AFR 185 flow numbers real? - Vintage Mustang Forums

 5Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 01:10 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
blkfrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Anaheim Hills, CA
Posts: 2,586
AFR 185 flow numbers real?

For those who know me, i've resisted the temptation to buy horsepower rather than "making" horsepower. I built my 331 in 2004 and used '70 351w heads that I fully ported and unshrouded with 1.94/1.6 valves and with 160cc intake port and 60cc exhaust port. I also used a comp 282S SFT cam and 1.7 probe shaft rockers with beehive springs. The engine produced 370 RWHP and it peaked HP at 6500 rpm with usable HP to 7200.

I'm going to "refresh" my FB and do several things I wished I did when I restomoded it from '99 to '04.

I'm considering aluminum heads suck as AFR 185s, a larger SFT cam and upping compression from 9.8 to 11:1 so I can have usable power to 7500. I'm going to change my rear end gears from 3.50s to 3.89s also.

The AFR flow numbers are very good. Are they really that good? Are there other heads that you would recommend?

Tracy Blackford

65 Mustang FB, 331 custom built with 289 H beam rods and 383W piston, 282S cam, self ported '70 351w heads, Dougs Tri-Y headers. 1.7 shaft rockers and 26986 beehives. Hurricane Single Plane and custom 750 HP. T5z and 3.50 9" posi rear.
430 HP @ 6500...not too shabby for old school heads!


'65 Fastback
blkfrd is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 01:18 PM
Senior Member
 
jdub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,674
Since your shaft rockers are probably for an inline head, you're probably not going to be able go with TrickFlow. Have you considered larger than 185s? Since you've already made 370 RWHP my fear would be you'd spend the money on 185s and not get satisfactory $/hp. It shouldn't cost too much more to go to 205s or larger, which I think would be more appropriate for a 331 or 347 at 7500 RPM.
zray likes this.

1965 Mustang
jdub is offline  
post #3 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 01:58 PM
Senior Member
 
turbo2256b's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: KY, OH, MI
Posts: 1,442
turbo2256b is offline  
post #4 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 02:00 PM
Senior Member
 
happystang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 3,284
I'd definitely go with the 205 heads on a stroker motor. You will not sacrifice power down low, especially if you get a cam to match the heads. Yes, most after market heads will outflow ported factory heads. (**MOST, not all)

AFR makes very good heads, although I'm much more biased towards Trick Flow heads as I've had immense success with them. The Trick Flow 190 11R cylinder heads make similar power to the AFR 205 heads at a much lower cost.

1969 Mustang Convertible field find (It's a 450hp spaghetti noodle)
www.SaveClassicCars.net

"The problem is not the problem, the problem is your attitude about the problem"

happystang is offline  
post #5 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 02:21 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
blkfrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Anaheim Hills, CA
Posts: 2,586
I should have mentioned that i'm not touching the bottom end except the cam. Its got 6000 miles on it and oil pressure is right where it was when the engine was fresh. Given that, I think trick flows require special valve reliefs on the pistons.

Several years ago, before Canfield went out of business I was thoroughly impressed with the power guys were making with the 195 head. Too bad they are no longer around.

Tracy Blackford

65 Mustang FB, 331 custom built with 289 H beam rods and 383W piston, 282S cam, self ported '70 351w heads, Dougs Tri-Y headers. 1.7 shaft rockers and 26986 beehives. Hurricane Single Plane and custom 750 HP. T5z and 3.50 9" posi rear.
430 HP @ 6500...not too shabby for old school heads!


'65 Fastback
blkfrd is offline  
post #6 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 03:38 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: far east north corner of Texas
Posts: 4,421
Garage
Elvira. Its an old 331 dyno series that I found when I started my 331 but still interesting because they tried quite a few things.

Elvira 331 Project Dyno - Mustangs & Fords Magazine

331 solid flat cam, rings and bearings break in run up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MNjb-AiWec

331 break in complete and is waiting on me to finish the body work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhnOk5FCBkE

One of the last tnt's on my 289 may she rest in pieces. It ran in the
high 11's low 12's when it was at its best.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2yWPZGfMT0
macstang is offline  
post #7 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 05:51 PM
Senior Member
 
turbo2256b's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: KY, OH, MI
Posts: 1,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkfrd View Post
I should have mentioned that i'm not touching the bottom end except the cam. Its got 6000 miles on it and oil pressure is right where it was when the engine was fresh. Given that, I think trick flows require special valve reliefs on the pistons.

Several years ago, before Canfield went out of business I was thoroughly impressed with the power guys were making with the 195 head. Too bad they are no longer around.
Years ago was a dealer (had a head porting service) for their heads begged him to make some more like street performance heads if he had he might still be in business. Most of his stuff was a bit much for most applications.
turbo2256b is offline  
post #8 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 05:53 PM
Senior Member
 
cmefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkfrd View Post
For those who know me, i've resisted the temptation to buy horsepower rather than "making" horsepower. I built my 331 in 2004 and used '70 351w heads that I fully ported and unshrouded with 1.94/1.6 valves and with 160cc intake port and 60cc exhaust port. I also used a comp 282S SFT cam and 1.7 probe shaft rockers with beehive springs. The engine produced 370 RWHP and it peaked HP at 6500 rpm with usable HP to 7200.

I'm going to "refresh" my FB and do several things I wished I did when I restomoded it from '99 to '04.

I'm considering aluminum heads suck as AFR 185s, a larger SFT cam and upping compression from 9.8 to 11:1 so I can have usable power to 7500. I'm going to change my rear end gears from 3.50s to 3.89s also.

The AFR flow numbers are very good. Are they really that good? Are there other heads that you would recommend?
Tracy, The new AFR Renegade 185 heads flow as well as the old AFR 205 heads. They also come with a much better spring and valve package stock then the older heads did. For the price the AFR 185 Renegade heads are a great value. I would consider buying them from Ford Strokers as he usually sells them with upgraded springs. Just make sure and buy them with the spring package that will work with your cam choice. You could also buy them from Flow tech Inductions (Ed Curtis). Those heads will support enough horsepower to split the stock block so no issue with them not flowing enough.
RyanSterling966 likes this.
cmefly is offline  
post #9 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 05:58 PM
Senior Member
 
zray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On the road in NE Oklahoma
Posts: 9,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkfrd View Post
"........The AFR flow numbers are very good. Are they really that good? Are there other heads that you would recommend?
I know first hand the AFR 165 numbers are verifiable. No reason to doubt the 185's are not also legitimate. If the price is not a concern, nor originality, then there are few reasons not to go the AFR route.

I believe they are located very close to you (in Valencia, CA). If I were that close, I wouldn't be able to resist a visit to their facility for a look-see.

Z

zray is offline  
post #10 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 07:10 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
blkfrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Anaheim Hills, CA
Posts: 2,586
I just noticed the word "suck" in my original post just after "aluminum heads" and just before "AFR 185s"...that was not a Freudian slip I swear!
I'm not opposed to going with aftermarket heads anymore (it's more about convincing myself than anything else). I got my fun out of the ported Ford iron, but if i'm going to refresh this car, I figured I should up my game a bit on the engine too. Those Renegade 185s look like a great way to go.

So the engine is about 430HP at the flywheel now. These changes are probably going to get it up in the 475 to 500 HP range. The block is a '68 302 block with ARP studs. Is it going to survive that kind of HP? I remember hearing that 500 HP was pushing a stock block but maybe that was a 5.0 block and the older blocks were stronger.

Tracy Blackford

65 Mustang FB, 331 custom built with 289 H beam rods and 383W piston, 282S cam, self ported '70 351w heads, Dougs Tri-Y headers. 1.7 shaft rockers and 26986 beehives. Hurricane Single Plane and custom 750 HP. T5z and 3.50 9" posi rear.
430 HP @ 6500...not too shabby for old school heads!


'65 Fastback
blkfrd is offline  
post #11 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 07:23 PM
Senior Member
 
cmefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,980
Not enough difference in strength between the older blocks and the roller blocks to make a difference. 500HP seems to be the limit give or take. some live and some do not at that level. I think the RPM that they get shifted at has a lot to do with it.
cmefly is offline  
post #12 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 07:24 PM
Senior Member
 
happystang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 3,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkfrd View Post
So the engine is about 430HP at the flywheel now. These changes are probably going to get it up in the 475 to 500 HP range. The block is a '68 302 block with ARP studs. Is it going to survive that kind of HP? I remember hearing that 500 HP was pushing a stock block but maybe that was a 5.0 block and the older blocks were stronger.
From what I remember.. HP alone won't kill a 5.0 block, as many people run boost through stock blocks and make a lot of power.

HP+high RPM is what seems to crack them.

The boosted engines are making their power at a lower RPM instead of winding them up to 7000RPM+

1969 Mustang Convertible field find (It's a 450hp spaghetti noodle)
www.SaveClassicCars.net

"The problem is not the problem, the problem is your attitude about the problem"

happystang is offline  
post #13 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 07:24 PM
Senior Member
 
zray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On the road in NE Oklahoma
Posts: 9,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkfrd View Post
I just noticed the word "suck" in my original post just after "aluminum heads" and just before "AFR 185s"...that was not a Freudian slip I swear!
"...... So the engine is about 430HP at the flywheel now. These changes are probably going to get it up in the 475 to 500 HP range. The block is a '68 302 block with ARP studs. Is it going to survive that kind of HP? I remember hearing that 500 HP was pushing a stock block but maybe that was a 5.0 block and the older blocks were stronger.
Stock Ford 289, 302, or 5.0 block + 500 HP sooner or later =




Z

zray is offline  
post #14 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 08:14 PM
Senior Member
 
silverblueBP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Ames, Iowa
Posts: 6,724
This thread made me go look at what the 185's flow compared to my 66, 289 iron heads. I guess mine are pretty good!

224/203 cfm @ .550" lift. Compared to 273/190 for the 185's.

Yeah, I'm smiling.

Tracy, you did a hell of a job on the engine...no need to mess with it IMO. Hell, anyone can "buy" horsepower. It's more impressive to "make it"!

-Mark-

1966 Mustang 2+2

"Money can't buy happiness, but it can buy a race car. And I've never been sad in a race car!"

silverblueBP is online now  
post #15 of 27 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 08:28 PM
Senior Member
 
zray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On the road in NE Oklahoma
Posts: 9,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by happystang View Post
From what I remember.. HP alone won't kill a 5.0 block,..... as HP+high RPM is what seems to crack them....."
Well, unless you you have 800+ cubic inches to play with, the engines aren't going to making any horsepower without the high rpm.

The obvious way to keep these SBF engines together at the ragged edge is to spend a lot money, or time if experienced, on the balancing. Unless each piston, piston rings, connecting rod, wrist pin, and bearing assembly is within 0.1 gram of all the others, then just forget it. It will blow sooner rather than later. And internal balancing is is usually the way to go. Extreme balancing won't keep an engine together, but it will keep an engine together longer. Hopefully long enough to get the checkered.

Z

zray is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Vintage Mustang Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome