All Posts (TonyMamo)
Re: Track results, AFR heads |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
 
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
 |
Quote:
Josh, My guess is the bog was more related to track prep variance than anything else. Assuming the tune was dialed to take advantage, a smaller runner with more flow will always be more responsive and make better torque down low (and up high for that matter). Once again, the pitfalls of track testing without having a large sampling of data (many passes and many trips to the track) to pour over and make conclusions from. -Tony
Posted on: 2009/9/9 14:42
|
|
 Transfer
|
 
|
|
Re: Dyno numbers for AFR heads |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Josh,
Thanks for doing all you have done in an effort to provide us with quality data to compare. Thorough A-B testing and eliminating variables always makes these types of things far more challenging. Personally, while Im obviously thrilled with the HP gain, Im more impressed with the immediate and substantial gap in torque thru out the entire power curve but especially in the middle where there are fat gains in all the real world RPM range most of us take more advantage of. That's power you can feel and appreciate just driving it "normal" every day and not having to delve much deeper into the higher RPM range to appreciate and experience the difference. Of course in theory, thats where an efficient higher flowing smaller runner shines and this curve is the perfect testimony to that fact. Looking forward to the track results....Im sure Beach Bum is inputing the difference into his simulator right now saving you a trip to the track and the admission fee....LOL My guess is a couple of tenths and a couple of MPH but I wouldn't fall over if it was a bit more because of the gains in average power. Also, Im thinking the track wont nearly have the same D/A in the August heat so we will have to correct it back to the same D/A you ran the other combo in assuming you have that data. Thats the problem with track comparisons....weather and track prep can skew results in such a huge way. Good stuff... Cheers, Tony
Posted on: 2009/9/1 15:52
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Driving impressions with the AFR heads |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Joe,
This thread is longer than it needs to be already with countless weeks/months of anticipation concerning Josh's results. I would view your question above as a separate thread perhaps or a PM....lets try and keep this on topic. In short, I don't believe in all the DCR calcs and pick cams based on real world experience. The problem with the calcs as you already pointed out is the number of different conclusions based on which one you decide to use. Its no different than all the different dyno simulation programs....they are as good as the software allows them to be and the knowledge of the program designer which is a dubious source. They are fun tools and I place the emphasis more on "fun". Take the plunge on the AFR's and call me prior to plunking down a credit card payment on a cam....I will guide you into an effective piece once I have a better feel of your goals and objectives which quite frankly is best handled on a 5-10 minute phone call. -Tony
Posted on: 2009/8/27 1:12
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Driving impressions with the AFR heads |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Hopefully this is still in the works.... I assume you are heading back to the same facility and will be playing with fuel and timing to optimize the combo....it may have slightly different likes and dislikes than the last combo you tuned there. Looking forward to the results Josh.....it was a long road to get here!! Cheers, Tony PS....I just realized I have officially been upgraded to "Guru" status in my post count.....LOL 
Posted on: 2009/8/25 17:40
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Driving impressions with the AFR heads |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
OK Joe,
Buy your RHS and I will provide the 195 for the testing...Im not even kidding. Im doing my best to show you the value here and I hope you can appreciate that. I dont think your badmouthing our product....Im just frustrated I cant seem to get thru. If you did the swap, I think the difference could be greater than 35 HP in my opinion, but even if it were not, the gains past peak compared to your RHS build would be 55 - 60 HP. What is that worth? BUT....even at 35 HP peak, just for one last fun exercise with the numbers, the additional money spent for the AFR's($600) breaks down to costing you only $17 per pony (thats like foreclosure prices on horsepower). Once your at this level (a good heads cam car with headers, cold air intake, etc,) please show me where your money can be better placed to pick up those 35 ponies you just left under the table at $17 a piece. Im serious....show me where you go next to find that type of power and how much will it cost you?? If you picked up a total of 35 HP from the RHS swap (a stretch with a $900 as cast head), you paid $40 plus per pony for the first 35.....why would you leave double that figure under the table for less than half the price of the first admission.....that's penny wise and dollar foolish. V-A-L-U-E.....you have to look at the bigger picture to grasp it and the fact real racers or anyone hooked on the horsepower bug always look for more....its just a matter of time. When you do, you will kick yourself in the azzz for leaving what you did (at the price you did) by not purchasing the better heads. GUYS....AM I MAKING ANY SENSE??  My work here is done....Josh, bring us some good news will you!....LOL Cheers, Tony
Posted on: 2009/8/19 2:18
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Driving impressions with the AFR heads |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
I posted this in another thread just a week or so ago that not coincidentally Joe (anesthes) was questioning the value inherent in spending more on AFR.
PLEASE take the time to read it and I think you will see the value a bit clearer if your open to spending more and getting more. If your not open to spending more and getting more my guess is it will never make sense and AFR perhaps is not a good fit for you. There is a product to fit everyone's budget thankfully and having options is always a good thing. After reading the hypothetical but very real world cylinder head installs below, tell me where my logic is flawed if you believe that to be the case.... Thanks, Tony --------------------------------------------------------- Guys... This is a long post so crack a beer and sit back. Its my last attempt to drive home the value inherent in our product. We build/manufacture a premium part with premium lightweight components....based on tons of independent data we (arguably) clearly provide the best performance in our market segment. So I ask you....when is that not worthy of a premium in ANY manufacturing business?? We invest absurd amounts of time on the R&D side (which costs more than any of you can fathom) to stay on the cutting edge and give you ports 20+ cc's smaller than our competitors that outflow them in spite of it (and deliver a much more ferocious power curve because of it). We fully CNC these parts on million dollar equipment and cut VJ's into them with a machine that costs 200K versus 50K or less that most of our competitors use (you get perfect seat concentricity with the really expensive machine). Our valve guide tolerance is held to .0001 when we have seen new budget heads that I would consider the guides used up right out of the box. Walk a few miles in our shoes and I assure you a better appreciation of the product we are building for you. Also, the way some of you guys want to casually dismiss the HP difference that the few hundred extra we charge is worth is absolutely penny wise and dollar foolish. Go find those types of gains elsewhere with the money you saved....good luck with that. I sell power for a living and once you already have a heads cam car with a few of the basic goodies you just don't fall into 30 and 40 horses anymore...in fact it costs a bunch of money to find those types of gains once your not dealing with an anemic stocker any longer....ask the hardcore more engine savvy amongst you and believe me they will back me on this. All our street ported heads when the smoke clears may cost on average about $300-$400 more than our competitors budget (mainly as cast) products....with you benefiting from everything highlighted a few paragraphs above in the event you spring for the AFR's). I know this post is long but follow along if you would.... Take a stock longblock with a cam and headers and install budget head "B" that cost $1100.....you pick up 30-35 HP Now thru one of our dealers you pick up an AFR street head for $1400 and you pick up 70 HP or even 60 to be conservative but my first number is more in line with the reality of the swap, especially in a hyd. roller combo. Take the same engine and now purchase a comp ported AFR head for $2000 and now you found 75-80 HP gains. What most of you never consider with the swap (and always should) is what did the entire swap actually cost with gaskets included, labor, tuning time, and other incidentals. It makes my argument even more lopsided and applicable. Lets just add $500 to the head cost (those paying someone to install this stuff would fair far worse than this) Budget head....$1600 total.....$53 per pony AFR Street.....$1900 total.....$32 per pony (and alot more of them) AFR Comp.......$2500 total.....$33 per pony (surprise there I bet) Note I used the more conservative 60 and 75 figures for both AFR comparos in this exercise. Soooo.....does it make more sense to "save up" and get all the quality benefits of the AFR's, the extra power, and the added value in HP per dollar when purchasing our product?? For the guy that "doesn't want to wait" or cant justify the added expense I say Im sorry....thats really not a wise move when you consider the main reason your buying cylinder heads in the first place (and likely other parts in the future to try and find more power). It is foolish for lack of a better word to leave all that added value and extra power under the table now....even the Comp AFR product provides a ton more VALUE (and a BUNCH of power over the typical budget piece). And btw....also coming from my seat where I live and breathe this stuff everyday and talk to easily 100 enthusiasts a month.....you guys have no clue how many guys looking to save those few bucks the first time come back to see us six months, a year, two years later when they are tired of getting beat or tired of AFR headed cars on the dyno smashing the numbers their combo managed to eek out. Then they sell their used budget head for 40 cents on the dollar.....ultimately buy the AFR's they should have bought in the first place....and spend twice on gaskets and install labor. THATS the biggest irony I see with guys that look for the shortcut to save a few bucks....in the long run it ends up costing twice as much to do it right. And if you think Im making that scenario up think again....I speak to a half dozen people a month in this situation and some are more butt hurt about it than others ultimately knowing they have themselves to blame for making the wrong moves. We have all been there, perhaps not in auto related purchase, but something we purchased in an effort to save a few bucks and it ultimately cost us more....I know I have and try to learn from the experience. And name a cylinder head company that offers better customer service than AFR....there must be a dozen reasons to buy our heads besides that it simply makes perfect sense from a value and economics standpoint but I can only lead the horse to water as they say....the rest is up to the horse. Im all typed out....I hope I have reached a few of this with this retarded long post....catch you guys later -Tony EDIT: After posting this I just read Beach Bum's post above mine and I think he got the same point across as I in two paragraphs....LOL
Posted on: 2009/8/19 0:35
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Driving impressions with the AFR heads |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
