I've got a few things going on in the shop right now so I haven't had a chance to scrutinize these things too much, but my first impression is that the overall fit & finish, and presentation is pretty nice. Over the next few days I'll try and get some measurements on them, but for today I only had a chance to put one on the bench and see what kind of numbers it put up.

Bore- 4.375
Test pressure- 28"
Intake tested with a radius plate, exhaust tested with and without a flow tube.
Exhaust flow tube diameter- 2"

Lift-----in/ex--ex w-tube
.100--71.6/52.9----52.9
.200-156.1/116.5--125.2
.300-229.3/163.6--174.8
.400-274.8/192.7--213.2
.450-290.5/202.6--226.1
.500-302.9/209.2--238.0
.550-311.1/215.0--245.7
.600-316.0/220.8--251.5
.650-317.9/222.7--254.2
.700-319.7/224.6--259.2
.750-321.6/226.5--261.1

Nice to see a head out of the box with numbers that continue to climb and not back up like most do. Looking forward to getting a set of these. Thanks for posting.

cool

That's pretty stout for an OOB standard-type intake port. How do the #s compare to the MCH CNC Edelbrock (Stealth?) you tested?

And another example of a stubby exhaust port that LOVES an extension added on to it.

Intake numbers are about 5% better than the last set of ported Edelbrock heads I had. The exhaust is roughly the same.

Thank you for the results & thank you for showing what was used to test the intake port & not using clay.
Intake tested with a radius plate

I ported a set of rpm`s years ago on Pettis`s flow bench that went 327-224 iirc w/the stock 2.14 intake valve BUT, if the meats there and someone either has a cnc program that will work w/these or can program, then they`d be really good for the intermediate power zone and a Max wedge could possibly really shine.......

Great info, (And Great to 'see' you, Fast)

Well there you go, 5-10 years ago guys who needed a "perfect" 650 horse capable head for their 500" B/RB strokers would have to buy a set of Eddie's and have them CNC'd or Hand ported, just to get about 95% of what we now have "off the shelf".

I really like the .400 lift numbers, mid lift is so critical for keeping the cylinders packed = Awesome torque. The non-stalling .500-.650 numbers look great for making big power at a still safe and moderate RPM ceiling. 290 at .450 lift is really exceptional IMHO, that's about PEAK flow for an out of the Box Edelbrock IIRC. Look perfect for a street-strip 10.5:1 440-451 4 speed and especially a 470"-520" Automatic.

Seems like a Near-Perfect gap filler, Standard 906 port size, anybody wanting/needing more would step-up from there to a Max Wedge. I've always liked the Trick flow finish quality, usually just want to upgrade the Locks/retainers and usually a quick 'true-up' of the as delivered VJ and they can be good-to-go compared to what I'd say to most other out-of-the-box head MFGs. I guess the main 'off the shelf' competition for these would be the EZ's but I'll bet the TF fit and finish is better.

I was planning on buying the std. port 440EZs for the 463 i'm putting together, but may now wait to see some more flow numbers on the Trick Flows.
Decisions, decisions

Nice to see a head right out of the box w/ comparable flow to a ported Edelbrock/Stealth/Sidewinder.

Ummm... I think you mean flow bench, not dyno.

More flow tests won't change how the heads work; I'll be interested in how they perform on an engine.

The flow numbers along with the modern combustion chamber should really make this head worth looking at. Even if the ported eddy matches the flow it should still be at a disadvantage. Can't wait to see some results in running cars. Thanks for the info Dwayne.

Since I don't know anything about a wedge why don't you guys enlighten me. Does this mean you use a bigger cam? I don't like rollers. Would a .590 lift purple shaft work well with these in a 512 BB? Thanks.

Brad, there was a post about Stealth head flow numbers a few weeks ago, I posted the numbers I got from the MCH CNC Stealth there.

Interesting they almost match a stock victor. I wonder what sort of things the head porting wizards will be able to do with these things.

I think the only standard port head that tops these As-delivered were the old Chapman Stage VI 260 (which I think JohnRR sent to Dwayne the same time I sent my Chap 265 MW's) And the Chapmans were Raised ports and long valve heads that need special rocker gear. I think they went 360 up around .600-.650, may still be in the Moparts archives. Not sure they were any better than these at .400-.450 though.

I'll have dyno numbers in a few weeks.

Purple shaft with stock stamped rockers are the HOT ticket right now.

Great Andy looking forward to it.

I can provide some comparative data from Dwayne's current bench (a Saenz 600) tested on the same 4.375" bore:

A. My old PRH-ported MP Stage VIs w/ 2.14" intake valves and small 215 cc runners (w/o RB adapters added). On a 10.8:1 CR RB 452 short block using a modified MP M1 intake, my BG "825" carb, 2" headers and a 266 at .050" x .600" x 108 LSA SFT cam, it made around 610 HP & 570 Tq on Dwayne's dyno.

