Here's my 0.02 on a few of the issues being discussed here. Can the iron 360 heads make as much power as the AFR? Maybe, but it would take a huge amount of work. The restriction to flow in the 360 style head is mostly around the apex area. That huge, ugly valve guide vein takes up too much real estate. To get a 360 head flowing much over 200-210 cfm requires a lot of deep port work. Opening up the pushrod pinch will do some good (very little really) in the mid lift range. A 2.02 valve with a nice valve job and bowl blend will help low and mid lift flow a bunch. Without addressing the flow restriction at the apex, opening the pushrod pinch and opening the valve and bowl area will actually HURT high lift flow due to increased flow separation over the short turn. Then there's the issue of the 72cc 360 chamber vs the 63-65cc AFR chamber. Totally different compression and quench characteristics.
As far as the TF vs the Chinese heads. The TF probably is a little nicer than the AFR, but only a little. TF uses multiple foundries in the states and has some difficulty maintaining consistent supplies. I have a set of TF heads that are a few years old and those heads look quite different from a TF head I purchased a few months ago for porting work. It is obvious that they came from 2 different foundries. The AFR head comes from the Steven Sun foundry, which does a really nice job with their castings. The brass guides and seat rings are pretty good stuff and machinability is on par with the TF. TF valves and springs are nicer than any Chinese products I have seen. I have no idea what valves and springs AFR is using.
One other note. I have flow tested 8mm valves vs 11/32 valves. There is no difference that I could detect. Going from a stock 3/8 stem factory valve to a reduced stem 11/32 valve is worth about 4-5 cfm on the top end. There is a significant weight difference in an 8mm valve vs the 11/32 however.