TrickFlow heads. A few teaser pictures

-
John, when was the last time you flowed any head, with any size valve....... that flowed [email protected] lift?
Or anything even close to that?

I know I never have.
Nothing ever even close.

FWIW, [email protected] lift from a 2.30” valve is 134% of the C/D for the available curtain area.
 
Last edited:
pittsburghracer said:
Wholly Batcave Batman!!!View attachment 1715888349View attachment 1715888350[/QUOTE
Click to expand...
pittsburghracer said:
View attachment 1715887216 View attachment 1715887217 View attachment 1715887218 View attachment 1715887219 Well I told you guys I bought a Harbor Freight weld several months back and a spool gun so I could set it up for aluminum and never have to run aluminum with my Lincoln mig welder. It was always a pain switching the liner back and forth so now hopefully I will practice more. Aluminum is not the easiest to run so I practiced several days this week. Today I tried my luck welded on my new TrickFlow heads so I can push the pushrod over. Last week I ground in prep to give me more room to weld since it had to be done. If you look at both pictures of the outside of the head you can see how much weld I applied. Just for curiosity I went ahead and quickly opened up the pinch .100 and after I blend it in will flow test it. I have more shaping and blending to do but I want to make sure I’m done welding then I can dip my burrs in transmission fluid. I don’t want to have to weld after doing that. The port with the X on it is the one opened .100
Click to expand...
I don't see any teaser photos, just cylinder heads that are all ground up and a hole in one of the ports.
 
pittsburghracer said:
Those head were raped at the shortside so bad it’s a wonder dn tiair could make that turn. BUT Bobby with that little tracker or whatever it is did run 10’s with them. Very short wheelbaseback test car and probably pretty light. I’m pretty sure that was also the issue with the first edition Bloomer heads. My best set of heads measured out at 195cc. I’m mean there’s only so much area to grab. That is good area.
Click to expand...

the air wolfs were a good bit better at the track than the trick flows were on the same car, same everything…just a head swap. Good buddy did back to back tests at the track just swapping out the heads.
I also know of another set of airwolfs that were tested against trick flows on the dyno, and didnt make nearly the power
Again, back to back tests on same dyno mule shortblock same dyno. Those differences were in line with actual track test i mentioned above
Typical A body bracket car, 12 to 1, 264/268 hughes solid, 620 ish lift.
I feel extremely confident in saying the airwolf head makes a good bit more power than the trick flows and is faster at the track.
 
B3422w5 said:
the air wolfs were a good bit better at the track than the trick flows were on the same car, same everything…just a head swap. Good buddy did back to back tests at the track just swapping out the heads.
I also know of another set of airwolfs that were tested against trick flows on the dyno, and didnt make nearly the power
Again, back to back tests on same dyno mule shortblock same dyno. Those differences were in line with actual track test i mentioned above
Typical A body bracket car, 12 to 1, 264/268 hughes solid, 620 ish lift.
I feel extremely confident in saying the airwolf head makes a good bit more power than the trick flows and is faster at the track.
Click to expand...


As they should when comparing a head with a 2.02 valve against one with a 2.08.
 
pittsburghracer said:
As they should when comparing a head with a 2.02 valve against one with a 2.08.
Click to expand...

well, you just said how buggered up the short turn was on the airwolf..just letting you know it cant be real bad, it was 3 mph faster than a trick flow. That head works extremely well. Wouldnt want someone to get the wrong impression, reading what you wrote, that would be easy to do.
You have bad mouthed that head since it first came out and before you had ever seen it( Moparts posts back then)
The short turn on any production style Mopar small block head( eddie, trick flow, etc, etc) is always going to be a compromise/ weak link. Its inherant in the design. Its just a matter of making it the “ least bad”..lol… not saying anything you don't already know
 
Last edited:
You have bad mouthed that head since it first came out and before you had ever seen it( Moparts posts back then)
The short turn on any production style Mopar small block head( eddie, trick flow, etc, etc) is always going to be a compromise/ weak link. Its inherant in the design. Its just a matter of making it the “ least bad”..lol… not saying anything you don't already know[/QUOTE]


Well instead of shop work I went digging for some posts on what I had against these heads. First off Dr J. was a "dirt bag" that would screw a moving snake. I'm betting some guys are still looking for him. You read the post and see the DYNO numbers and track numbers to see if anything confirms his advertised numbers. Who the HELL posts .900 numbers on a head like this??? So Billy got his car in the 9's with nitrous. Billys car went 10.80's. Do some entertaining reading from years gone by. I wish I could post up the discussions from Yellowbullet as many guys were afraid to hand out there.