Lift -- Int / Exh (no flow tube)
.100 --- 69 / 53
.200 -- 143 / 108
.300 -- 213 / 146
.400 -- 262 / 181
.500 -- 293 / 211
.550 -- 305 / 222
.600 -- 307 / 231
.650 -- 307 / 237
.700 -- 307 / 243

B. My Hughes CNC-ported 1st-generation Edelbrock Victors w/ 2.20" intake valves and an estimated 270 cc runner volume (adjusted down about 40 cc for the built-in RB adapters). Like the Chapmans, these have raised ports and need special-offset intake rockers.

Lift -- Int / Exh (no flow tube)
.100 --- 75 / 58
.200 -- 169 / 109
.300 -- 237 / 157
.400 -- 280 / 201
.500 -- 318 / 229
.550 -- 329 / 239
.600 -- 341 / 246
.650 -- 347 / 253
.700 -- 345 / 256

At the same CR as the MP Stage VIs and the .650" roller version of the SFT mentioned above, I'll take a s.w.a.g. and say I'd expect to see 640+ HP from the Trick Flows on the same RB 452 short block as the Stage VIs were tested, between the different heads and switching to a roller.

But it's all just educated(?) guesses until someone puts 'em in service.

My bad, too many blue moons..........

Brad, didn't some combination of stuff we tried end up making like 625hp?

The CNC "standard" port Victors had quite a bit bigger port opening as I recall compared to a true std sized head.
These TF heads have port openings that look like a std valley pan gasket would seal up okay.

This particular set I have in the shop are going on a pump gas 505 with a solid cam and a 6bbl.

Here's the Chapman 260 standard Ports ( from the Tech archives)



These are the Chapman CNC'd MP Stage VI 260cc's:

Lift" I/E

.100--71.5/58.2
.200-150.0/118.6
.300-219.4/180.0
.400-278.7/219.4
.500-323.6/233.9
.550-338.9/240.3
.600-352.3/243.5
.650-348.5/246.7
.700-348.5/249.9
.750-348.5/251.5
.800-348.5/253.1

I think up to .450 the TW's are impressively close. 290cfm at only .450 is gonna be killer, you basically only need a very mild .525-.550 lift cam to easily cover 600hp, easy on the RPM/bottom end, easy on springs too

Yeah, my ported Victor intake, a 1" open spacer and your CFS "dyno mule" Holley made about 625 HP. The 610 HP I referenced was as I ran it in my car (my carb & my ported M1 intake because of hood clearance), so I can correlate that to the car's on-track performance.

A modified Victor on the TFs w/ the .650" RX roller... 650+ HP? (EDIT: The standard port location would even allow for running a Victor intake under my T/A hood )


Right; Hughes' "standard" CNC job still opens the entry to 2.40" x 1.30"; not MW, but definitely bigger than a standard valley tray port size. (EDIT: Found something that says the TF port entry is 2.270″ x 1.230... is this what you measured, too?)


Bet my ol' 440 6BBL RR would have loved that engine!

I agree, but just want to see what the numbers may be after a little hand work. I'm wanting something in the 320-325cfm at .600".

I hate to say this Andy but your DYNO numbers never show up in track times. Something in your corrections must be accrue. LOVE your products and use them but MOST dyno numbers are way out in left field almost as bad as the rag racing magazines. Hopefully track times will be posted early spring.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The dyno that I use sends a lot of engines to the track and the track times back up the dyno numbers. You live a couple of thousand miles away from me and don't know anything about the dyno that I test on or the engine shop involved.

Are the Trick Flows available w/stock straight plug design? Or are they all angled plugs? TTI headers in A-Body RB set up has a couple cylinders looking really close (visually) to accept angled w/out modifying.

Call Trick flow and let us know please

LOL - Yup, was going to call Friday

Uh oh!

Bill stepping it up a notch...

Someone needs to remake the Chapman heads.

I'd say to expect they're ALL angle-plug because it goes w/ how the chamber was designed.

You mean that still need RB adapters and sell for $2500+ each bare? I don't think so... They really missed the market for those.

Edelbrock could have nailed it w/ the Victors, only they didn't get it "right" either. At least you can still buy Victors and they priced them reasonably.

According to Trick Flow, they already are.

It seems every time a new product comes on the market there is always something about it that makes you scratch your head..... Like these harmless looking little squares cast into the decks of these new TF heads

Then you put a head gasket on the head, located by the dowel pin holes, and then I go......... Hmmmmm
First pic is a Cometic, second is the TF recommended Fel-Pro 1009.
The Fel-Pro is right at the edge of the square. I put some bluing on the head and scribed where the end of the head gasket lays.
I'm thinking there's gonna be a little leak here if you don't do something about it.
I also have a Victor graphite faced gasket here that was wide enough in this area that it would probably seal this off okay, but the gasket fire ring was ever so slightly inside the chambers in a few areas.
IMO, for the next batch of castings, TF should just fill these squares in. There is one at each end of the head, and they both have this same issue.

Fill with epoxy or weld er up!

But yeah that should be changed on the casting.

Overall, the fit and finish on these heads is quite nice, even though I found a couple of things done differently than I would like.
The machining looks real good, and the heads have been very nicely deburred.
The part number they show for head bolts is the same as used for Victor heads.
The rocker shaft bolt holes don't seem super deep and TF recommends using studs, and I would agree with that.
Obviously a company that's making and selling as many heads as TF does must have their reasons for doing certain things the way they do, and I'm sure I don't have the credentials to argue with those reasons, but there are a couple of things I would do a little different.
The guide clearance was pretty much right at .0008, although there were 3 exhaust guides on one head that were really closer to .0006. That's really tighter than I like to see them.
After brushing out the guides with solvent and wiping down the valve stems, they "felt" nice and smooth, but since the heads were already here and apart, and my customer wants me to use my best judgement on them, I honed them out for a little more clearance. I set them to .0010 intake and .0012 exhaust.
Another thing I would do differently is, the OD of the 45 on the exhaust valve job was like .015-.020 larger in diameter than the valve. I don't know if this is intentional on their part, or a slight mistake when they set up the cutter. My preference is to have the OD of the 45 to be .005-.010 inside the OD of the valve, particularly on street heads.
The 45 on the intake seat was right at the size of the valve at 2.19.

Why do these head companies recommend that 1009 gasket when it overhangs more bores than not?

Kevin

Heck if they are that bad I'll just buy a set of Elderbrocks. Are the Indy heads that much better than the TF,s?

Fill the hole with right-stuff and go on. As for eddelbrocks instead, well they all have tight guides also, most pro shops like to hone them out while most DIY guys just bolt em on and don't have an issue.

Yeah I just don't know alot about Aluminum heads. Never owned a set. Would I better off to buy the Indys?

My guess would be they all have inconsistencies do to mass production.

I have a few different rockers here I test fit to check the sweep.
The standard HS rockers are really too long. The TF specified part number is the rockers that fit the RPM heads, and they are shorter, so they should fit well.
I also checked an Indy/Dove rocker. Slightly too long.
A Comp Pro-magnum looks pretty good, but the best sweep of the rockers I have here was with a Crane Gold. I believe the "short" HS rockers are supposed to have the same shaft to roller relationship as the Crane Golds, although I haven't had any of those to check myself.

The things I've said I would do differently on these heads are really kind of nit-picky things. Of the currently available BB Mopar offerings, I would say these have the nicest overall fit and finish, especially when you take the price into consideration.
I don't see how you can go wrong with these things for $2000, if they will work in your combination for the level of performance you're after.

Keep in mind, TF guarantees you won't have any problems with the guides, valve job, valves, springs, etc. for two years, and I'm sure most of the heads they sell will get taken out of the box and bolted on.

And what is the "right-stuff" to fill the hole whit??

That's what I would like to know. Permatex?

Permatex??

Gasket Sealent.

I know what Permatex is, so you will fill that hole whit Permatex? I dont think thats is what i whant to do as a solution.

Permatex and JB Weld has been fixing leaks for years lol.

great to see an informative post Dwayne! just sitting in the shadows enjoying the info..... even though I've fallen back to my first mopar love.... small blocks!

Right stuff .. ... THE RIGHT STUFF , a gasket sealant.

I would just fill them with JB Weld .

People would be goin' out of their damn minds if this little square was on a "Chinese" head casting...

Thanks Dwayne.


Right stuff
http://www.autozone.com/sealants-glues-a...ker/416211_0_0/

Is there anything on the Is there anything on the deck of the block that would intersect that square divit in the head like any open passage?

Nice Info Dwayne!

Its a nice to see they are living up to all the hype so far!

The info on the rockers that fit is interesting
Rocker arms: Harland Sharp #S70015KE (1.5 ratio)
Harland Sharp #S70016KE (1.6 ratio)
Most COMP Cams and Crane Cams rockers

They also recommend
Rocker arm stud kit: Trick Flow #TFS-61600613

The only place that I can find that lists these other than HS (and they only list the 1.5)is Summit at $907 - I wonder if the Scorpion rocker under development will be the go to rocker for these since they do make many of rockers for the Ford Trick Flow heads.

It would be great if there was a comparison with same short block two sets of heads, Trick Flow and Edelbrock or Indy.

