AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
I used to own a set of TFS heads. I bought them a few years back when they were a very decent head. I since sold them when the AFR Eliminator head came on the scene. I have had both heads flowed and I am posting the results. Just for one, I will post some results from my friend 113 (1989 C4) heads as well.
I will be bolting these on a 421 sbc, and hope to see excellent port velocity, and torque everywhere!!
.200 lift(intake/exhaust) Trickflow-138/98, AFR-143/113, L-98-122/102
.300 lift(intake/exhaust) Trickflow-190/130, AFR-199/161, L-98-161/131
.400 lift(intake/exhaust) Trickflow-230/156, AFR-246/195, L-98-188/150
.500 lift(intake/exhaust) Trickflow-253/174, AFR-276/214, L-98-197/169
.600 lift(intake/exhaust) Trickflow- 260/185, AFR-286/218, L-98-N/A
http://store.summitracing.com/partde...5&autoview=sku Trickflow head has a 2.02/1.60 valve, 195cc/62cc.
http://www.adperformance.com/index.p...roducts_id=208 AFR has a 2.05/1.60 valve, 195cc/65cc.
Anyways, Just some bit of information for you guys. The TFS head did rather well, but it seems like the AFR is the best bang for your buck head in today's market. I know its not the best head for my 421 build, but it will have to do. Hope you enjoyed the thread. Just so you know that is condensation on the aluminum on the heads. That's what happens when you go from -20 weather to plus 20.
If anyone else has had there heads flowed that are out of the box or ported, Let's see how they did! :thumbs:
AFR'S



TRICKFLOW'S


I will be bolting these on a 421 sbc, and hope to see excellent port velocity, and torque everywhere!!
.200 lift(intake/exhaust) Trickflow-138/98, AFR-143/113, L-98-122/102
.300 lift(intake/exhaust) Trickflow-190/130, AFR-199/161, L-98-161/131
.400 lift(intake/exhaust) Trickflow-230/156, AFR-246/195, L-98-188/150
.500 lift(intake/exhaust) Trickflow-253/174, AFR-276/214, L-98-197/169
.600 lift(intake/exhaust) Trickflow- 260/185, AFR-286/218, L-98-N/A
http://store.summitracing.com/partde...5&autoview=sku Trickflow head has a 2.02/1.60 valve, 195cc/62cc.
http://www.adperformance.com/index.p...roducts_id=208 AFR has a 2.05/1.60 valve, 195cc/65cc.
Anyways, Just some bit of information for you guys. The TFS head did rather well, but it seems like the AFR is the best bang for your buck head in today's market. I know its not the best head for my 421 build, but it will have to do. Hope you enjoyed the thread. Just so you know that is condensation on the aluminum on the heads. That's what happens when you go from -20 weather to plus 20.
If anyone else has had there heads flowed that are out of the box or ported, Let's see how they did! :thumbs:
AFR'S



