Author Topic: TFS vs Edelbrock  (Read 7975 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

1964Fastback

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 92
    • View Profile
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #30 on: September 02, 2020, 08:49:34 AM »
I'm gonna yell at Doug again and talk to him about it.  Even if he made stands 1/4" shorter, shimming up is pretty easy and you could shim based on the rocker arm.

Maybe include a pack of 5 shims per stand, at something like 2 @ .050, 1 @ .030 and 2 @ .020.  Don't know if that's feasible or not.

Pat
1964 Galaxie 500 2 dr Fastback, 390, 4 speed, Indianapolis Indiana

blykins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4811
    • View Profile
    • Lykins Motorsports
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #31 on: September 02, 2020, 08:55:16 AM »
I'm gonna yell at Doug again and talk to him about it.  Even if he made stands 1/4" shorter, shimming up is pretty easy and you could shim based on the rocker arm.

Maybe include a pack of 5 shims per stand, at something like 2 @ .050, 1 @ .030 and 2 @ .020.  Don't know if that's feasible or not.

Pat

Bad thing about just using shims per stand is that the end stands are not fully supported.  That's why I had my one-piece laser cut stands made. 
Brent Lykins
Lykins Motorsports
Custom FE Street, Drag Race, Road Race, and Pulling Truck Engines
Custom Roller & Flat Tappet Camshafts
www.lykinsmotorsports.com
brent@lykinsmotorsports.com
www.customfordcams.com
502-759-1431
Instagram:  brentlykinsmotorsports
YouTube:  Lykins Motorsports

GerryP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 566
    • View Profile
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #32 on: September 02, 2020, 08:57:54 AM »
What do the factory 428 CJ heads flow?  If the Edelbrocks flow same or a bit more still a decent street head for a mild performance. Save weight and allow a bit more compression on pump gas.
Depends on what your performance goal is. Driving on street you will be below 5000 RPM most the time.

In the 250 to 260 CFM range.  Depends upon whose flow bench is sucking.  There wouldn't be all that much power difference between a factory MR, CJ, or Edelbrock.  And the Edelbrock is closer to the MR in design as it uses the same MR port.  Difference is in the CJ valve size and the slightly relocated valves.  I know the band wagon is coming through a town near you to throw out those crappy Edelbrock heads.  I got mine shortly after they came out and I still think they are a pretty good head.  Not saying there aren't better options out there now, but Edelbrocks are, in my opinion, a good bolt-on option.

1964Fastback

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 92
    • View Profile
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #33 on: September 02, 2020, 09:52:28 AM »
Bad thing about just using shims per stand is that the end stands are not fully supported.  That's why I had my one-piece laser cut stands made.

I forgot you had those, and had to look it up!  Sounds like the stands are the only missing puzzle piece.

Pat
1964 Galaxie 500 2 dr Fastback, 390, 4 speed, Indianapolis Indiana

blykins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4811
    • View Profile
    • Lykins Motorsports
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #34 on: September 02, 2020, 10:53:06 AM »
Talked to Doug.  He's gonna offer a complete kit for TFS heads with .200" shorter stands.  That would be a "universal" stand that would be able to be used with every rocker I've tried so far.  Worst case scenario at that point is just shimming up when needed.
Brent Lykins
Lykins Motorsports
Custom FE Street, Drag Race, Road Race, and Pulling Truck Engines
Custom Roller & Flat Tappet Camshafts
www.lykinsmotorsports.com
brent@lykinsmotorsports.com
www.customfordcams.com
502-759-1431
Instagram:  brentlykinsmotorsports
YouTube:  Lykins Motorsports

chilly460

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 688
    • View Profile
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #35 on: September 02, 2020, 01:35:53 PM »
Well, that’s cool.  I haven’t found a local machine shop I’ve found that I trust, or that has anything close to sane turnaround times, so this will be a nice option for TFS heads

wayne

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
    • View Profile
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #36 on: September 03, 2020, 11:00:32 AM »
We may be hurting our self when edelbrock came out they were the best thing in a long time now junk? It takes a lot of money and time to make a new new part  barrys bbm trick flow pro max jays not as many fe as small block.People have to make their money back or we will stop seeing new parts. Think about what you need a little better then what you have now or a race head on the street you will never use give all the players a chance. This is not for any one maker just my 2 cents.

