A typical steel retainer with a 7 or 10 degree lock, depending on what springs you choose.

Cool, REAL heads!

Those look nice

Those look very nice. Are there flow numbers out there anywhere?

Lift Value Intake Flow CFM Exhaust Flow CFM
.100″ 78 58
.200″ 154 130
.300″ 230 186
.400″ 282 222
.500″ 310 243
.600″ 326 253
.700″ 334 262
Tests conducted at 28″ of water (pressure). Bore size: 4.350″; exhaust with 2″ pipe.

WOW, that does look nice

I think there will be a lot more information available soon from various sources, as the first pair will arrive here at our shop Tuesday.

Will you be diving in and porting them right away? or bolting them on an engine. I'm Excited to hear there potential.

I'm definitely buying a set of these heads. I wish they had a matching dual plane intake to match.

No dual plane in that port size can match the flow potential of those new heads. You could use a Performer RPM, but it will cost you power on a combination otherwise intended to take advantage of those heads. Not a good match of parts, IMO.

Too bad my flow bench isn't back together, yet. It would be interesting to see the results from another independent bench.

Brad, which head do you feel would be a better option to bolt an RPM intake onto for $1979?

A customer of mine supposedly ordered a set a week ago, so I'm hoping to have them here to test fairly soon.

If the engine is an RB, use the Indy dual plane. If it's a B, use a single plane and make the best of it by camming the motor correctly. Another alternative would be to port the RPM if you're trying to keep up with the heads. Hughes Engines' site has reference flow numbers and comments on various aftermarket intakes.

Dollar for dollar, I don't think much is going to touch these heads in a stock port window street application, out of the box.

IMO, the build that person talked about previously sounds like a better fit for a mildly worked-over set of Sidewinders, especially if he's target-locked an a d-p intake for whatever reason. Would save him some $$$, too. This is the same guy who had a "hissy fit" over the idea of having to spend more $$$ on better-than-OEM rockers to go along w/ some new heads, too.

I'd like to see some TF #s from your bench even more than mine, considering the extra "horsepower" your Saenz has to test 'em.

So... would you think the standard-port location TFs would make more HP than my old raised-port Stage VIs, since the TFs boast more "raw" CFM? If I wasn't so invested in Victors right now (heads, offset lifters & rockers, etc.), I'd be really curious how just swapping out my old Stage VIs for a set of TFs along w/ the COMP .650" RX roller you got me would work. They would even have the same compression ratio, too.

If the TF heads really flow what they claim, and the port volume is only 240cc's, then I think these will be pretty tough to beat on a pump gas hot street/strip 440-470 type combo.
If they actually flow 330+, that's 15+ better than a MCH CNC stealth on my bench, and 12cc's smaller port volume and a bigger valve.

I have numbers from my bench and your stage 6's, so it will be interesting to see how they compare side by side. IMO, what those 6's really had going for them was decent flow from pretty small port volume, which I feel is a good combo for moderate cube pump gas motors running in heavy-ish cars with closed exhaust systems.

If the TF's flow 330+, then I think the real apples to apples heads to compare them to are going to be the Hughes std port EZ's where they CNC the chambers and fill in the lip on the intake roof. But those cost $800 more.
Both are std port heads, heart shaped chambers, std height ex ports, std rocker arms.
I guess you could include some CNC ported 75cc edelbrock heads too, but they are also over $500 more than the TF's.

That would be a pretty fun dyno shoot out. Those three heads on like a 505 pump gas short block, try a couple different intakes on each set of heads.....see how it all shakes out.

I was thinking that considering all of the constraints on a "replacement" type head, that we are approaching diminishing returns. I was also thinking the same thing on the 75 cc Eddy head. MCH CNC but with the 2.19 and irrespective of the flow bench numbers, the real winner could only be determined on a dyno, or better, in a car.

My gut feeling is that on a 440-451ci package, assuming the TF heads flow as advertised, they would likely be the "winner". I also feel that at 500"+ the reworked EZ would prevail, provided there was enough cam and a good enough manifold to allow the motor to peak high enough to take advantage of the extra volume.

I should have a 470 inch B block on the dyno in a month or so with the TF heads. Pump gas engine with a solid roller. PipeMax says it will make 680 hp so I guess we'll see how close it comes.

Andy.. that 680 hp.. is that the min, average or max
on pipemax... I havent figured that out over all these
years... mine has always been near the min or slightly
above that

680 was the low, 700 was the high. This was based on a total intake flow of 310 cfm which is a bit of a guess. Once I have the heads I can bolt the intake and the carb on and see what my little flow bench says.