AIRWOLF 220 Sbm heads tested on 360
 
pittsburghracer said:
You have bad mouthed that head since it first came out and before you had ever seen it( Moparts posts back then)
The short turn on any production style Mopar small block head( eddie, trick flow, etc, etc) is always going to be a compromise/ weak link. Its inherant in the design. Its just a matter of making it the “ least bad”..lol… not saying anything you don't already know
Click to expand...


Well instead of shop work I went digging for some posts on what I had against these heads. First off Dr J. was a "dirt bag" that would screw a moving snake. I'm betting some guys are still looking for him. You read the post and see the DYNO numbers and track numbers to see if anything confirms his advertised numbers. Who the HELL posts .900 numbers on a head like this??? So Billy got his car in the 9's with nitrous. Billys car went 10.80's. Do some entertaining reading from years gone by. I wish I could post up the discussions from Yellowbullet as many guys were afraid to hand out there.

AIRWOLF 220 Sbm heads tested on 360[/QUOTE]


Billy went 10.30’s with those heads, and that white beast wasnt light. That was with a 600 lift flat tappet cam.
I didn't say i liked the guy, or that he didn't wig out. I am talking strictly about the heads.
My buddy went 128 with them in 3200-3300 feet of air with his flat tappet, and it was far from sorted out.
Not sure what your agenda was/is, but i read that post from Moparts where the guy and Dulchich put them on that 360. This was long before the guy had ever dicked anybody around, and the only guy who had a set gushed about them.
And there you were slamming them.
If you dont remember something, fine, but dont lie. I can pull the post up where Billy stated his track numbers.
 
B3422w5 said:
Well instead of shop work I went digging for some posts on what I had against these heads. First off Dr J. was a "dirt bag" that would screw a moving snake. I'm betting some guys are still looking for him. You read the post and see the DYNO numbers and track numbers to see if anything confirms his advertised numbers. Who the HELL posts .900 numbers on a head like this??? So Billy got his car in the 9's with nitrous. Billys car went 10.80's. Do some entertaining reading from years gone by. I wish I could post up the discussions from Yellowbullet as many guys were afraid to hand out there.

AIRWOLF 220 Sbm heads tested on 360
Click to expand...


Billy went 10.30’s with those heads, and that white beast wasnt light. That was with a 600 lift flat tappet cam.
I didn't say i liked the guy, or that he didn't wig out. I am talking strictly about the heads.
My buddy went 128 with them in 3200-3300 feet of air with his flat tappet, and it was far from sorted out.
Not sure what your agenda was/is, but i read that post from Moparts where the guy and Dulchich put them on that 360. This was long before the guy had ever dicked anybody around, and the only guy who had a set gushed about them.
And there you were slamming them.
If you dont remember something, fine, but dont lie. I can pull the post up where Billy stated his track numbers.[/QUOTE]


Don't lie, well go to heck buddy. I'm done with you.
 
Larry did the work on my Indy heads and intake. The flow numbers weren’t that impressive but I’m satisfied, 134.74 mph at 3300 pounds on pump 93. It makes decent power.
 
Post up the numbers if you have them…let’s see how they compare with his trick flows
 
I built Billy's engine using those heads...I spec'd the cam, he wanted 11:1 compression, it made 605HP on my dyno. And yes I went over the heads very well...they made HP even though the flow numbers were not as advertised.
I also did a set of Eddy heads for a customer in a class, to replace his AW heads that started to have the spring seats sag...I told him he'll probably run within a .10 of the AW heads. He PICKED up a .10 and 1 mph with my heads! Flow numbers should not be the reason you buy a certain head. Can't say that enough!!
 
ou812 said:
I built Billy's engine using those heads...I spec'd the cam, he wanted 11:1 compression, it made 605HP on my dyno. And yes I went over the heads very well...they made HP even though the flow numbers were not as advertised.
I also did a set of Eddy heads for a customer in a class, to replace his AW heads that started to have the spring seats sag...I told him he'll probably run within a .10 of the AW heads. He PICKED up a .10 and 1 mph with my heads! Flow numbers should not be the reason you buy a certain head. Can't say that enough!!
Click to expand...


