Outstanding stuff Richard!. Really appreciate the education. You guys helped me dyno tune my 347 a year and a half ago - and I truly appreciate the knowledge and skill it takes to do this, and do it right. Still loving my motor, (347, TF Twisted Wedge 195 heads, 444HP/436 TQ - a "square motor" ...your words...!) One thought on each of these head options - do you think there's a "sweet spot" for each head, given a matched cam combination? I'm wondering if you can get to a max combination for each. Keep the videos coming - I know it takes tons of time, but I'll devour every single one!
T Web I started with what I wanted the result to be. I wanted a flat torque curve low that lasted through the rpm range for drive ability. From there, just research and some of my own experience. The result isn’t the biggest overall HP number, but amazing torque and drive ability. I can share the recipe if you like.
Good heads on a 302 that eventually would go on a stroker seems like the most common way people would do it. Budget builders usually just start improving what they already have.
Be neat to see how the old school stuff stacks up to the new stuff. Old high ports, twisted wedge, Canfields 192cc ( the ones everyone says crack... which mine are holding up fine on my street car), gt40X, etc..
Hello Richard like say thanks for the video. Wow that's a lot of cam lift.The piston must have a lot of valve relief to take that much lift . What was the heads flowing at ? Because why would you need that much valve lift in the cam if the heads doesn't flow that high. And you would of thought the RPMs would have been higher with that duration. But second thought if it's a solid roller the valve gap would change the rpm
Be good to see valve sizes, throat size, min CSA, average CSA etc and flow numbers to compare the actual efficiency. a hand ported 195-205cc would be where id lean
Would be nice to see BSFC numbers for this direct comparison, do the 170 heads make a bit less down low for a lot less fuel ? This is a big consideration for a daily driver
I would think if were concerned about fuel usage then its better to not run at WOT like this test. The WOT test also shows no part-throttle power differences or throttle response-both of which maybe be better with a smaller head
@@richardholdener1727 agreed but in consideration of wallet impact, how much can you save on fuel bill with a little trade of in top end hp was my curiosity, budget only goes so far for some.
too much manifold and carbie for the first two heads. Possible cam too. a more appropriate setup for them would have seen more bottom end toque. But probably less power.
Hi Richard. Would a edelbrock dual plane performer rpm air gap #7521 fit and work with this combo. Have a dart iron eagle, same speck bore and stroke. No cam yet or heads. Was thinking 195-205 afr. Now, not so sure🤔I can only run 1/58 log tube 3inch collector headers on my 72 maverick street strip warrior. Any advise is very much appreciated. Legend.
Curious what the results would be with a typical street cammed 302 and these 4 heads. I’ve a.ways wondered if they would respond like LS engines, using short duration, high lift cams.
170 is really large for a stock b/s 302 cid and street cam. For street cars I have better driveability with 144-150 intakes AND a 110* cam. How much time do you spend above 5,000 rpm???
@@richardholdener1727 Have you done a test on how much compression affects power output? If not that would be a very interesting test. It would also be interesting to see how much compression affects boosted power output. I know more compression equals more power but how much more and is it linear? Thanks
Honestly try finding Pontiac or cad 500 or BBF. The SBF gets more attention, not dogging just letting you know some of us are just left out. He did cover the 400m which was super cool. If you want sbf content I recommend the Aussies and Boss 302 stuff because the Windsor pattern head is the biggest downside to the sbf.
Would love to see a compari$on of cheape$t heads cams intakes for us low buck guys in tough times. Even Elgin Mellings Pioneer etc scrape the bottom please. Thanks for all you do.
That is next to impossible on a water brake dyno. Also the Dyno is not like a car with how the load is applied. It's probably more like a jet boat if I had to guess.
Would love to see a similar test on a 302. This test showed that you didn’t put “too much” head on the engine. How much is too much on a 302? Is there such thing?
It’s been done several times with MM&FF. It depends on what you are doing. If it’s just a mild NA street build a 170cc head is plenty adequate. If you planning an all out NA race engine with solid lifters, big cam and 9000 plus rpms then a CNC machined 205s would be better choice. Cam heads and intake must work together. So many guys out there that miss match parts. Several years ago I street raced a guy that put roller rockers valve springs and a aftermarket cam in his foxbody. My foxbody was bone stock other than I bumped up the timing to 14 degrees and took the air silencer out. I blew his doors off in the 1/4. His car lost a lot of torque down low. Car sounded good with the choppy idle. But it was a pig till 3500rpms. Good example of miss matched parts. Even with the cam power would fall sharply after 5500 rpms. The reason? Stock heads and stock long runner intake was not designed to provide adequate air beyond 5500 rpms when the cam shaft was designed to make power all the way to 6500rpms. After riding in his car I could feel how much torque the car lost compared to mine down low. The guy was pretty bummed out that he lost to a basically stock car. But we both learned a lesson from it.
