Here is a flow sheet of the typical TFS FE cylinder head as delivered from Summit Racing.

.100      70
.200     144.58
.300     234.31
.400     289.68
.450     311.96
.500     329.79
.550     336.92
.600     328.90
.650     325.33
.700     325.33
exhaust
.100      55.25
.200     110.49
.300     155.49
.400     194.38
.450     202.48
.500     207.34
.550     209.93
.600     212.20
.650     212.20
.700     213.82 with tube if flows 238.44 cfm

Same head with my tweaking
.100      69.25
.200     147.54
.300     215.53
.400     282.60
.450     308.40
.500     328.01
.550     345.39
.600     352.07
.650     360.98
.700     363.66 cfm
exhaust
.100     58.49
.200     108.87
.300     165.22
.400     199.24
.450     208.96
.500     215.44
.550     220.30
.600     222.57
.650     225.16 with pipe 252.70cfm

This is with the stock 2.189/2.190" intake valve and 1.6245" exhaust valves.  Still the MR gasket size, not enlarged for CJ, or  other intake manifolds.  I don't think posting higher lift numbers does anyone any benefit since most of the street/strip engines that folks around here seldom have camshafts with lift numbers above .700-.725" lifts.  Once the valve gets beyond the combustion chamber edge, the flow will go up some all the way to 1.000" or more and that is not something I will ever post.  Yes, Jay's tunnel port heads can flow 425cfm and more with careful attention to taper of port, and his big heads have been tweaked to 459-460cfm.  There is absolutely no reason to argue over flow numbers unless you flow the different heads on the same flow bench with the same operator on the same day under the same conditions.  If someone wants a certified flow sheet I will do a calibration check before starting a flow test just to make sure the machine is set up correctly and the room temperature is always the same.  I have my shop air conditioner set to 71* and have always verified no leakage before starting a test using at least a 7/16" radius for the intake port opening.  On many heads I have acrylic venturi already formed with a radius that is exact for every head and not subject to clay manipulation.  I use head bolts to position the FE head with threads into the flow bench fixture so that the head is always in the same position for every test.   Taking the variables out is paramount to valid and consistent results.  JMO, your experience may differ.  Joe-JDC   

    Hope this works.  Have you guys seen this on Facebook?  JAK's Performance is casting tunnelwedge's for 

Windsors, Boss 302's, and Clevelands. He says he may also come out with a 3 x 2 for the 429 guys. and possibly the FE.


                       https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1FVnJXGEA2/?mibextid=xfxF2i ok

Quote from: blykins on September 13, 2026, 01:10:10 PM

Here's one thing that everyone should appreciate about me: I'm not brand loyal. 
As for how the new [BBM] heads perform, I'm good with not knowing.

Umm, surely you can see the flaw in those 2 statements? Being an engine builder, you're good with not knowing?

As far as the "proof", every major engine builder readily admits that dyno numbers are for bragging rights, and running on a dyno is for tuning and verifying that everything is okay with a build. The only "proof" is on a track. On the street, it doesn't really matter much. 500hp will kill you just as quick as 550hp. In fact, on the street, the more HP you're pushing, the faster you will get yourself into bad trouble if you don't handle it correctly, which means you'll never be using the full potential of 550hp, especially on street tires.

So for "proof", here's your chance, Brent. List up those class wins with your FE engines. Any EMC? Drag Week? SS and/or S class wins? I mean, besides your 15th place in the camshaft challenge? Don't be shy.

As for the OP, my stock stroke 427 uses untouched MR heads, has more HP than I can put down on the street (497) and runs me right at 11.50 on the strip, with a less than optimized set-up. That's right at the limit of requiring a rollbar. Pretty much any modern FE head will make a very nice hot street/strip combo right out of the box. I wouldn't overthink it too much, unless you want the numbers for bragging rights, or you don't mind making your car more "strip" than "street", to take advantage of that power. There's a big tradeoff when you do that.

This is the most relevant post in this thread.
TFS heads are good. Breathed on they're better
BBM heads are good. Even the early ones.
Patricked they're better.

Folks seem to rarely ask what do I need to run a ballpark ET. Kind of a shame.
Folks like the 600hp number. It's impressive. I like it too.

Just to put things into perspective, not science, I've run low 11's with a 454FE, very mildly worked Edelbrock heads, and a .590 lift 294 advertised duration single pattern camshaft, in a mini tubbed '67 Mustang fastback.
I'm sure with 600hp it would have been faster but I was already the fastest kid on the block with a car that could actually drive a good distance.
Big power and fancy parts are really nice. Venture to say an 11 second ET would be very scary for the majority here.

Another reason that I would have done the BBM's, is that you'll remember all the talk about the TFS backing up at above .600 lift and getting noising. JDC verified that.

I'm sure the BBM will not back up.

How much are a pair of "Trick Flow comparable" BBM heads and how much power do you think they'd make on top of the TFS head in a typical 445-462ci street engine, like the OP has?

Edited for spelling.

They'll sell