I agree that’s why I push for a .300 number and go from there. I could care less what a head flows at .900 if I’m running a .650 lift cam. It’s a compromise.
 
ou812 said:
I built Billy's engine using those heads...I spec'd the cam, he wanted 11:1 compression, it made 605HP on my dyno. And yes I went over the heads very well...they made HP even though the flow numbers were not as advertised.
I also did a set of Eddy heads for a customer in a class, to replace his AW heads that started to have the spring seats sag...I told him he'll probably run within a .10 of the AW heads. He PICKED up a .10 and 1 mph with my heads! Flow numbers should not be the reason you buy a certain head. Can't say that enough!!
Click to expand...

i would say 605 with a flat tappet and only 11 to 1 compression is extremely impressive.
I agree about Dr J posting 800,900 lift flow numbers, heck even 700 is rarely used on a production style 59 degree head.
But him posting those unusable high lift numbers has nothing to do with whether they make power or not. Its obvious they do/did.
My close friend local to me might be the only guy in the country that has had both those heads and trickflows on his same shortblock( and everything else is the same) and tested both in very similar air, at a racetrack. Just the head swap, and probably lost some compression with the AW heads.
And he isnt a novice, has raced W8 stuff, Small block eddies, Indy’s etc. Airwolfs were a good bit better. 3 mph better
 
Last edited:
I was told years ago that 300+ cfm is the minimum needed to make power. After I had RAMM port my W2’s I’m now convinced that 300+ cfm is not needed. It’s all about the combo.
Mine flow 286 @ 650 lift. More then enough to put my little 340 into the 9’s with an off the shelf Hughes solid cam.
 
79410aspenrt said:
I was told years ago that 300+ cfm is the minimum needed to make power. After I had RAMM port my W2’s I’m now convinced that 300+ cfm is not needed. It’s all about the combo.
Mine flow 286 @ 650 lift. More then enough to put my little 340 into the 9’s with an off the shelf Hughes solid cam.
Click to expand...
W2's have always been an different animal...it would be interesting to dyno heads having similar flow numbers with stock vs W2 pushrod location...
 
pittsburghracer said:
View attachment 1715887216 View attachment 1715887217 View attachment 1715887218 View attachment 1715887219 Well I told you guys I bought a Harbor Freight weld several months back and a spool gun so I could set it up for aluminum and never have to run aluminum with my Lincoln mig welder. It was always a pain switching the liner back and forth so now hopefully I will practice more. Aluminum is not the easiest to run so I practiced several days this week. Today I tried my luck welded on my new TrickFlow heads so I can push the pushrod over. Last week I ground in prep to give me more room to weld since it had to be done. If you look at both pictures of the outside of the head you can see how much weld I applied. Just for curiosity I went ahead and quickly opened up the pinch .100 and after I blend it in will flow test it. I have more shaping and blending to do but I want to make sure I’m done welding then I can dip my burrs in transmission fluid. I don’t want to have to weld after doing that. The port with the X on it is the one opened .100
Click to expand...


Thanks for taking time and sharing the info and work you do.
 
Rat Bastid said:
The W2 would kill a stock head with similar flow numbers.
Click to expand...
Would you say that is from the moved pushrod or culmination of other features of the port/chamber shape? In other words, will moving the pushrod on an Eddy or TF head with no other changes significantly improve track performance, even if the flow bench doesn't show much improvement?
 
gzig5 said:
Would you say that is from the moved pushrod or culmination of other features of the port/chamber shape? In other words, will moving the pushrod on an Eddy or TF head with no other changes significantly improve track performance, even if the flow bench doesn't show much improvement?
Click to expand...


It’s all about the shape. All of it. A round or oval port is far more efficient than a square or rectangular port.
 
Based on my one experience with a 340 with X heads 250cfm flow that I sold... the new owner switched over to a W2 heads that flowed in to 280 range...with the same cam the car picked up close to 100hp based on the 1/4 mile times...
 
gzig5 said:
Would you say that is from the moved pushrod or culmination of other features of the port/chamber shape? In other words, will moving the pushrod on an Eddy or TF head with no other changes significantly improve track performance, even if the flow bench doesn't show much improvement?
Click to expand...



the chamber sucks on an Edelbrock type head too.
 
67autocross said:
Based on my one experience with a 340 with X heads 250cfm flow that I sold... the new owner switched over to a W2 heads that flowed in to 280 range...with the same cam the car picked up close to 100hp based on the 1/4 mile times...
Click to expand...


Well that’s 60 horsepower in flow alone if it was in the usable range. And I’m betting the low cfm numbers were better too so it’s a win, win, win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top