C4 Tech/Performance L98 Corvette and LT1 Corvette Technical Info, Internal Engine, External Engine

406 head comparison E-TEC 200 vs AFR 220

 
Old 09-02-2015, 10:09 AM
  #1  
bjankuski
CF Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Member Since: Sep 2001
Location: Glenbeulah Wi
Posts: 3,228
Thanked 176 Times in 161 Posts
Default 406 head comparison E-TEC 200 vs AFR 220

I was looking to pick up some power on my street driven 406 6-speed 1988 Firebird (I know it is not a Vette but the engine management is the same so it applies). My goal was to have the same street manors as the current combination (Car drives great, good power, nice street manors, good gas mileage 22+ MPG on highway with the air on) and run mid 11's in the 1/4 at 116+ MPH on a 80 degree day. The current car (E-TEC 200 heads) has run a best of 12.00 at 114 MPH in good weather. The engine combination is as listed and is the same between both tests besides the head change:

-406 SBC
-10:1 compression
-Comp cams 280 XR HR13 cam 280/288 230/236 @.050, .576/.570 lift on a 113 LSA
-3" MAF sensor
-1-3/4 LT headers to a single 3" exhaust (No room in this car for dual)
-HSR intake for vortec heads with E-TEC 200 cylinder heads 64cc
-HSR intake with 1206 port for AFR 220 cylinder heads 65cc, competition ports
-6 speed car
-Pump gas

I am of the belief (general statement, other factors do come into play) that the better flowing the head, is the more power you will produce. I am also under the opinion that it is hard to get too big of a head on a 406 CI engine, it needs as much air as you can feed it. That being said here are the results of my head swap.

All numbers are rear wheel readings:

The head swap netted me approximately 70 RWHP (374 vs. 444) increase and a 30 RWTQ increase with almost no low end change in power. I have attached the dyno runs with comparison runs layed over each other.

Just some observations about power left on the table. My 3" air intake is too small, I had 2.8" of vacuum in the intake at WOT. My exhaust is too small the dual headers that dump into the single 3" exhaust pipe had 6.5 PSI of back pressure. Some day in the future I will change these two restrictions and I expect to see another 30 RWHP increase.

Thoughts?








bjankuski is offline  
Old 09-02-2015, 11:03 AM
  #2  
Tom400CFI
CF Senior Member
 
Tom400CFI's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2004
Location: Park City Utah
Posts: 13,930
Thanked 591 Times in 525 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bjankuski View Post
Thoughts?
Yes....


Originally Posted by bjankuski View Post
The head swap netted me approximately 70 RWHP (374 vs. 444) increase and a 30 RWTQ increase
WOW! I'd expect 70 hp increase over STOCK heads...but 70 over an aftermarket, 200cc head is incredible, IMO!


Originally Posted by bjankuski View Post
Just some observations about power left on the table. My 3" air intake is too small, I had 2.8" of vacuum in the intake at WOT.
WOW...that is a lot of restriction! Wow.


Originally Posted by bjankuski View Post
My exhaust is too small the dual headers that dump into the single 3" exhaust pipe had 6.5 PSI of back pressure.
WOW, again! That is a lot of back pressure! I can't believe your engine is putting down 444 to the wheels on a Mustang with those limitations. I have no doubt that you'll pick up a large gain w/an exhaust and intake. It will virtually be like adding FI to your current set up!

Over all thoughts? Killer gains. I agree w/your thinking on heads, but the gains over another aftermarket head are fantastic.
Tom400CFI is offline  
Old 09-02-2015, 12:34 PM
  #3  
dizwiz24
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Sep 2001
Location: NEwhere Ohio
Posts: 9,921
Thanked 67 Times in 66 Posts
Default

Love the scientific back to back, heads-only comparison

Thanks for sharing.

That is an unbelievable amount of back pressure.

Yes, I think you are correct in where the bottlenecks are.
dizwiz24 is offline  
Old 09-02-2015, 01:40 PM
  #4  
Matatk
CF Senior Member
 
Matatk's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2007
Location: SW Chicago Burbs IL
Posts: 1,423
Thanks: 0
Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
Default

That is an impressive increase! Very nice and thanks for posting the results with actual data to back it up.
Matatk is offline  
Old 09-02-2015, 03:33 PM
  #5  
dizwiz24
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Sep 2001
Location: NEwhere Ohio
Posts: 9,921
Thanked 67 Times in 66 Posts
Default

IMHO, switching to afr heads on an ltx or sbc (and getting rid of the crappy l98 intake) negates the benefits of an lsx swap.
dizwiz24 is offline  
Old 09-02-2015, 03:45 PM
  #6  
cuisinartvette
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: Valencia Ca.
Posts: 67,880
Thanked 1,113 Times in 1,024 Posts
St. Jude Donor '05
Default

Agree, that is a huge gain and knowing theres more on the table if you feel like getting after it....theres some oval almost flat exh tubing thing 1989 transam has it on his but can be pretty pricy.

