MMS 220 heads....Info, Pics, and discussion inside
03-25-2015, 01:46 AM
#1
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
MMS 220 heads....Info, Pics, and discussion inside
Guys,
This is the "official" thread discussing the launch of what I feel is a very exciting new product.
I will get the apology out of the way now for the delay in sharing this information.....numerous folks have inquired (some numerous times), but my time is spread extremely thin of late and you juggle the time designing and building the product with the time you would like to spend talking about it....LOL
That being said gets us right to one of the first topics that should come as good news.....the product is available now.....in fact this past week I shipped the first half a dozen sets or so and have more in the works as well. Some of these builds are clearly more long term projects while others I suspect will be done alot sooner. Hoping for some independent results to start rolling in the next 3-6 weeks or so.
I also have a 347 forged shortblock being built for me by Golen Engines (I simply have no time), and I plan to use that engine to showcase the merits of the new design as well (on the engine dyno). I anticipate the lead time on that to be around the same (3-6 weeks) as I'm still awaiting the arrival of the shortblock. I may test a small cam (no flycut) and a more aggressive medium-plus sized cam (mid 230's @ .050) in the same engine to accurately show the trade offs and gains associated with a larger cam in the same exact engine. I may go 10 degrees larger in fact (a 227 intake lobe and a 237 int lobe potentially)....something notable but not over the top where the drivability becomes really poor. The first cam representing a great street/strip cam....the latter a great strip/street cam with enough civility to actually consider it. Pick your poison based on the type of build/application you have in mind knowing that flycutting or aftermarket pistons will be a must for the larger grind.
What was my objective with this design?? A few things come to mind that were permeating my brain during the development of this head. First and foremost, I wanted a head that would really work well on a 3.900 bore which I feel still represents a large chunk of the aftermarket in spite of it not being in production in close to a decade. That means minding the diameter of the intake valve was/is important.....also the cross section of the head needed to be modest to get the air speed where it needed to be at a reasonable RPM (assuming a 346/347 based combination). Having enough flow to also feed the newer crop of larger based 6.0 and 6.2 liter engines as well as the natural growth of a 346 to 383 CID through the use of a relatively affordable stroker crank was also an important design criteria. That meant I was hoping to see a legit 320 CFM's or so through a head with a modest sized valve and a modest cross section. Keep in mind guys a stock LS6 head is 210 - 212 cc.....most OEM ported heads that legitimately flow 300 CFM (not just on paper
), are usually 228 - 240 cc.
The other large bulls eye for me for the 220 project was to create a cylinder head that in out of the box trim would rival a "Mamofied" AFR 215 in flow knowing that head has worked wonders on just about every build I have been privied to the information (my own builds and the independent results of my customers). That head has performed well on 346 all the way to 400+ CID LS2 based stroker engines (knowing how to cam them based on displacement/application making all the difference).
At the end of the day (more like a month and some change), I'm happy to say I hit all my design objectives and a little more. The MMS 220 is not only as good as a much more expensive hand finished AFR 215, it's actually a little better flowing over 320 CFM when tested on a 4" or larger bore (it goes almost 320 on a 3.900 bore!) and does this using only a 2.055 inlet valve. Its a very efficient head that brings a nice blend of substantial peak airflow (enough to comfortably make 600+ at the crank), and combine it with alot of velocity which is just as important as peak airflow numbers. Guys...its important you understand that managing the two of them is the name of the game for a really explosive package (and good valve control to keep all that goodness working the way its supposed to!).
Alot of guys on the phone have asked me whats the right sized engine for this head.....clearly I was focusing on an efficient piece for the venerable 346, but truthfully its the right sized head for alot of engines depending on application, but its sweet spot IMO is a 346 to a 383 based application.
OK....its past 3AM and I would like to wrap this up so let me share some of the flow bench data with you folks....keep in mind all flow equipment is not the same and NOT comparable. I can tell you that the original head I designed for AFR in 2004 which still holds its own today (the AFR 205) on the same bench and the same 3.900 bore, it flowed 298 CFM at .600 (20 less that the MMS 220)....a stock LS1 head flows 230 CFM and a stock LS6 casting around 250-255 CFM. These numbers being shared to get a better handle on the type of CFM gains we are discussing and how they relate to the real world. I have tested alot of "325 CFM" heads that barely mustered 300 on my equipment. Btw, a stock LS3 head with a 2.165 valve at 260 cc's and a raised runner design flows about 320 CFM on a 4" bore (but sadly only 210 CFM on the exhaust). Consider/visualize what a 40 cc difference in size really equates two. A cc (cubic centimeter)....maybe a little smaller than a cube of sugar....but picture 40 of then stacked on your desk in front of you. Its a HUGE difference.....10 cc's easily seen be eye gazing into a port without having to be an expert in cylinder head design.
Anyway....lets get into the numbers
First on the 3.900 bore
Lift.....Int.....Exh
.200....151....126
.300....214....183
.400....260....217
.500....296....234
.550....311....239
.600....318....243
Now the 4.060 bore
.200....152....130
.300....216....184
.400....266....222
.500....302....239
.550....315....245
.600....323....249
Solid numbers on both bore sizes.....but seeing how the 3.900 chokes alot of the better flowing heads, I'm especially pleased with those results. Really strong for a modest sized head with a modest sized intake valve. Like I said earlier, a great compromise of peak flow and high velocity which really means its just a well designed port more than anything else....that's the trick to getting both. With a larger less efficient design (a stock LS3 for example), it relies on sheer size (both in valve and port size) to achieve similar peak airflow figures (on the intake side at least), but your completely missing the inertia and extra cylinder fill available from the velocity portion of the equation. It also takes longer to activate a larger valve/larger port design which also delays/hampers some of the cylinder fill. Now I don't want this thread to turn into a cathedral versus square port thread....I could use the old school oval port BBC versus rect port but its easier to discuss the LS3 only as most of you are familiar with and can relate to it. There are tricks to getting everything to work OK (reducing some of the certain handicap), but at the end of the day a more efficient design is always more desirable if your focused on the scope of the entire power delivery.....especially when discussing part throttle and roll on seat of the pants stuff....a larger less efficient design really hurts you in that department due to almost zero inertia from the slower moving column of air.
So I have to break this retarded long post into two parts....typical for a topic I'm trying to be thorough with (another reason I conveniently avoided tackling it....LOL).
-Tony
This is the "official" thread discussing the launch of what I feel is a very exciting new product.
I will get the apology out of the way now for the delay in sharing this information.....numerous folks have inquired (some numerous times), but my time is spread extremely thin of late and you juggle the time designing and building the product with the time you would like to spend talking about it....LOL
That being said gets us right to one of the first topics that should come as good news.....the product is available now.....in fact this past week I shipped the first half a dozen sets or so and have more in the works as well. Some of these builds are clearly more long term projects while others I suspect will be done alot sooner. Hoping for some independent results to start rolling in the next 3-6 weeks or so.
I also have a 347 forged shortblock being built for me by Golen Engines (I simply have no time), and I plan to use that engine to showcase the merits of the new design as well (on the engine dyno). I anticipate the lead time on that to be around the same (3-6 weeks) as I'm still awaiting the arrival of the shortblock. I may test a small cam (no flycut) and a more aggressive medium-plus sized cam (mid 230's @ .050) in the same engine to accurately show the trade offs and gains associated with a larger cam in the same exact engine. I may go 10 degrees larger in fact (a 227 intake lobe and a 237 int lobe potentially)....something notable but not over the top where the drivability becomes really poor. The first cam representing a great street/strip cam....the latter a great strip/street cam with enough civility to actually consider it. Pick your poison based on the type of build/application you have in mind knowing that flycutting or aftermarket pistons will be a must for the larger grind.
What was my objective with this design?? A few things come to mind that were permeating my brain during the development of this head. First and foremost, I wanted a head that would really work well on a 3.900 bore which I feel still represents a large chunk of the aftermarket in spite of it not being in production in close to a decade. That means minding the diameter of the intake valve was/is important.....also the cross section of the head needed to be modest to get the air speed where it needed to be at a reasonable RPM (assuming a 346/347 based combination). Having enough flow to also feed the newer crop of larger based 6.0 and 6.2 liter engines as well as the natural growth of a 346 to 383 CID through the use of a relatively affordable stroker crank was also an important design criteria. That meant I was hoping to see a legit 320 CFM's or so through a head with a modest sized valve and a modest cross section. Keep in mind guys a stock LS6 head is 210 - 212 cc.....most OEM ported heads that legitimately flow 300 CFM (not just on paper
), are usually 228 - 240 cc.The other large bulls eye for me for the 220 project was to create a cylinder head that in out of the box trim would rival a "Mamofied" AFR 215 in flow knowing that head has worked wonders on just about every build I have been privied to the information (my own builds and the independent results of my customers). That head has performed well on 346 all the way to 400+ CID LS2 based stroker engines (knowing how to cam them based on displacement/application making all the difference).
At the end of the day (more like a month and some change), I'm happy to say I hit all my design objectives and a little more. The MMS 220 is not only as good as a much more expensive hand finished AFR 215, it's actually a little better flowing over 320 CFM when tested on a 4" or larger bore (it goes almost 320 on a 3.900 bore!) and does this using only a 2.055 inlet valve. Its a very efficient head that brings a nice blend of substantial peak airflow (enough to comfortably make 600+ at the crank), and combine it with alot of velocity which is just as important as peak airflow numbers. Guys...its important you understand that managing the two of them is the name of the game for a really explosive package (and good valve control to keep all that goodness working the way its supposed to!).
Alot of guys on the phone have asked me whats the right sized engine for this head.....clearly I was focusing on an efficient piece for the venerable 346, but truthfully its the right sized head for alot of engines depending on application, but its sweet spot IMO is a 346 to a 383 based application.
OK....its past 3AM and I would like to wrap this up so let me share some of the flow bench data with you folks....keep in mind all flow equipment is not the same and NOT comparable. I can tell you that the original head I designed for AFR in 2004 which still holds its own today (the AFR 205) on the same bench and the same 3.900 bore, it flowed 298 CFM at .600 (20 less that the MMS 220)....a stock LS1 head flows 230 CFM and a stock LS6 casting around 250-255 CFM. These numbers being shared to get a better handle on the type of CFM gains we are discussing and how they relate to the real world. I have tested alot of "325 CFM" heads that barely mustered 300 on my equipment. Btw, a stock LS3 head with a 2.165 valve at 260 cc's and a raised runner design flows about 320 CFM on a 4" bore (but sadly only 210 CFM on the exhaust). Consider/visualize what a 40 cc difference in size really equates two. A cc (cubic centimeter)....maybe a little smaller than a cube of sugar....but picture 40 of then stacked on your desk in front of you. Its a HUGE difference.....10 cc's easily seen be eye gazing into a port without having to be an expert in cylinder head design.
Anyway....lets get into the numbers
First on the 3.900 bore
Lift.....Int.....Exh
.200....151....126
.300....214....183
.400....260....217
.500....296....234
.550....311....239
.600....318....243
Now the 4.060 bore
.200....152....130
.300....216....184
.400....266....222
.500....302....239
.550....315....245
.600....323....249
Solid numbers on both bore sizes.....but seeing how the 3.900 chokes alot of the better flowing heads, I'm especially pleased with those results. Really strong for a modest sized head with a modest sized intake valve. Like I said earlier, a great compromise of peak flow and high velocity which really means its just a well designed port more than anything else....that's the trick to getting both. With a larger less efficient design (a stock LS3 for example), it relies on sheer size (both in valve and port size) to achieve similar peak airflow figures (on the intake side at least), but your completely missing the inertia and extra cylinder fill available from the velocity portion of the equation. It also takes longer to activate a larger valve/larger port design which also delays/hampers some of the cylinder fill. Now I don't want this thread to turn into a cathedral versus square port thread....I could use the old school oval port BBC versus rect port but its easier to discuss the LS3 only as most of you are familiar with and can relate to it. There are tricks to getting everything to work OK (reducing some of the certain handicap), but at the end of the day a more efficient design is always more desirable if your focused on the scope of the entire power delivery.....especially when discussing part throttle and roll on seat of the pants stuff....a larger less efficient design really hurts you in that department due to almost zero inertia from the slower moving column of air.
So I have to break this retarded long post into two parts....typical for a topic I'm trying to be thorough with (another reason I conveniently avoided tackling it....LOL).
-Tony
03-25-2015, 01:47 AM
#2
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
You guys still with me....I commend you if you are! (Really sorry for the lengthy post....just wanted to share my personal "mission" with this new head).
I don't have alot of pics but I did take the time to snap a few.....some of them you likely saw in a few other threads I mentioned the head in but for the sake of those who may have missed them I will include them here as well.
Guys, regarding pricing I would like to get into more detail in one of my next posts, but I would quickly mention the base price of the new MMS 220's with a 150lb (seat pressure) high quality HR spring and a titanium retainer (fully assembled) is $2650
In wrapping up I really want to convey that the level of execution of the CNC and valvejob integration into the chamber and bowl is really well done....my best work to date. This is what helped this head be such a winner in out of the box trim. While hand finishing it will no doubt improve it a notch further (no mass produced CNC part can be perfect.....not yet at least), its not required to punch a big number....but for the guys with a larger budget looking for ALL the money, its still something worth considering.
That said I will also include a pic of a "Mamofied" 220 I shipped last week....its "aluminum art" meets a cylinder head.....LOL. While Its impossible to get that type of seat, bowl, and chamber transition off a machine (at this price level at least), the out of the box 220 is very impressive I assure you
I'm sure you guys will have questions etc....will do my best to get back to this thread as quickly as possible and get everyone handled.
Cheers,
Tony
PS....Keep your eye out for another post addressing the next MMS cylinder head in this cathedral line.....a new 235 cc head aimed squarely at the 4" stroker stock block crowd.....400 - 416 CID. Similar level of detail and efficiency.....larger runner, more flow, and a larger valve to compliment the larger engines it is designed for.
I don't have alot of pics but I did take the time to snap a few.....some of them you likely saw in a few other threads I mentioned the head in but for the sake of those who may have missed them I will include them here as well.
Guys, regarding pricing I would like to get into more detail in one of my next posts, but I would quickly mention the base price of the new MMS 220's with a 150lb (seat pressure) high quality HR spring and a titanium retainer (fully assembled) is $2650
In wrapping up I really want to convey that the level of execution of the CNC and valvejob integration into the chamber and bowl is really well done....my best work to date. This is what helped this head be such a winner in out of the box trim. While hand finishing it will no doubt improve it a notch further (no mass produced CNC part can be perfect.....not yet at least), its not required to punch a big number....but for the guys with a larger budget looking for ALL the money, its still something worth considering.
That said I will also include a pic of a "Mamofied" 220 I shipped last week....its "aluminum art" meets a cylinder head.....LOL. While Its impossible to get that type of seat, bowl, and chamber transition off a machine (at this price level at least), the out of the box 220 is very impressive I assure you
I'm sure you guys will have questions etc....will do my best to get back to this thread as quickly as possible and get everyone handled.
Cheers,
Tony
PS....Keep your eye out for another post addressing the next MMS cylinder head in this cathedral line.....a new 235 cc head aimed squarely at the 4" stroker stock block crowd.....400 - 416 CID. Similar level of detail and efficiency.....larger runner, more flow, and a larger valve to compliment the larger engines it is designed for.
04-26-2015, 03:07 PM
#9
Pro
Member Since: Mar 2004
Location: Springfield Ohio
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 100 Likes
on
83 Posts
I have a set of these heads on order from Tony for my stock 04. This will be my first major modification and I'm pretty excited to get the heads, cam and everything put together. The car runs good now but this should really wake it up!
04-26-2015, 04:47 PM
#11
Pro
Member Since: Mar 2004
Location: Springfield Ohio
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 100 Likes
on
83 Posts
No on both. I'll probably have to save some cash for the transmission - it may require some tweaking once the engine is done. I read that bang for the buck with headers and the Fast intake just isn't there for street use.
04-26-2015, 05:45 PM
#13
Le Mans Master
I have NO plans at all to do any engine modifications to our 04 vert... BUT if I did... those look amazing! Nice work... look forward to seeing dyno #'s and hearing about your heads in the real world! 
04-26-2015, 06:38 PM
#14
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
Headers and a ported FAST intake on a combo with these heads is easily worth 50+ RWHP and that's a very significant gain....and even with the moneys spent for both it isn't a bad return on your investment. Basically a large capitol expenditure gets you a large increase in power. $60 a pony is pretty much "par" in this industry (costing $100 or more the higher your current baseline is). Figuring a new ported 90 TB in the mix to do it right....the price of porting the intake which doubles the gains.....and adding a $1500 exhaust system you would have an additional $3400 or so to come up with. That's a hefty amount but considering the gains and the fact your paying roughly $68 a pony which when you consider your baseline already has a set of quality heads and how much more difficult it is from there to make power.....its actually decent value.
Thing is you can always do that later as a "Part 2".....or some guys don't want headers for the added valvetrain noise it transfers or the hassle with the smog police.....I get it.....BUT.....you cant deny the cost effectiveness of both options mentioned and I just felt it was worth better clarifying the fact there are significant gains to be had if the reasons above and your checkbook weren't obstacles in the way.
Hell the engine would actually be alot more fuel efficient with both mods as well as they both increase the VE% of the engine (Volumetric Effieciency) and help just make it a more efficient air pump!
Good stuff!
-Tony
PS.....Consider both of the mods I highlighted in this post are both simply extensions of the cylinder heads and you will have a better idea of why they are potentially so important (and why the gains are so significant). The best intake port in the world can only breathe as well as the runner configuration in front of it will allow....same on the exhaust side.....the best exhaust port in the world will be limited by the inefficiencies incorporated in a stock exhaust manifold which is more about noise suppression and neatly collecting all the exhaust in a single outlet than it is about true performance.
Last edited by Tony @ Mamo Motorsports; 04-26-2015 at 06:48 PM.
04-26-2015, 09:15 PM
#15
Pro
Member Since: Mar 2004
Location: Springfield Ohio
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 100 Likes
on
83 Posts
I was only going to replace the harmonic balancer when I started this project and decided to throw in a cam since I'll be most of the way there while doing the balancer. Then I realized I'd have to replace the valve springs and everything got completely out of hand. Saw this post and gave Tony a call about his new heads and blew my budget to hell and back. The good news is that I think I'll love the changes without too much more expense. I'm guessing the trans won't last long with the additional power and when it goes I'll have to deal with it. I can add the headers and an intake later if/when the mood strikes.
The cam is custom....221/228 (LSL/LXL) @ .050.....114 + 2 purchased from Tony to mate with the heads. Tony is providing heads, cam, lifters, timing chain, push rods, head gaskets and excellent technical advice, everything but the rocker arms. I'm keeping the stock rockers using the Comp Cam Trunion Upgrade kit to beef them up. This is a street build only - the car will never see the drag strip or race track. We'll see how it goes!
The cam is custom....221/228 (LSL/LXL) @ .050.....114 + 2 purchased from Tony to mate with the heads. Tony is providing heads, cam, lifters, timing chain, push rods, head gaskets and excellent technical advice, everything but the rocker arms. I'm keeping the stock rockers using the Comp Cam Trunion Upgrade kit to beef them up. This is a street build only - the car will never see the drag strip or race track. We'll see how it goes!
04-27-2015, 05:33 AM
#16
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Dec 2005
Location: Port Arthur, Texas 77642
Posts: 8,475
Received 331 Likes
on
241 Posts
I was only going to replace the harmonic balancer when I started this project and decided to throw in a cam since I'll be most of the way there while doing the balancer. Then I realized I'd have to replace the valve springs and everything got completely out of hand. Saw this post and gave Tony a call about his new heads and blew my budget to hell and back. The good news is that I think I'll love the changes without too much more expense. I'm guessing the trans won't last long with the additional power and when it goes I'll have to deal with it. I can add the headers and an intake later if/when the mood strikes.
The cam is custom....221/228 (LSL/LXL) @ .050.....114 + 2 purchased from Tony to mate with the heads. Tony is providing heads, cam, lifters, timing chain, push rods, head gaskets and excellent technical advice, everything but the rocker arms. I'm keeping the stock rockers using the Comp Cam Trunion Upgrade kit to beef them up. This is a street build only - the car will never see the drag strip or race track. We'll see how it goes!
The cam is custom....221/228 (LSL/LXL) @ .050.....114 + 2 purchased from Tony to mate with the heads. Tony is providing heads, cam, lifters, timing chain, push rods, head gaskets and excellent technical advice, everything but the rocker arms. I'm keeping the stock rockers using the Comp Cam Trunion Upgrade kit to beef them up. This is a street build only - the car will never see the drag strip or race track. We'll see how it goes!
04-27-2015, 08:30 AM
#17
Pro
Member Since: Mar 2004
Location: Springfield Ohio
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 100 Likes
on
83 Posts
I love good news and that's good news about the trans holding up. I was mostly concerned about the 3/4 clutches going when giving the car power while in third gear. That seems to be the weak link in most automatics. Any thoughts on that?
04-27-2015, 02:23 PM
#18
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Jan 2009
Location: Easley/Anderson South Carolina
Posts: 2,127
Likes: 0
Received 32 Likes
on
24 Posts
What the projected time frame on the 4.00in bore heads? I currently have a set of TFS As Cast 220's that I'm looking to have worked over for my striker build or replace them with another set. (Depending on pricing)
04-27-2015, 02:28 PM
#19
Safety Car
then, get it rebuilt again!
04-27-2015, 02:30 PM
#20
Safety Car