Maybe you should do the same test on a bigger stroker, maybe a 427. Then I believe you would see the changes in the power curves you were talking about. I have the 210cc CNC Pro1s on my 417" Windsor stroker with quite a bit bigger solid roller cam. Never had it on a dyno, but it is pretty stout in my 79 Mercury Zephyr pro street car.
I wish these videos were around back in early 90s, would have served me well and saved me money. I built my stock 302ci first with ported E7 head 1.94x1.6 vlvs and B303 cam along with all other bolton, high flow cat H and flowmaster catback, 3.73. Car was a blast much quicker/powerful than stock, this car was my daily driver and back then everyone saying you need high port velocity for street manners…blah blah blah. Kept everything the same then swapped out just heads for TW170 and WOW! Blown away at the gains I saw everywhere, traction was a serious issue now and this thing pulled fantastic from idle to new higher redline. With the “high velocity” hogged E7 i felt like power really kicked in @2200 with the B303 surprisingly that dropped to about 1800 when i installed the larger lower port velocity 170s. Learned my lesson a larger head (within reason) doesn’t affect down low or street manners and moving forward i will always install the best head that i can erring on larger side. Right before i sold the car i built a budget 302 that had stock cam and slapped on TWs, still shocked at the gains everywhere over the stock small high velocity port heads.
I drove a 60 over 302 with boss crank, 289 block, 289 rods, chevy pistons, file fit, world product heads, 351 cam , and slightly illegal carb at East Alabama Motor Speedway and got 7th place money. I had never sat my ass in a dirtcar before.
With a cam choice I didn't even need to see the video to know the outcome. That particular cam is for a lot of RPM and massive air flow. For the track this is a great build. But for drivability not much fun. The smaller head with the right cam intake carburetor matched, would make a fine little driver-friendly toy to play with
OK when you do the 351 turbo late model engine you had to notch the Pistons with aluminum heads and cam what head and cam combination would you recommend for that that you wouldn’t have to notch pistons and still achieve 1000 with a turbo.
@@richardholdener1727 Did you see that Engine masters 32v 5.4 based stroker that had 32 exhaust pipes, 2 for every cylinder? It produced some crazy power and hotrod wrote some about it
Building a Sbf Svo 351 408ci might go larger ci.. I found a set of tf high ports, 225 CNC used. I was thinking about using a valley Girdle and main girdle? What's you take wanna build a nice 351 Windsor Base motor. Any tips? What lift springs should I run?
So you have shown that a small head on so much motor is a silly thing to do. As others have said, put it all on a smaller motor with less cam. That will definitely show a torque winner.
I have a 351 Cleveland. After watching this I’m leaning more towards trickflow 225 heads vs the 195 heads. What do you guys think? Obviously this video is fantastic and answers a lot of questions . I can use some input. What would u guys do?
Thank you Richard I have watched many of your vids, but this is the first time commenting. I really appreciate how you get to the point. And show the data. Ty again Mark D
I'm 61, been hopping up these motors since I was 15. Went thru several die grinder doin backyard porting. Two things, cylinder heads have gotten so cheap buy a set. The only reason you'd use an 8.2 deck block is a 9.5 deck won't fit without surgery!! You're gonna get the heads anyway!! Just build a cheap 357 and have some fun!
Shouldn't that be 8.5 deck? I remember in the late 70s early 80s people saying I have 289 hipo heads. I have a 82 mustang GT bought it in 88. First thing I did bought a junkyard 351w, dart senior iron heads, comp roller cam, Edelbrock intake and Holley 750. That 4 speed lasted about a week. Put in a junkyard t5 , junkyard 373s out of a Ford ranger for the 7.5 rear end. Switch to ranger rotors and axles for 5 lug. That car was a blast never took it to the track, but it beat it's a lot of low 12 second cars on the street.
Nice tests Richard, would like to see more head port changes and it's effect - one you hear is throat % to valve 90-91% is best go to 93% "now you've just ruined the head " can't see it myself Also would the drip in TQ in the midrange be function of the camshaft specs ? I see alot of tests of older engines using tight lsa like your test but most LS tests are more in 112-114 lsa range - why is that ? - cam grinders stuck in 80's for the older engines ?
If it's possible to change the display settings so that when you add a new dyno result it doesn't change the colors of all the previous results that would make it easier/quicker to digest the new information. If it's not something that's easy to change,, no biggie.
but you ran a huge cam on all the heads,what about a cam most streetguys run HE,264/ 266/,its tailored more for the smaller port low end torque heads,hopefully you will do that test soon,???? still great shows
@richard holdener did you ever do the dr.j ported speed master A3 heads on a small motor? That is a ton of head on no cubes. Is it a total turd below 4k and a monster out to 8500? I know you ran them on the 400m but that's alot more motor to soak up those lazy sewer size heads. I have a set sitting here ported and flowed over 400 cfm. But the mind wonders what if.
