Come on, guys. This always turns out the same way. You are going to have to start learning to get along or stop coming here. Pick one.

 

i am done in this thread. i just want you all to know that i am not against AI at all, i think they make great packages, but i also think LE does too. and for me its not "AI vs LE", its "make what ever choice you want and you will make power just dont bash someone cause you chose someone else".

good luck to everyone with whatever decisions they have or will make, its really all for the good of the sport

 

You don't think this had anything to do with the gain?

 

Big improvement. But I can't understand how the LE heads can be so far off. I'm thinking maybe he "thought" he could make them flow better trying to fix someone elses work, when in reality he should have just said, I can't help you. I pulled out my charts from the heads I had him do 5 years ago, (before he had stages) and the #s are below. These are with a 195cc intake port and upgraded valves.

.100 65.2 54.1
.200 137.2 109.4
.300 199.0 153.5
.400 241.1 174.1
.500 265.3 185.7
.600 268.8 192.5
.650 269.0 194.2

I'm not comparing my ports to the AIs, as we all know theres more than just #s when comparing heads and port designs. I just feel it's a shame that the LEs didn't come out better than they did, as I'm very happy with my heads and Lloyds work.
Good luck, and hopefully you'll have the car where you want it in short order.

 

The improvement on the exhaust side is just sick.

 

I believe you made more power. In fact I would expect more power, since obviously you were not satisfied with the previous performance ( hence the switch to AI/) AI does great work and Ron and Phil's customer service is OUTSTANDING.

I'm sure there are other shops that would have increased your performance and probably could increase it now. HOwever, AI provides an outstanding bang for the buck and their customer support continues well after the bill has been paid. So I will continue to recommend them, but I will not flame Lloyd since I did not buy his product and he seems to be an honest businessman with integrity (hence the loyal customers).

What I'm sick of is all the guys that have an opinion without personal knowledge IE guys that recommend mods and talk smack, while they are saving up for a head cam package. IMO their input is useless internet babble.





MIke

 

Can someone explain that graph? Is that a before and after comparison between LE & AI?

 

You really need to right-click on the image and select "View Image" or save
the image to your computer and open it, because the image that you are
viewing here is being resized smaller, making it difficult to read.

Anyway, this is obviously a comparison of the two heads. The Black and Green
lines show the flow for the LE2 heads, the Cyan and Maroon lines AI's. It should
be obvious which are flowing better.

(If I'm wrong, I'm sure I'll be corrected )

 

Thanks. It certainly helps to be able to clearly see the image.

 

Oh I know I almost went with TEA, but they seemed to have a problem even returning 1 email so it was pretty much a no-brainer to go with Ai. I have no regrets going with them, the performance is awesome and the customer service is the best I've ever seen.

 

I have had that same exact experience with TEA as well. They must have so much business that they don't feel the need to respond to emails.

 

My LE setup makes good power

My peak numbers were a little low as well. Had some valve float as my Morel lifters are sensitive and want very little preload.

My track numbers are traction limited on a 95 degree day with stock suspension.

Both of these guys do good work. Lets not bash eachother.

 

as far as the flow chart goes and comparing the flow #'s, I am not sure who tested them and what they were wanting the end result to show but you are not gonna get the same flow #'s from the exhaust port as you do the intake port at .100 lift as showed on the AI head.

There is gonna be a 10 to 15 cfm difference (sometimes more) at hat lift point alone. Should be closer to 48-55 cfm on exh. and 65-70 cfm on intake. NOT the same CFM though, nice try.

Maybe the guy testing the heads made an honest mistake and had the valve opened to .150 instead of .100, maybe there was a leak from the head to bench, etc, Lots of things can effect the flow test especially if you are wanting the results to end up a certain way before testing them.

Maybe it is an honest mistake and at that lift point only but judging from who posted the chart, you just have to believe it fits along with all the other lies he has posted.

Most people can see this for what it is worth but I just wanted to point that out to people that do not flow heads all the time and would not know any better.

Lloyd

 

Considering the fact that MOST companies don't even show flow data at that increment, lets file this argument under it doesn't really matter.
Example: http://www.airflowresearch.com/195sbc_lt4.php

The rest of the data seems to match every avilable flow chart from those heads that I have seen. They might even be a bit low compared to some that are available online.
Example:


Not that an argument about .100 flow numbers really has much validity.

 

...especially if you're trying to use it in a pathetic attempt to discredit the rest of the data.