Well? Are they giving "magical" performance. I'd hope with a semi mild cam and the right tuning that 450HP would be possible.

 

There are a lot guys running AFR heads on the board. 450 crank wouldnt be a problem at all with a good size cam and bolts ons with AFR's.

 

I'm running AFR210's on my 396

Best ET at 5600 elevation on the factory slipping clutch is 12.03@116.33

Take that for what it's worth, as I know the car will run better with a good clucth.

 

5600ft elevation? I'm at like 200..so thats basically a low 11 second pass where I live.

I want to build an LT1 for my next motor, and I want between 450-550HP at the crank, I thought FI was my only option, but I heard a few people had 500 at the crank with AFRs and was wondering if it was the real deal. The bigthing is streetability, keeping the cam below 280 duration (or around 230 @ .5).

 

AFR's are great, but stay away from the 190/195 heads. They don't flow what they are advertised to. AFR says 262 cfm, Thunder Racing's flow bench says 233 - 240 cfm.

But the 210's are a different story (I'm on my second set now). AFR says 285 cfm and the flow bench says 280 - not bad realistically.

My opinion is 210's on a 350 or 383 and 220's on a 396 and up.

My last car ran well with 210's and no blower / no nitrous. Here's the combo:

'89 Firebird coupe, 700R4, Vigilante 3600, 3.73 gear, drag radials, 3550 lb with me in it.
11.3/1 compression 383, 5.7 rods. Pump gas: no problem.
AFR 210's out of the box.
GM 847 hydraulic roller cam (296/304 advertised, 234/242 at .050).
Victor Jr. intake and Holley 750 carb.
SLP 1 3/4" shorty headers, SLP muffler.

This car ran a best of 11.09 at 122.7 mph, which equates to about 440 rwhp, or about 530 at the crank.

I sincerely believe there was more power available in the combination. It had a little 2 1/4" y-pipe, which was probably restricting the exhaust. Plus, the shorty headers aren't as good as LT's. Finally, the cam was a conventional hydraulic roller. A Comp Extreme cam that's 294/300 advertised or 242/248 at .050 would not have idled any worse, but would have made more power.

Mike

 

I am running ported 190cc AFR heads on a forged 350. They are right though they dont flow the advertised flow rates stock but with porting they rock especially with any kind of forced induction.
HVY SS

 

I am using AFR 195s and Nick at Nu-Tek tested them and they flowed 266.

 

In my experience, a well ported LT1 casting will outperform AFR's 195 LT4 cnc stuff, and can get close to their 210 Competition CNC offering ($26XX). AFR's in the business of making awesome castings, not really making killer ports. They're restricted in that they're forced to try to do a one size fits all port for each iteration IMO.

Recently a customer gave me some 210cc LT4 "Competition CNC" stuff with 2.080/1.600 valves etc. Here is a flowsheet:
http://www.advancedinduction.com/Flo...CFlowsheet.jpg

Now.. after taking some dimensions, that port is much larger than it needs to be in a few spots, which is why the midlift flow is so bad IMO. That and a large part is likely valvejob and valve prep. Those topend #'s may be slightly generous, as the port was trying to get turbulent over .600" lift, and my depression #'s were fluctuating anywhere from 28.0" h2o to 28.5" or so.

If you're curious here's something comparing the AFR's with an LT4 port that was kept as small as possible (always a goal), and only made large enough to feed the hotcammed engine it was for.
http://www.advancedinduction.com/Flo...Comparison.jpg

There you can actually see that the LT4 walks over the big cnc 210 port up until ~.600" lift (and weren't turbulent at all until ~.720"). IMO for most street guys, I'd stick with a ported stock casting if you can find someone you trust to do the work. I'm not trying to say anything bad about AFR, they do give you a decent port that's on par or better than what most shops would probably do for you. On top of that the castings are just awesome for a head guy because they allow us the room to develop a port with fewer limitations than the stock casting. I had considered selling these AFR's as-is since I don't need them, but now I think I'll see if I can't fix some stuff first & toy with them a bit - I think they've got a good bit of potential .

 

can you pass nj emissions with a 210 or 220 head in the future i want to do heads and cam but i have to pass emissions even if i have to do a little bit of stuff to get it to pass thats fine. It just has to be ok to drive on the street but i am a little more tolerant as to what is streetable compared to some others. It will be a weekend drag car but it is still a daily driver.

 

I was looking at the LT1 195's as the possible key to hitting somehwere "around" 500 at the engine.

Now I'm wondering if they will do it since it seems that they may not flow 255CFM @ .500 as AFR claims. Maybe a full port on the 195s would get them up to the task, I'm not sure if I want to run 210s...I'm also not an expert on the intracies of port size/flow/port velocity/swirl/ etc etc. I know outright CFM flow doesn't always mean the most HP. I'd rather run 195s....but I have no idea if thats feasible to hit the power levels I would want.

 

I'll agree with this. Obviously, all benches are different, but I had similar results w/ my 190s. Out of the box, the intake maxed out in the low 250s. The best I got out of them was like 280 something.

 

Another one of my combinations was an 8.4/1 compression 355 with AFR 210's. With the 847 cam, this ran a best of 11.96 at 114.5 mph. Not bad for such low compression. Based on this, I'd say that the 210's work fine on a 350 cid motor.

If you buy the 195's, then pay for a full port job, you'll spend way more to get the same results of 210's out of the box.

Mike

 

Holy crap. Was the 11.09 pass N/A? 122mph is good too. I have a 406 with protopline heads, 220cc 2.05/1.60's, retro roller cam 288/294, 236/242, 2800 stall, 3.23 gears, long tubes dual exhaust, and run 7'8's @90.4 mph in the 1/8. I don't have any SFC's, LCA's or brackets yet, and its a t top car. I am lucky I haven't broke a t top yet.
You are running almost a second faster than what I am now, and with a 383. I gotta get tot he bottom of this.

 

Yes, the 11.09 pass was NA. My 1/8th mile speed was 94.9, so yours was only about 4 mph slower than mine, which is only about 40 hp difference (yes, this rule applies to 1/8th mile speed also).

You don't mention your compression ratio. Compression ratio is critical in building a strong naturally aspirated engine. An engine can gain or lose 5% power per full point in compression ratio.

You also don't mention your intake set up. It isn't tuned port, is it? If so, there may be the problem.

Do you have legitimate flow numbers on the heads (actual test numbers, not vendor advertised numbers)?

Finally, I had a 3200 Vigilante, which is an excellent converter, and 3.73's, versus your 2800 and 3.23's. My best 60' was in the 1.55 range. I suspect yours wasn't that quick 60', especially with the Pep Boys radials.

Mike

 

Get some decent tires and rework your suspension. A little weight loss wouldn't hurt either.