First of all your comparing two different cars....Josh doesn't run a Sportsman head....he has baselined and documented this test extensively (if you care to read thru it) with a different head entirely. I suggest you take the time to go over the pertinent information. And the fact you would expect ANY head to give you the increase you are suggesting (8-10 MPH trap speeds) after having the chance to read what that would actually entail tells me you don't really spend much time at the track or building/dyno testing engines to truly appreciate the huge gains you are carelessly throwing around. If Josh does pick up 2-3 MPH in trap speed that IS a significant gain and once you've been to the track a few times and have changed combinations and spent money to increase your performance, you will have a better appreciation of whats really needed to accomplish this. I dont want to argue with you Joe but Im confident others on this board that have more track experience will back me in what I am saying....picking up just a few MPH in your trap speeds is easily noticeable in the SOTP and requires a good deal of HP to accomplish that. An 8-10 MPH increase in trap speeds isn't in the realm of any headswap....period. -Tony
Posted on: 2009/8/18 18:37
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Driving impressions with the AFR heads |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
No... That's neither reasonable or remotely possible. Reasonable is paying about $30-$40 per horsepower in most mods you do in an attempt to increase power. Once you have a stout baseline count on that figure per pony doubling....the stronger your baseline, the more it costs to increase your power output and its an X-squared curve of sorts working against your pocketbook. A three MPH increase in trap speed in a 3500 pound car requires about 35-40 additional HP. The AFR heads in this test cost the same or less than the ported TFS head he is comparing them to, but even if they were $500 more it would be well worth the money (assuming a three MPH gain) because Josh would have only spent less than $15 per pony....thats a Walmart blue light special for the power gained. Expecting/hoping for a 119 MPH trap speed to potentially see 130 (and mentioning "reasonable" in the same sentence) would require an increase of 140 horsepower over a baseline head that costs about the same as the AFR we are comparing it to. All costs aside, I dont think ANY headswap could ever be expected to produce or achieve those types of results even if the baseline heads were bonestock emissions heads (although I have seen some AFR heads approaching an 80 HP gain over a weak stock headed baseline). Its all about value and if you determine value based on HP per dollar (which is the only way you should be evaluating it) the AFR's will shine whether your comparing them to a $800 budget set of stock heads or more expensive set from one of our competitors. Lastly, none of the AFR's are as cast....they are all 100% CNC ported which is where some if the value inherent in their purchase is derived from, but that is only one of many perks. Anyway...gotta run but needed to quickly bring this thread back to reality -Tony
Posted on: 2009/8/18 17:08
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Driving impressions with the AFR heads |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
How we looking Josh?
Any more info on the head swap....the wait is painful.....LOL Cheers, Tony PS....If its notable in the SOTP like you describe I would imagine the gains may approach 20 HP. Looking forward to seeing the power curves overlayed.
Posted on: 2009/8/12 21:42
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Jsup is back at it........:) |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
OK....Got a few good laughs from a few of you and now I am on to the brain teaser! (which is a bit more bizarre). You did a similar track event and what was the new temp and pressure exactly versus where you normally see it? Did you have similar oil level and has anything else been changed or modified since your last track outing? -Tony
Posted on: 2009/8/12 2:55
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Jsup is back at it........:) |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Andy.....you twitching a little bit like the inspector in the Pink Panther comedies??.....LOL Nobody would be likely to have as big an issue with it as myself (indirectly the aim of all his charades, twists, and long winded diatribes) and I didn't really take offense to Rick's mention of it. Seemed to me he more meant it as off topic entertainment than anything else but I certainly know they have a huge history as well. Of course the thread that Rick has linked is waaaaay over the top being more of JSUP uncensored....LOL I say we all cut Rick some slack if he promises to get his Vette actually running soon so we can quantify more performance results from the new Elim's....I know Rick's combo has a very small head relative to displacement (and a small cam as well) but I hope/have a hunch the end results will surprise some in spite of the conservative nature of the build. -Tony PS....Mike V, your avatar is funny as hell. That from a movie I take it?
Posted on: 2009/8/10 23:56
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Driving impressions with the AFR heads |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Excellent....
I was expecting the top end charge to be the area of greatest gains....thats when airflow is at a premium and every little bit extra helps. Also, the largest disparity in the two heads was on the exhaust side and that will always help the motor make more top end power when there is so little time to evacuate the cylinder. If you cant make room for the next intake charge, power starts to roll off rather quickly because you aren't filling the cylinder with a complete fresh charge to light off... Looking forward to the dyno/track results....don't forget this head may need/want completely different fueling and ignition timing requirements. The fact you can already see/feel a difference (and considering the unlikely scenario that the WOT tune will like everything exactly the same) is very encouraging. -Tony PS....Hey Matatk, I could really use your BS meter for a unique opportunity on another board....LOL Great sig photo....dont know how I just saw it now!
Posted on: 2009/8/7 4:33
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Started the car with the AFR heads last night |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Joe,
Speak to ten different engine builders and you will get seven different opinions at least. A 106 LSA is great for a small motor in an effort to boost its torque output....a 350 or smaller yet can only produce "X" amount of torque and a tight LSA helps to fatten it up some but it also adds a fair amount of overlap which effects low RPM part throttle, idle quality, and fuel economy....everything a street car would have concern with. Its great for a road race application where economy, part throttle, and idle quality has no concern and helps a car come off a corner much harder but there is no free lunch because it does effect the other aspects I mentioned as well as falling off alot faster than a wider LSA cam. With your displacement, you will have more midrange torque than you can probably hook well on street tires anyway....I would cam it with a wider LSA to reduce overlap some and improve the aspects of street performance I mentioned above. Take the same 400 CID combo and run a 230/236 cam on a 106 LSA....if you installed a 234/240 cam and ran it on a 110, the larger cam would actually have better idle quality and better low RPM part throttle driving manners, and it would destroy it in peak and after peak power with the added duration and the wider LSA positioning the intake closing point later in the cycle. The 106 LSA cam would make 20 ft lbs more torque in the 3500-4000 range but I would rather have better driving manners and 20 more HP (peak) with 35+ more HP past peak at your shift point. The average power in the range you would likely run WOT would be improved (say from 4000 - 6500) and it would actually be cleaner around town (less surging and those types of issues). The fact I lose a little torque in the middle of the curve (especially with a big motor that has more than enough) is a trade-off I'm willing to have for better driving manners and a stronger top end charge. Regarding your flat tappet solid making more power than a modern fast ramp hydraulic roller I really have to beg to differ there. The ramp rates are faster and the modern hydraulic roller will lift the valve more tapping into the meat of the AFR 195's flow curve (.550 + is more ideal). At the very least spending a bunch more time in crank degrees at 280+ CFM). The only advantage a flat tappet solid has is clean higher RPM capability but the reality is our new Eliminator stuff is so good now with all the lightweight components and lightweight hyd. roller springs, you can buzz it cleanly to 6700 or so and with the cam size you are considering thats more RPM than you will likely be able to use anyway so the fact you could spin your flat tappet mechanical to 7000 is a waste....it will have nosed over hard many RPM's before that. Once again....besides the added power a hyd. roller has zero maintenance and your not biting your nails for 25 mins hoping it breaks in properly either (I don't miss that!). Flat tappet stuff is old school honestly....the only reasons to consider running it are cost and class rules that sometimes say a flat tappet style cam is all you can run. Wes Migletz tested his AFR headed 392 on the engine dyno (when we compared the Dart/AFR/and ported GM heads) and with the exact same heads and just swapping to a modern hyd. roller I believe picked up something like 25 HP....it was a huge gain over his solid flat tappet grind. In short, building extremely capable pump gas street combinations is an area I spend (and have spent) alot of time developing. Some of this related to my own projects over the last 25 years as my primary source of fun has been more the street than all out track oriented applications (although I know how to make them run hard as well). Just ask Cusinart Vette who got a ride in my C5.....perfect driving manners around town....slight burble at an idle, and all hell breaks loose at WOT. Car traps 130 MPH with a 91 octane 383 combo....with a 114 LSA cam btw :thumbleft: Also, one last thing with LSA....I have noticed the EFI engines with good heads dont respond the same to narrow LSA gains like carbed applications generally would...alot of people that are in the narrow LSA camp are looking at data surrounding carb'ed applications. With a good cylinder head and EFI you want to spread those lobes. Look at the latest trends from the OEM's as well.....117 and higher and these engines are producing great power for their given displacement and mild nature of the package. -Tony
Posted on: 2009/8/3 18:38
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Started the car with the AFR heads last night |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Joe,
If you decide to stick with your current cam choice I think the 195 would work out better than the 210.....not enough lift to really tap into the larger heads sweet spot so the only thing you accomplish is slowing the airspeed and cylinder packing ability. Even with the hyd. roller I proposed, a 195 is still a solid choice if you want to enhance the curve on the bottom for that big inch grunt feel versus a little more peak power up top. Two good choices....the decision becomes more about the personal taste of the guy sitting in the drivers seat but with the smaller flat tappet a 195 would work best all around. -Tony
Posted on: 2009/8/2 17:13
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Started the car with the AFR heads last night |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Flatmill is less expensive but the max flatmill is 60 cc's....anything less dictates an angle mill is required. 10.8 is fine assuming you have enough duration at .050 and overlap....I seem to have missed those figures. Also, I would have encouraged you to go alot wider on the LSA.....110 or so would have been better IMO for a street car at least. IMO, 106 would be more ideal for a roadrace application. It would have been more "friendly" on the street with a slightly wider LSA. I would have went in the mid 230's at .050 with high .500's lift with a 1.6 rocker. A 236/242 XE cam with our 195 street heads would have made great torque and big power as well, not nosing over hard till 66-6700 or so (probably peak at 61-6200) I would have installed it at 106-107 or so (3-4 degrees advanced). -Tony EDIT....Just saw your cam....our duration numbers are close BUT, your discussing a solid flat tappet which will act smaller due to the lash. I was thinking hydraulic roller which would make more power than the cam you quoted specs on. Not sure if you would consider going that route but I would think the extra power and lack of valve adjustment/maintenance would be worthy of consideration.
