out of the box Trick Flow heads vs. ported Edelbrocks?

[plovett]

How would out of the box Trick Flow heads fare vs. ported Edelbrock heads?  Here are the two combos:

1) Edelbrocks with something like 2.20/1.71" valves.   No welding or filling, or moving pushrods or valves around.  Just a good hand port job, roughly medium riser size, but a bit bigger.   Possibly 320 cfm at .600" or .650".

2) Trick Flows, out of the box.

This would be going on a roughly 474 inch street/strip engine turning about 6500 rpm, high octane pump gas, around 10.5-10.8:1 compression ratio, solid flat tappet cam in the 250-260 degree range with around .600" lift, and 2" headers.  Intake would be a ported 1x4 BT flowing 370+ cfm or a ported Dove Tunnel Wedge flowing 470+ rpm.  Both intakes have roughly medium riser sized ports.

Any idea which would work better?

thanks,

paulie

[e philpott]

You should be able to surpass the TFS’s full hand ported but that is the beauty of the TFS is the out of box flow numbers can be duplicated by anybody’s  flowbench USA are legit numbers with a small port

[blykins]

You gotta look at port volume.  You can get an edelbrock to go 330 cfm, but all the ones I’ve seen have been a lot bigger than 169cc.

My vote is TFS.

[1968galaxie]

Agree 100% with Brent.
Standard Edelbrocks ported - or BBM's for that matter have quite large port sizing.
I would chose the TF heads over the Edelbrock or BBM heads.

However a pro-port developed Edelbrock is a different story.

[351crules]

like to see what some ported tfs can do

[Joe-JDC]

The "out of the box" TFS heads are CNC ported.  An Edelbrock RPM head can be ported to flow over 350 cfm with the larger intake valves, and have been for the last 25+ years.  Edelbrock stepped up when there was very few options for the Fe, and they gave us a very good product to build from.   Cost vs flow, the TFS wins hands down at the moment.  Joe-JDC

[Dumpling]

JMO, but flow isn't everything. Velocity and aim are important as well.  For racing only applications, hog away, but I believe the TFS ports would will in everyday street driving. Again, JMO.

[chilly460]

Have to consider chamber as well, my BBMs like 4* less timing than my Edelbrocks, assume similar modern chamber on the TFS.  Hard to quantify, but logically seems it has to help a good bit.  I’d also be interested to know what TFS will do ported, understanding it’s tough for many guys to take a known decent CNCd port and give the go ahead to grind on it

[blykins]

All of my TFS headed engines have ran between 30 and 34° total timing.  Very efficient chamber.  The 30° total was with 12:1 compression.  The others were pump gas.

[My427stang]

I am a Trick Flow fan, very much so, but I am also a money fan LOL So, I would do some math 

Cost of Trick Flow heads + machine work to use the (rocker stands/shims) + springs (if required) to meet your cam

Compare that to two different math problems
1 - Cost to prep your heads to meet peak flow with fresh seals/valve job etc (my bet is to compete, you are probably pretty close)
2 - Money you'd get from selling them if willing to do so

I think that if you can get your flow numbers up, which would require smaller stem valve, porting, etc, you'd be hard pressed to say the change in timing from 38 or so to 32-34 means anything.  However, I think the money in your pocket is going to drive it, assuming you are willing to sell off a good set of Edels

[1968galaxie]

If I was putting together another FE, the Trick Flow head would be at the top of my shopping list.
As said by others, the bang for the buck is huge - as well as a very well designed cylinder hear (taking into account the milling required for rocker geometry).

Brent and others have put together very impressive FE builds using the TFS offering.
I do like the TFS intake as well. I believe it was used on the engine masters winning FE entry.

[CaptCobrajet]

The standard Edelbrock casting does not have enough material in the right places.  You can make it flow more, but it will get too big in the process.  The Pro Port casting, as was mentioned above, is a blank sheet of canvas, with plenty of meat to make the right shape.  To surpass the TFS with a small port, a person needs the Pro Port.  I have some that are small and will outflow the TFS significantly, but they do cost more.

