Just got finished up with my 306 build this spring with AFR 165s and longtubes. I used the XE266 cam and it is running great so far! I haven't went WOT yet as I am still breaking in the clutch and working on the tune but it seems to pull extremely well compared to the E7s. I have also gotten a lot of compliments on the sound. Thanks to Richard for all the 5.0 videos and willingness to answer questions!
@@UFOGHOSTHUNTER They are doing good so far! I’ve had no problems whatsoever. The valve train is noisier than I would like but I can’t contribute that to the heads being at fault. I want to get to the bottom of that over winter.
I have a 94 gt with this same combo, but a ported explorer intake and 20 lbs injectors. Equal length shorty headers. It pull hard to 6,000 . But I don't belive it has over 350 ish hp. Could be the carb setup and msd distributor works better than the stock 94 ecu/ ford extender box.
For real. I was a senior in 2000. Car Craft, Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords were always on my desk. I learned a lot more reading those. Than I did in HS.
For anyone auto-crossing or canyon carving in their car, a set of aluminum heads and moving the battery to the trunk is well worth the price of admission to get 100lbs off the front suspension.
@@natricjol 5 lug on a Fox body for sure. My 5.0L is in a 91 T-Bird, so I've already got 5 lugs, A-arms up front, 8.8 IRS out back. The real struggle with this chicken is weight balance and reduction.
Heads are great, but if I've learned anything from Richard.... it's that boost is the great equalizer. I'm starting a dirt cheap fox body project and I'm skipping straight to turbo-ing it
I love these videos. My first two cars were both '89 hatch's. Third car was an '89 notch. My notch had a set of twisted wedge r heads on a 408 Windsor. That thing was a monster in the mid 90s. Had that car deep into the 2000s where I did a double A-arm front conversion and terminator rear suspension with battle boxes, among other things. I miss that car and this video bring the feels out.
They also changed the rocker ratio from 1.6 to 1.7 on that test to get to 400 hp. That is how they simulated a bigger cam. So they said. I read that article. That is why I only buy AFR heads.
Plus electric water pump helped a little. I think whoever threw that short-block back together must've did a hood job. Because every little bit counts. When you're being challenged like that. Kinda like Ford, Chevy & Dodge. Letting the race teams come into the foundry. So they could make a stronger " stock " block. By altering the molds. Prior to the block being poured into the molds lol.
My thoughts exactly. It's not apples to apples if every bit of it isn't the same. I'd also like to see the dyno results of factory heads with factory cam and compare 1.6 to 1.7 to see how much that little extra lift actually does.
@@BrandenMcNabb I wonder if the cam was degreed differently from stock too. I believe I have the original magazine at my parents house. I need to check.
@@BrandenMcNabb Iv'e seen a test where going form stock rockers to rollers of the same ratio made just over 10 HP, really not worth the swap done on it's own. Going to a higher ratio should be good for about the same gains (so 20-25 hp over stock rockers) but will put bit more strain on the valve train, mostly at higher RPMs.
@@johnjones928 the only time it's worth a difference is if the rockers you're using are flexing. Higher ratio may give a small bump depending on the combo but usually within 10hp or so unless the change is drastic. The big thing with these builds is all the incremental stuff. An electric water pump is about 8hp at the top end. Performer rpm air gap manifold is about a 12hp gain over a generic raised dual plane. The headers are probably worth 15hp over a set of cheap manifolds. That's a 35hp gain altogether! It's worth making the small changes, they all add up eventually.
a 306 in my Fox right now that was rebuilt 7 years ago.AFR 165 heads as shown,TF stage 1 cam,short headers and h pipe/flowmasters.Vortech intake with Accufab race 70mm throttle body and 30lb injectors.Top it off with a Vortech A-trim blower(very low boost,very small and first ones ever made).when dynoed it made 400 RWHP and 430 RWT.It screams along for me and fun to drive with the 5 speed and 3.73 gears.Its basically almost a show car so driven accordingly most of the time.Im a Ford tech and drive all sorts of things,I know it could keep up with the current 302 mustangs and the 05-10 gt500s in the 1/4.good stuff that i truly can relate to.
Just more info to use on the ole fox. Always great choices to choose from with correct information to be informed with. Many thanks for the work and sharing the knowledge Richard Holdener.
Richard, please do the David Vizard head test soon! Thanks for everything. You are the best source of info for engine building on the net...now if I could only get you to tune my combo!
Went from stock cam & E6 heads to an E303 & GT40p's and the difference was huge. Next time you test them get the Alex's drop in spring kit for the GT40p's. It will smooth out that top end.
Have they got things back in stock ? Last I looked a year ago or so they were sold out of almost everything. Fortunately I had bought springs from them few years ago
I have a soft spot for the small-inch small-blocks, Ford, Chevy, Chrysler, whatever. So I'm always down for learning what makes these engines tick faster.
Richard great work we all appreciate it can you test afr outlaw heads against renagade heads on sbf ford 302 and 347 with small and big cams very hard to find dyno on renagade heads even your old books I have are the older outlaw heads and like you said experienced valve float would love to see lunati voodoo came tested against extreme energy too thanks keep up the great work very thorough and non biased just results
Mr Holdener, I would love to see you repeat this test with a solid roller lifter and the off the shelf AFR (or TFS) hydraulic valve spring pack... RPM! Ill bet many of us running around with 5.0 motors aren't driving them to work anymore, these are weekend toys and hydraulic lifters aren't as important.
The 1-5/8 headers are a restriction with even GT-40P heads. Bonafides: 1993 coupe, stock 35K mile explorer long block, GT-40P heads never came off of it, I believe 26986 Comp beehives, stock Mustang 5.0 camshaft, 1-3/4 BBK headers (yes a couple spark plug wires are tight), Explorer intake manifold. Made 300 *wheel* horsepower through a 5 speed on a dynojet dyno years ago. Car with a hot-shoe driver ran high 11s @ 2900 lbs. Speedbrain engine management, so we were able to run a Lightning MAF, and actually control timing, etc. This combination came to be because the 331 that was in the car died horrifically, and there wasn't money to replace it. All that remained was the intake manifold, throttle body, inlet tubing, and exhaust. Throttle body opening on the upper was opened for the larger throttle body from the expired stroker.
@@richardholdener1727 If you say so. However, a set of BBK 1-3/4 headers with a Fel Pro 1487 header gasket, is worth repeatable horsepower and mph over a set of BBK 1-5/8 longtubes with a stock cam. Or, at least it is when you cut off the ball and socket and use V-bands.
I just watched a vid on a 403 hp 302 however it was a .030 302 making it a 306, using aftermarket comp cam, dual plane weiand intake, 600 holley carb with "CAST iron heads" however it had 2.02 and 1.60 valves in those heads. it did not specify what heads those were. Just that they were cast iron and had been worked. so what that tells me is that its matching combo to your flow numbers, cam, carburation.