Posted on: 2009/8/2 4:46
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Started the car with the AFR heads last night |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Joe...
You could go with our 210 street heads also....the major difference being the 210 street has a larger 1206 style entrance (similar to the 195 Comp) The 195 street has a 1205 style entrance.... How much octane do you run? -Tony PS....Also, you could flat mill either head (195 or 210) to 60 cc's which only costs $150 I believe.
Posted on: 2009/8/1 20:51
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Started the car with the AFR heads last night |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Need to verify a few pieces of info... CID Comp Ratio (about 11.0 recommended...slightly more on 93 and perhaps slightly less on 91) Cam type (hyd. roller, solid roller, etc.) and approx duration/lift Application Desired RPM and shiftpoints And yes....keep the head about .040 from the piston via block milling, gasket thickness, or both. Thanks, Tony PS....Can you humor me and say you picked up something from the essay I wrote??....LOL
Posted on: 2009/8/1 19:44
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Started the car with the AFR heads last night |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Guys...
This is a long post so crack a beer and sit back. Its my last attempt to drive home the value inherent in our product. We build/manufacture a premium part with premium lightweight components....based on tons of independent data we (arguably) clearly provide the best performance in our market segment. So I ask you....when is that not worthy of a premium in ANY manufacturing business?? We invest absurd amounts of time on the R&D side (which costs more than any of you can fathom) to stay on the cutting edge and give you ports 20+ cc's smaller than our competitors that outflow them in spite of it (and deliver a much more ferocious power curve because of it). We fully CNC these parts on million dollar equipment and cut VJ's into them with a machine that costs 200K versus 50K or less that most of our competitors use (you get perfect seat concentricity with the really expensive machine). Our valve guide tolerance is held to .0001 when we have seen new budget heads that I would consider the guides used up right out of the box. Walk a few miles in our shoes and I assure you a better appreciation of the product we are building for you. Its not an accident our stuff always out performs the competition.....this is all we do and we hyper-focus on it like no other company in the industry. Name ONE of our competitors that doesn't have their hands in selling and producing ALOT of other products besides cylinder heads....it would be impossible for any of them to devote the time we do to just this segment of the market. Also, the way some of you guys want to casually dismiss the HP difference that the few hundred extra we charge is worth is absolutely penny wise and dollar foolish. Go find those types of gains elsewhere with the money you saved....good luck with that. I sell power for a living and once yuo already have a heads cam car with a few of the basic goodies you just dont fall into 30 and 40 horses anymore...in fact it costs a bunch of money to find those types of gains once your not dealing with an anemic stocker any longer....ask the hardcore more engine savvy amongst you and believe me they will back me on this. All our street ported heads when the smoke clears may cost on average about $300-$400 more than our competitors budget (mainly as cast)products....with you benefiting from everything highlighted a few paragraphs above in the event you spring for the AFR's). I know this post is long but follow along if you would.... Take a stock longblock with a cam and headers and install budget head "B" that cost $1100.....you pick up 30-35 HP Now thru one of our dealers you pick up an AFR street head for $1400 and you pick up 70 HP or even 60 to be conservative but my first number is more in line with the reality of the swap, especially in a hyd. roller combo. Take the same engine and now purchase a comp ported AFR head for $2000 and now you found 75-80 HP gains. What most of you never consider with the swap (and always should) is what did the entire swap actually cost with gaskets included, labor, tuning time, and other incidentals. It makes my argument even more lopsided and applicable. Lets just add $500 to the head cost (those paying someone to install this stuff would fair far worse than this) Budget head....$1600 total.....$53 per pony AFR Street.....$1900 total.....$32 per pony (and alot more of them) AFR Comp.......$2500 total.....$33 per pony (surprise there I bet) Note I used the more conservative 60 and 75 figures for both AFR comparos in this exercise. Soooo.....does it make more sense to "save up" and get all the quality benefits of the AFR's, the extra power, and the added value in HP per dollar when purchasing our product?? For the guy that "doesn't want to wait" or cant justify the added expense I say Im sorry....thats really not a wise move when you consider the main reason your buying cylinder heads in the first place (and likely other parts in the future to try and find more power). It is foolish for lack of a better word to leave all that added value and extra power under the table now....even the Comp AFR product provides a ton more VALUE (and a BUNCH of power over the typical budget piece). And btw....also coming from my seat where I live and breathe this stuff everyday and talk to easily 100 enthusiasts a month.....you guys have no clue how many guys looking to save those few bucks the first time come back to see us six months, a year, two years later when they are tired of getting beat or tired of AFR headed cars on the dyno smashing the numbers their combo managed to eek out. Then they sell their used budget head for 40 cents on the dollar.....ultimately buy the AFR's they should have bought in the first place....and spend twice on gaskets and install labor. THATS the biggest irony I see with guys that look for the shortcut to save a few bucks....in the long run it ends up costing twice as much to do it right. And if you think Im making that scenario up think again....I speak to a half dozen people a month in this situation and some are more butt hurt about it than others ultimately knowing they have themselves to blame for making the wrong moves. We have all been there, perhaps not in auto related purchase, but something we purchased in an effort to save a few bucks and it ultimately cost us more....I know I have and try to learn from the experience. And name a cylinder head company that offers better customer service than AFR....there must be a dozen reasons to buy our heads besides that it simply makes perfect sense from a value and economics standpoint but I can only lead the horse to water as they say....the rest is up to the horse. Im all typed out....I hope I have reached a few of this with this retarded long post....catch you guys later -Tony EDIT: After posting this I just read Beach Bum's post above mine and I think he got the same point across as I in two paragraphs....LOL 
Posted on: 2009/8/1 17:29
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Started the car with the AFR heads last night |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Dan, The street heads are 100% fully CNC ported, with premium components, and for the money simply cant be touched (obviously we agree there)....its the "value play" of AFR for sure and I share that sentiment with all our customers every chance I get (its the head I recommend to most customers I speak with). However, if your the type of guy that will lose sleep knowing you left that extra 10-15 HP under the table then the Comp package is for you and paying for it unfortunately is something the end user has to justify and deal with....LOL. A comp ported head spends twice as much time in the CNC machine because it gets an extra rough pass and a finer finish pass (among other other small details that help it flow and perform better), and when your business is largely dictated by how many heads you can produce in a given day, CNC machine time is paramount and we have to charge accordingly. Thank God you don't own a BBC Chevy which cost 50% more than a comp ported SBC (a fully ported pair of BBC heads burns 12 hours of CNC porting time...not including any other machine ops to the casting). Instead of being upset we don't give away all the extra CNC porting and other perks with the Comp package, be happy we found a way to cut the costs dramatically with our street package and still provide a cylinder head for you guys that far and away beats anything reasonably close in price, and performs within striking distance of its comp ported more expensive brother. Name another product or service where you purchase there better model which costs significantly more money and time to produce, and you aren't charged a hefty premium to own it.....good luck with that!! Most people will be thrilled with the performance that our street head offers, but guys really serious about their craft will always buy the Comp ported version....that's just the way it is and once again I think its bonus that we can cater to a wider group of end users that way. Beach Bum was torn for awhile on which 227 to buy....I didn't push him either way at the time....but I knew a guy like him (a very serious enthusiast with a very mathematical approach to the hobby) had to have the extra flow as he would lose sleep knowing he could have went a little faster....LOL Turns out thats exactly what he decided to purchase and I don't think he has any regrets! -Tony PS....OK...truth be told I may have slightly pointed Beach towards the Comp version of our 227 but I knew I would save him self torture down the road had he bought the street version!! And thats only because I had a much better "feel" of who my end user was in that particular case....he's the type of guy we cater the Comp product towards (much like myself I might add!)
