OK….I have been promising you guys some information on the new AFR 225 heads we are about to release so what I propose is that any and all questions pertaining to this “topic” be kept here under this thread. It will be easier to keep track of all the information that way, and I’m hoping that many of the questions you might come up with might have already been addressed on this thread saving everyone a lot of time.

Rick (the President of AFR) would prefer me to be brief, but the reality of the situation is there is quite a lot to talk about and I will be making additions to this post fairly regularly (time permitting), as well as answering as many questions as I can as well.

First off, so as not to string this out any further, we ARE accepting deposits on the 72 cc chamber version of the AFR 225’s effective tomorrow October 26th. We already have a “pre-order” list in the works for some time now and those people will come before any new orders placed tomorrow on a first come, first serve basis. Our sales techs will start contacting all the large chamber 225 customers on the pre-order list tomorrow and begin processing work orders. Once all the pre-order list customers have their “spot in line” so to speak, all orders placed from tomorrow forward will be handled in the same first come, first serve fashion. It’s the only fair way to handle the influx of orders on a product that currently has a lot more demand than supply.

Don’t forget, we can still flatmill a 72 cc chamber as low as 65 cc’s (the same figure as a stock LS6 head), but any of you looking for a higher compression (11 to 1 etc.) stock displacement shortblocks will unfortunately have to wait an additional 3-4 weeks or so till we start taking deposits on our 62 cc version which has the capacity to be milled into the mid 50 cc range. Don’t forget, the 225’s will in most cases require valve notching (due to the larger 2.080 valve) and even a 65 cc head ends up slightly lowering your compression due to the couple of extra cc’s from the valve reliefs you would need to cut into your pistons….although that might not be too big a concern on a forced induction application.

Also, our 225 small chamber version already has a pre-order list (significantly longer than the large chamber version) and anyone wanting to get on that list prior to us accepting deposits can simply do so by calling myself or any of the AFR sales techs during business hours. More than likely by the end of next month, we will begin processing all of those orders as well as accepting deposits for any new orders. Bottom line, the 62cc and smaller camp (myself included) will have to wait an additional month or so till engineering makes all the proper changes to insure your 62 cc head drops on your engine just as flawlessly as our 72 cc version (or a stock head for that matter) with all manifolds, headers, bolt holes and mating surfaces allowing a true “bolt on” no hassle install.

Castings are due to arrive at AFR the end of this month and we expect to start shipping large chamber 225’s by the 2nd week of November. We have already snuck a few out the door for some SEMA projects and a couple of high horsepower blower build-ups….one to be in a magazine featured with twin turbo’s on a 408 CID engine we are hoping eclipses the 1000 HP mark and then some. Any input and power figures from the few prototype projects that have left here already will certainly be shared with you as soon as the data becomes available.

OK….enough for now…next installment will be on design parameters and goals for the 225’s as well as discussing flow numbers on this product, as well as flow numbers in general, especially some of the loftier figures flying around the internet and how they never seem to show their face in Pacoima, CA on AFR's testing equipment.…must be all the smog obstructing the flow.

Till next time….

Regards to all,
Tony Mamo
AFR Sales / Product Design
(818)890-0616

 

thanks tony for the info

 

C'mon guys...This thread was already in the middle of page two and dropping fast!!

For the benefit of those who might still have an interest, here is some further "insight" into the AFR 225 program....I'm trying to post the same information in the same thread on a few of the boards we actively participate in so it's easy to reference and gather facts from.
Anyway...here it is the latest.


For our next AFR installment…..How about we talk about FLOW NUMBERS??

Sounds like a plan and I know it’s the “meat and potatoes” you have all been waiting to see ….First off, if your even thinking about comparing flow numbers from one source to another….don’t bother. At best it might be close…..At worst you might be 40 CFM away, and the reality is that in most cases, the actual results if compared on the same bench will be somewhere in the middle. Too many variables, and I know this has been hashed to death in the past, but to name a few….What make or type of flow bench?...When was it calibrated last?....What size bore fixture?.....Does it leak any air?....What type of a radiused inlet was used (clay or otherwise)…..How was the head positioned on the fixture?......Was a pipe used on the exhaust?......Was it actually shaped like most production headers (curving almost immediately exiting the port)?......Who operated the equipment and how was the data recorded? Etc…Etc….Etc. Not to mention are the flow numbers “advertised” that you are comparing actual production numbers or are they the best numbers recorded off the best port of a prototype head the was copied and actual results might “vary”. Bottom line, the AFR 205 at an actual 298-301 CFM’s (about the average from many production pieces tested) has outflowed 80-90 % of factory ported castings that I have seen from all over this country (with a considerably smaller intake port). AFR has been obtaining, borrowing, and secretly BUYING, products from our competitors just to see how we truly stack up against as much of the competition we could get our hands on….not to mention will continue to do so in the future. Don’t ask for names because I WON”T even go there….Have I flowtested every product every manufacturer offers?….of course not. But the products I have had the opportunity to evaluate have been quite a bit off of their advertised #’s….at least on our testing equipment….some of them off as much as 40 CFM!! (that would ruin your day after laying out you hard earned dollars).

With that said, let me cut to the chase….Our goals with the 225 head was to stay true to our beliefs that big power is not made with huge ports and “sexy” big peak flow numbers….big power is made with a cylinder head that has a moderately sized cross section (and runner volume) and moves a lot of air…everywhere…at high airspeeds for better cylinder filling….especially all thru the low and mid-lifts where the valve actually spends MUCH more time than close to a peak number on a cam card. You know how much time in crank degrees a .610 lift cam actually spends over .600 lift….probably NONE. At higher RPM’s , deflection in valvetrain parts coupled with hydraulic lifters slightly compressing under load would probably knock .010 -.020 lift right off the top. BUT….do you know how many crank degrees are spent between .500 and .550 with the same cam ….if its an XER lobe, probably 60-80….not to mention all the time spent on the way to those lifts as well as all the time spent on the way back down from those lifts.
During the “design phase” of the 225, I made several conscious decisions in shaping the port, shaping the valve job etc., that HURT peak flow because I saw a significant increase in flow from .200-.500 I felt it was a “good trade” that would actually enhance power output, although I can’t lie….it always killed me knowing I was losing some “bragging” rights in our catalog and website.

On to the numbers….This information was recorded utilizing an SF600 Superflow with a 4.125 bore, radiused inlet, “hooked” 1.875 exhaust tube (about 10 inches in total length, and represents an “average” of many of the 72 cc 225 heads tested as we “dialed” in the program over the last few weeks. Advertised numbers you will soon see in our catalog and website might vary slightly by a CFM or two.

Intake Flow @ 28”

.200 152 CFM
.300 221 CFM
.400 268 CFM
.500 306 CFM
.550 315 CFM
.600 322 CFM

Exhaust Flow @ 28” w/ a 1.875 Flow Tube

.200 122 CFM
.300 180 CFM
.400 220 CFM
.500 241 CFM
.600 250 CFM

By the way, the exhaust numbers are crushing everywhere and reflect some of the best numbers I have personally witnessed from a small block “production” style cylinder head (versus what I would call more “exotic” like a raised runner 12 or 14 degree head).


I know some of you have asked some questions which I will address tomorrow as soon as I find some time….This post is already way too long but hopefully you hung with it and maybe picked up on some things you haven’t considered in the past.

Regards,
Tony Mamo

 

So are these heads a waste of time on a stock cube motor? Anyone else looking to eclipse 500 rwhp h/c only?

 

looking good flow at .500 is sick

 

Good info and the flow numbers

Which compression numbers (approx) would I expect to see using the 62cc or 72cc on a 427' C5R block ? I'm running a ported LS6 head now with 10.6:1

Thanks

 

I sent Tony an email asking the very same question on whether with my current mods would AFR heads compliment them and get me to the 500rwhp level.

Tony's suggestion was the 225's were the way to go. So judging by that response I would say you can use the 225's on a stock cube motor depending on the other mods you already have or have planned.

Steve

 

I agree. We just shipped out a set of AFR 205's for a customer with our G5X-3 cam and in Chicago he made 467rwhp 431 rwtq using a stock intake manifold and a stock ported TB. with a stock bottom end.
If this car had the 225 heads on, I think the power would be up and the low end torque would not suffer that much. I think the peak torque could be up as well.
For a car that is a daily driver without one of the larger cams, the 205 would give the best "Stop light" performance. But for a car with drag racing in mind I think the 225 heads will perform better at the track.

Of course, we plan on trying both heads on the same car to see where the power curves differ.

We appreciate the effort that Tony and AFR have put out to get a better head out for the LSx engine. The consistentcy and quality of the AFR heads has been great.

And considering all the problems we have had with the LS6 heads that we use in the World Challenge series, the AFR heads are the way to go.

thanks
Lou Gigliotti LGM

AFR 205 heads in stock.

 

Thanks for the update! Im very happy with the 205s. Im sure the 225s will be the next killer head for bigger displacement motors! Feels good to know that I can upgrade my cam anytime and my heads can still take advantage of a larger profile!

to Tony at AFR!