One of my 306 builds ran the 200cc Roush heads that are cast iron. Using the factory HO cam it made 360hp. Them heads and cam are now in the 351W for my '91 E150 travel van.
To make decent power just save up $ and get the cam, AFR or Trick Flow heads along with headers, intake and 650 cfm carb. Then you can leave it alone and be happy with 400 HP for your street mobile
some years ago i use to look for an pull GT40 heads from Explorers. i never found the effort worth it tho its a real pain in the butt to pull them. then you still have a used head that should really be gone through by a shop and upgrade the springs. thats alot of time and effort for gaining like 20hp. this is why i went ahread and spring for aluminum heads. only real advantage i see with getting junkyard heads is you can also get the GT40 intake to replace the crappy stock intake if you do not want an aftermarket intake
To bad AC delco doesn’t make a head for it ! I don’t know how much better they would be compared to AFR or Edlebrock . Just a wild guess they would be as good if not better than the Brodix ? I’d say they would be better than the trick flow ! Because that would be the trick when AC Delco made performance heads for small block ford ! I would like to see retro fit hemi heads for small block Chevy and ford . Also I’d like to see a flat plane crankshaft for say 302 / 327 . Because we know you can’t go real big in cubes with a flat plane crankshaft . The other is dual overhead cam with 4 valves per cylinder ! I can say I learned that a small bore and a long stroke is the better combo for efficiency of power . That floored me dad always said short stroke big bore more horsepower ! Small bore long stroke big torque out the hole or truck motor made to pull ! But they show that with the long stroke it can get more flow and when the burn doesn’t have to go far out an it’s in a smaller hole you get more efficient punch down on the cylinder because it’s concentrated in a smaller circumference. Now if you run 4 valves per cylinder on this type engine then the angles of the valves dictate wether it’s a fuel efficient engine or it’s a performance engine ! You find out the craziest things when you just go to see if Toyota got GM’s old 5.7 engine . No 4x3.48 no way a longer stroke than the 454 yeah 4.03 and a bore smaller than the two baby’s 265 and 305 3.75 bores the Toyota 5.7 bore is smaller than the smallest small block. Like I’m thinking it said 3.65 or something around that size . Then you find Yamaha has a lot to do with Toyota engines ! And the Taurus SHO 3.0 was built for ford by none other than Yamaha . Say what then the 4.4 for Volvo built by you know who Yamaha . Yes all because I just had to see if the Toyota 5.7 was the old GM 5.7 . Who would have ever guessed but now we know why Toyota doesn’t build motorcycles and why Yamaha doesn’t build cars . They say they been in bed with Toyota from back in the 60’s . That’s a lot of information I did not know or if some one would have said they built a engine for ford . Why that would be the biggest lie ever told ! Then the 5.7 bore an stroke a torque monster. I wounder if that’s the same bore and stroke they run in NASCAR? 8-9000 rpm ? ? ? I’m afraid to go find out it’s hard to tell how much more I’ll find out I didn’t know ! I love the engine building Richard I even build up 3.5 lawnmower engines to shaving head under cut valves port polish weld cam regrind . I’m 50 and started that kind of hot ridding at 10 years old ! I got tired of the stupid mower dieing out in high grass then not wanting to start back up ! When it’s cutting around 5-7000 rpm it just don’t have that bogging down problem any more . It just burns right through it and red bricks and saplings . Even ol sawgrass . I’ve never bent a crank or sheared a key in a built motor but a stock one I have . Now I’ve bent a ton of blades with a built motor . Even hit an drove a railroad spike through the side of the deck . It’s amazing how powerful a 3.5 horse Briggs & Stratton engine can put out . Thanks for+the video and what you do from one old motor head to another keep on motoring !
They used 1.7 RR in the Car Kraft Article. Funny you didnt mention this as the lift is alot more. Dyno measurements can also be way different between dynos
E7 heads flow about 150/110 from what I've read so 306hp is pretty close to max. The 166 number you gave was for the GT40 head?. That would be in line as 16cfm additional would give an extra 30 hp.Stepping up to an old B303 cam would get you 425-430hp with the AFR's.BTW, this build with the Demon 650, roller rockers, 165's, mild roller, 15/8" headers and MSD is very similar to the Car Craft build done about 9-10 years ago. Same results.
I've seen the 2002 T3 Tickford 5.6 liter Falcon factory 369 HP net from CNC ported GT40P heads, with a 1993 Cobra SVT style cam. So thats 405 HP gross. Again, Maybee, just Maybee, that 400 HP with those alloy heads, 1.7 rockers and a stock 5.0 Mustang HO roller cam 5.0 engine is possible. I vote for a New Test. Best wishes for the conquest of Truth over Hype!
Would be awesome to also see a test with the standard 5.0 bottom end with each AFR head to see if/when you can have too much head and what the trade offs are.
Ever taken .030 off a set of 1996 4 bar GT40’s? I read on the interweb that Ford did this on the cobras. Funnier yet when you start looking into combustion chamber sizes you’ll find several answers on the 93 cobra heads. Have you ever measured those? Any idea if the head milling story is true?
Richard, I recently had my 289 kill 2 pistons. It was a 0.030" over, 9.1:1 with AFR 165's and a flat tappet XE274H cam, Performer RPM and 650 Brawler. Since it is down, I'm thinking about upgrading to a 5.0. My question is, do you know if stock pistons will have issues with 165's and the XE274HR? I know of one that should only need a mild cleaning and honing. If I have to spend a small fortune to build a bottom end, I may just punch my 289 0.040" over and reuse everything else. Thanks again, your stuff is very informative and enjoying to watch.
@@richardholdener1727 the stock pistons of a 5.0 have small valve reliefs, but are they adequate for the XE274HR and the 165 heads or are they too shallow? Just wondering if you have tested that cam on a stock bottom end and have run into piston to valve issues.
So the mustang 302 and explorer 302 are rated for about the same HP. If the explorer heads gain HP on a mustang engine then what does the mustang engine have that the explorer doesn't?
When you put gt40 explorer heads on a 5.8W do you have to get different pushrods and are the head bolts the same size. I like watching your videos you do a really good job explaining thanks.
Curious what just the 165's slapped on an otherwise stock setup would do, or heads & better intake, but stock cam. I really enjoy the streetability and daily driver characteristics of the factory cam.
Iirc, 15 years ago the magazine did that and it was worth power everywhere except way down low. Maybe max 30-40 HP? Then they put a street cam in it and together got well over 100hp. The stock cam is really small so the heads great flow didn't shine up top.
This sort of mild camshaft with 212@50 duration would be very streetable. A 224@50 would be deemed streetable by most gearheads and manual transmission drivers but would need a converter and maybe some gear in an auto. The bigger grinds like 230@50+ tend to really end up fairly extreme for a daily and are best suited to weekend warriors and street/strip machines.
Hope you run the new test you mentioned at the end. Racer I know has a stock short block, carbed 95 GT with an E303 cam and a Weiand Stealth intake. He picked up 3 tenths in the 1/8 going from ported GT40 heads to AFR165 Renegades. Ran 11.88 @ 114.75 in the quarter with the AFR heads. He 60 foots about 1.58.
