new heads:new edelbrocks, AFR165 or Trick Flow?

[homerojr]

I´m considering new aluminum heads, and my nominees are the ones listed above. My first choice is the new Edelbrock (as soon as I get to know new flow and horsepower graph comparison), followed by the AFR165 (probably one of the best to my knowledge). I want to keep my previous mods (and the cam, the XE270HR specs 218 224 270 276 0512 0512 114). I want also keep my 1.6 FRPP rr (pedestal mount) and if possible the pushrods. Would like to know if my MAC specific "p" headers will fit with either the Edelbrock or the AFR. By the way my p heads are non emissions (I got no cats, EGR, etc) and want the new heads to be the same.
Which one would be the best bolt-on (stree use, good low and medium torque, power to 1500 to 6500).
Any comments or information would be greatly appreciated!

 

[Rootus]

The AFR's are the best, but they are also the most expensive. The newest version of the Edelbrocks is pretty close to the AFR's. The TFS heads would probably have the least low-end torque, they're better suited for larger displacemen engines. You can get them in either stud or pedestal mount, so you can keep your rockers. Pushrods you can probably keep, but you should measure to be positive. The P headers should be just fine.

One other comment -- if you don't have to pass emissions, why not get a nice aggressive custom cam? You'd need a chip, but on a modified 94/95 you really should put a chip on it anyway, it helps a lot.

Dave

 

[stangin it]

Here we go again......

 

[red94fiveo]

Chalk another one up for the AFR's. Only with them you won't be able to keep your rockers and pushrods as the AFR's are only stud mount and will require hardened pushrods.

 

[homerojr]

Yeah, a new cam and a chip would shine on this combo, the problem is I´d have to spend maybe 300 for a custom cam and a similar amount for a chip..no money at all right now..anyway, by now I´m satisfied with my cam, has a sweet sound and offers a pretty decent performance for the street.
I thought the AFRs came with the pedestal mount option too?
Thanks

 

[GTJake]

Chalk another one up for the AFR's. Only with them you won't be able to keep your rockers and pushrods as the AFR's are only stud mount and will require hardened pushrods.

You can get them in 60cc pedestal mount versions.

Jake

 

[5.0hatch]

I´m considering new aluminum heads, and my nominees are the ones listed above. My first choice is the new Edelbrock (as soon as I get to know new flow and horsepower graph comparison), followed by the AFR165 (probably one of the best to my knowledge). I want to keep my previous mods (and the cam, the XE270HR specs 218 224 270 276 0512 0512 114). I want also keep my 1.6 FRPP rr (pedestal mount) and if possible the pushrods. Would like to know if my MAC specific "p" headers will fit with either the Edelbrock or the AFR. By the way my p heads are non emissions (I got no cats, EGR, etc) and want the new heads to be the same.
Which one would be the best bolt-on (stree use, good low and medium torque, power to 1500 to 6500).
Any comments or information would be greatly appreciated!

I'd say its a toss up between the edelbrocks and the afrs. I met up with a buddy of mine at the track with a similar combo to mine except afrs and I would trap 1mph higher than him. I'd say for the money edelbrocks are the way to go, but i'm a little biased.

 

[GTJake]

The cam can have a lot to do with that. Different cams suite different heads. It's all about the combo.

Jake

 

[Joes95GT]

We'll see how the new E-brocks do when my cam gets here. I think I'll install the stuff in about a month. I've got a pretty wild cam coming so it should put up decent numbers.

Joe

 

[dirtyo2000]

hey just want to throw in a mokey wrench lol friend of mine is running pro line. a lot cheaper than all but ranked with the afr's on flow.

 

[Grn92LX]

The AFR's are the best, but they are also the most expensive. The newest version of the Edelbrocks is pretty close to the AFR's. The TFS heads would probably have the least low-end torque, they're better suited for larger displacemen engines.

Dave

Ehh, dude, no offense for your wayyyy wrong. Afr's are NOT the best and TFS would NOT make the least low end tq. Do a search for my sn and I posted my dyno with my tfs/fti set up. Its not 100% tuned, but its much better with the chip. Makes about 300ft/lbs @ 3k and about 280ft/lbs @ 2700. Post your graph, lets compare low end. I'm not posting to say tfs is the best, im saying its all about the entire combo and how well thought out it is. All 3 heads mentioned are great and will work just as good and you wouldnt notice much if any differenc ebetween the 3 if you switched out the heads on your car for each of them. I'm just tired of reading all these afr dick-licking threads like their the ONLY way to go fast.

"Here we go again......"
Well said MIke

 

[Joes95GT]

Ehh, dude, no offense for your wayyyy wrong. Afr's are NOT the best and TFS would NOT make the least low end tq. Do a search for my sn and I posted my dyno with my tfs/fti set up. Its not 100% tuned, but its much better with the chip. Makes about 300ft/lbs @ 3k and about 280ft/lbs @ 2700. Post your graph, lets compare low end. I'm not posting to say tfs is the best, im saying its all about the entire combo and how well thought out it is. All 3 heads mentioned are great and will work just as good and you wouldnt notice much if any differenc ebetween the 3 if you switched out the heads on your car for each of them. I'm just tired of reading all these afr dick-licking threads like their the ONLY way to go fast.

