LB9GTA

iTrader: (1)

I was very curious to flow bench these heads as they were the best "advertised" heads on the market for the under 200cc class.

Friends of mine(thanks Skip and Tim) have built a flow bench. They researched other flow benches on the market and mimicked theirs to the best points of all of them.

Here's a pic.

The heads were put on a wood mold with a 4.1" bore and then radiused to a 5" bore. Also, there is a wood intake that is radiused on the intake side.
We tried to put an exhaust pipe on and it didn't seem to make a difference for the flow numbers
These numbers are corrected to 28" of water.

So here's the results

Intake
Advertised Actual
0.05 - n/a -35.9
0.1 - n/a -70.4
0.15 - n/a -110.4
0.2 - 137 -139.6
0.25 - n/a -163.7
0.3 -196 -188.3
0.35 -na -211.7
0.4 -243 -230.4
0.45 na -245.5
0.5 - 274 -257.4
0.55 -na -259.1
0.6 -280 -251.9
We had problems getting the valves to open to 0.6", even though they advertise them to open this much

Exhaust
Advertised Actual
0.05 -na -29.8
0.1 -na -62.8
0.15 -na -90.2
0.2 -110 -115.1
0.25 -na -138.7
0.3 -158 -163
0.35 -na -179.3
0.4 -190 -189.4
0.45 -na -195.9
0.5 -207 -202.2
0.55 -na -203.9
0.6 -211 -na
Couldn't get the exhaust valve to open to 0.6"


SOOOOOOO, I guess the intake is down from advertised and the exhaust is almost right on.

Wishmaster's87IROC

iTrader: (4)

does ur test...now make the AFR's a bad head? and make other heads a better choice?

HD4mula

This is a great test no matter what and I thank you for it. But of course no one can go now and compare these #s to other head #s because the test bed is not the same no matter what good things you got from others. It would be nice to see other common heads tested on it for a fair comparison.

LB9GTA

iTrader: (1)

No, I have a cam that has lift to 0.52, so I am still happy.

As for other heads, I am going to ask a friend(GTA) if he will lend me his stock L98 heads to flow for comparision. Too bad I sold my LB9 heads

I'll keep you posted on other results.

I am going to flow my LT1 intake and see what is the restriction now.

Dialed_In

iTrader: (3)

That test is good for a baseline to see how modifications to the head affect the flow. As a comparason to heads flowed on other benches it's absolutely useless.

Guest

Standard response #1. Sounds like the first thing AFR would say.

Anyway, while not entirely untrue about being useless, it does give people another number to look at. I've never heard of heads flowing as advertised, AFR included. The real question in the end is, how much power does the engine make?

CeeDubYa

Absolutely not. Unless their flowbench is junk, which I doubt, as it sounds like these guys did their research and know what they're doing, or they were doing the test incorrectly, the heads have been grossly over-rated for intake flow.

Good heads still, but not blowing the comparable TFS (as cast, CNC'd chambers vs. CNC ported AFR to begin with) heads out of the water like they were supposed to. Artie from TFS was never concerned about these heads from the beginning, now I'm sure he'll have a good chuckle when he hears these results.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

it can go both ways, i dont think all flow benches are the same and numbers could be affected either way. more testing would be needed with other heads and compare those numbers with other benches to see whats up.

i'm still betting that AFR elminators are great heads and possibly make more power than other brands out there. I've seen what they did on my buddies 406 Trans am...and i was impressed. Not sure other heads could have done the same, but the old 195 heads made power for sure.

Camaroz29

iTrader: (3)

I would have expected the flow #s to be a little better than advertised since AFR advertises flow on a 4.060" bore. Very interesting, I want to see how they flow on other benches around the country.

Dialed_In

iTrader: (3)

To take this home made one and compare it to an industry standard is ridiculous. I didn't say it was a useless tool, I said it's useless to compare it to tests done on other benches. Now if you were to take a head and flow it on this bench then do some porting and flow it again on the same bench then it would give you good results. You'll even get different results between two identical flow benches. I have a SF600, so does a shop up the street. Our benches disagree by about 2%. Which one is right? Who knows, but a flow bench is made to show results after a change. Not to mention that test procedures have too many variables that will affect the results.

HD4mula

Typical reaction expected from TFS customer

LB9GTA

iTrader: (1)

If you want to send me a comparison TFS head, Colin, I would pay to flow it.

Then we would have a direct comparison.

LB9GTA

iTrader: (1)

Anyone else independantly flow a set of afr 195 eliminators?

ZimGTA

So, nobody has seen the Emperor's new cloths yet? Sounds like ths standard " mine is best and all else is crap" debate.

shaggy56

So whatever happened to this? Did the bench ever see another set of heads as a comparison. I have seen a similar test done with the old AFR heads and the same thing was revealed with 20-30 cfm short on the intake.