I've ran afrs 165s with a stock cam and 1.72 rockers with better springs then what the sold them with back them. 1st gen sbf heads so before they switched to 8mm valves and better springs. Lol its wasn't close to 400 without the nitrous typical EFi foxbody with gt40 intake and all the bolt on junk. Ran 12.30@109 at 3300lbs and low 11s on the bottle. Think it dynoed 280rwhp something on motor back then. It picked a good bit when I did swap the cam for a mild cutom grind. They must of had one of those factory stock or real street nmra class cams for that test lol
Why does ford say the explorer 5.0 with gt40p heads only have 215hp? It seems like your able to make way more power out if that motor without doing much work.
Richard, the Tickford branch of Ford Australia did a bit of budget trickery with the iron GT40P heads on the 2001/2002 Falcon XR8 220kw model (Factory hand built 302w's, 295hp). They shaved the head to bump up compression, then fitted the Alloy heads 1.94/1.54 size valve combo, with 1.7 ratio Yella Terra roller rockers as an added bonus. No other FACTORY installed, pushrod 302, including the mighty Boss 302 was as powerful ! Tickford did this because at the XR8's price point, the business case for the Alloy GT40 heads did not stack up !!
@@richardholdener1727 Unrestricted, yes, but straight out the factory gate, the 69/70 Boss 302 rated at 290 SAE Gross, 01/02 XR8 rated at 295 SAE Net. Both cars run mid 14s. Boss 302 3300lb, XR8 3530lb. Torque curves would be intersting !!
@@arkhsm Firstly, all Australian Wheels and Motor publications quoted two up 1/4 mile times, which are 480 pounds above the stock iron headed XR8 Rebel or TE50 220 kW 1650 kilo weights. That is a start line mass of a huge 4117 pounds. In nearly all US publications, One seasoned 200 pound person and gas for 50 miles. Second, rampant HP fudging started in December 1967 right about when Ford took 66 HP off the 306 HP gross K code Shelby 289, and made two production G codes, the Street Tunnel Port and then the first Boss 302 with nearly the same block in 1969. Like the SCCA approved mid 68 model year Mustang Street 302 Tunnel Port that was withdrawn (240HP gross at 4600 ) other car makers followed suit, namely the 340 4bbl Chrysler E55 ( 275 HP Gross), the Six Pack 340 (290 HP Gross) the later Boss 351 (330 HP Gross) and the first 428 CobraJet (335 HP Gross, same rating with out without Ram Air, no allowance for the Super Cobra Jet option either). Specifily, the actual Boss 302 gross power figures were taken 1300 rpm below the engines actual power peak, which removed 50 to sometimes 80 HP gross . On the same 265 to 272 CFM 4V Heads, the 302 Boss and 351 Boss made 374 and 383 HP gross respectively in Richard Holdeners two tests with Holley 750cfm 4bbls and open headers. All the Big Four, Ford, GM, Chrysler and AMC, de rated there best engines by quoting the power figures many rpm below the power peak to avoid the 10 pound per hp Insurance hike.
@@richardholdener1727 This is not an attempt to Throw shade in subtle way of disrespecting or ridiculing someone verbally or nonverbally. Love everything you do, and respect your way to do things. Down in Australia, Ford spent a lot of money with Aston Martins Tickford wing. They were the ones who went back to iron GT40P heads after six months of Aluminum factory Heads. A 5.6 liter stoked 4.00 by 3.40 5.0 HO engine with 90 mm throttle body and 1.7 rockers with a custom variation on the Watson's Cobra roller cam isn't anything like 400 HP gross Alloy head 5.0 with dual plane and 750 carb. Just putting the info out there Sir.
@@deanstevenson6527 Yeah Dean, some of those factory numbers were downright hilarious. I think my mill would kill the Boss on torque up to around the 4500 rpm mark, and not fall too far behind to 5500. Finally, after that those drain pipes will kick butt, but the factory installed a lame 6150 rpm limiter. I tell ya, for an old non-VCT pushrod donk, Tickford's version pulls strongly from idle to its 5750 rpm redline....that's one real elastic powerband !!
"Back in the days"... The AFR165 were excellent machining, but the TFW TW design allowed more low lift flow and they flowed more than enough for the typical 300-340rwhp non boosted setups back with then with the typical components. And the TFS TW would win by a little bit of power and torque over the AFR165. The AFR165 had better build quality, and better hardware. But this was before the 11R head, which appear to be a better constructed head than the original TFS TW head.
@@richardholdener1727 I don't like to go against you, but back in the day the typical cobra/gt40 intake, e303 or f303 cam, 1 5/8"-1 3/4" long tubes or shorties, catback exhaust, throttle body on a stock block situation that the guys were all trying to get over 300rwhp, i was pretty sure that while the afr165 was a better built head with better hardware, the chamber design on the TFS TW let it make a little more power. You'd notice it more on the torque curve where these heads made just a little more torque over the curve than the inline valve heads. But it certainly was a long time ago. The 11R appears to be a much improved head to replace the TW, with better machining, better hardware, even better valve angles, it probably like you said would certainly take the 165 AFR head.
331-347 cubic inches with appropriate stroker kit. TFS 225 heads. 11-12:1 compression, 1 3/4" or 1 7/8" long tubes, victor jr or sr intake with 750 Holley. Or Victor 5.0 EFI intake. Intakes are ported to match heads. Camshaft 235@.050" .600-.650" lift. 106-110lsa. Something around there, there are other heads which can do it. Different cams, but the induction and exhaust is about right.
@@turbomike71 From the link I sent for that 500HP combo on a 5.0 block, the TFS PORTED 185 Track Heat and 205 Track heat can also get the job done. However I gave the 225 TFS because it flows similarly to an LS3 or LS7 head and will let you make the power with a smaller cam. There are other heads which will get the job done from other vendors: The Edelbrock Victor Jr, The AFR 205 and AFR 225. But look at the flow data of the "lowly" 170cc TFS TW head compared to some of the "big" heads from other vendors and even the 170cc have as much or more low lift flow at .200 and .300"... This is why those heads were kicking ass.
the stock 5.0/5.8 timing cam is good to 350 hp, i'll bet the old magazine test has a rocker arm ratio swap. Still, a 400 hp engine and the right gearing is a potential 11 second Foxbody...cheaper than a coyote swap before you even spray with N2O.
electronic fuel pump of regulator I ran 11.23 I a quarter mile at 129 I spun in first and second t5 trans so I got the oil changed in they put the oil filter that a stock motor called for I didn't even put a 100 miles on it since the oil change now it making a grinding noise and lost all of its power
I’m putting together this exact afr and cam setup together but with a ported explorer intake. roughly estimated how much of a decrease in power would I see over this carbed set up?
Richard just a quick question, will forged pistons on a daily driver affect driveabillity in any way for a street car, or should I stick to them oem Pistons for street use.
You use a lot of COMP Cam stuff. I'm in an FE engine group on Facebook. All I hear about is COMP CAM and lifters failure. Hardly go a day without hearing about cam and lifter failure from COMP CAMS equipment. Do you have any comments ?
I have a set of 1970 351 DOOE heads that now are ported with 1.94/1.50 valves thatre goin on my 5.0.Do you have a guess on what they might flow as they are?
I have a 89 ford e150 van with a 302 glass tappet engine. I am converting it to carburetor and I'm also convert8ng it to a roller motor. But I'm keeping the same pistons and crank. What cam and heads can input on this motor. My carb is a holley 600cfm
@@richardholdener1727 the lift is .576 intake and exhaust. Duration is .331/.342 I think they are very secretive of there cams. I will have the cam tomorrow it coming in the mail
Yeahi think you're right, I seem to remember that they're more efficient and need less timing (kind of similar to more modern motors). Hopefully he'll pop in and clarify what he used
@@richardholdener1727 I can't even find headers for the explorer. Was thinking about buying a cheap set of mustang headers and seeing if I can modify them to work
Richard, I know this is an older episode. I respect you experience and knowledge. I am building a 289 for a 66 GT-350 and wonder if I use the AFR combination and a stroked crank could I see similar numbers? Running Tri Y headers. Can I run a hydraulic roller in a 66 289?
@@richardholdener1727 most of your sbf head testing, while very much appreciated, was done on older outdated stuff. Why not revisit a test with the latest greatest offerings to see a comparison?
All the 5.0 Cobras: 93, 94, & 95 had GT40 heads, not "P" heads. GT40 is also know as a 3 bar head and the GT40P is known as a 4 bar head. 3 or 4 bar is a reference to casting marks on the heads.
Just got finished up with my 306 build this spring with AFR 165s and longtubes. I used the XE266 cam and it is running great so far! I haven't went WOT yet as I am still breaking in the clutch and working on the tune but it seems to pull extremely well compared to the E7s. I have also gotten a lot of compliments on the sound.
Thanks to Richard for all the 5.0 videos and willingness to answer questions!
How are the AFR 165's?
@@UFOGHOSTHUNTER They are doing good so far! I’ve had no problems whatsoever. The valve train is noisier than I would like but I can’t contribute that to the heads being at fault. I want to get to the bottom of that over winter.
I sold a set of 165 renegade heads to a guy with a 70 mustang. It had a stockish roller cam motor. The 165s really woke up his car.
I have a 94 gt with this same combo, but a ported explorer intake and 20 lbs injectors. Equal length shorty headers. It pull hard to 6,000 . But I don't belive it has over 350 ish hp. Could be the carb setup and msd distributor works better than the stock 94 ecu/ ford extender box.
Ole Richard is the OG 5 liter whisperer. I’ve been learning from his 5.0 dynos for 20+ years!
For real. I was a senior in 2000. Car Craft, Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords were always on my desk. I learned a lot more reading those. Than I did in HS.
@@I_like_turtles_67 Me too man! I’m a professional auto technician now. I guess I was actually training for my future career.
You should of learned that LS swapping is the best thing
@@sinistersilverado965 It really isn't. To prove my point. I'm putting a 67 camaro together with a coyote swap.
@@sinistersilverado965 I’m building a Stroker 6.0 LS right now!
For anyone auto-crossing or canyon carving in their car, a set of aluminum heads and moving the battery to the trunk is well worth the price of admission to get 100lbs off the front suspension.
True story
Agreed. Throw in an aftermarket K member as well.
Don't forget the 5 lug conversion to put better brakes, wheels and tires on.
@@natricjol 5 lug on a Fox body for sure. My 5.0L is in a 91 T-Bird, so I've already got 5 lugs, A-arms up front, 8.8 IRS out back. The real struggle with this chicken is weight balance and reduction.
Don’t forget also swapping the cast iron water pump, intake manifold, and exhaust manifold and swapping all with aluminum and steel (headers)
Richard's 5.0 dyno book is how I learned about different and proven combinations over 20 years ago! Thank you Richie!
Heads are great, but if I've learned anything from Richard.... it's that boost is the great equalizer. I'm starting a dirt cheap fox body project and I'm skipping straight to turbo-ing it
I love these videos. My first two cars were both '89 hatch's. Third car was an '89 notch.
My notch had a set of twisted wedge r heads on a 408 Windsor. That thing was a monster in the mid 90s. Had that car deep into the 2000s where I did a double A-arm front conversion and terminator rear suspension with battle boxes, among other things.
I miss that car and this video bring the feels out.
They also changed the rocker ratio from 1.6 to 1.7 on that test to get to 400 hp. That is how they simulated a bigger cam. So they said. I read that article. That is why I only buy AFR heads.
Plus electric water pump helped a little. I think whoever threw that short-block back together must've did a hood job. Because every little bit counts. When you're being challenged like that.
Kinda like Ford, Chevy & Dodge. Letting the race teams come into the foundry. So they could make a stronger " stock " block. By altering the molds. Prior to the block being poured into the molds lol.
My thoughts exactly. It's not apples to apples if every bit of it isn't the same. I'd also like to see the dyno results of factory heads with factory cam and compare 1.6 to 1.7 to see how much that little extra lift actually does.
@@BrandenMcNabb I wonder if the cam was degreed differently from stock too.
I believe I have the original magazine at my parents house. I need to check.
@@BrandenMcNabb Iv'e seen a test where going form stock rockers to rollers of the same ratio made just over 10 HP, really not worth the swap done on it's own. Going to a higher ratio should be good for about the same gains (so 20-25 hp over stock rockers) but will put bit more strain on the valve train, mostly at higher RPMs.
@@johnjones928 the only time it's worth a difference is if the rockers you're using are flexing. Higher ratio may give a small bump depending on the combo but usually within 10hp or so unless the change is drastic.
The big thing with these builds is all the incremental stuff. An electric water pump is about 8hp at the top end. Performer rpm air gap manifold is about a 12hp gain over a generic raised dual plane. The headers are probably worth 15hp over a set of cheap manifolds. That's a 35hp gain altogether!
It's worth making the small changes, they all add up eventually.
a 306 in my Fox right now that was rebuilt 7 years ago.AFR 165 heads as shown,TF stage 1 cam,short headers and h pipe/flowmasters.Vortech intake with Accufab race 70mm throttle body and 30lb injectors.Top it off with a Vortech A-trim blower(very low boost,very small and first ones ever made).when dynoed it made 400 RWHP and 430 RWT.It screams along for me and fun to drive with the 5 speed and 3.73 gears.Its basically almost a show car so driven accordingly most of the time.Im a Ford tech and drive all sorts of things,I know it could keep up with the current 302 mustangs and the 05-10 gt500s in the 1/4.good stuff that i truly can relate to.
Just more info to use on the ole fox. Always great choices to choose from with correct information to be informed with.
Many thanks for the work and sharing the knowledge Richard Holdener.
Richard, please do the David Vizard head test soon! Thanks for everything. You are the best source of info for engine building on the net...now if I could only get you to tune my combo!
what head test?
@@richardholdener1727 2.2 chrysler th-cam.com/video/cu8zqGzugtM/w-d-xo.html
Went from stock cam & E6 heads to an E303 & GT40p's and the difference was huge. Next time you test them get the Alex's drop in spring kit for the GT40p's. It will smooth out that top end.
Who is alex?
Have they got things back in stock ? Last I looked a year ago or so they were sold out of almost everything. Fortunately I had bought springs from them few years ago
@coffeecan7440
Just search for "Alex's valve springs"
it's very easy to find on the internet
Great video! I’d like to see the letter cams tested with the p heads just see what the difference is in hp and torque going in order from e,b,f,x,z.
I have a soft spot for the small-inch small-blocks, Ford, Chevy, Chrysler, whatever. So I'm always down for learning what makes these engines tick faster.
New house = new project! # Bring the Mustang home!! Got to have something to test all of the Ford stuff in.
Would love to see AFR Enforcers! Thank you Richard
Rich I love your channel and simply couldn't plan and build engines for my cars with out you. Thanks!!!
I would pay you to do some head and cam tests on a Jeep 4.0. I know they make little power with upgrades but you bring the TRUTH!
jeep stuff is planned
@@richardholdener1727 seriously thank you for what you do, the information you spread is like gold! Stay safe bro!
Richard great work we all appreciate it can you test afr outlaw heads against renagade heads on sbf ford 302 and 347 with small and big cams very hard to find dyno on renagade heads even your old books I have are the older outlaw heads and like you said experienced valve float would love to see lunati voodoo came tested against extreme energy too thanks keep up the great work very thorough and non biased just results
hi Richard would like to see some test on AFR budget 1351 enforcer 185cc cheap but interested in flow or clean up porting value
Mr Holdener, I would love to see you repeat this test with a solid roller lifter and the off the shelf AFR (or TFS) hydraulic valve spring pack... RPM!
Ill bet many of us running around with 5.0 motors aren't driving them to work anymore, these are weekend toys and hydraulic lifters aren't as important.
for this rpm, hyd roller is more than adequate-we only run solid roller cams on very high rpm stuff
Hey Richard, I would love to see a test on 302-306 ci engine with a 390cfm vs 600/650 cfm carburetor!
The IROC racer cars use 390's to make 450 HP, of course those were modified carbs on 7500 rpm 350 cid engines.
Good information working on a 302 now
This is good stuff Richie. I got two 302 small blocks from my dad. One of them is a 60’s Cougar engine that I think would be a good hot rod motor.
So by the hp curve shape, the stock heads have the best matched valve springs..less of a drop off after peak.
The 1-5/8 headers are a restriction with even GT-40P heads. Bonafides: 1993 coupe, stock 35K mile explorer long block, GT-40P heads never came off of it, I believe 26986 Comp beehives, stock Mustang 5.0 camshaft, 1-3/4 BBK headers (yes a couple spark plug wires are tight), Explorer intake manifold. Made 300 *wheel* horsepower through a 5 speed on a dynojet dyno years ago. Car with a hot-shoe driver ran high 11s @ 2900 lbs. Speedbrain engine management, so we were able to run a Lightning MAF, and actually control timing, etc.
This combination came to be because the 331 that was in the car died horrifically, and there wasn't money to replace it. All that remained was the intake manifold, throttle body, inlet tubing, and exhaust. Throttle body opening on the upper was opened for the larger throttle body from the expired stroker.
1 5/8 headers are not restrictive on a stock-cammed 5.0L
@@richardholdener1727 If you say so. However, a set of BBK 1-3/4 headers with a Fel Pro 1487 header gasket, is worth repeatable horsepower and mph over a set of BBK 1-5/8 longtubes with a stock cam. Or, at least it is when you cut off the ball and socket and use V-bands.
Great video Richard
How about trying running the Baby Crower camshaft for the ford 5.0L
I just watched a vid on a 403 hp 302 however it was a .030 302 making it a 306, using aftermarket comp cam, dual plane weiand intake, 600 holley carb with "CAST iron heads" however it had 2.02 and 1.60 valves in those heads. it did not specify what heads those were. Just that they were cast iron and had been worked. so what that tells me is that its matching combo to your flow numbers, cam, carburation.
One of my 306 builds ran the 200cc Roush heads that are cast iron. Using the factory HO cam it made 360hp. Them heads and cam are now in the 351W for my '91 E150 travel van.
stock cam afr heads and tune the weather station until it reads 400 hp
I love my AFR 165!
To make decent power just save up $ and get the cam, AFR or Trick Flow heads along with headers, intake and 650 cfm carb. Then you can leave it alone and be happy with 400 HP for your street mobile
some years ago i use to look for an pull GT40 heads from Explorers. i never found the effort worth it tho its a real pain in the butt to pull them. then you still have a used head that should really be gone through by a shop and upgrade the springs. thats alot of time and effort for gaining like 20hp. this is why i went ahread and spring for aluminum heads. only real advantage i see with getting junkyard heads is you can also get the GT40 intake to replace the crappy stock intake if you do not want an aftermarket intake
Love love love this channel....can you do a top end kit on a sbf 289 build....not a stroker but stock spec bottom end??
I have 289 vids up
@@richardholdener1727 thank you....you are the best
To bad AC delco doesn’t make a head for it ! I don’t know how much better they would be compared to AFR or Edlebrock . Just a wild guess they would be as good if not better than the Brodix ? I’d say they would be better than the trick flow ! Because that would be the trick when AC Delco made performance heads for small block ford ! I would like to see retro fit hemi heads for small block Chevy and ford . Also I’d like to see a flat plane crankshaft for say 302 / 327 . Because we know you can’t go real big in cubes with a flat plane crankshaft . The other is dual overhead cam with 4 valves per cylinder ! I can say I learned that a small bore and a long stroke is the better combo for efficiency of power . That floored me dad always said short stroke big bore more horsepower ! Small bore long stroke big torque out the hole or truck motor made to pull ! But they show that with the long stroke it can get more flow and when the burn doesn’t have to go far out an it’s in a smaller hole you get more efficient punch down on the cylinder because it’s concentrated in a smaller circumference. Now if you run 4 valves per cylinder on this type engine then the angles of the valves dictate wether it’s a fuel efficient engine or it’s a performance engine ! You find out the craziest things when you just go to see if Toyota got GM’s old 5.7 engine . No 4x3.48 no way a longer stroke than the 454 yeah 4.03 and a bore smaller than the two baby’s 265 and 305 3.75 bores the Toyota 5.7 bore is smaller than the smallest small block. Like I’m thinking it said 3.65 or something around that size . Then you find Yamaha has a lot to do with Toyota engines ! And the Taurus SHO 3.0 was built for ford by none other than Yamaha . Say what then the 4.4 for Volvo built by you know who Yamaha . Yes all because I just had to see if the Toyota 5.7 was the old GM 5.7 . Who would have ever guessed but now we know why Toyota doesn’t build motorcycles and why Yamaha doesn’t build cars . They say they been in bed with Toyota from back in the 60’s . That’s a lot of information I did not know or if some one would have said they built a engine for ford . Why that would be the biggest lie ever told ! Then the 5.7 bore an stroke a torque monster. I wounder if that’s the same bore and stroke they run in NASCAR? 8-9000 rpm ? ? ? I’m afraid to go find out it’s hard to tell how much more I’ll find out I didn’t know ! I love the engine building Richard I even build up 3.5 lawnmower engines to shaving head under cut valves port polish weld cam regrind . I’m 50 and started that kind of hot ridding at 10 years old ! I got tired of the stupid mower dieing out in high grass then not wanting to start back up ! When it’s cutting around 5-7000 rpm it just don’t have that bogging down problem any more . It just burns right through it and red bricks and saplings . Even ol sawgrass . I’ve never bent a crank or sheared a key in a built motor but a stock one I have . Now I’ve bent a ton of blades with a built motor . Even hit an drove a railroad spike through the side of the deck . It’s amazing how powerful a 3.5 horse Briggs & Stratton engine can put out . Thanks for+the video and what you do from one old motor head to another keep on motoring !
AFR165cc is a strong head for its port size. I think most cases a AFR185 can be used for any sbf but that 165 does well for its size.
If you re visit this would love too see even bigger heads with a mild cam like this
Stock 5.0 runs 12s with 14 degrees timing 4.10 gears slicks .
They used 1.7 RR in the Car Kraft Article. Funny you didnt mention this as the lift is alot more.
Dyno measurements can also be way different between dynos
I did mention it-and having run the same motor on 4 different dynos across the US-properly calibrated dynos read the same
E7 heads flow about 150/110 from what I've read so 306hp is pretty close to max. The 166 number you gave was for the GT40 head?. That would be in line as 16cfm additional would give an extra 30 hp.Stepping up to an old B303 cam would get you 425-430hp with the AFR's.BTW, this build with the Demon 650, roller rockers, 165's, mild roller, 15/8" headers and MSD is very similar to the Car Craft build done about 9-10 years ago. Same results.
the 166 is the E7 flow
I've seen the 2002 T3 Tickford 5.6 liter Falcon factory 369 HP net from CNC ported GT40P heads, with a 1993 Cobra SVT style cam. So thats 405 HP gross. Again, Maybee, just Maybee, that 400 HP with those alloy heads, 1.7 rockers and a stock 5.0 Mustang HO roller cam 5.0 engine is possible. I vote for a New Test. Best wishes for the conquest of Truth over Hype!
We need a x-pipe vs h-pipe vs true duals test on a dyno
Would be awesome to also see a test with the standard 5.0 bottom end with each AFR head to see if/when you can have too much head and what the trade offs are.
please see the port volume head test video
Ever taken .030 off a set of 1996 4 bar GT40’s? I read on the interweb that Ford did this on the cobras. Funnier yet when you start looking into combustion chamber sizes you’ll find several answers on the 93 cobra heads. Have you ever measured those? Any idea if the head milling story is true?
Richard, I recently had my 289 kill 2 pistons. It was a 0.030" over, 9.1:1 with AFR 165's and a flat tappet XE274H cam, Performer RPM and 650 Brawler. Since it is down, I'm thinking about upgrading to a 5.0. My question is, do you know if stock pistons will have issues with 165's and the XE274HR? I know of one that should only need a mild cleaning and honing. If I have to spend a small fortune to build a bottom end, I may just punch my 289 0.040" over and reuse everything else. Thanks again, your stuff is very informative and enjoying to watch.
no valve reliefs?
@@richardholdener1727 the stock pistons of a 5.0 have small valve reliefs, but are they adequate for the XE274HR and the 165 heads or are they too shallow? Just wondering if you have tested that cam on a stock bottom end and have run into piston to valve issues.
The AFRs only seem expensive when you buy them, but you wont miss that money a bit after you get it running. Money well spent.
So the mustang 302 and explorer 302 are rated for about the same HP. If the explorer heads gain HP on a mustang engine then what does the mustang engine have that the explorer doesn't?
cam
When you put gt40 explorer heads on a 5.8W do you have to get different pushrods and are the head bolts the same size. I like watching your videos you do a really good job explaining thanks.
heads need to be drilled out for 1/2 bolts
Curious what just the 165's slapped on an otherwise stock setup would do, or heads & better intake, but stock cam. I really enjoy the streetability and daily driver characteristics of the factory cam.
Iirc, 15 years ago the magazine did that and it was worth power everywhere except way down low. Maybe max 30-40 HP? Then they put a street cam in it and together got well over 100hp. The stock cam is really small so the heads great flow didn't shine up top.
This sort of mild camshaft with 212@50 duration would be very streetable. A 224@50 would be deemed streetable by most gearheads and manual transmission drivers but would need a converter and maybe some gear in an auto. The bigger grinds like 230@50+ tend to really end up fairly extreme for a daily and are best suited to weekend warriors and street/strip machines.
Hope you run the new test you mentioned at the end. Racer I know has a stock short block, carbed 95 GT with an E303 cam and a Weiand Stealth intake. He picked up 3 tenths in the 1/8 going from ported GT40 heads to AFR165 Renegades. Ran 11.88 @ 114.75 in the quarter with the AFR heads. He 60 foots about 1.58.
Some of that will be the 40 lbs the AFR's took off the front end. LOL
Always like the 5.0 videos,Richard what's your opinion on world products Windsor senior heads with the 2.02 intake valve?
Junk.
i had good luck with those... not so much the Jrs.
Ran the Roush 200's on a 306 of mine with stock HO cam. Made 360 at the flywheel. Have them and the cam in my E150's 351W now.
I've ran afrs 165s with a stock cam and 1.72 rockers with better springs then what the sold them with back them. 1st gen sbf heads so before they switched to 8mm valves and better springs. Lol its wasn't close to 400 without the nitrous typical EFi foxbody with gt40 intake and all the bolt on junk. Ran 12.30@109 at 3300lbs and low 11s on the bottle. Think it dynoed 280rwhp something on motor back then. It picked a good bit when I did swap the cam for a mild cutom grind. They must of had one of those factory stock or real street nmra class cams for that test lol
More like a cam I would choose on a daily. I probably would pick one real similar but with a 110 or 111 LSA not significant difference though.
Why does ford say the explorer 5.0 with gt40p heads only have 215hp? It seems like your able to make way more power out if that motor without doing much work.
rated vs tested power
Good morning band headers you use I have flowtech long tube. Installing gt40p problem #4 plug touching.
I'm wondering as well. I have afr's on my bone stock explorer shortblock. Be cool to see what the power numbers are.
Richard, the Tickford branch of Ford Australia did a bit of budget trickery with the iron GT40P heads on the 2001/2002 Falcon XR8 220kw model (Factory hand built 302w's, 295hp). They shaved the head to bump up compression, then fitted the Alloy heads 1.94/1.54 size valve combo, with 1.7 ratio Yella Terra roller rockers as an added bonus. No other FACTORY installed, pushrod 302, including the mighty Boss 302 was as powerful ! Tickford did this because at the XR8's price point, the business case for the Alloy GT40 heads did not stack up !!
I still think a Boss 302 (275 cfm) would make more than the GT40P (200 cfm?) headed motor you described
@@richardholdener1727 Unrestricted, yes, but straight out the factory gate, the 69/70 Boss 302 rated at 290 SAE Gross, 01/02 XR8 rated at 295 SAE Net. Both cars run mid 14s. Boss 302 3300lb, XR8 3530lb. Torque curves would be intersting !!
@@arkhsm Firstly, all Australian Wheels and Motor publications quoted two up 1/4 mile times, which are 480 pounds above the stock iron headed XR8 Rebel or TE50 220 kW 1650 kilo weights. That is a start line mass of a huge 4117 pounds. In nearly all US publications, One seasoned 200 pound person and gas for 50 miles. Second, rampant HP fudging started in December 1967 right about when Ford took 66 HP off the 306 HP gross K code Shelby 289, and made two production G codes, the Street Tunnel Port and then the first Boss 302 with nearly the same block in 1969. Like the SCCA approved mid 68 model year Mustang Street 302 Tunnel Port that was withdrawn (240HP gross at 4600 ) other car makers followed suit, namely the 340 4bbl Chrysler E55 ( 275 HP Gross), the Six Pack 340 (290 HP Gross) the later Boss 351 (330 HP Gross) and the first 428 CobraJet (335 HP Gross, same rating with out without Ram Air, no allowance for the Super Cobra Jet option either). Specifily, the actual Boss 302 gross power figures were taken 1300 rpm below the engines actual power peak, which removed 50 to sometimes 80 HP gross . On the same 265 to 272 CFM 4V Heads, the 302 Boss and 351 Boss made 374 and 383 HP gross respectively in Richard Holdeners two tests with Holley 750cfm 4bbls and open headers. All the Big Four, Ford, GM, Chrysler and AMC, de rated there best engines by quoting the power figures many rpm below the power peak to avoid the 10 pound per hp Insurance hike.
@@richardholdener1727 This is not an attempt to Throw shade in subtle way of disrespecting or ridiculing someone verbally or nonverbally. Love everything you do, and respect your way to do things. Down in Australia, Ford spent a lot of money with Aston Martins Tickford wing. They were the ones who went back to iron GT40P heads after six months of Aluminum factory Heads. A 5.6 liter stoked 4.00 by 3.40 5.0 HO engine with 90 mm throttle body and 1.7 rockers with a custom variation on the Watson's Cobra roller cam isn't anything like 400 HP gross Alloy head 5.0 with dual plane and 750 carb. Just putting the info out there Sir.
@@deanstevenson6527 Yeah Dean, some of those factory numbers were downright hilarious. I think my mill would kill the Boss on torque up to around the 4500 rpm mark, and not fall too far behind to 5500. Finally, after that those drain pipes will kick butt, but the factory installed a lame 6150 rpm limiter. I tell ya, for an old non-VCT pushrod donk, Tickford's version pulls strongly from idle to its 5750 rpm redline....that's one real elastic powerband !!
Would like to see a "head to head" comparison of AFR 165 Renegade and Trick Flow 170 11R on a 331. Any chance of this?
"Back in the days"... The AFR165 were excellent machining, but the TFW TW design allowed more low lift flow and they flowed more than enough for the typical 300-340rwhp non boosted setups back with then with the typical components. And the TFS TW would win by a little bit of power and torque over the AFR165. The AFR165 had better build quality, and better hardware. But this was before the 11R head, which appear to be a better constructed head than the original TFS TW head.
THE AS CAST TW HEAD DOES NOT MAKE MORE THAN AN AFR 165 HEAD-BUT THE 170 11R SURE MIGHT
@@richardholdener1727 I don't like to go against you, but back in the day the typical cobra/gt40 intake, e303 or f303 cam, 1 5/8"-1 3/4" long tubes or shorties, catback exhaust, throttle body on a stock block situation that the guys were all trying to get over 300rwhp, i was pretty sure that while the afr165 was a better built head with better hardware, the chamber design on the TFS TW let it make a little more power. You'd notice it more on the torque curve where these heads made just a little more torque over the curve than the inline valve heads. But it certainly was a long time ago. The 11R appears to be a much improved head to replace the TW, with better machining, better hardware, even better valve angles, it probably like you said would certainly take the 165 AFR head.
I want to get a set of these 11r and port them up real nice and put in my Windsor. Mayb I can hit some high 4 sec 1/8
@@slopoke22 They have a 225cc 1r head that does 356CFM@.700"
I love these kind of tests. I would like to see how much modification is needed to get a 5.0 to the 500hp level
If we're talking naturally aspirated that'd be a pretty special motor, anything making 100hp/Liter without boost or very high rpm is very efficient
Nitrous or blower. That’s an expensive way to get 500plus bhp. Then there’s the issue with the block splitting at higher power.
331-347 cubic inches with appropriate stroker kit. TFS 225 heads. 11-12:1 compression, 1 3/4" or 1 7/8" long tubes, victor jr or sr intake with 750 Holley. Or Victor 5.0 EFI intake. Intakes are ported to match heads. Camshaft 235@.050" .600-.650" lift. 106-110lsa. Something around there, there are other heads which can do it. Different cams, but the induction and exhaust is about right.
@@dennisrobinson8008 Thank you
@@turbomike71 From the link I sent for that 500HP combo on a 5.0 block, the TFS PORTED 185 Track Heat and 205 Track heat can also get the job done. However I gave the 225 TFS because it flows similarly to an LS3 or LS7 head and will let you make the power with a smaller cam. There are other heads which will get the job done from other vendors: The Edelbrock Victor Jr, The AFR 205 and AFR 225. But look at the flow data of the "lowly" 170cc TFS TW head compared to some of the "big" heads from other vendors and even the 170cc have as much or more low lift flow at .200 and .300"... This is why those heads were kicking ass.
What about the Edelbrock e-street
Richard will you run the xe282hr at some point? I’d like to see the difference between it and the 274
Right on
the stock 5.0/5.8 timing cam is good to 350 hp, i'll bet the old magazine test has a rocker arm ratio swap. Still, a 400 hp engine and the right gearing is a potential 11 second Foxbody...cheaper than a coyote swap before you even spray with N2O.
Awesome video! 🇺🇸💪🏼
I’d like to see what kind of power it makes reving it too 6500-7000rpm with good valve springs
it was already past peak power
Have you done dyno test on a mildly ported GT40P head? maybe with your valve spring upgrade, just for comparison?
yoiu have to add run videos to this - we want to hear them :)
quick question I got a 87 hatch back GT40 heads header edelblock intake 600 CFM carburetor
electronic fuel pump of regulator I ran 11.23 I a quarter mile at 129 I spun in first and second t5 trans so I got the oil changed in they put the oil filter that a stock motor called for I didn't even put a 100 miles on it since the oil change now it making a grinding noise and lost all of its power
DID THEY PUT OIL BACK IN
Richard have you tested the Edelbrock intake and the Edelbrock Clevor heads
NO SIR
@@richardholdener1727 do you think you can sometime? Edelbrock designed an intake to resolve the water crossover on the W block.
@@richardholdener1727 I hope you can test a few different brands..
I'd like to see how a 185 head would do in thes commonest to know if its worth it.
Short answer is yes, Richard did a video on it.
Hey Richard i see comp cams do a xe274 flat tappet cam any experience with them
Thanks
it works too
Great video! What street camshaft (hyd. flat tappet) do you recommend for use with the gt40p heads?
PICK THE CAM FOR THE POWER AND RPMRANGE YOU WANT-LOTS WILL WORK WITH THOSE HEADS
@richardholdener1727 thanks! You think I can get away with new stock valve springs if I stay under .500 lift?
no
I’m putting together this exact afr and cam setup together but with a ported explorer intake. roughly estimated how much of a decrease in power would I see over this carbed set up?
Richard, i have a 6.0 LQ9 with 799 heads. What is the biggest camshaft that i can fit without ptv clearance issues. Love the content
something near the specs of the Comp 54-469-11-but you should check p-v
Richard I apologize I know this is off topic but where can I find a video of a LS2 with cathedral port heads with the Truck Norris cam ?
NEVER RUN AN LS2 WITH THE TN CAM
@@richardholdener1727 Richard I can't believe you haven't had a TN cam in a LS2 and on the dyno yet.
Richard just a quick question, will forged pistons on a daily driver affect driveabillity in any way for a street car, or should I stick to them oem Pistons for street use.
no
won't change a thing-maybe a little more noise
Were the aluminum Ford heads the GT40X? I think the X is like a gen2/redesign.
I tested both X and J GT-40 heads
Can you provide any more details on the rocker arm setup you used on the GT40P heads?
comp stainless
@@richardholdener1727 stud or pedestal rockers? The GT40 heads are pedestal as cast.
You use a lot of COMP Cam stuff.
I'm in an FE engine group on Facebook.
All I hear about is COMP CAM and lifters failure.
Hardly go a day without hearing about cam and lifter failure from COMP CAMS equipment.
Do you have any comments ?
I've never run an FE on the dyno
I have a set of 1970 351 DOOE heads that now are ported with 1.94/1.50 valves thatre goin on my 5.0.Do you have a guess on what they might flow as they are?
no way to know without flow testing
I have a 89 ford e150 van with a 302 glass tappet engine. I am converting it to carburetor and I'm also convert8ng it to a roller motor. But I'm keeping the same pistons and crank. What cam and heads can input on this motor. My carb is a holley 600cfm
cheap way is to add gt40 heads from an Explorer
@@richardholdener1727 yeah but I was wanting to put aluminum heads on it but if the gt40s is all I can use then I guess I will get those
Lol, I have a 91 converted to carb. 👍🍻
Could I run the stock distributor in lieu of the msd distributor? Running 302, .030, RPM intake, E cam, Holley 600cfm carb, and 1.6 roller rockers.
yes
Hey Richard were these ARF heads the Renagade heads? Thanks
this was done before renegade heads even existed
@@richardholdener1727 thanks
What are the biggest valved head you can run in stock HO short block????
depends on cam, but 2.02 intakes can be run
I have afr165’s on my 347 with funnel web intake and a Anderson af-n112 camshaft. Was wondering what kind of power it will make.
don't know specs on that cam
@@richardholdener1727 the lift is .576 intake and exhaust. Duration is .331/.342 I think they are very secretive of there cams. I will have the cam tomorrow it coming in the mail
@@richardholdener1727 with 1.6 rockers
What about promaxx 175 sbf heads ?
Please, test cheap Chinese heads, like NKB, Speedmaster, ProComp
I have tested Speedmaster
I'm Wondering what your peak timing was on the "p" heads? I read they like no more than 30*?
Yeahi think you're right, I seem to remember that they're more efficient and need less timing (kind of similar to more modern motors). Hopefully he'll pop in and clarify what he used
So what are solutions for the valve springs?
you need them
I used the same cam & head combo in my build. Did you find the valvetrain noise to be on the excessive side?
NO SIR
I'm using the AFR165s and the XE266 cam and Comp 1.6 rockers. My valvetrain is much noisier than the stock pedestal mount stuff.
Does any one know the pushrod length he used for the gt40p heads I’m guessing the stock length is a tad to short?
I have an explorer V8 that I want to play around with and make some power. I want to keep it efi and budget friendly. Do you have any suggestions?
cam and springs and headers
@@richardholdener1727 I can't even find headers for the explorer. Was thinking about buying a cheap set of mustang headers and seeing if I can modify them to work
Do a vid with early close chamber 302 heads
I wonder what 185 afr and a trick flow stage 4 cam would do in this configuration because that's basically my engine I'm putting together
do you have valve reliefs?
@@richardholdener1727 yes 7 cc flat top wiseco I know I killed the spelling on that I also have .039 felpro head gaskets
what intake are you using would a 1.7 roller be to much for the piston to valve clearance
it doesn't need 1.7 rockers-it already has a cam-RPM intake
Richard, I know this is an older episode. I respect you experience and knowledge.
I am building a 289 for a 66 GT-350 and wonder if I use the AFR combination and a stroked crank could I see similar numbers? Running Tri Y headers. Can I run a hydraulic roller in a 66 289?
YES YOU CAN RUN A HYD ROLLER (RETRO FIT CAM), YES USE AFR AND JUST BUILD A 302 OR BIGGER TO START-PUT 289 VALVE COVERED ON IT
Can you add that to my 95 Flareside please?
got one for you IMCA dirt late model chev vs ford shout out
AFR165 Renegade vs TFS11R 170’s is what A LOT of us would like to see!!!
both win
@@richardholdener1727 most of your sbf head testing, while very much appreciated, was done on older outdated stuff. Why not revisit a test with the latest greatest offerings to see a comparison?
95 Mustang Cobra heads , what are they GT40 or 40 P. Just thought I'd ask as I'm sure you know 🙃👍
All the 5.0 Cobras: 93, 94, & 95 had GT40 heads, not "P" heads. GT40 is also know as a 3 bar head and the GT40P is known as a 4 bar head. 3 or 4 bar is a reference to casting marks on the heads.
these were P heads
@@richardholdener1727 You're the man , thanks
What would the GT40P and x274 cam make? How about 1.94/1.60 valves?
a little more
Headers to fit p heads is getting harder