"Here we go again......"
Well said MIke

I don't think he said that AFR's are the ONLY way to go fast. How long did you talk to Ed Curtis? He didn't tell you that AFR's are the best 302-based head on the market? I guess not . We aren't dyno racing here. People use what is proven to work, and AFRs are proven time and time again to be one of the best, and most of the time, the best head on the market. Look at the tests in MM&FF. I too, would agree with Dave that the TFS heads would have the least low-end torque. The port volumes are much larger and the intake valves are larger which would theoretically kill velocity. The air would be moving lazily into the cylinders. When air does that, torque is lost. Cylinder fill equals torque. Sure your car probably puts out pretty good numbers, but you have to remember that the cams that you Fox guys run, we cannot because of our picky processors. For the sake of comparison, you should always use the same cams when comparing two cylinder heads. Dave could have had Ed grind up a mild cam because he still wanted to drive his car everyday with no problems. Compare flow data, compare cross section, don't compare dyno numbers.

Joe

 

[Rootus]

Ehh, dude, no offense for your wayyyy wrong. Afr's are NOT the best and TFS would NOT make the least low end tq. Do a search for my sn and I posted my dyno with my tfs/fti set up. Its not 100% tuned, but its much better with the chip. Makes about 300ft/lbs @ 3k and about 280ft/lbs @ 2700.

I'm talking about objective tests -- every one I've seen that compares heads to each other with all other variables remaining equal shows the AFR's with an advantage both in peak power (but not by much) and in under-the-curve power (much more significant). By that measure, they are the best. If you figure price into the equation, as many people must, then perhaps they are no longer the "best", because they are one of the most expensive aftermarket 302 heads.

And it's absolutely true that the Twisted Wedge heads are not as ideally suited to a 302 setup, they don't have as much velocity as the smaller AFR 165's. This is not my opinion, this is objective fact. Put them up side by side *with all else being equal* and see which one makes more torque down low.

And it's worth mentioning that there are other explanations for good low-end torque that have nothing to do with the heads -- before I fixed my headers, which it turns out were restricting exhaust flow, my setup (AFR 165's, FTI cam) made silly amounts of low-end torque -- I'm talking 250 ft-lbs at less than 1500 RPM and my first torque peak (320 ft-lbs) occured at 3000 RPM. Amazing what a little extra backpressure does for torque .

Dave

 

[stangin it]

Its all in the combo. It seems like the majority of people who buy AFR heads get an FTI cam. Ive searched around for a while looking #'s and track times from Edelbrock and TFS users and theres definately alot more AFR users with custom cams then Edelbrock and TFS. Id like to see a test done where you take 3 cars of the same year one with TFS/FTI/Rpm intake one with AFR/FTI/RPM and the last Edelbrock/FTI/RPM. Have the cars tuned and hit the dyno. Il put money on it that they will all be very similar with #'s.

 

[FordStang]

i got the new eldebrocks there Awesome

 

[hillie16]

Sure your car probably puts out pretty good numbers, but you have to remember that the cams that you Fox guys run, we cannot because of our picky processors. For the sake of comparison, you should always use the same cams when comparing two cylinder heads. Dave could have had Ed grind up a mild cam because he still wanted to drive his car everyday with no problems. Compare flow data, compare cross section, don't compare dyno numbers.

That's the thing is a lot of people think numbers will be the same for a Fox as for our cars and they aren't. AFR's have consistently proven to be the better head, at least from what I've read. My original plan was Edelbrocks, but I'm thinking of sticking with the other sheep in the herd LOL and getting the AFRs and a custom grind FTI cam.

 

[Rootus]

My original plan was Edelbrocks, but I'm thinking of sticking with the other sheep in the herd LOL and getting the AFRs and a custom grind FTI cam.

It's okay to be a sheep, do what works. Being different just to be different has no benefit .

Dave

 

[mo_dingo]

Intake Flow Chart from FordMuscle.com

Exhaust Flow Chart from FordMuscle.com

You can pick up a set of TW heads for under $1000 & AFR's run $1300, usually. My money will go to trickflow.
Scott

 

[Rootus]

You can pick up a set of TW heads for under $1000 & AFR's run $1300, usually. My money will go to trickflow.
Scott

Heck, if all you want is a lot of flow, then you can get heads that flow a *lot* more than any of the ones on that chart. Why not pick up a set of blue thunder heads and put them on your 302?

Flowbenches and dynos don't make very good times at the track... not aerodynamic enough...

Dave

 

[final5-0]

I´m considering new aluminum heads, and my nominees are the ones listed above. My first choice is the new Edelbrock (as soon as I get to know new flow and horsepower graph comparison), followed by the AFR165 (probably one of the best to my knowledge). I want to keep my previous mods (and the cam, the XE270HR specs 218 224 270 276 0512 0512 114). I want also keep my 1.6 FRPP rr (pedestal mount) and if possible the pushrods. Would like to know if my MAC specific "p" headers will fit with either the Edelbrock or the AFR. By the way my p heads are non emissions (I got no cats, EGR, etc) and want the new heads to be the same.
Which one would be the best bolt-on (stree use, good low and medium torque, power to 1500 to 6500).
Any comments or information would be greatly appreciated!

You asked for comments!

Will making the choice of heads based upon parts from the existing combo compromise the potential of the new combo?

Later
Grady