plovett

  • Guest
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #37 on: September 03, 2020, 03:16:36 PM »
All right, that's it!  I am going to keep my Edelbrick heads after all then.  Trick Flow heads are too mainstream for me now.   Next thing you know I'll be spinning a hydraulic roller cam and dreaming about turbos and LS's, and talking about my feelings.  Yech!  :P

pl

KsHighboy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #38 on: September 03, 2020, 06:30:52 PM »
I personally think that as FE Lovers we should embrace new technology. I understand that those who bought Edelbrock heads  may now feel like they bought something subpar. But, at the time they were not. Obviously,  the BBM' s and TFS heads are a better no matter the level of build.  Camshafts as well have come a long way. FE's didn't come with roller cams but to me if they make mote power and keep the FE competitive let's embrace that. I love guys like Brent,  Barry, Jay and Blair that keep old iron competitive. Look at how many parts are available to us today that the old time r s didn't have. 

GerryP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 566
    • View Profile
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #39 on: September 03, 2020, 07:15:29 PM »
I personally think that as FE Lovers we should embrace new technology. I understand that those who bought Edelbrock heads  may now feel like they bought something subpar.

We do.  Nobody is taking the position that Edelbrock FE heads are state of the art and top of the line.  If their day, they were about the only practical choice in aftermarket FE heads.  They are still very good and I don't think anybody who has them is having regrets.  After all, how could you lament a choice made 15 years ago when there weren't any other options?  I like my Edelbrocks.  They work quite good.  When I get around to building my 428, I will not be recycling the Edelbrocks.  They won't work for how I intend to build that engine.  It will be whatever is the best option for when I need to screw heads onto the thing.  Maybe TFS will take it's place on the pile of subpar because someone will come out with a new, magical cylinder head.  You make a choice based upon what's available and what information you've been able to gather.

wayne

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
    • View Profile
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #40 on: September 03, 2020, 09:07:34 PM »
What i was trying to say was Berry Brent Jay cant spend with edelbrock bbm trick flow and we got some good stuff from them And i hate to see them not sell enough to make it worth their time and cash to do it .

Nightmist66

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1209
    • View Profile
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #41 on: September 03, 2020, 11:38:34 PM »
We needn't forget the Pro Port line from Edelbrock. It is very potent in the right hands. The nice thing is they are a blank canvas. I have a set of custom Pro Ports on my junk and I know they will out perform the TFS as delivered. Shortly after I got mine, a new program came out to start the chamber at 64cc. Wish I could've started with those instead of 70cc. I had them wacked miles to get to 53cc. Yes, they will cost more, but there is a little more love baked into the recipe. JMO
Jared



66 Fairlane GT 390 - .035" Over 390, Wide Ratio Top Loader, 9" w/spool, 4.86

Nightmist66

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1209
    • View Profile
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #42 on: September 03, 2020, 11:43:08 PM »
I've never owned a set, but was under the impression that they had a more modern chamber that required less initial timing, which is still a big plus. I just glanced at a few pictures and saw the chamber isn't much different than stock, so I guess the timing advantage isn't there?


I believe the off-the-shelf Ed's like around 37°.
Jared



66 Fairlane GT 390 - .035" Over 390, Wide Ratio Top Loader, 9" w/spool, 4.86

plovett

  • Guest
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #43 on: September 04, 2020, 08:07:02 AM »
I've never owned a set, but was under the impression that they had a more modern chamber that required less initial timing, which is still a big plus. I just glanced at a few pictures and saw the chamber isn't much different than stock, so I guess the timing advantage isn't there?


I believe the off-the-shelf Ed's like around 37°.

That's exactly where my Edelbrocks liked the timing, on the dyno.  I run them at 36-37 total.   I think that is a little less timing than most factory FE heads.

pl

Tommy-T

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 313
    • View Profile
Re: TFS vs Edelbrock
« Reply #44 on: September 05, 2020, 02:48:08 PM »
Paulie,

I wouldn't worry about Edelbrock going out of business soon as far as FE parts go.

The Survival head and the TFS head are both foundered by Edelbrock. Their logo is quite prominent on both castings. Along with the Pro Port and their own RPM complete head, besides BBM and the China stuff they have the FE market locked.

There were numerous 10 and 9 second cars around a few years ago with the standard Edelbrock head extensively ported. The old Texas Thunder Galaxie comes to mind. Where is Mark Artis now?