.
 
#6
I ran AFR 185's CNC'd on my 347. I ditched my Eddy RPM Intake in favor of a Holley Systemax and I suggest you do the same. I wouldn't run shorty headers at all. In fact I ditched 1-5/8" Long Tubes in favor of 1-3/4" Ceramic Long Tubes with 3" Collector. Of course I went with a 3" Prochamber and 3" Cat Back to complete the system. If I were you I'd look into a Pro-M 80MM Plastic Mass Air Meter. It flows much better than the 75MM.

5. MAF AIR FLOW DATA (In CFM):​
​
1.Stock 5.0L 58MM (89-93 Mustangs), 606 CFM​
2.Stock 5.0L 70MM (94-95 GT/Cobra Mustangs), 815 CFM​
3.Pro-M Bullet (75MM), 964 CFM​
4.Ford 80MM (Lightnings), 1017 CFM​
5.C&L 73MM, 1171 CFM​
6.Modified 80MM (Flow Bar Removed), 1368 CFM​
7.C&L 80MM, 1415 CFM​
8.Pro-M 77MM (Shorty/Supercharged Version), 1543 CFM​
9.Pro-M 77MM (Standard Version), 1562 CFM​
10.Pro-M 83MM, 1598 CFM​
11.Pro-M 80MM, 1612 CFM​
 
#7
FYI, the AFR 185s and the TW 185s are very different, don't let the numbers fool you. OOTB, the TW flows nearly 25 more CFM on the intake side at .600 lift. The AFR 205 is closer to what the TW 185 is.

IMO, the parts that you have listed are small for a 347. For the heads you are considering, the TW 185s would be my choice but I don't think you'll see their full potential until you step up on some of your other stuff. Also, TWs have special piston considerations which is what I think Rick is getting at.
 
#8
ugh oh.. Nic is starting to read my mind ;) I had a guy bring me a motor one time with a set of AFR205s and he only had TFS notch pistons...oops, I now always ask!

Dont get caught up in the CC stated, those heads are very different in runner length and design. The 190cc fast as cast are also a very nice head PT#51400015. I will say I am a HUGE AFR BANDWAGONER as well, I use more of their heads on my builds then any other manufacture...but I have been looking at and using the TFS and RHS as well.
 
#9
any of you guys ever notice when comparing the almighty head flow numbers, that TFS does their testing with a 4.030" bore, while AFR does theres with a 4.060" bore(to unshroud the valves better i'm assuming)? most people dont run a 4.060" bore...dont expect those AFR numbers to be accurate, or even as high as advertised, when you slap their heads on a 306, 331 or 347...just sayin...
 
#10
need4spd90 said:
any of you guys ever notice when comparing the almighty head flow numbers, that TFS does their testing with a 4.030" bore, while AFR does theres with a 4.060" bore(to unshroud the valves better i'm assuming)? most people dont run a 4.060" bore...dont expect those AFR numbers to be accurate, or even as high as advertised, when you slap their heads on a 306, 331 or 347...just sayin...
Click to expand...

I used to be convinced that bore size really affected flow numbers quite a bit, but recently I've seen some pretty convincing arguments that suggest it doesn't, so I'm kind of on the fence now. Regardless, I do believe AFR exaggerates their numbers a bit. For example, they claim their 205s are moving 308 CFM by .600" lift on the intake, but I've never seen an actual flow test that puts it over 300. Of course, there is a lot more to a cylinder head than flow numbers alone, so it is what it is. FWIW, my TW 205s flowed 4 CFM more than what Trick Flow said they would at .600".
 
#11
Nic, a local machine owner I deal with has a flow bench and he has tested the AFR and they have found them to be within a few CFM of advertised numbers. We played with a AFR225 and saw a difference with a .030" to a .125" bore... you really see it the difference on a inline head with a 2.08" valve on a small bore.

I try not to get to caught up in numbers since we dont race flow benches..lol
 
#14
Rick 91GT said:
Nic, a local machine owner I deal with has a flow bench and he has tested the AFR and they have found them to be within a few CFM of advertised numbers. We played with a AFR225 and saw a difference with a .030" to a .125" bore... you really see it the difference on a inline head with a 2.08" valve on a small bore.

I try not to get to caught up in numbers since we dont race flow benches..lol
Click to expand...

BTW, how much difference did you see on those 225s?
 
#15
Nic Ill have to go back down there and ask for specifics, I remember the advertised 205 numbers out flowing it... He actually turned me on to the RHS stuff, the flow numbers have been great and based on the theroy of needing "x" flow to make "y" power, hes been backing it up on the engine dyno. Another plus is they actually come with decent valvetrain, or I buy them bare, add a Serdi valve job, and what ever valvetrain combo I want.

I dont have any apples to apples to compare combo wise yet... I did a 10.3:1 408ci, box stock hyd roller AFR205, stock Super Victor, 750cfm Holley Street Avenger carb, my custom cam off the top of my head .608/.600 224/232 112 and with a 1.875" to 2" step header we made 510hp/540tq on the engine dyno. We made 400ftlbs at 3000rpm, peak power 5400rpm I know the headers were holding it back but his 1.75" BBK swap header wouldnt clear the engine dyno. Thing runs awesome on the street, daily driver type combo, plenty of vacuum and idles great. On some chassis dyno pulls through a TKO600 it made 489hp/510tq with the correct headers so, my guess is the motor was making closer to 580hp/600tq. The guy really questioned me not putting a 225 on the car and a 950 carb, however we jetted the 750 down 4 sizes on the engine dyno....at times bigger isnt better. If he wanted to go solid roller or something real aggressive I would have cranked the rpm up, added compression and went larger....but he wanted too much "street manners"

Now that being said, I have a 4.125" bore 347ci, PORTED AFR225, Canfield Spyder, .577/.577 218/218 114 custom cam, 76mm turbo and make 609rwhp with 9psi
 
#16
Rick 91GT said:
Nic Ill have to go back down there and ask for specifics, I remember the advertised 205 numbers out flowing it... He actually turned me on to the RHS stuff, the flow numbers have been great and based on the theroy of needing "x" flow to make "y" power, hes been backing it up on the engine dyno. Another plus is they actually come with decent valvetrain, or I buy them bare, add a Serdi valve job, and what ever valvetrain combo I want.

I dont have any apples to apples to compare combo wise yet... I did a 10.3:1 408ci, box stock hyd roller AFR205, stock Super Victor, 750cfm Holley Street Avenger carb, my custom cam off the top of my head .608/.600 224/232 112 and with a 1.875" to 2" step header we made 510hp/540tq on the engine dyno. We made 400ftlbs at 3000rpm, peak power 5400rpm I know the headers were holding it back but his 1.75" BBK swap header wouldnt clear the engine dyno. Thing runs awesome on the street, daily driver type combo, plenty of vacuum and idles great. On some chassis dyno pulls through a TKO600 it made 489hp/510tq with the correct headers so, my guess is the motor was making closer to 580hp/600tq. The guy really questioned me not putting a 225 on the car and a 950 carb, however we jetted the 750 down 4 sizes on the engine dyno....at times bigger isnt better. If he wanted to go solid roller or something real aggressive I would have cranked the rpm up, added compression and went larger....but he wanted too much "street manners"

Now that being said, I have a 4.125" bore 347ci, PORTED AFR225, Canfield Spyder, .577/.577 218/218 114 custom cam, 76mm turbo and make 609rwhp with 9psi
Click to expand...

Rick, both of those engines you just described sound badass! In regards to the 408 and not going with the 225s, it was my understanding that the intake valve on the 225 is intended as a "big bore" head (meaning, 4.125" and up). Would you agree with this?

Also, good to hear about the RHS stuff. I always like to see new QUALITY offerings from the aftermarket for our old Windsor junk.
 
#17
nothing to bring to the table but Ron Rhodes REALLY showed what an RHS head can do. he's was running them when he dipped into the 4.90's with his 23* headed small block chevy and has a new RHS 23* head on it now
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

9
Engine Donor '00 Mountaineer meet '91 Fox
Replies
41
Views
515
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
91firecracker
9
M
Engine Unexplainable Exhaust Pop and Gurgle
Replies
12
Views
459
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Noobz347
Noobz347
J
Engine LOSS OF POWER AT 4,000 RPM.
Replies
38
Views
2K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Jarhead67
J
WhiteCobra95
SN95 Desktop 363 Engine Combination - Looking for input
Replies
11
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Habu135
Habu135
J
68 Mustang with Foxbody Engine Stalling Issues - MSPNP2
Replies
3
Views
401
Digital Self-tuning Forum
JayV68Stang
J
Top Bottom
Back
Forums
Menu