Glad you posted this, good info for all sbc guys Vette or not.
Would love to trade in my Darts some day for some AFRs...or a new head that Tony has out (its friggin insane).

We live in a great era of tech where one can make outstanding power with a sbc....growing up getting 400hp out of a 350 required quite a bit!

Nice job!
cuisinartvette is offline  
Old 09-02-2015, 05:25 PM
  #7  
pologreen1
CF Senior Member
 
pologreen1's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2007
Posts: 15,828
Thanked 196 Times in 187 Posts
Default

Awesome. Shows the AFR220 can really flow some air.

Jim will love to see this.
pologreen1 is offline  
Old 09-02-2015, 07:33 PM
  #8  
1985 Corvette
CF Senior Member
 
1985 Corvette's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2004
Location: Jacksonville Florida
Posts: 4,270
Thanks: 0
Thanked 50 Times in 38 Posts
Default

Lot of gain off the head swap. Gotta love the 406. Ron, what new head is Tony cooking up?
1985 Corvette is offline  
Old 09-03-2015, 12:06 AM
  #9  
blackozvet
CF Senior Member
 
blackozvet's Avatar
 
Member Since: Nov 2009
Location: Adelaide South Australia
Posts: 1,938
Thanked 79 Times in 70 Posts
Default

you realise that as an Edelbrock head owner you have made me very sad !

how does it drive on the street after the change ?
blackozvet is offline  
Old 09-03-2015, 01:00 AM
  #10  
Widebody
CF Senior Member
 
Widebody's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2002
Location: Burlingame Ca.
Posts: 283
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bjankuski View Post
I was looking to pick up some power on my street driven 406 6-speed 1988 Firebird (I know it is not a Vette but the engine management is the same so it applies). My goal was to have the same street manors as the current combination (Car drives great, good power, nice street manors, good gas mileage 22+ MPG on highway with the air on) and run mid 11's in the 1/4 at 116+ MPH on a 80 degree day. The current car (E-TEC 200 heads) has run a best of 12.00 at 114 MPH in good weather. The engine combination is as listed and is the same between both tests besides the head change:

-406 SBC
-10:1 compression
-Comp cams 280 XR HR13 cam 280/288 230/236 @.050, .576/.570 lift on a 113 LSA
-3" MAF sensor
-1-3/4 LT headers to a single 3" exhaust (No room in this car for dual)
-HSR intake for vortec heads with E-TEC 200 cylinder heads 64cc
-HSR intake with 1206 port for AFR 220 cylinder heads 65cc, competition ports
-6 speed car
-Pump gas

I am of the belief (general statement, other factors do come into play) that the better flowing the head, is the more power you will produce. I am also under the opinion that it is hard to get too big of a head on a 406 CI engine, it needs as much air as you can feed it. That being said here are the results of my head swap.

All numbers are rear wheel readings:

The head swap netted me approximately 70 RWHP (374 vs. 444) increase and a 30 RWTQ increase with almost no low end change in power. I have attached the dyno runs with comparison runs layed over each other.

Just some observations about power left on the table. My 3" air intake is too small, I had 2.8" of vacuum in the intake at WOT. My exhaust is too small the dual headers that dump into the single 3" exhaust pipe had 6.5 PSI of back pressure. Some day in the future I will change these two restrictions and I expect to see another 30 RWHP increase.

Thoughts?








