Thats for sure - in fact I would say that 475 is on as I have been there.
DV
Moderator: Team
Thats for sure - in fact I would say that 475 is on as I have been there.
qikgts,qikgts wrote: ↑Mon Nov 12, 2018 9:03 pmI honestly believe you guys have done some great work! However, please check out this segment of a SBF cylinder head shootout that was published several years ago in MM&FF. The link is below. Wayback Machine is the only way I could find it.David Vizard wrote: ↑Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:42 am To put this in prospective try and find an aftermarket set of heads at any price that will bump the power to this extent!! You won’t but we will look at some of the best just for the sake of comparisons.
DV
https://web.archive.org/web/20101212175 ... 2/A-P1.htm
Cruise to the last page of that article to look at a summary of the numbers. I'm pretty sure there are several sets which performed really well. As good as yours Mr. Vizard and Charlie? Perhaps but nobody will know for sure considering dyno time is so expensive, no two dynos are the same, etc...
While we were changing heads Jack said," You know if we just fixed the quench we can get another 25hp!"
I was asked if I thought hp would go up with the roller rockers. My guess was 8hp peak. Thanks, Charlie
So DV and Charlie took an old iron head and produce as good a results with less cam as redesigned head casting.qikgts wrote: ↑Mon Nov 12, 2018 10:42 pmI think DV made a poor choice of words there.
The Holley's picked up 71 hp compared to the E7's in that test. Baseline to results.
I'd say it's like comparing a Granny Smith to a Crispin. Feel free to disagree.
Know I'm not hatin' on anyone.
However, NOBODY should ever say "You won't" unless it's true that NOBODY can't. Simply, I prefer to not deal in absolutes.
They sure did and I also never said it wasn't impressive!Stan Weiss wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:36 am So DV and Charlie took an old iron head and produce as good a results with less cam as redesigned head casting.
Stan
qikgtsqikgts wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:56 amThey sure did and I also never said it wasn't impressive!Stan Weiss wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:36 am So DV and Charlie took an old iron head and produce as good a results with less cam as redesigned head casting.
Stan
No problem Sir. I know what you guys (yourself, Charlie and John Rossello) accomplished with those E7's is a big deal and all of you should be proud of it! No shade thrown from me or anyone that I can tell.David Vizard wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:18 pm qikgts
thanks for the thumbs up here.
I think I have fumbled my way through the confusion. I thought you had my post and Stan's confused but it turn out it was me that was confused!!!!!!
DV
...was an absolute statement which I didn't think was fair or accurate. I knew of one particular test where contrary info to this was demonstrated and I shared it.David Vizard wrote: ↑Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:42 am To put this in prospective try and find an aftermarket set of heads at any price that will bump the power to this extent!!
DV
No you didn't. My point was it is hard enough to compare the heads tested on the same short block and same dyno let alone a different short block and dyno. How to quantify the difference from the test you posted? As an example the AFR 165 made more peak and average HP and torque then the Holley you used, but the AFR also had 0.9:1 more Compression.qikgts wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:56 amThey sure did and I also never said it wasn't impressive!Stan Weiss wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:36 am So DV and Charlie took an old iron head and produce as good a results with less cam as redesigned head casting.
Stan