 

Tony,

Good to see some light at the end of the tunnel! As we have discussed over the last 9 months, we are very eager to get our set of 225 heads for our 62 Chevy 2 twin turbo 427 Pro Touring project. Fortunately we have had a few chassis setbacks so the delay you have had has not killed the project. We are however ready to assemble the shortblock in the next two weeks so it is time! We are very excited to use these heads for this project as we know that they will aid in the 1200 HP we are aiming for with reliablity under high boost. We want the engine on the dyno by mid January..

I hope to hear from you guys shortly with a ship date!

Thanks for the update!

Howard
Redline Motorsports (NY)

 

Tony,

You're 225 number's look great for an out-of the box head even compared to a fully worked stage III (LS6/LQ9) head. In fact, the AFR225 exhaust flow number's eclipse my A&A(Richard Reyman, West Coast Cylinder Head) stage III LQ9 heads by a few points at .500 & .600 on the exhaust. The worked ones I have, still flow about 23 points more on the intake. Richard does some of the best work in the country.

I wonder, what your heads would do, if they were massaged further? Great job.

Tony, I also agree with you that 80-90% re-worked heads I seen floating around, leave more than a lot to be desired.

Looks like, I will be buying a set of 242's from you this winter and having Andy do the install on my 429. You are a bad influence.

Congrads.

 

I'd love to see some blower results with the 225's (stock cubes).

Mark

 

Me too. Or the G5x3 cam with these heads.

 

Should be interesting. I'm dying to see G5X-3 numbers also.

 

The AFR's are consistant and rock. I thought 225's were clearly a max effort/drag/blower head which is fine-- as opposed to the 205 head . I notice that LGM just about recommended them with the GX3, stock bottom w/a stock LS6 intake & ported stock throttlebody. ("power would be up and the low end torque would not suffer that much. I think the peak torque could be up as well") Hmmm.
Maybe for peak dyno numbers at 6900 rpm but I hope that such a drag package includes 4:10's, tuning, slicks and flycutting tools. I am excited to see what the 225's do with a GX3 cam (or bigger) & 90mm/Nick Williams combo.

 

OK....

Quick update...

Here is the same 225 head I quoted flow numbers on earlier, but flow tested on the stock 3.900 bore. Notice how even with the additional "shrouding" of the larger 2.08 intake valve, the correct shapes and contours of the new 225 still provide very impressive gains right from "jumpstreet". Bottom line, I started my R&D on this project with the smaller 2.055 valve but when the smoke cleared, I found a way to utilize the larger 2.080 with better results at every lift point even with the stock 3.900 bore.

Also, I pulled a 205 out of production to compare at the exact same time I flowed the 225 this morning...note how close to "advertised" the 205 actually flows, and how the larger 225 has significantly more "area under the curve" starting immediatly.

Intake @ 28" (3.900 Bore size)

205 225

.200 142 CFM 151 CFM +9
.300 202 CFM 210 CFM +10
.400 246 CFM 258 CFM +12
.500 280 CFM 292 CFM +12
.550 292 CFM 305 CFM +13
.600 300 CFM 314 CFM +14


Guys, as far as the exhaust number go, I ALWAYS flow test every "small block" cylinder head (Ford, Chevy, Mopar....whatever) with the SAME 1.875 flow pipe....I have used this same pipe for 8 years or so....this way when I look at all my documentation so I can personally compare one head to another (even if i flowtested it 6 years ago) I don't have any variables to consider. However, I will obtain a 1.75 pipe to quote you guys the information you request, but once again, all of the "factory ported" castings I have flowtest all had the same 1.875 pipe on it and trust me when I tell you that I haven't seen anything else come close....especially in the low and midlift #'s.

I might not be able to provide you with that info till I get back from SEMA, but I will post it as soon as I have completed the testing.

Thanks,
Tony

 

Tony, I have a buddy thats doing a small stroker motor and going with a very small Lingenfelter cam.

He has ordered the 72cc heads from you guys after talking to you on the phone.

Even after millling, wouldnt these heads leave too much compression on the table on a NA motor?

 

Are the AFR 225's available now for the general market? Any numbers of FI cars??

Thanks,

Mark

 

I agree. Are the 225's available now? I have been watching to see if anyone posted about them, but have not seen anything definitive yet. I don't live on this site, so I might have missed it. I am getting a forged short block built now and would like to add the 225's at the same time if they are available.

 

There are a few tuners getting the 225's in real soon. However, for the most part they will be 72 cc's. I think in a few more months the 56 cc 225's will be out for your forged 346 CID block. From what i understand the 72cc version will only be for the bigger/Stroker motors unless you put in domed pistions.