Thoughts? Great results!! And thank you for sharing info that BELONGS in C4 tech and performance!! 100% agree that a better flowing head will make more power, all things being equal.
Btw, back in the late 80's I had a 82 Z/28 with a 415" motor. I managed to run to 3" pipes down the passenger side tunnel stacked one on top of the other. Went over the axle and had the double offset mufflers stacked. Sort of mounted like the stock tranverse muffler with both pipes exiting on the drivers side rear. Looked like a V6 exhaust on steroids with 2 3" tailpipes. IDK if I still have any pics though.
Widebody is offline  
Old 09-03-2015, 09:34 AM
  #11  
Aardwolf
CF Senior Member
 
Aardwolf's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 2004
Location: Fremont, WI
Posts: 10,833
Thanked 25 Times in 22 Posts
Default

Very nice Brian! We will have to line them up at WIR again. I might have to borrow your tires to win from now on!
Aardwolf is offline  
Old 09-03-2015, 01:37 PM
  #12  
bjankuski
CF Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Member Since: Sep 2001
Location: Glenbeulah Wi
Posts: 3,228
Thanked 176 Times in 161 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by blackozvet View Post

how does it drive on the street after the change ?
The car drives well, it has an aggressive idle but as soon as you are off idle it is fairly smooth. I cruise at 60 mph in overdrive at 1450 RPM and the car drives well.
bjankuski is offline  
Old 09-03-2015, 04:31 PM
  #13  
Orr89rocz
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Jul 2006
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 1,080
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bjankuski View Post
The car drives well, it has an aggressive idle but as soon as you are off idle it is fairly smooth. I cruise at 60 mph in overdrive at 1450 RPM and the car drives well.
Yeah thats a nice cam but alittle small in a 406 imo but with great heads and intake small cams work.
I would have guessed 50 hp but 70 is really great! The 220 head is a great street strip head for 400" motors! Just shows how weak the etec 200's are in stock form on large motors. Tired of seeing big motor builds and people using typical 190-200cc small heads. 210-227 works great for big inch motors
Orr89rocz is offline  
Old 09-03-2015, 05:00 PM
  #14  
C4vettrn
CF Senior Member
 
C4vettrn's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2009
Location: Ft Wayne IN
Posts: 1,014
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

So what is the max size head for a 383ci LT-1 with 224/230 duration and 530 lift 112 lsa. ? I would like to get at least 500 hp at the motor. I have port matched stock heads with 2:02/1:96 valves and mild bowl work, springs, roller rockers, etc. I know I am falling off hp at higher rpms. Is my cam large enough for 200cc + heads?
drive train is built 4l60, 3,000 stall and dana 44 with 3:73's.
C4vettrn is offline  
Old 09-03-2015, 07:20 PM
  #15  
96 lt-4
CF Senior Member
 
96 lt-4's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2005
Location: Angier nc
Posts: 1,847
Thanked 20 Times in 17 Posts
Default

I had AFR 195's on my 383 LT4 with a 233*/236* cam and it pulled hard all the way to fuel shutoff at 6800 rpm if I wanted it to.I could have made more power with more cam and larger heads but it was a street car and manners played a part in my choice.
96 lt-4 is offline  
Old 09-03-2015, 10:17 PM
  #16  
bjankuski
CF Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Member Since: Sep 2001
Location: Glenbeulah Wi
Posts: 3,228
Thanked 176 Times in 161 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Orr89rocz View Post
Yeah thats a nice cam but alittle small in a 406 imo but with great heads and intake small cams work.
I agree with you, I picked the cam because I drive the car every day 50 miles round trip to work and I wanted something that drove well but still had good power. This cam fits that bill, sure it could have been bigger but I wanted a smooth easy cruising combination. My other cars have the wilder cams and more aggressive combinations, but they are not my daily driver.
bjankuski is offline  
Old 09-03-2015, 11:08 PM
  #17  
tpi 421 vette
CF Senior Member
 
tpi 421 vette's Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: S.L.C. UT
Posts: 2,896
Thanked 23 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Nice work Brian. I am glad to see the AFR's work out for you.
tpi 421 vette is offline  
Old 09-03-2015, 11:13 PM
  #18  
cuisinartvette
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Oct 2004
Location: Valencia Ca.
Posts: 67,880
Thanked 1,113 Times in 1,024 Posts
St. Jude Donor '05
Default

Thats a fun drive to work!

Dyno sheet oughta leave a few scratching their heads (says 350 on it)
cuisinartvette is offline  
Old 09-04-2015, 07:31 AM
  #19  
bjankuski
CF Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Member Since: Sep 2001
Location: Glenbeulah Wi
Posts: 3,228
Thanked 176 Times in 161 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by cuisinartvette View Post
Dyno sheet oughta leave a few scratching their heads (says 350 on it)
That was the combination when I first dynoed the car back in 2008 on that dyno. Since then I have made a few changes!
bjankuski is offline  
 


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 406 head comparison E-TEC 200 vs AFR 220


Sponsored Ads
Vendor Directory

Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: