AFD alum heads for cleveland

[souzape]

Anyone here used the Aussie AFD alloy heads on the 351C? Aus Ford Parts is the US distributor for western US.

[blykins]

AFD heads are good heads, but they won't hold a candle to the CHI cylinder heads. The CHI's aren't that much more expensive at all, and when you compare performance aspects, they're definitely worth the little extra that you have to pay.

[AusFordParts]

Originally Posted by blykins

AFD heads are good heads, but they won't hold a candle to the CHI cylinder heads. The CHI's aren't that much more expensive at all, and when you compare performance aspects, they're definitely worth the little extra that you have to pay.

Hi,

Would have to beg to differ with you.
At AFD all the design work is done by AFD's owner. A renowned porter of some 20 years experience and has a real passion for Ford cylinder heads. The overall expense of fitting them is always a major consideration in the design process. Things like keeping the exhaust port in a as close to stock location and being able to use pretty much everything from your existing Cleveland whilst producing never seen before performance results from a cylinder head that retains all of those factory type layouts. This all equates to less expense and more performance from an AFD product. I don't think any of their competitors can even think of laying claim to that.

The dyno results supplied on www.airflowdynamics.com.au stand as a testimonial to their capability of making top shelf HP figures.
I would also like to mention the recent Boss 340 series of articles by www.mustang50magazine.com culminating in an impressive Dyno proven result of 598hp for a low compression, small cube street engine using the older version of the AFD heads. A smaller cam would have also increased the low-end torque as well as lowering the HP curve to make this an even more impressive result.

On a personal note, our company could have chosen to sell any brand of head we like, we chose AFD after exhaustive research on the company and their products. AFD won not just because of their superior product but also the back up service, extensive knowledge base and the cost effective usability.

Video of the AFD, Boss 340 dyno run
http://www.mustang50magazine.com/mul...yno/index.html

Kindest Regards
Lawrence Ryan
www.AusFordParts.com

[blykins]

I think the advantage of the CHI heads is that the port velocity is so high. Sure, anyone can make 600hp with 340ci and a big cam, but making that much power and having the torque to back it up is a different scenario.

CHI has several dyno charts and magazine articles showing 408's Clevelands and Clevors that make 650hp up top, and are still making 500 lb-ft at 2500 rpm. The 3V port is an awesome middle ground.

I think that's the reason why CHI is the choice for all the Engine Masters Competitions....a broad torque curve is what it takes to win there, and that's what it takes to get a thrill in a street car.

[AusFordParts]

Originally Posted by blykins

I think the advantage of the CHI heads is that the port velocity is so high. Sure, anyone can make 600hp with 340ci and a big cam, but making that much power and having the torque to back it up is a different scenario.

CHI has several dyno charts and magazine articles showing 408's Clevelands and Clevors that make 650hp up top, and are still making 500 lb-ft at 2500 rpm. The 3V port is an awesome middle ground.

I think that's the reason why CHI is the choice for all the Engine Masters Competitions....a broad torque curve is what it takes to win there, and that's what it takes to get a thrill in a street car.

Funny, the Edelbrock heads fell short of the 600hp mark by about 130hp
The AFD 2v heads have seen +740HP@6800 & +600lbs from 5000 to 6100rpm, +500lbs@4100 where the chart begins. As seen on AFD's dyno section on their website
That was with only 393ci Cleveland built for a race 1/4 miles back to back in the real world as uposed to the dyno queens we see in EMC.
The aforementioned AFD 2v heads were the early series heads first produced by AFD. This engine was built by one of Australia's most reputable racer/engine builders & has made many passes in competition.

nuff said.

cheers
Lawrence

[blykins]

I'm very confused, because nowhere in this thread did I ever mention the word Edelbrock.

I'm referring to CHI, from Austrailia, the cylinder head that all the Cleveland and Clevor guys use to win the EMC's with. Dave Storlien, Jon Kaase, AD Performance, etc. They have to pick a head that makes the most power over a complete range, not at a very short peak, like a drag car. It's for that reason why I would pick them over anything else. I agree with you, an EMC engine is very much a dyno queen, but no other Cleveland head will produce that broad of a powerband, and that's what makes a street car feel strong.

600lb-ft is quite impressive, but I've seen CHI dyno sheets/graphs where that is available at a lower peak, and 500lb-ft is available at 2500 rpm. All of that was with a very, very mild solid roller cam, with .050" durations in the lower 240's. For a street car, I don't want a torque peak at 5000-5500, I want it down low where I can take advantage of it.

I realize that you're talking about a 393ci drag motor, and I'm talking about a 408ci engine built to make low/mid range power. However, I've viewed your website many times before and couldn't find any street/strip builds that reflected that kind of torque down low.

[AusFordParts]

[quote=blykins;904825]Sure, anyone can make 600hp with 340ci and a big cam, but making that much power and having the torque to back it up is a different scenario.
/QUOTE]

Well Edelbrock didnt have any luck when 5.0 magazine did the article.
I also reiterate that the 740 engine was on the small & now out of date series AFD 2v heads that use Cleveland parts
(not a hybrid head like the 3v with dedicated parts),
the engine was making plenty of torque down low but the dyno sheets only show from 4100 up. Im sorry but Id be stocked if I got a torque curve like that out of a big diesel let alone a small Cleveland.

As for Kaase & the EMC. I have a great respect for the man his history & accomplishments with Ford based products but if you think hes using a CHI head anyone can get off the shelf you need to (as we say in Oz) leave it alone. He would be using raw unmachined castings & working them from there as he does with his Pro Stock blocks & heads. I would shudder to think what a duplicate of sheriff Jon's EMC head would set you back

Anyway, wasted enough time back & fourth here. At the end of the day its up to the customer to decide, after all there are still people out there buying XXX XXXX

cheers
Lawrence

[blykins]

I can show many articles relating to the EMC where that amount of torque was made at that rpm by Windsors and Clevelands both.

From his post-EMC interview, Jon mentioned that he didn't do much to the CHI heads at all.

It isn't absolutely necessary to use 3V components with the 3V heads, others have adapted 2V manifolds to them. However, if the whole combination works, there's nothing wrong with paying less for the 3V intake than what it costs for a nice Funnel Web intake.

[AusFordParts]

Unless of course your on a budget & dont want or cant afford to go paying to "adapt". Unfortunately some manufactures dont take into account the vast majority who want good reliable bolt on HP without all of the BS
As I said before, the AFD are the most user friendly

[LoBelly]

was this a fishing expedition gone wrong?

LB

[AusFordParts]

Apparently LOL

[blykins]

Just curious, and I'm not trying to be difficult....but what's good reliable bolt-on horsepower? In my eyes, the AFD heads are cheaper, but you'd have to work on them to get them to the level of the CHI heads. Also, the numbers that you have quoted are probably with a Funnel Web intake, which are over $600. That's not inexpensive to me, and it's over $100 more than the CHI intake. How is that staying on a budget?

I'm actually playing devil's advocate here because I'm in the market or a set of heads for my 393C. I'm not CHI brand loyal, but from the media and dyno charts, they appear very nice for my application.

Fishing expedition? Maybe....but mostly just some friendly banter between engine guys.

[767Jockey]

I'm still confused how the Edelbrock heads got tossed into the mix. You can make an argument about the CHI's being better, and certainly if the AFD's are not as good (arguably) they are at the very least a very close second. It's well known in the Cleveland world, however, that the Cleveland Edelbrock heads are a joke, and both the CHI's and the AFD's make them look silly. They're just not in the same class. You will NEVER see Edelbrock heads on a serious Cleveland engine. The FE Edelbrocks are decent heads, I guess the guy who designed them was unavailable when the Cleveland heads were designed. The CHI's and the AFD's indisputably lead the pack in Cleveland heads. You want to start a real bonfire? Tell these Windsor guys how much better the Cleveland CHI's and AFD's are than their puny little Windsor heads - that usually gets their panties in a tight little wad.......

[cobrarkc]

[quote=767Jockey;905159] You will NEVER see Edelbrock heads on a serious Cleveland engine.
Not to add anymore fuel to this fire but someone had better tell Keith Craft that! I got a qoute for a set of CNC ported heads flowing 340 cfm for $2500. He didn't really know much about CHI heads. He said he builds alot of 393c engines with these heads with some real impressive results.
I think he builds a few serious engines. I wonder what he could do with CHI or AFD heads?

[767Jockey]

Rich, I am very surprised that Keith uses the Edelbrock heads, especially considering that they're 2V heads. Then again, guys like Keith, Barry R. Kasse and others are so talented they could drill a hole in a brick and make it flow crazy numbers!

As you know, Cleveland's are sort of like FE's, everyone can build them and make power, but the real deep specialists are where the cutting edge resides. Keith is certainly cutting edge in the FE world, but I think there are others who occupy that niche in the Cleveland world. Scotty Johnson out in Seattle and Mark McKeown (sp?) in Maryland are two that come to mind, of course there are many more. You will NEVER see a set of Edelbrock heads on an engine that these guys build. The key, I believe, is in your last sentence. Imagine, with all that time and money that Keith put into these Edelbrock heads, what incredible results he would have had if he had started with a set of 3V's that flowed almost that much out of the box? Keith is a genius with engines, he supplied the vast majority of the parts for my engine, and I certainly respect him and his talents.

I just think that in the Cleveland world, there are MUCH better choices than the Edelbrock's. All the Cleveland development, and the cutting edge for everything Cleveland, comes from the Aussies, both CHI and AFD. They never had much in the way of Windsors down there, the Cleveland was really the only small block widely available from Ford, just as the Windsor was up here. If you want state of the art Windsor heads (ZZZZzzzzzz), you buy American. If you want state of the art heads for the Cleveland, you buy Aussie. It's just the way it is.

Personally, I still think the Cleveland is the most awesome small block out there, I have no doubt that if Shelby had continued making Cobras into the late 60's and early 70's, they would have had Cleveland's in them. A awesome big block canted valve head on a small block - you just can't beat that combination.

[Keithc8]

We use the Edelbrock for our street engines where the customer wants to install all stock location stuff. They work for most applications where we want to make 550HP stroker for the street.
If I was doing an all out project or something like the Engine Masters I would look at some different heads. The main thing here to consider is what you are bolting to the head because if you get away from a stock style intake and header you should go to a nicer Ford Racing D1 or Blue Thunder head. If you want to use a stock header or manifold the heads mentioned above would work nicely.
I have quite bit of expirence with the 351C engines myself having set several NHRA records in past with my own 1971 Mustang with a 351C engine. We have done some pretty neat stuff with the stock heads as well and gotten 360/260 cfms out of them. There has not been as much demand for them over the last 20 years with the block problems that they have had. This is one reason you see a lot of them done with the SVO blocks.
We build and port them all so it just depends on the end use of the engine.
Good luck, Keith Craft

[mk2gt40]

Do you guys use Windsor or Cleveland blocks? In the cleavor days I found the Aussie 2v heads a lot more usefull to pull me out of a corner than the 4v which bogged somewhat.
Ross

[Falcon Coupe]

Originally Posted by blykins

I'm very confused, because nowhere in this thread did I ever mention the word Edelbrock.

I'm referring to CHI, from Austrailia, the cylinder head that all the Cleveland and Clevor guys use to win the EMC's with. Dave Storlien, Jon Kaase, AD Performance, etc. They have to pick a head that makes the most power over a complete range, not at a very short peak, like a drag car. It's for that reason why I would pick them over anything else. I agree with you, an EMC engine is very much a dyno queen, but no other Cleveland head will produce that broad of a powerband, and that's what makes a street car feel strong.

600lb-ft is quite impressive, but I've seen CHI dyno sheets/graphs where that is available at a lower peak, and 500lb-ft is available at 2500 rpm. All of that was with a very, very mild solid roller cam, with .050" durations in the lower 240's. For a street car, I don't want a torque peak at 5000-5500, I want it down low where I can take advantage of it.

I realize that you're talking about a 393ci drag motor, and I'm talking about a 408ci engine built to make low/mid range power. However, I've viewed your website many times before and couldn't find any street/strip builds that reflected that kind of torque down low.

Speaking of the CHI Kasse heads, here is the latest build from Aus:

440ci, 15.1 comp and VP Q16 fuel.

The numbers say it all......




Oh and i believe this is the AFD car in question, something don't match up ?

http://www.carpoint.com.au/Tig/Minis...ointau&id=8101

[lovehamr]

For what it's worth; that video from AusFordParts gave me a stiffie! As a Boss owner there is nothing quite like a screaming small block. I often wonder how I'm gonna feel about my 6k rpm FE for my BDR.

Steve

[chris393W]

Originally Posted by AusFordParts

Funny, the Edelbrock heads fell short of the 600hp mark by about 130hp
The AFD 2v heads have seen +740HP@6800 & +600lbs from 5000 to 6100rpm, +500lbs@4100 where the chart begins. As seen on AFD's dyno section on their website
That was with only 393ci Cleveland built for a race 1/4 miles back to back in the real world as uposed to the dyno queens we see in EMC.
The aforementioned AFD 2v heads were the early series heads first produced by AFD. This engine was built by one of Australia's most reputable racer/engine builders & has made many passes in competition.

nuff said.

cheers
Lawrence

Interesting reading

Is it just me that noticed the Edelbrock heads were run with a mild hydraulic roller cam and not a monstrous .770 lift 270 .050 solid roller.

Any wonder they were down 130. I think your hand finished AFD heads may have been in for a rude shock if the Edelbrocks were put on the same engine

How about comparing apples with apples instead of trying to make one product look good, against one that was clearly not meant designed to make the same hp level