The BBMs are better than the regular Edelbrock.  I have a CNC chamber and port that will equal the TFS, which is also cnc ported.  The BBM will be a bigger port, but I think for 482 and larger engines, it is better with the added volume.

The TFS flow is very good out of the box, to about .550 lift, but it has issues with turbulence after that.  My flowbench is a little more sensitive than a Superflow, and it picks up the problem sooner.  A pitot tube to measure velocity around the short turn shows it, as well as the sound when it gets "mad".  The hump in the floor flows good when you just put a radius on the end of the port, but it needs to be flowed with about another two inches of port.......to about the valve cover rail, to really see what is going on.  The TFS head is not bad, but it does not produce power to match the "standard" head flow that most people see.  I am fairly sure that the development was done with just the head only, and not any more extension to simulate the "rest" of the head that is in the intake manifold.  My opinion is that the hump is too abrupt, the short turn is too sharp, and the vane behind the guide is turned the wrong direction.  I have fooled with the port some and some of the issues can be corrected some before the low lift numbers start to suffer.  I think the head is best suited for smaller cubic inch engines with .600 or less lift.  If you are going bigger and more lift, I think the BBM with some loving is better.  In my shop, the next level after a ported BBM with a CNC chamber, is to go to Pro Ports.

[blykins]

I've done a hand-full on the same dyno, so it allowed me to do a good comparison between other cylinder head offerings.

The largest engine I've had a set on so far is a 465 inch bracket race engine.   That engine, with out of the box TFS heads and valve springs to match the cam, a solid flat tappet, and 12:1 compression, hit within 20hp (680) of a 465 inch engine with 12:1 compression, a solid roller, and ported (read smaller CSA) 380cfm Tunnel Port heads.  The TP engine peaked at 7000.  The TFS headed engine pulled easily to 7200, with similar durations on the camshafts.  I feel that if the TFS headed engine had a solid roller, it would have been a lot closer.

The smallest engine I've had them on was a 390 and the 390 made 540 hp at 6000 rpm with a hydraulic roller and a Performer RPM on pump gas. 

On a 445, the TFS heads made 20 more horsepower than a 445 with BBM heads, with 4° less duration on the camshaft.  Same compression, same intake manifold, etc. 

FWIW, these 445's that I'm doing with the TFS heads are making almost as much horsepower and torque as the 482's I used to do with CNC ported Pond heads.

I have seen the same turbulence on the flow bench.  I generally limit the lift to .625-.630" and have a grand ole time. 

If I wanted to use an Edelbrock head for a high performance engine, I'd use Blair's Pro Ports.

[plovett]

I am a Trick Flow fan, very much so, but I am also a money fan LOL So, I would do some math 

Cost of Trick Flow heads + machine work to use the (rocker stands/shims) + springs (if required) to meet your cam

Compare that to two different math problems
1 - Cost to prep your heads to meet peak flow with fresh seals/valve job etc (my bet is to compete, you are probably pretty close)
2 - Money you'd get from selling them if willing to do so

I think that if you can get your flow numbers up, which would require smaller stem valve, porting, etc, you'd be hard pressed to say the change in timing from 38 or so to 32-34 means anything.  However, I think the money in your pocket is going to drive it, assuming you are willing to sell off a good set of Edels

You hit the nail on the head.  I am trying to decide whether to keep my ported Edelbrocks and upgrade them or get some Trick Flows and sell my Edelbrocks. 

My Edelbrocks are ported and flow 293/206" cfm at .600", and 302 cfm on the intake at .650", with 2.09"/1.65" valves.  I would likely buy11/32" stem 2.20"/1.71" valves and just have the throats opened up a bit to match.  I am not sure how much I would gain, but some.  I imagine they will flow less than the untouched Trick Flows and my ports will be larger.

paulie

[plovett]

You gotta look at port volume.  You can get an edelbrock to go 330 cfm, but all the ones I’ve seen have been a lot bigger than 169cc.

My vote is TFS.

What would you guess I would lose, in terms of peak power, with my ported Edelbrocks compared to the TF's, at approximately the 550 hp level?

thanks,

paulie