TRICKFLOW'S


Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,703
Likes: 132
From: Orange, CA
Car: '90 Trans Am-12.45@110.71
Engine: 355 w/AFR 195's Elem. 400/430 HP/TQ
Transmission: Tremec T-56
Axle/Gears: 12 Bolt 3.73
Re: AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
I had some flowed also, very close to your numbers on the AFR 195's
(281-221) but the trick lows were not that close (239-183).
You need a real good intake system to use the AFR's.
There are some fitment issues with the valve covers on the 195's, stock covers don't seal right, spacing between the rails is too narrow.
My $.02
(281-221) but the trick lows were not that close (239-183).
You need a real good intake system to use the AFR's.
There are some fitment issues with the valve covers on the 195's, stock covers don't seal right, spacing between the rails is too narrow.
My $.02
Re: AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
I had some flowed also, very close to your numbers on the AFR 195's
(281-221) but the trick lows were not that close (239-183).
You need a real good intake system to use the AFR's.
There are some fitment issues with the valve covers on the 195's, stock covers don't seal right, spacing between the rails is too narrow.
My $.02
(281-221) but the trick lows were not that close (239-183).
You need a real good intake system to use the AFR's.
There are some fitment issues with the valve covers on the 195's, stock covers don't seal right, spacing between the rails is too narrow.
My $.02
The combo is going on a 421 with a bowtie big bore block. Will make massive torque!!
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,703
Likes: 132
From: Orange, CA
Car: '90 Trans Am-12.45@110.71
Engine: 355 w/AFR 195's Elem. 400/430 HP/TQ
Transmission: Tremec T-56
Axle/Gears: 12 Bolt 3.73
Re: AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
Your combo sounds very good.
I did a little port work to the TFS heads and got them to 266-202
Keep us updated on your progress.
I did a little port work to the TFS heads and got them to 266-202
Keep us updated on your progress.
Re: AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 811
Likes: 2
From: 4-22 / 7-25
Car: '91 Z28 L98 G92
Engine: Modded L98
Transmission: Modded 700R4
Axle/Gears: Modded 10-Bolt
Re: AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
Also, when using the AFRs, check the distance (gap) between the china walls and the corresponding sealing surface of the intake. On my engine the gap measured .05 inch - .07 inch. I ended up using the cork gasket along with RTV sealant, to fix an oil leak. Bill
Trending Topics
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 811
Likes: 2
From: 4-22 / 7-25
Car: '91 Z28 L98 G92
Engine: Modded L98
Transmission: Modded 700R4
Axle/Gears: Modded 10-Bolt
Re: AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
If you mean me, I have the Edelbrock Hi-Flow intake base. My heads were milled to achieve 62cc chambers. Not 100% sure, but I think AFR said .006 inch mill per 1cc removed; started with 65cc chambers, so I think the heads were milled .018 inch. Bill
Member

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
From: Huntley, Il
Car: 89 ws6
Engine: 355 afr195, hsr,gmpp cam, hs rr,
Transmission: t-5
Axle/Gears: 3.08
Re: AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
I had some flowed also, very close to your numbers on the AFR 195's
(281-221) but the trick lows were not that close (239-183).
You need a real good intake system to use the AFR's.
There are some fitment issues with the valve covers on the 195's, stock covers don't seal right, spacing between the rails is too narrow.
My $.02
(281-221) but the trick lows were not that close (239-183).
You need a real good intake system to use the AFR's.
There are some fitment issues with the valve covers on the 195's, stock covers don't seal right, spacing between the rails is too narrow.
My $.02
Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 353
Likes: 0
From: Columbus
Car: 89 Camaro rs.
Engine: 357 t88 turbo motor
Transmission: Powerglide
Axle/Gears: 3.55
Re: AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
afr all the way. i have the elem 210 awsome head and way more power than the edelbrock vr jr. wich was a 215
Re: AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
Re: AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
Did you flow them? After speaking to Tony at AFR, He mentioned that the 210cc head flowed really well, but it was the 195cc head that they are really proud of for the bang for your buck.
According to the AFR website, the 195 vs the 210's. There isnt much diff in cfm #'s all the way up to .600 lift. Obviously the 195's offer better port velocity.
Love to see what yours flowed?
According to the AFR website, the 195 vs the 210's. There isnt much diff in cfm #'s all the way up to .600 lift. Obviously the 195's offer better port velocity.
Love to see what yours flowed?
Last edited by 88BlackZ-51; Jan 10, 2008 at 05:19 PM.
Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 353
Likes: 0
From: Columbus
Car: 89 Camaro rs.
Engine: 357 t88 turbo motor
Transmission: Powerglide
Axle/Gears: 3.55
Re: AFR Eliminator's vs Trickflow's vs 113's.
i dint do anything to them just bolted them on and wet 10 mph faster than a edelbrock vr jr.
they flow better than the old afr 210. remeber im shifting at 7800 so a 195 is out for shure. i could use a 227 but its a 350 and a 2.10 valve would be shrouded. truck went 9.993 at 134.98. as a bolt on from 10.35 at 124
they flow better than the old afr 210. remeber im shifting at 7800 so a 195 is out for shure. i could use a 227 but its a 350 and a 2.10 valve would be shrouded. truck went 9.993 at 134.98. as a bolt on from 10.35 at 124
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Pac J
Tech / General Engine
3
May 17, 2020 10:44 AM






+1.