You do a great job showing, what many get wrong but most importantly. You show just how important the combination, application, rpm range, etc is. Many never learn this for years and in many cases never learn period. They get stuck believing they know everything already. Which is the quickest way to become the least intelligent person in the room. Smart people never stop learning. Now that said here's my 2 favorite heads. First the original TFS street heat heads for a mild 302-351 build. Which I still have a set that I got new in the 90s. Then for full out race. The M2 race systems Neal202's heads. Had them on a 428 sbf nitrous combination which made 840+hp N/A this was back in early 2000's with 500+ single stage of nitrous that put the car well into the 7s back then. They also worked great will a single 100mm turbo. Fun times back then.
What I take from this video is: Although heads are an important part of the equation, they have so much less effect on power production than most people think. And the "as cast" AFR 185 Enforcers I plan to use on my stock 94 5.0 will be more than enough and definitely not too much. I'd like to see this same series of tests on the same 363" smallblock with "ideal" camshafts for each pair of heads.
This is by no means in any way are these typical results. That short block it's a big board short stroke. That cam is built for motors over 400ci . Just look at the power curve that motor in a street car would suck. You would need a 4,000 stall or a manual transmission.
I love your head comparison vids. Im getting the info together for a 460 build for our 65 mustang. Ill watch any ford motor build you put out!! Keep up the good work.
The bigger you can afford the better. More head you can run less cam good heads make any cam make more power seen heads give easy 50 wheel I feel like you spend once on heads because even if they are to big you can always grow into them with nitrous or boost or bigger cam it sounds weird but I would put 210 on a stock engine then grow around them
You have by far the most informative channel ive came across so far, thank you for all the hard work testing and all the info. ive been binge watching your videos for the past week. The info is awesome.
Interesting. 🤔. I wonder if these heads would perform the same if the vehicle in question was used primarily in low gear at part throttle? (Rock crawler).
Richard, with a 331, 10:1, Chinese knock off dart pro 1 195cc clone, XE270HR, GT40 tubular manifold, shorty headers. Engine made 315whp, 360-370 crank. Is the gt40 intake holding me back?
Richard, awesome videos and thanks for your work. I have that exact 363 shortblock but I use a custom ground Crane hydraulic roller, .629/.629 @ 226°/236° .050" I also use AFR 195cc Renegade heads. I've tested Air Gap and Victor in my application. My engine makes as much top end power, at a slightly lower RPM but more torque across the curve. My pulls are loaded at lower starting speeds. I wish your tests pulls started off idle and make more accurate "low speed" torque comparisons. With that testing, I think the smaller heads would perform as good or better and on a street application, be more responsive. Thanks for your work!
Here’s what confuses me. With a 351w for example stage 2 trickflow cam would I be better off going with the largest head I can buy regardless of “Brand” or name brand smaller head I can afford for let’s say $1600 would I be better off with a Flotek 205 or a AFR 185 for example ??
@@richardholdener1727 ah ok. I just didn’t know if all 185s were similar or what I assume is the low buck cylinder 185s would flow less so if I get a low buck 205 would prolly flow similar to like an AFR 185 but I’m no guru lol
i love this knowledge i’m in the works of building the 351w that’s in my 95 F150 i wanna double the power of stock i’m looking at 450+hp NA maybe some nitrous for the those 4 bangers that think there car is a race car just because of a fart can muffler
What's the bore size on that 363 ? The 302 must be shrouding the valves ? I suppose you had more compression in the 363 with that healthy cam ? Anyway , good test that little 363 could be a nice sleeper , especially with the laughing gas . 🤐
Wise choice to use the Parker Funnel Web intake. I used this on a similar sized SBF but with a set of AFR 185 heads. The intake is terrific, making great top end power with almost no loss down low. A great intake for the small block Ford's. These engines are surprisingly good in the larger sizes like the 363's.
Love the information, but there is a fan in the background. Love your channel, I have learned so much! Still trying to understand centrifugal super chargers vs. Turbo. How do they compare on small displacement vs large displacement.
@@richardholdener1727 Maybe to rephrase ... I was wondering if this larger bore (363) helped the two bigger heads in this test vs all four heads tested on a smaller 4.030 bore? As in the larger bore unshrouded the valves better making the larger heads produce more low end torque. Or that the two smaller heads were actually holding back this 363 just as they would a comparable cubic inch engine with a smaller bore?
Port volume seems like a strange metric to me, useful to compare otherwise identical heads, but meaningless in absolute terms. Thanks again for sharing so much.
Liked the video! Soon I'm going to assemble my 357 Windsor for my 94 flairside F150. I have a set of professionally ported 289 hypo heads with big valves, but I also have a set of new budget aluminum heads! I going with the aluminum just for the detonation issue. The heads are 60cc if I remember! The high energy 274 seems to work really well on your videos, but in your opinion will it be to much for that pig with 3.55s and my TCI c4?? I just got all this stuff lying round! I don't want to go steeper than 3.73's, I'm not buying an AOD! It's just a Sunday afternoon ride on country roads and remembered the old man! I'm 62!
@@richardholdener1727 thanks, 351 Windsors have fallen outta favor lately! Got that tall 9.5" deck, nearly 6" connecting rod for a good rod/stroke ratio, bell housing is the same! If only they had used the same crank as the Cleveland and put a good head on it!
At part throttle, do smaller intake runners give better throttle response? You're debunking all of these myths. I don't know what to believe anymore. Lol
Richard, Thanks for all the sbf info, I have been watching all your stuff. You do some great work. I have the Pro -1 195 as cast on my stock block 347 with a .543 intake/.563 exhaust 112 lsa, and 231/235@.050 (howards hydraulic roller) Rpm air gap and a quickfuel 680 carb in a 2800 pound car with 5 speed and 3.55's love driving it. Do not see a lot of Dart head tests as most ford guys go with the trick flow or afr. THANK YOU
I hit the like button at 19 seconds into the video. Was the compression ratio the same for all 4? Did all 4 heads have the same combustion chamber volume? The CR could be a variable that affected power. I would like to see this test on a bigger motor, say 400 inches, to see if the 220s are more appropriate for that size engine. And I would like to see a test of different compression ratios.
Low RPM power may be similar among the different heads at WOT but I'll bet throttle response of the smaller heads at lower/mid RPMs is better than the larger heads. This is important to street driven machines..
I think the big lift cam is killing the smaller heads. I also think a lift in the .5?? Lift area would be more practical to all 4 heads with the exception of all out drag racing
Have you ever run a test with the CLEVOR setup? It looks like Edelbrock is making the manifolds for it these days. Just curious, ought to be some good data there. Cheers!
Thumbs up for the same test on a 302.👍
Agree
Can you test it with different heads though. How about the AFR heads
Richard, you are easily the HARDEST WORKING guy on youtube, or on the planet.. wow thanks for all your hard work to teach me !!
Very cool. I've been waiting for this video
Outstanding stuff Richard!. Really appreciate the education. You guys helped me dyno tune my 347 a year and a half ago - and I truly appreciate the knowledge and skill it takes to do this, and do it right. Still loving my motor, (347, TF Twisted Wedge 195 heads, 444HP/436 TQ - a "square motor" ...your words...!) One thought on each of these head options - do you think there's a "sweet spot" for each head, given a matched cam combination? I'm wondering if you can get to a max combination for each.
Keep the videos coming - I know it takes tons of time, but I'll devour every single one!
T Web I started with what I wanted the result to be. I wanted a flat torque curve low that lasted through the rpm range for drive ability. From there, just research and some of my own experience. The result isn’t the biggest overall HP number, but amazing torque and drive ability. I can share the recipe if you like.
Man, I appreciate your work. This info would be so expensive to gather by trial and error
Always great content from holdener!
Good heads on a 302 that eventually would go on a stroker seems like the most common way people would do it. Budget builders usually just start improving what they already have.
Great video,really enjoy these myth buster style videos. Would definitely like to see the same test on the 302.
Be neat to see how the old school stuff stacks up to the new stuff. Old high ports, twisted wedge, Canfields 192cc ( the ones everyone says crack... which mine are holding up fine on my street car), gt40X, etc..
Awesome content! Love this channel!
The Goldilocks mystery...Flow style.
I’m just here learning, pay me no mind.
I would love to see a plain 351w head shootout. From a afr 165 to a 225.
Hello Richard like say thanks for the video. Wow that's a lot of cam lift.The piston must have a lot of valve relief to take that much lift . What was the heads flowing at ? Because why would you need that much valve lift in the cam if the heads doesn't flow that high. And you would of thought the RPMs would have been higher with that duration. But second thought if it's a solid roller the valve gap would change the rpm
Be good to see valve sizes, throat size, min CSA, average CSA etc and flow numbers to compare the actual efficiency. a hand ported 195-205cc would be where id lean
I was thinking that too, a mildly hand ported 195 may be spot on.
cool video..i would like to see some old F,E or even old y block tests done
YES to BOTH
Great videos Keep them coming. Would love to see test test on yuor 496 BBC!
Would be nice to see BSFC numbers for this direct comparison, do the 170 heads make a bit less down low for a lot less fuel ? This is a big consideration for a daily driver
I would think if were concerned about fuel usage then its better to not run at WOT like this test. The WOT test also shows no part-throttle power differences or throttle response-both of which maybe be better with a smaller head
@@richardholdener1727 agreed but in consideration of wallet impact, how much can you save on fuel bill with a little trade of in top end hp was my curiosity, budget only goes so far for some.
I’d like to see the power difference between AFR 165 and the AFR 185 on a stock cubic inch sbf 302
very minimal with a mild cam
too much manifold and carbie for the first two heads. Possible cam too. a more appropriate setup for them would have seen more bottom end toque. But probably less power.
I subbed. Hoping for a 302 test
lots of 302 stuff up
Hi Richard. Would a edelbrock dual plane performer rpm air gap #7521 fit and work with this combo. Have a dart iron eagle, same speck bore and stroke. No cam yet or heads. Was thinking 195-205 afr. Now, not so sure🤔I can only run 1/58 log tube 3inch collector headers on my 72 maverick street strip warrior. Any advise is very much appreciated. Legend.
use the 1 5/8 headers, and air gap works fine
How much nitrous did you spray? Great Vid!
on what?
Oh, and I wanted to ask if BBF FE ' s interest you ?
yes-have not built one though
Doesn't look like you could go wrong with any of them, especially if you're keeping the revs below 6k.
My cool Ford with an LS3?
my confusion comes from combustion chamber shape.
Chamber shapes make a burn difference, which is often greatly affected by BORE. Bore also affects flow.
C o m b i n a t i o n.
Your results WILL vary.
Yeah I’d love to see the same head test done on a 302 to see how the smaller airflow requirement effects how the heads work!
I did that
@@richardholdener1727 Upload!!! 🤪
Curious what the results would be with a typical street cammed 302 and these 4 heads. I’ve a.ways wondered if they would respond like LS engines, using short duration, high lift cams.
170 is really large for a stock b/s 302 cid and street cam. For street cars I have better driveability with 144-150 intakes AND a 110* cam.
How much time do you spend above 5,000 rpm???
@@richardholdener1727 Have you done a test on how much compression affects power output? If not that would be a very interesting test. It would also be interesting to see how much compression affects boosted power output. I know more compression equals more power but how much more and is it linear? Thanks
Not enough SBF stuff on youtube. Thank you for this! More head shoot-outs!! Somebody should test a bunch of the ebay cheapos just for yucks.
I ran Speedmaster heads
Honestly try finding Pontiac or cad 500 or BBF. The SBF gets more attention, not dogging just letting you know some of us are just left out. He did cover the 400m which was super cool. If you want sbf content I recommend the Aussies and Boss 302 stuff because the Windsor pattern head is the biggest downside to the sbf.
@@compted10 I will agree that the canted valve stuff is much better however it is just not as common. I have to think that's due to cost.
@@compted10 If you're interested, Richard dynoed a BBF less than a week ago.
@@richardholdener1727 I missed it did they perform good
Would love to see a compari$on of cheape$t heads cams intakes for us low buck guys in tough times. Even Elgin Mellings Pioneer etc scrape the bottom please. Thanks for all you do.
Let's go crazy and see if you can actually bolt an LS head to a 302 and make it work? You wanna see some views lol?
Thank you for the ford content, interesting results.
You are doing Hotrod Gods work. Keep it up, Rich. The subs are coming and you deserve so many more.
The Gods of Internal Combustion certainly do smile upon Richard.
Comparing two heads from the same manufacturer? Ok boomer.
@@DeliriumTremensTWU
Man...you really missed the point on this video bud.
Would be interesting to see some part-throttle and tip-in performance between some of these head and intake combos.
That is next to impossible on a water brake dyno. Also the Dyno is not like a car with how the load is applied. It's probably more like a jet boat if I had to guess.
tip in doesn't happen on the engine dyno
Part throttle?? Naah none.
NO PREP
👍👍👍👍
Exactly.
We dontbrace nor drive dynos !!!😁😁😁
That's possible on a chassis dyno , but it's no fun wrenching a bunch of heads on and off an engine in a car usually.
Your killing it with the sbf videos by far the best channel on TH-cam
Would love to see a similar test on a 302. This test showed that you didn’t put “too much” head on the engine. How much is too much on a 302? Is there such thing?
It’s been done several times with MM&FF. It depends on what you are doing. If it’s just a mild NA street build a 170cc head is plenty adequate. If you planning an all out NA race engine with solid lifters, big cam and 9000 plus rpms then a CNC machined 205s would be better choice. Cam heads and intake must work together. So many guys out there that miss match parts. Several years ago I street raced a guy that put roller rockers valve springs and a aftermarket cam in his foxbody. My foxbody was bone stock other than I bumped up the timing to 14 degrees and took the air silencer out. I blew his doors off in the 1/4. His car lost a lot of torque down low. Car sounded good with the choppy idle. But it was a pig till 3500rpms. Good example of miss matched parts. Even with the cam power would fall sharply after 5500 rpms. The reason? Stock heads and stock long runner intake was not designed to provide adequate air beyond 5500 rpms when the cam shaft was designed to make power all the way to 6500rpms. After riding in his car I could feel how much torque the car lost compared to mine down low. The guy was pretty bummed out that he lost to a basically stock car. But we both learned a lesson from it.
Thanks for Doing more ford stuff!!!!
Maybe you should do the same test on a bigger stroker, maybe a 427. Then I believe you would see the changes in the power curves you were talking about. I have the 210cc CNC Pro1s on my 417" Windsor stroker with quite a bit bigger solid roller cam. Never had it on a dyno, but it is pretty stout in my 79 Mercury Zephyr pro street car.
I wish these videos were around back in early 90s, would have served me well and saved me money. I built my stock 302ci first with ported E7 head 1.94x1.6 vlvs and B303 cam along with all other bolton, high flow cat H and flowmaster catback, 3.73. Car was a blast much quicker/powerful than stock, this car was my daily driver and back then everyone saying you need high port velocity for street manners…blah blah blah. Kept everything the same then swapped out just heads for TW170 and WOW! Blown away at the gains I saw everywhere, traction was a serious issue now and this thing pulled fantastic from idle to new higher redline. With the “high velocity” hogged E7 i felt like power really kicked in @2200 with the B303 surprisingly that dropped to about 1800 when i installed the larger lower port velocity 170s. Learned my lesson a larger head (within reason) doesn’t affect down low or street manners and moving forward i will always install the best head that i can erring on larger side. Right before i sold the car i built a budget 302 that had stock cam and slapped on TWs, still shocked at the gains everywhere over the stock small high velocity port heads.
I drove a 60 over 302 with boss crank, 289 block, 289 rods, chevy pistons, file fit, world product heads, 351 cam , and slightly illegal carb at East Alabama Motor Speedway and got 7th place money. I had never sat my ass in a dirtcar before.
With a cam choice I didn't even need to see the video to know the outcome. That particular cam is for a lot of RPM and massive air flow. For the track this is a great build. But for drivability not much fun. The smaller head with the right cam intake carburetor matched, would make a fine little driver-friendly toy to play with
Seems like you ran out of camshaft by the time you put on the 225cc heads which might explain the limited power gains over the 210cc heads.
OK when you do the 351 turbo late model engine you had to notch the Pistons with aluminum heads and cam what head and cam combination would you recommend for that that you wouldn’t have to notch pistons and still achieve 1000 with a turbo.
Fords B 4v heads have a combined intake port volume that exceeds any other production 4.6 4v heads. I believe its a combined 214cc of intake port!
individual ports don't act the same
@@richardholdener1727 Did you see that Engine masters 32v 5.4 based stroker that had 32 exhaust pipes, 2 for every cylinder? It produced some crazy power and hotrod wrote some about it
Awesome info! Could you tell me what the Compression ratio was on the 220 head when you tested?
Building a Sbf Svo 351 408ci might go larger ci.. I found a set of tf high ports, 225 CNC used. I was thinking about using a valley Girdle and main girdle? What's you take wanna build a nice 351 Windsor Base motor. Any tips? What lift springs should I run?
please see the 408 video
So you have shown that a small head on so much motor is a silly thing to do. As others have said, put it all on a smaller motor with less cam. That will definitely show a torque winner.
I would not be happy with that power out of a 351 w. You guys got something wrong.
Hey Richard can you make a video talking about a cheap reliable 1000HP LS engine cost break down?
cheap, reliable and 1000 hp-pick any 2
@@richardholdener1727 lol
Good data right there that can be applied to any engine. Thanks for the tests.
Could you do a boss 302 and 351 clevor build? But test them with the windsor/ stock heads first?
Hey Richard. I like your Cubbyhouse.
I have a 351 Cleveland. After watching this I’m leaning more towards trickflow 225 heads vs the 195 heads. What do you guys think? Obviously this video is fantastic and answers a lot of questions . I can use some input. What would u guys do?
Thank you Richard
I have watched many of your vids, but this is the first time commenting.
I really appreciate how you get to the point.
And show the data.
Ty again
Mark D
You are very welcome
I'm 61, been hopping up these motors since I was 15. Went thru several die grinder doin backyard porting. Two things, cylinder heads have gotten so cheap buy a set. The only reason you'd use an 8.2 deck block is a 9.5 deck won't fit without surgery!! You're gonna get the heads anyway!! Just build a cheap 357 and have some fun!
Shouldn't that be 8.5 deck? I remember in the late 70s early 80s people saying I have 289 hipo heads. I have a 82 mustang GT bought it in 88. First thing I did bought a junkyard 351w, dart senior iron heads, comp roller cam, Edelbrock intake and Holley 750. That 4 speed lasted about a week. Put in a junkyard t5 , junkyard 373s out of a Ford ranger for the 7.5 rear end. Switch to ranger rotors and axles for 5 lug. That car was a blast never took it to the track, but it beat it's a lot of low 12 second cars on the street.
Nice tests Richard, would like to see more head port changes and it's effect - one you hear is throat % to valve 90-91% is best go to 93% "now you've just ruined the head " can't see it myself
Also would the drip in TQ in the midrange be function of the camshaft specs ? I see alot of tests of older engines using tight lsa like your test but most LS tests are more in 112-114 lsa range - why is that ? - cam grinders stuck in 80's for the older engines ?
tighter lsa can add power-but hurt drivability and idle
What's the best cylinder head?!?!............................It depends.
I would like to hear that little Ford spin up to 7 grand!
It was awesome
If it's possible to change the display settings so that when you add a new dyno result it doesn't change the colors of all the previous results that would make it easier/quicker to digest the new information. If it's not something that's easy to change,, no biggie.
but you ran a huge cam on all the heads,what about a cam most streetguys run HE,264/ 266/,its tailored more for the smaller port low end torque heads,hopefully you will do that test soon,???? still great shows
they do the same thing
@richard holdener did you ever do the dr.j ported speed master A3 heads on a small motor? That is a ton of head on no cubes. Is it a total turd below 4k and a monster out to 8500? I know you ran them on the 400m but that's alot more motor to soak up those lazy sewer size heads. I have a set sitting here ported and flowed over 400 cfm. But the mind wonders what if.
I have not-but look at LS3 heads-they work
You do a great job showing, what many get wrong but most importantly. You show just how important the combination, application, rpm range, etc is. Many never learn this for years and in many cases never learn period. They get stuck believing they know everything already. Which is the quickest way to become the least intelligent person in the room. Smart people never stop learning.
Now that said here's my 2 favorite heads. First the original TFS street heat heads for a mild 302-351 build. Which I still have a set that I got new in the 90s. Then for full out race. The M2 race systems Neal202's heads. Had them on a 428 sbf nitrous combination which made 840+hp N/A this was back in early 2000's with 500+ single stage of nitrous that put the car well into the 7s back then. They also worked great will a single 100mm turbo. Fun times back then.
What I take from this video is: Although heads are an important part of the equation, they have so much less effect on power production than most people think. And the "as cast" AFR 185 Enforcers I plan to use on my stock 94 5.0 will be more than enough and definitely not too much.
I'd like to see this same series of tests on the same 363" smallblock with "ideal" camshafts for each pair of heads.
Do you think the difference between the 210s and the 220s Would have been a lot bigger on a larger cubic inch motor like a 427 Windsor?
on a combo that could take advantage of the airflow, the gains should increase
Did he ever say what the compression ratio was?
This is by no means in any way are these typical results. That short block it's a big board short stroke. That cam is built for motors over 400ci . Just look at the power curve that motor in a street car would suck. You would need a 4,000 stall or a manual transmission.
this is typical
Dart block 363 with AFR heads and fuel injection = 550 hp. Good enough for me.
What's the setup? Which computer are you running? Please.
More 427w ford stuff. What ring Gap was in that engine
.0055 per 1 inch of bore
I love your head comparison vids. Im getting the info together for a 460 build for our 65 mustang. Ill watch any ford motor build you put out!! Keep up the good work.
I absolutely love these videos, please don't ever stop what you are doing.
The bigger you can afford the better. More head you can run less cam good heads make any cam make more power seen heads give easy 50 wheel I feel like you spend once on heads because even if they are to big you can always grow into them with nitrous or boost or bigger cam it sounds weird but I would put 210 on a stock engine then grow around them
better heads are always a good idea
You have by far the most informative channel ive came across so far, thank you for all the hard work testing and all the info. ive been binge watching your videos for the past week. The info is awesome.
54k subscribers! Were getting that exponential growth now!
Choo choo for the hype train
351
Interesting. 🤔. I wonder if these heads would perform the same if the vehicle in question was used primarily in low gear at part throttle? (Rock crawler).
Really curious about the 302 test now.
Richard, with a 331, 10:1, Chinese knock off dart pro 1 195cc clone, XE270HR, GT40 tubular manifold, shorty headers. Engine made 315whp, 360-370 crank.
Is the gt40 intake holding me back?
yes
@@richardholdener1727 what’s a good option for this combo?
Richard, awesome videos and thanks for your work.
I have that exact 363 shortblock but I use a custom ground Crane hydraulic roller,
.629/.629 @ 226°/236° .050"
I also use AFR 195cc Renegade heads.
I've tested Air Gap and Victor in my application.
My engine makes as much top end power, at a slightly lower RPM but more torque across the curve.
My pulls are loaded at lower starting speeds. I wish your tests pulls started off idle and make more accurate "low speed" torque comparisons.
With that testing, I think the smaller heads would perform as good or better and on a street application, be more responsive.
Thanks for your work!
Which heads work best for low end (towing) torque?
smaller port for part throttle but very minimal differences at WOT down low
What was the compression?
Here’s what confuses me. With a 351w for example stage 2 trickflow cam would I be better off going with the largest head I can buy regardless of “Brand” or name brand smaller head I can afford for let’s say $1600 would I be better off with a Flotek 205 or a AFR 185 for example ??
never tested flotek
@@richardholdener1727 ah ok. I just didn’t know if all 185s were similar or what I assume is the low buck cylinder 185s would flow less so if I get a low buck 205 would prolly flow similar to like an AFR 185 but I’m no guru lol
Your videos are awesome! You are helping the community immensely! I'm glad to see all engines represented.
i love this knowledge i’m in the works of building the 351w that’s in my 95 F150 i wanna double the power of stock i’m looking at 450+hp NA maybe some nitrous for the those 4 bangers that think there car is a race car just because of a fart can muffler
Thanks for doing the videos Richard. I try to watch them all. I have learned a lot from them.
This was an awesome test. Let’s see it on the 302!!!! And a intake test on both, the 363 and the 302!!!! Thanks Richard, love these videos!
Why do you repeat things so much? Listen to your own vids.
I can't watch myself-I repeat stuff too much
What's the bore size on that 363 ? The 302 must be shrouding the valves ? I suppose you had more compression in the 363 with that healthy cam ? Anyway , good test that little 363 could be a nice sleeper , especially with the laughing gas . 🤐
4.125 bore
@@richardholdener1727 thanks man . So what do you think , FE ?
Waiting for the 302 test
Wise choice to use the Parker Funnel Web intake. I used this on a similar sized SBF but with a set of AFR 185 heads. The intake is terrific, making great top end power with almost no loss down low. A great intake for the small block Ford's. These engines are surprisingly good in the larger sizes like the 363's.
Love the information, but there is a fan in the background. Love your channel, I have learned so much! Still trying to understand centrifugal super chargers vs. Turbo. How do they compare on small displacement vs large displacement.
I'd like to see a similar test on a 4" bore factory block. Wonder if the bigger slugs help the torque numbers down low on the bigger heads?
more displacement and compression (you get both) will help torque down low with every head
@@richardholdener1727 Maybe to rephrase ... I was wondering if this larger bore (363) helped the two bigger heads in this test vs all four heads tested on a smaller 4.030 bore? As in the larger bore unshrouded the valves better making the larger heads produce more low end torque. Or that the two smaller heads were actually holding back this 363 just as they would a comparable cubic inch engine with a smaller bore?
Port volume seems like a strange metric to me, useful to compare otherwise identical heads, but meaningless in absolute terms. Thanks again for sharing so much.
the heads are advertised by manufacturers as such
Liked the video! Soon I'm going to assemble my 357 Windsor for my 94 flairside F150. I have a set of professionally ported 289 hypo heads with big valves, but I also have a set of new budget aluminum heads! I going with the aluminum just for the detonation issue. The heads are 60cc if I remember! The high energy 274 seems to work really well on your videos, but in your opinion will it be to much for that pig with 3.55s and my TCI c4?? I just got all this stuff lying round! I don't want to go steeper than 3.73's, I'm not buying an AOD! It's just a Sunday afternoon ride on country roads and remembered the old man! I'm 62!
IT WILL WORK
@@richardholdener1727 thanks, 351 Windsors have fallen outta favor lately! Got that tall 9.5" deck, nearly 6" connecting rod for a good rod/stroke ratio, bell housing is the same! If only they had used the same crank as the Cleveland and put a good head on it!
Put the biggest head on it and shoot gas on it till it can catch its breath!! It'll kick the training wheels off from there!
At part throttle, do smaller intake runners give better throttle response? You're debunking all of these myths. I don't know what to believe anymore. Lol
Yeah, the same test on a 302 would be sweet. Could you get power #s at lower rpm too? For the people into off-roading, cruising, and towing.
We need to know
With the 363 the 210 heads are about perfect. With a 408-427 obviously the 220 heads would make more without a loss of torque with the added cubes.
Richard, Thanks for all the sbf info, I have been watching all your stuff. You do some great work. I have the Pro -1 195 as cast on my stock block 347 with a .543 intake/.563 exhaust 112 lsa, and 231/235@.050 (howards hydraulic roller) Rpm air gap and a quickfuel 680 carb in a 2800 pound car with 5 speed and 3.55's love driving it. Do not see a lot of Dart head tests as most ford guys go with the trick flow or afr. THANK YOU
I hit the like button at 19 seconds into the video. Was the compression ratio the same for all 4? Did all 4 heads have the same combustion chamber volume? The CR could be a variable that affected power. I would like to see this test on a bigger motor, say 400 inches, to see if the 220s are more appropriate for that size engine. And I would like to see a test of different compression ratios.
Low RPM power may be similar among the different heads at WOT but I'll bet throttle response of the smaller heads at lower/mid RPMs is better than the larger heads. This is important to street driven machines..
I think the big lift cam is killing the smaller heads. I also think a lift in the .5?? Lift area would be more practical to all 4 heads with the exception of all out drag racing
Have you ever run a test with the CLEVOR setup? It looks like Edelbrock is making the manifolds for it these days. Just curious, ought to be some good data there.
Cheers!
These tests have been done previously on 302 and the 195 heads end up being the best overall unless you're going above 7000 RPMs
I tend to agree and my actual tests confirm...even with smaller cammed 363.