Posted on: 2009/8/1 0:15
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Started the car with the AFR heads last night |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Joe... Do you really believe all that is true?? I wont even get into the "advertised" number comparisons....that could take up pages. Not to mention I don't think when comparing cc's (similar port volumes), even if you were to base your statement on that I feel a comparison wouldn't bring up anything similar. Also, the quality of the few heads you mention aren't even in the same playing field as the AFR's. Then there's the lightweight 8mm valves, trick lightweight small diameter valve springs, heavy duty castings with 3/4 inch thick deck....I can go on and on but I wont bore the people that have already read most of my rants. Do a search on some of the various message boards and have lots of time set aside in front of the computer. To NOT spend the extra few hundred on the AFR's is a far bigger mistake....that few hundred you saved cost you twice the potential gains in power in some cases and Im not exaggerating. Look at cost per pony and the AFR's will look like a Walmart blue light special.... Also, try to search out real world results of the various heads you might consider....independent results speak volumes. In Josh's test we are all following an out of the box AFR is going against a high quality aftermarket casting that additional handwork was also invested and I still think/hope the AFR's are going to shine....not to mention cost the same or less in this particular comparo. Do your homework....the more you do the better value you will perceive our product to be worth and the easier it will be to part with the extra money. As I said, if your serious about performance and want to get the most power and the most value from the swap, the far bigger mistake is not to. Cheers, Tony
Posted on: 2009/7/31 21:01
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Air Flow Research (AFR) 195's VS Trick Flow Specialties (TFS) 195's - Test within |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Nope.... Just trying to figure out how expensive a cigar I want to purchase after getting the results....LOL :thumbright:
Posted on: 2009/7/31 20:04
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Air Flow Research (AFR) 195's VS Trick Flow Specialties (TFS) 195's - Test within |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
I will have the second version of the Eliminators finished before the results are in.....LOL
Whats the latest Josh.....inquiring minds want to know!! -Tony
Posted on: 2009/7/31 3:25
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: My Corvette Project is slowly progressing.... |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
You went from potentially close to the best weather in the country (close to the water in So Cal), to potentially close to the worst with Houston (referring mainly to their summer climate).....LOL
Seriously....Im such a puss now after leaving the east coast and the cold and the humidity. The summers in Houston are far worse than Long Island NY though.....we have (had) our share of 95 degrees and 95% humidity but you guys get it even worse with slightly elevated temps and probably close to what feels like a 100% humidity and thats what kills you. Instant sweat because nothing is evaporating....you feel suffocated by it. I went back to NY a couple of years ago to visit family etc. and left my hotel room to walk to my rent a car on a warm day in July....probably only 90 then because it was still late morning. Was drenched by the time I reached the car...LOL...I already needed another shower! That was it for me....I knew then and there I would never move back to that type of climate...the day and experience is pretty vivid in my mind. And btw, its hot as shit in So Cal this week.....low 100's every day but of course its dry which makes all the difference in making it more manageable....you lose the suffocation/instant sweat factor....just feel HEAT. If your doing manual labor when its this hot of course you will be sweating in no time but if you just walk to your car (or even walk around the block) you wont break much of a sweat....just the obvious sense of the heat. Anyway....Mamo the weatherman signing off. Beech....I can seriously walk you thru an A/C install on the phone. I just put a unit in a house with concrete slab exterior which is an even bigger PITA but once youve done that once or twice its no big deal either. If you can build an engine you can certainly blow an A/C unit in the wall!! Basic handtools is all you need. Good luck dealing with the rest of the oppresive weather and the rest of the go fast parts install as well....call and say hello one of these days Cheers, Tony
Posted on: 2009/7/22 5:34
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: My Corvette Project is slowly progressing.... |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Beach...
What are you waiting for on the A/C This weekend's project should be installing one. Sales are all over on this type of stuff already also. Just picked up a 10K unit from HD for $250 for a different type of project....cools up to 500 Sq. feet. They had a 12k there also which would cool it even faster ($300 ish) Its a no brainer man....you will kick yourself for not doing it sooner. Get out the sawzall and have at it! Nice work so far.....everything looks sano! Regards, Tony
Posted on: 2009/7/21 3:15
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Air Flow Research (AFR) 195's VS Trick Flow Specialties (TFS) 195's - Test within |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Why did you get so aggressive with the static CR? A 23' engine even with our heads wont tolerate as much as a Gen III which has a superior chamber/quench design. You might have made more power with less compression and more timing (closer to 11.0)....in fact likely the case. Most of the dyno testing I conduct seems to favor low/mid 30's for optimal ignition advance. I would be curious what your engine would make with 100 octane no lead mixed 50/50 and more timing added. I bet it would produce even better numbers in that configuration. IMO, you simply have all the timing your engine will tolerate with the octane fuel your running.....not so much that you optimized your package at that little total timing. Once again, less compression and more timing would have likely produced better results and been alot safer. Knock/detonation over the long haul is certain to cause cracked ringlands or worse depending just how bad it gets/persists. -Tony
Posted on: 2009/7/19 19:59
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Took the 62 back to the track |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Guys,
I sent an email earlier today to Wes commenting on some of his recent track outtings. For the benefit of those reading and following along Wes's journey Im copying and pasting it here as well because I think it offers a little more insight. Bottom line....Wes has already made some solid gains but right now he is still really scratching at the surface. In a nutshell, there are more gains left [I]under[/I] the table than the gains he has already tapped into and thats very encouraging IMO. Here is the email I was referring to... -Tony PS....A few WOT runs on a desolate stretch of road prior to your last track event would have been extremely beneficial....Your next swap should be a manual trans and eliminate all these shifting gremlins for good....LOL The car would feel like a rocket ship with an M-20/M-21 install!) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Wes I think it goes without saying this car is far from being optimized to take advantage of the new power plant. The biggest sting in its performance potential is the fact you cant shift it even remotely close to where it really needs to be (about 1700+ RPM higher!) essentially missing the fattest and strongest part of the power curve (and essentially the meat of the gains we observed on the dyno). You also may be experiencing fuel pressure problems (why its laying down upstairs) but I have no idea the type of fuel system/pump you are running. It could be something as silly as a clogged filter. This car could/should easily run close to 120 MPH with everything dialed in properly (timing, fuel, shiftpoints, etc.). Discounting the power some and calculating a 3400 pound race weight still spits out 118-120 MPH trap speed potential depending on whether we are trying to push a brick or something more streamlined down the track. Considering your average power is down 40+ HP with the early shifting and your not getting the back half charge you should be due to some other gremlins (not to mention far from optimal D/A), your current performance data all kind of backs that up. With so-so traction and 60 foot times, once you get some of these issues handled I would bet anything this car goes 11.70s at 118+ trap speeds with essentially nothing different except for better optimizing this package in your vehicle. This is why having the dyno data in this round of testing was also so important ..running big numbers at the track require a lot of other variables to be right and sometimes thats easier said than done unless you have loads of time and money to throw at it. Get that shifting situation handled ..your missing the entire rush this package has to offer you!! Thanks for the heads up and the update . Regards, -Tony
Posted on: 2009/7/14 19:47
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Final dyno numbers and track times this weekend for the TFS heads |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Hey Josh,
Glad to see things are moving along. While the dyno has the benefit of a correction factor with a weather station, the track obviously does not, but thankfully its really all mathmatics and there are computer programs that can tell you pretty much to the number what a different density altitude would net you in your ET and trap speeds. Beach Bum has a good one and there are others available if you look around. Point is, you might have very different conditions for the track outtings.....this is just a reminder to perhaps borrow a weather station that can calculate D/A if you dont already own one, or try to get with someone at the track that day that has one (maybe ask a few people to confirm that info is reasonably accurate). Its an extremely important piece of information when comparing track times for obvious reasons. Its the one thing I dont like about people comparing track results....unless they are providing you with the D/A, for the most part they are meaningless as any type of scientific comparisons. Now if two people ran their combo's on the same day (at the same facility), thats a completely different story. The best comparisons (when evaluting combination changes) are really done using the same chassis dyno (eliminating variables from different dynos) which of course is what you are doing....the track results are really just a bonus but do offer good comparable feedback only when the D/A and track conditions are included in the equation. Look forward to all the results (I'm hoping....LOL) -Tony PS....If any of you guys get to the track much (or even if you go infrequently but value a more scientific approach), this is the best $250 you will ever spend. Fits in your shirt pocket and accurately measures temp, D/A, elevation, wind speed, etc. After having one I cant imagine going to the track and not having all this information at my finger tips any more. Flea Bay sells them also....just search under Kestrel Ckeck it out http://www.kestrelmeters.com/Kestrel-4000-weather-meter.pro
Posted on: 2009/5/29 17:17
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: 410 CFM Miniram... |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
It allows me to completely reshape the ports and entrance to the ports...essentially re-designing and improving on whats already there. Everyone assumes removing material is always the answer to more flow while if you look at the Eliminator SBC product line, I spent more time adding material to the right places (changing and ultimately improving the shape for more airflow). The major side benefit of a smaller port that flows more is a higher velocity charge for better cylinder fill (and more efficiency) and alot of you guys miss that or casually dismiss it when it comes to cylinder head discussions (and I have somewhat given up preaching it in some respects because Im convinced some people just dont want to get it....LOL). Once I have a proven prototype with the added material we cast a port around that new shape allowing us to CNC port a final part for all of you guys to benefit from. A ported stock head can never be made as good as a truly efficient, well thought out clean sheet design UNLESS you were to add material to the stock port (in all the righ places) via epoxy or welding which is time and cost prohibitive , not to mention not as reliable. Not much different on this manifold....I used epoxy to change and improve the shapes and contours of the runners and their critical entrances (where alot of flow can be found) taking a decent part out of the box and making it better and much more efficient. If I was in the manifold business we could take a splash or have all my changes digitized/X-rayed and than make a better as cast part from that data but then I would have to pry it from Jim's hands not to mention that right now we arent quite in the manifold business.....but we are getting there  Cheers, Tony
Posted on: 2009/5/28 16:16
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: 410 CFM Miniram... |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Here you go guys.....if you want to copy my work feel free!!
This intake kicked my azzz and turned out to be far more work than I originally envisioned but Jim is about as nice a guy to work with as it gets and although the cost escalated some during the job, he was committed to letting me have at it.....and wouldnt let me cut a corner even if I wanted to.....LOL Truth be told I was curious what I could get from this and felt with liberal use of the grinder and even more liberal use of epoxy I could perhaps give him something special. While I usually only let mid 300's leave my lips, I secretly hoped for closer to 400 (my most optimistic goal) once Jim gave me the green light on the extensive plenum reworking and runner extensions (all through many applications of epoxy obviously). That I knew would make a big difference in the outcome of this project. The pics arent that great because the flash washes everything out and no flash is a little grainy but you certainly get the idea. I ended up providing him with tapered runners longer than stock, nice radiused corners always condusive to flow, and a nice bellmouthed radius on all the port openings best I could without removing (cutting) the actual top of the manifold off. I could just fit my arm/hand to the rear of the intake to work that section but honestly that was a big PITA and my forearms are still bruised from it....LOL There are a few other tricks I will opt not to disclose but this is the basic premise of the work I performed. As Jim mentioned, the worst flowing port came in at 399 CFM and the best at 410, with the other six holes somewhere in the middle. I also flowed the manifold correctly, that is to have blocked every other port when I flowed each one, and of course plugging off the injector hole so no additional airflow snuck thru there. This essentially forced all the air to be pulled from the TB opening only (negotiating somewhat of a 90' bend into each port) just as it would on an actual running engine. This reduced flow per cylinder by about 15 CFM btw and provided us with more real world results. A shot of the first operation.....the major metal removal in the roof and sides of the port....the opposite side (the floor) needed epoxy added to achieve the correct height and radiused corners. Left port has roof reworked obviously.....right side as delivered from Jim with a little clean up work already performed [IMG]http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn283/Flowizard/Thebeforeshot-rightside.jpg[/IMG] And here is the left side....both of the "before" shots I had already roughed in the sides (getting them close to net). I should have taken some virgin pics but didnt think to start snapping away till I was covered pretty well in aluminum chips....LOL I guess most of you guys already know how small the ports are out of the box. This was either a 1204 or a 1205 Miniram btw (now its a 1206 Mamo-Ram  [IMG]http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn283/Flowizard/Theaftershot-leftside.jpg[/IMG] Here is a shot of a finished pair of roof and sides.....the other side needing to be shrunk with epoxy before all the smoke clears [IMG]http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn283/Flowizard/Finishedroofcombo.jpg[/IMG] Some pics of the finished port outlets complete with the epoxy and all the trimmings.... [IMG]http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn283/Flowizard/Intake.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn283/Flowizard/Intake2.jpg[/IMG] And a shot of the plenum....some skunkworks in this area so only one shot of this work.....generous use of properly shaped epoxy the name of the game here. [IMG]http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn283/Flowizard/Plenum-1.jpg[/IMG] Thats about it guys.... Price to do another? Well.....if you have to ask Even if one of you offered me the [I]right[/I] money to do this job, I wouldnt/couldn't take it on right now. I'm actually buried in a couple of engine builds anyway but even if I was twiddling my thumbs, I just couldnt bring myself to start another....not till this one is a distant memory at least.....then I might be stupid enough to say yes again! Also, I would like to see how Jim's new combo works out. If it goes as well as I think I may have to raise prices....LOL Thanks guys, Tony
Posted on: 2009/5/28 4:06
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Arrrggg #@$%!!! |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Yep... I wasnt sure if on some of the later model stuff some gasket manufacturers included them or not (endrail gaskets). Best way to check and see if your manifold is bottoming is to find some .060 washers, spring shims, whatever (I use valvespring shims), and place one in each corner leaned against the head so when you drop on the intake the shims represent your .060 crushed gasket thickness. You should be able to slide a thin feeler guage at the least between the end rail and the lower parallel face of the intake. If its hanging up on the end rails (zero clearance), the manifold wont even sit squarely on the shims unless you increase their thickness lifting the manifold off the endrail now allowing it to properly rest in the "V" created by the cylinder heads intake interface. -Tony
Posted on: 2009/1/19 19:22
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Arrrggg #@$%!!! |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Sure...that would help and offer some additional clearance. To be honest, I never even use the endrail gaskets....silicone correctly applied works great and has less chance of leaking IMO. -Tony
Posted on: 2009/1/19 18:40
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Arrrggg #@$%!!! |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Welcome to the world of high performance engine building....LOL
To clarify, your heads were in fact angle milled to 58cc and the intake interface corrected after that machining op (and headbolt shoulders spotfaced). Look at your paperwork next to the $260 charge for the angle mill operation. We only flatmill to 60 cc (max)....any less always gets done with an angle mill. My guess is your problem stems from the fact your intake manifold might be hanging up on the end rails of your block (before the interface gaskets have been sealed/crushed) requiring either the bottom of the intake be machined and/or the use of a thicker gasket so when you torque down the manifold the end rails don't bottom before the gaskets along each side of the head (which are sealing water and air obviously). The key is which course of action is better for performance (thicker gasket or machining the bottom of the intake that sits parallel with the block end rails). That answer is best handled by evaluating which option will better line up the intake ports of the manifold to the entrance of the cylinder head intake ports. If the intake is sitting low (in relation to the ports), a thicker gasket will raise it up solving both your problems (potential sealing issues and port alignment). If the manifold and runners line up nicely now (which means a double thick gasket will raise the manifold higher causing further misalignment), then the better approach is to mill the intake to clear the end rails and use a standard thick gasket once again. I hope this helps and I hope my hypothesis into your problem might be on the right track. Regards, Tony
Posted on: 2009/1/19 17:37
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Actually check out the peak with the stock ported heads....its about where you had guessed. Better heads will always allow a milder combination to peak later because even though the valve events are short, they are still able to adequately fill the cylinder. The fact I ground the cam on a 112 also helped the power curve hang on (wider LSA's always do that) and the single plane intake also pitched in to allow the curve to carry a little better as well. Honestly a port mathced cleaned up RPM air gap would have made the same peak power figure and added 20 ft/lbs to the peak torque numbers and a ton of area under the curve....I wish Wes could have fit that intake but unfortunately he had to go with a lower profile manifold. Would have been cool to test both....probably one of my only regrets from the testing. -Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/31 2:30
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
I think Wes is going to be out of pocket for awhile traveling with his family. The original flat tappet solid was a single pattern 236/236 on a 112 LSA....the new hyraulic roller was basically a shelf XE grind (Comp Cams), that I instructed Comp to grind on a slighter wider LSA (112 also....shelf cam was 110') in an effort to tame the idle a bit, increase vacuum, and aid in drivability. The engine had the highest vacuum readings with the AFR 195's btw, which was around 13" @ 1000 RPM. It would be better in the car at 875 or so and would likley drop to 11" at that RPM....maybe a tad more but still plenty for a street car with 400 CID of displacement (395 to be exact). It will drive perfectly smooth at practically any RPM with the right carb tune. Cant wait to get Wes's reaction to the new motor in the car....its going to act like a completely different powerplant. -Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/30 4:53
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Quote:
WOW...Tag team misinformed comments. What a priveledge How about its exactlty as I described....our 210 street porting (NOT the Comp package), did exactly what I said it did (outflowed the much larger ported stocker at any usable liftpoint). For that matter why not compare it to our 227 street porting....same price with even more of a lopsided advantage in flow compared to the 240+ cc ported stocker and still a significantly smaller cross section (our 227 street head actually pours about 223 cc's on average). Or, lets compare it to our 195 Comp ported head (JSUP) which btw would have been the same or less money for a new version of the head Prozac purchased freshened up second hand. Considerably more flow to .600 lift with only 45 cc's smaller port. Hmmmm....which would run better?? Guys....give it up already....your looking for loop holes that dont exist. The problem with your entire attack is your hoping/assuming I am full of sheet about our product and our claims....the problem (with all your arguments) is I'm NOT, but as Beach Bum mentioned why should making sense or common sense have any merit. Its the Internet afterall... -Tony But hey....all this gives my porting hand a rest in between jobs and I get to spread the word and educate more people about our product. BTW, dont beat up on Ricky....the engine isnt even in his car yet. I bet you he doesnt disappoint with a bunch of excuses and gets it on the chassis dyno rather quickly.
Posted on: 2008/12/28 23:50
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Lets keep it civil Prozac... Did you forget I had the opportunity to flowcheck and pour your heads? You almost paid as much second hand for a set of freshened up ported stock casting as you would have paid AFR for a brand new set of our 100% CNC ported street heads (within a few dollars). But you didnt get aftermarket castings with a .750 thick head deck and you didnt get our premium 8mm lightweight valve and spring/retainer package either. Not to mention our 210 street head outflows your 240 cc ported OEM casting on the intake and really beats it up badly on the exhaust side. Which do you think would run harder at the track (and on the street) as well as provide you with a ton more part throttle and SOTP acceleration at low RPMs (not to mention get better fuel economy). Your the perfect example of why sinking a bunch of money in a 20 year old design is NOT a good investment, and why taking the plunge on a clean sheet of paper much more efficient recent design definately is. Sure....a guy on a tight budget could maybe drop a new valvejob in his head and do some bowl blending, but if that job turns into needing new guides, aftermarket valves, etc. its foolish to sink big money in stock OEM castings. You wont even get that close to the better "as cast" stuff on the market today and fall way short of the Eliminator performance potential and not even save much money (or possibly spend the same or more when the smoke clears!). I know for a fact that many fall into that trap thinking its going to save them money and hopefully be "close" to a good aftermarket head in performance....they end up missing on both sides of the equation. Money gets close to the same and the performance falls short by quite a bit....a lose-lose situation. I probably speak to one person a week that does this so I know what Im talking about. The worst of it is later on when they look for the perfoemance they missed the first time (and learn from the error of their ways), they end up purchasing our product anyway and the project winds up costing them twice as much as it would had they done it right the first time. Advocating buying ported OEM stuff is very dicey and I urge all who are considering it to think it thru befor you pull the trigger....is the money you might save in the long run really worth it (and factor in the TOTAL cost of the swap and time involved with gaskets, machine work like milling and upgrading to threaded rocker stud holes perhaps, a tune, labor costs for the swap, possible chassis dyno time, etc., etc.). You would be surprised how quickly everything adds up...and I guarantee you this....figure the cost per horsepower of the swap and the AFR's will be clear winners every time. -Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/28 21:35
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
That's the best you can do JSUP? Starting to look very desperate....very sad. For the record, I did not know Wes prior to posting about the AFR challenge (a situation that would require someone actually willing to TEST SOMETHING to prove his point which you casually dismiss because the results went against you). After speaking with him for a little bit and hearing about his unique situation (having ported factory heads, Dart heads, and willing to take the time to PULL HIS ENGINE so we could test everything on much more reliable engine dyno), it became apparent to me all to quickly that this was a perfect situation. The fact he was close just made it a little more convenient and allowed us to meet at Westech which is a premier testing facility (two engine dyno's and a chassis dyno) to get this done. Have you ever even stepped foot in a dyno cell?? I would have done all the testing on the flowbench for anyone for free as I clearly laid that out in the CF thread about the original testing. Without that data the dyno results wouldnt have been nearly as complete or pertinent if you will (showing "dry flow" prevailing once again). We did pay for the dyno time as originally discussed and offered a moderate discount on the heads also as originally discussed (a few hundred dollars). I give you a guarantee in writing Wes spent more on this test than both of those figures combined....easily twice that factoring in his time. I told him his headers were too small to take advantage of all the heads....he manned up and spent the better part of a weekend installing larger headers to have a better more accurate baseline and to better maximize the AFR headed combo later assuming we came out on top. He spent money on track fees, gas to get there, head gaskets, intake gaskets, new hydaulic roller cam and lifters.....I could go on and on. I would drop this marketing ploy of yours like a hot potato....I assure you that it wont be received very well. When I mentioned to Wes it would be really nice to test this stuff on an engine dyno and make parts swapping much easier he didnt hesitate a minute to tell me he would pull the engine from his car and deliver it to Westech...this guy stepped up bigtime and you had better believe it. In fact if this board (and others) had more guys like Wesley on it, guys like you (keyboard jockeys that never actually test or swap parts to confirm or deny their own beliefs) would get run out of town much sooner. You still havent even tested your own combo....I know transmission issues....blah blah blah. And...."it doesnt matter and you dont care if you left power under the table". Then why should you even have a voice in conversations dealing with others who DO care about that extra power and strive to choose the best components in an effort to get there. Your just starting to sound like a sore loser honestly and while some people are still amused, most are just rolling their eyes.... I was actually impressed that it seemed you decided to drop it....what was I thinking....LOL -Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/28 18:43
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
I like to shoot a bit conservative when quoting numbers....(ask Wes....he can vouch for me!) Looking at the difference in usable flow (.550 and less in this particular case), and the limited duration the valves would be open (a 230 cam is light on duration compared to a much more aggressive build obviously), I would say there would be a 15 - 20 HP difference. Would I fall over if it made more than 20....no...but I wouldn't go to the dyno expecting it. Take the same combo, add a point and a half of compression, throw on a cleaned up port matched Super Vic (Wes just put an aftermarket hood on his car with more room hypothetically!), slide in a 242-248 XE hydraulic roller and THEN I would head to the dyno looking to see more of the potential between the two show itself (especially factoring in the higher RPM's this combo would then operate within). My guess is that combo would show a solid 25+ HP gain....30-35 past peak at say 6800 RPM's. BTW, I will bet you my hypothetical combo above would make 530-540 with the 195 street heads and 560 ish with the Comp 195's. It will also be perfectly content running on 91 octane, and be a great choice for a Vette with a little rear end gear in it and a manual trans, or an auto with a 32-3600 stall. Could be a daily driver but better suited as a nice driving part time vehicle. Wes....you up for it? (just kidding man....but its fun bench racing about it!) -Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/27 2:51
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Pete, The new AFR 235's flow extremely well (340+ CFM in the mid .700's....330+ in the mid .600's). They are well over 300 CFM as early as .500 lift which is insane. This a a non raised runner 23' head with a 1206 opening and it swaps in place just as easy as our 227 (same geometry, valve, and stud location). Im really excited to see its power potential and might be building a 460 CID smallblock (with a Dart Little M block) that I may feature those heads on. Its going to be a low compression build (9.5 CR) with a mild for its size hydraulic roller (in the 248 range at .050). Its going in a boat hence the low compression but this build could easily be copied or used as a suggested starting point for something more aggressive in a street car (I would add 10 degrees to the cam and a point of compression for starters). Im hoping for 600 ft/lbs and 600 HP by 5700 RPM's or so (TQ peak likley around 4300 ish). Obviously with big area under the curve (450+ ft/lbs @ 2800). Should be pretty interesting....the more aggressive builds with these heads should easily clear 700 HP....725-750 in a well built high compression engine. Keep tabs on this product....we should be releasing it around March of 09' -Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/26 22:27
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Dont forget guys that the 25 HP spread, while very significant in and of itself, was purely peak to peak. Alot of dyno curves that show that type of gain would also follow the other power curve very closely and potentially even narrow past peak (look at the Dart vs camel hump comparo which shows a net gain/curve which narrows past peak).
Its the area under the curve and the complete different shape of the AFR power curve that speaks volumes and would propel the vehicle faster than a typical gain of 25 HP might indicate without checking out the bigger picture (the rest of the power and torque gains). By 6400 there is a 40 HP gap between the two and by 6700 (still a very usable and pertinent data point) that spread gaps to 60 HP!!....the difference in top end pull of these two combo's would be notably different. I could and would like to comment on about a half a dozen of JSUP's other off base commentary thru out this thread but Im not going to bother as nothing it seems will change the way he feels anyway and honestly its a complete waste of time. Not that I expected anything different in light of the excellent results we posted. Of course my target audience isn't JSUP, its the others reading this that dont have an agenda and are simply looking for the best value and customer service when it comes to mass produced high quality aftermarket cylinder heads. Look for more AFR results to be posted over the next few months including Wes's track results with the new combo which should be really interesting as well. Hope you guys are enjoying some time off... Regards, Tony EDIT....JSUP, the ported T1 Brodix (your new hope to unseat the AFR's) are over 210 cc's when finished (closer to 220 cc's I believe) and would NOT be relevant to this testing for obvious reasons (cost and port volume). However, I would be more than happy to compare them to our larger race heads. Others have and have gone faster with the AFR Eliminators in out of the box configurations. A T1 casting has good potential though in the hands of a very knowledgable and talented porter (in fact Ive ported a number of them back in the day prior to my joining AFR) but once again now we are comparing apples and oranges in dollars spent. Our Comp version 227 would cost less and still outflow the best efforts I have seen on the Track one stuff and the upcoming AFR 235 would smoke both of them. While you think (and have accused me countless times) of "marketing" and hyping just a comparable product in your eyes thru smoke and mirrors (which I find poetic after recently finding out you make a living somehow marketing related), the reality is I am much more knowledgeable than you in this field and have a ton more real world experience related to it. I am imtimately familiar with our product as well as most of my competitors having the opportunity to see most of them on the flowbench as well as the dyno. Also, while some of our other products have far more intense competition, our 23' Eliminator line is one of our latest efforts and it shows (alot of our competitors 23' stuff was designed years ago). While I would agree that most companies rely heavily on marketing to make themselves appear to be better than their competitors (speaking generally of any type of product), there are a select few companies that really do offer their customers a truly better mousetrap. While they market their products as well, they have the goods to back their claims. Reread this paragragh a few times because its the reason you going to continue bringing a knife to a gunfight if you stay the course and continue to badmouth AFR and minimize our accomplishments. Ultimately your going to continue to come up short... I offered you a sweet situation awhile ago to try our product at a later date (after dyno testing and hitting the track a few times with your current combination) but instead you decided to make it your mission to try and badmouth AFR and belittle our efforts which is a shame. If and when you ever quantify what you have I would still be up for working with you in light of all the BS you have started. Perhaps then you could join the "leghumpers" as well. Im thinking a 210 Comp package would kill on that combination of yours...when your ready to actually get off your butt and do some real R&D let me know.
Posted on: 2008/12/26 21:39
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Don't forget that Im referring to raceweight....which includes a driver, helmet, fuel, etc. To get close to 3100 pounds would require the car be closer to 2900 with an average weight driver sitting in it....that would be a pretty light Corvette but not out of the question for someone that prepped and lightened it for track use. -Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/25 13:03
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Yep...thats probably reasonably close (regarding net gains) but I have a 3500 lb. car going about 119 MPH trap speeds with the AFR heads (490 HP) and decent air quality (500-1000 feet above sea level). My sliderule needs either more power or less weight (about 3080 lbs raceweight) to get to that type of trap speed. Will that program actually accept the real world dyno numbers? Some will....that would make the results even more scientific. Problem is unless you go to the track fairly often and understand what it takes to knock off a few tenths in an already reasonably fast car, you can't really appreciate what sounds like a small gain or improvement to an internet keyboard racer. Once you've been there however its a different story. A 14 second car is much easier to knock down similar improvements as it requires less power to do so. Let me know if your program accepts the actual dyno info and I will find a way to get it to you. Cheers, Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/25 6:16
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Prozac...
What are you rambling about?....seriously Picture this....two Corvettes of the same weight with the same combo's spend $1500 on aftermarket heads looking to improve their performance (One buys Brand "A"....the other buys Brand "D") A month later they happen to meet on a lonely stretch of two lane blacktop so remote the radar guns call in sick. We all know what happens next.... In the end, one car walks the other car by approximately three car lengths at the end of a 1320 foot blast. Its not even a race... Which car would you rather be in? We are talking about sizable differences in performance here....dont even attempt to make it seem meaningless because it just looks worse for you...I will leave it at that. Also, the gains in power are VERY significant when you consider both of them are leading competitor's products with the same price tag attached. The fact ours are fully CNC ported with very efficient port designs and high quality lightweight valvetrain components makes the purchase that much more of a no brainer for the end user. Which is exactly the point I have been trying to make for the better part of 18 months (concerning the new Eliminator product at least). You want to invest more money in the other brands in an attempt to even the bar, have at it but bigger isnt necessarily better and once you start carving on a 200 cc port in an effort to improve it, low and behold its 210 - 220 cc's before you have seen any notable gains in airflow worth mentioning (and have invested significantly more money point as well). At that point I offer you the new AFR 210 or AFR 227 head....perhaps our higher flowing Comp version of either (seeing as you were dumping a bunch more money in the other castings the price point would likely be less even purchasing our Comp ported package). See where I am going here...so now an apples to apples comparo pits the ported head of your choice to one of our larger much higher flowing pieces (assuming a bigger head is still right for the combination but thats a different argument completely). Let me sum it up for you....cc for cc, the AFR heads deliver and are arguably the most efficient aftermarket 23' heads per their given size. Better yet they are mass produced, easily attainable, and reasonably affordable all things considered. Not to mention is backed by a 35 year old company that has stellar customer service and involves themselves heavily in these public forums to help out the end users. When I get a chance I am going to calculate optimal average power curves for the three combo's we tested and look at actual average power gains (not a single peak figure) which is what will determine performance results (trap speeds and ET reductions). BTW, Im curious if you ever get your new combination to the chassis dyno? -Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/25 3:39
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine Dyno Predictions: |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Guys,
Here is all the pertinent data I acquired for this round of testing (which took quite a bit of time to gather I might add), that the guys who like to pour over the numbers will really enjoy. A big thanks goes out to Wes for providing the ported camel hump and the Dart heads and for taking all the time he did to baseline his car, hand deliver the heads to AFR for all the testing, taking the day off for the dyno day, etc. etc......I could go on and on. After speaking with him briefly after posting about the "challenge" some of you may remember on the "other board", it was clearly apparent to me this was a perfect situation with the right guy involved. Yes...AFR did discount the cylinder heads as promised months ago and yes, AFR did in fact foot the bill for the dyno testing but besides that the chips fell where they fell and driving to the dyno last Friday, although confident our product would once again deliver, I would be lying if I didnt say I was a little nervous knowing even just "OK" results would likley not be received well. Based on the numbers posted below I was hoping to see some solid gains (we had strong low/midlift gains on the intake side and a much stronger, more efficient exhaust port) and in the end I was certainly very pleased with the results. (Which were in line with my better expectations and needless to say I had a much more relaxing ride home!). BTW, you guys just looking at peak numbers are fooling yourselves. Our cars arent electric motors that operate at one RPM....as Beach touched on, you have to take the average power over the best 1500-2000 RPM span avaialable. You would obviously shift the AFR headed combo higher to take advantage of its huge gains in power past peak (the signs of an efficient higher flowing head btw). While there was a 25 HP differnce in the peak numbers (still sizable all things considered), there is closer to a 40 HP gain in average power and that would equate to serious improvement in SOTP acceleration and track times. Given the same quarterermile stretch of road, the AFR headed combo would be 3-4 car lengths ahead....thats a serious loss or a serious win depending on your vantage point. We arent taking about the difference being a fender or two or even a single car length. DONT easily dismiss that type of power differential (which the haters would incline you to do) and the fact you spent the same money makes it all that much sweeter. Enjoy the numbers....I invested many hours to coalate all of this information. ---------------------------------------------------------- INTAKE DATA (@28" of water with radiused entry on all heads LIFT...Fuelie-180 Dart-200 Dart-195 AFR (street) .200....146…….124……….143…………154 .300……195…….184……….195…………216 .400……239…….225……….238…………256 .500……252…….251……….268…………282 .550……257…….258……….272…………281 ------------------------------------------------------------------- .600……260…….261……….271…………280 .650……262…….261……….271…………280 .700……264…….262……….271…………280 EXHAUST DATA (@28" w/1.75 exhaust tube) .200……123……123……….116…………127 .300……158……151……….151…………173 .400……183……177……….180…………210 .500……199……198……….200…………230 .600……208……213……….211…………236 .700……214 Notes: I “fenced” off the .600 and up numbers on the intake because none of it applied to this testing…..but kept it in mainly for Wes’s benefit to compare his other fuelie head data (all the heads were flat there anywhere)which honestly was quite a bit optimistic. These are very good numbers for a ported camel hump head and having the time to llok them over carefully it was obvious to me Mike Stark spent alot of time on them. Even more modern ported Bowtie heads would be looking good here and the best I have seen those go with extensive time and money invested is in the 270-280 range but you would have likey invested twice the cost of an AFR head to accomplish that and it would have happened at a larger runner volume making them less efficient which would be mostly noticable in part throttle operation and some WOT power differences as well. More very important data The Dart 180 intake port poured 191 cc’s!! (quite a bit bigger than advertised). The fuelie head coincidentally poured the same 191 cc’s (lots of hogging there!) The Dart 200 head poured 201 cc’s (much closer to advertised) The AFR 195 street head poured 194 cc’s. Exhaust port volume Fuelie 67cc’s 180 and 200 cc Dart 75 cc’s 195 AFR 70 cc’s ------------------------------------------------------------ Thats about it for now....I will add more to this conversation at some point later time permitting. BTW, we seriously under-advertise our 195 cc exhaust flow data (intake side is pretty close). We were suppose to change that in our 09' catalog and overlooked it so we likely will leave the website alone and address both on 2010. I mention this only because the flow is alot more than we advertise and I didnt want anyone crying foul on the numbers. Wes can vouch for the fact these heads were not touched up one bit and were CNC ported only as delivered from us and others who have tested our heads can vouch for the fact the exhaust numbers on that particular line of heads (the 195's) are very conservative. The flow more on my equipment without a pipe than we advertise. Long story why but customers usually arent upset when their heads flow better than we claim. Wes....thanks again for the opportunity and all the hardwork. I told you a project of this magnitude would require lots of planning (and it did) but hopefully be very rewarding when the smoke cleared. I could tell you really enjoyed yourself the day we spent testing and swapping parts. Post that pic of the dyno day if you have it! Happy Holidays guys Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/24 21:04
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Another LSX cam question….Seriously this one is different |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Thanks....but I still cant cut a light....LOL (Did you notice the red bulb on the tree go on!) Beach....I enjoyed your video's as well. Thanks for sharing! Regards, Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/16 3:01
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Another LSX cam question….Seriously this one is different |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Quote:
Sure do... Here is an 11.20 run at 124 MPH (Notice how docile the idle is before I launch the car) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=209aBeeUfU4 -Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/10 21:10
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Another LSX cam question….Seriously this one is different |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
You dont even need that big a cam in the LS platform to make big power. With a stock GM shortblock in my C5 Vette and a well optimized pump gas package (with AFR 205 heads and a 224/228 cam), I routinely put down 475 RWHP/435 RWTQ....there were a couple of magazine articles about the build etc.
In fact I think there is one on our website.... Found it....copy this package as much as you can afford to and you would be in good shape! http://airflowresearch.com/articles/article078/A-P1.htm Its a good read if you own a C5....LOL -Tony PS...With stock LS6 heads and a stock LS6 intake and alot less of the bells and whistles I addressed you would likely see about 100 RWHP less (with a manual trans)....still not too shabby for a smallish cam with perfect driving manners.
Posted on: 2008/12/10 7:08
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Ordering AFR 195 heads, have header questions..... |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
180 and 195 street heads are raised .100 (very marginal).
The 210 and 227's are raised the additional .150 (.250 total). No one has any issue with the exhaust port height and neither will you so get the rest of your "T"'s crossed and the "I"'s dotted and you should be good to go. Hope this helps... Tony
Posted on: 2008/12/10 6:57
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: My opinion on AFR |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
WOW....
While I would like to comment on about a dozen different items I just dont have the energy. Its just a waste of time and I doubt most people even bothered to read it in its entirety anyway. What you guys will soon find out though is any thread remotely AFR related will all go to hell in a handbasket while this guy is allowed to post. It happened on the CF enough times for him to get banned and it will likely happen here. And btw I invested quite a bit of time explaining WHY our product works as well as it does in many threads that ultimately turned into crap but honestly for those interested with an open mind there is still alot of good info there to read. Some of your fellow members here would certainly back me on that. Anyway....we are always looking to raise the bar and perfect the art of what we do and I thought I would share some recent photo's of a 210 Eliminator Comp package that we have recently tweaked and dialed in some of the CNC work with new software and updated toolpaths. While the Comp porting isnt cheap, this level of CNC work is usually seen on much more exotic stuff costing 2 and 3X as much. Its a bargain for $2000 - $2500 IMO and makes sense for the guys that dont want to leave anything under the table when the tires hit the rollers (or the street, track, etc.) While the street porting is still the best bang for the buck, the Competition porting on some of the latest stuff we have been shipping looks like jewelry and they are every bit as effective as they look.... BTW, feel free to contact me directly if any of you have questions about our product CHAMBER / BOWL PICS  [/img] NOTE THE TRANSITIONS BELOW into and out of the valvejob/chamber (very difficult to mass produce a part thats this accurate)   LOOKING DOWN THE INTAKE PORT  EXHAUST PORT OUTLET  EXHAUST PORT SHORT SIDE RADIUS  NOTE THE TIME invested in the valve shape/profile. Back cut intake with specific width angles....tulip exhaust valve with a radiused leading edge....all standard equipment. Also note the more desirable beadlock keeper grooves as well.  Regards, Tony Mamo AFR R&D / Product Design Mgr (661)257-8124 Ext. 109
Posted on: 2008/12/1 8:42
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
Re: Engine swap on the C1 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Guru
Joined:
2008/11/15 22:20 Posts:
54
|
Beach,
I will be attending AETC and directly following the PRI show. Please stop by and say hello....I look forward to showing you the product and a few bells and whistles we have been working on. I agree with everything you stated by the way and understand that the situation is unfortunate. The company that did the porting should have been honorable and if they were this customer would not be in this position. Also note I did in fact offer to try and fix the heads at a nominal fee assuming we could. The customer never reached out to discuss my offer....only to start unjustified negative commentary on this board instead....very frustrating for us when you care about the product and our customers as much as we do. Looking forward to meeting you in Orlando... Cheers, Tony
Posted on: 2008/11/27 5:54
|
|
|
Transfer
|
|
|