These heads look like my EZ heads only much nicer finish. I have to wonder why Trickflow doesn't make rockers to mate with these heads It cant be a big secret that there are issues with rocker arm geometry on big block Mopar heads. I really like my EZ heads but if these heads were out when I bought my Indys I would have bought these just because the ports look more finished.I had to do a lot of work to my EZ heads to make them work as well as they do.
Gus

Thanks Dywane
glad you're posting good information on the board again
Very informative as usual
Just wish there were more post like this.
Jim F

fabo also has a thread on these heads and did some flow numbers

You must be new here...

They'd be offering up 1001 and one uses .. and excuses ... for bubble gum to fill that hole

yes ... the lifter valley ...

Would you foresee any problems running the Crane ductile rockers?

Yep.

And, as usual, something in the water in Idaho leads to inflated flow bench numbers when compared to two others that are virtually identicle.

numbers ??

Link me, dude.

I was waiting for the big numbers from "the Idaho bench" to get posted here. Kinda curious they weren't. But numbers higher than everyone else sorta confirms that the bench is

Maybe Jim did a little magical clean up of the factory porting, hence the bigger numbers (at least that is what I'd claim ).

A guy on the bullet mentioned he got one of the first sets of heads. I advised him to send them to Andy F since they're both in the same state. He said he was sending them to Idaho instead. I warned him about the inflated numbers that come out of that part of the country but he sent them anyway.

LINK --- V Scroll to post #48

http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1178282&highlight=trick+flow+mopar+heads

http://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/showthread.php?t=328349&page=4

I'm not going to post the numbers here to avoid confusion...

Let's just say ~20 more cfm at .500 lift.

Jim must be throwing a bit more correction into his numbers these days. Frankly, I was expecting he'd come in at 360+ cfm @ .600"-.700".

Hey, 40 more HP is nothing to sneeze at!

It's been my experience that he's usually pretty consistent if he's flowing an as-cast port. It's the "hand ported" results that IMO get really creative. Sometimes darn near impossibly creative.

Maybe Jim has hands like these and can get in the port where no 5 axis machine can...

Ha ha!

No problem, I can give you any kind of intake flows you want just by changing the radius plate. (1) no plate, (2) 1/4" clay roll, (3) 1/2" clay roll, (4) radius plate #1, (5) radius plate #2

Lift.......(1).......(2).......(3).......(4).......(5)

.100.....74......75...................75...........75
.200....151.....153................153.........151
.300....206.....225................225.........219
.400....229.....274................279.........272
.500....236.....291................317.........320
.600....239.....295................323.........338
.700....239.....284.....312.....315.........333

And yes, all intake ports I tested began to stall between .600" and .700" lift.

I probably have been making a mistake as to how I open the exhaust valve at the beginning of the test and skewing the opening lift flows. Here is what I get now, on this one port, with no pipe and then w/ my 2" pipe design.

Lift......no pipe......2" pipe w/belled end

.100......52.............53
.200.....119............133
.300.....161............185
.400.....192............227
.500.....211............251
.600.....223............267
.700.....230............273

Yep, head flow numbers don't mean a ton to me unless there is a way to really document everything. I found this out years ago on my own bench when I played around with head placement over the cylinder. It is easy to pick up some cfm my moving the intake over closer to the center of the bore. I finally built a fixture with dowel pins so the head was always in the same location on the bore. I also machined up a radius plate that I used on all heads. Once I did that I was able to start getting repeatable results.

There were some guys on SpeedTalk a while back who had a test fixture which they sent from guy to guy so everyone could calibrate their benches to the same fixture. Something like that makes sense for people who are working back and forth a bunch.

pass around calibration plates.


http://www.flowbenchtech.com/orificeplates.html

I participated in the flow-around on speedtalk a few years ago...results were very interesting.
I always wanted to know how my bench compared to Meaux's and found out it's just a tad lower than his.
We first tested flow plates, then tested an AFR BBC 385 head using supplied head, valves and radius plate, then tested a ProComp cnc ported SBC head with supplied valves and radius plate.
We were also told what bore size to flow at, and if we didn't have that size to include the size we used...
Brian

A Flowbench never has been, nor ever will be a Dynomometer.
And as I am quite sure we all know, it is just a "tool" to measure gains or losses in one particular area.
I don't discuss "flow" on the internet.... way too many variables not just in benchs, but in methodologies, which ALL can affect results.

THANKS to ALL of you here for posting your results, from ALL locations, very informative and much appreciated.

On the other hand, utilizing flow numbers from a KNOWN flow bench that has shown on track results that back up those flow numbers is never a bad thing!

Dwayne's numbers have always been spot-on IMO!

I like to see real world numbers vs.the inflated numbers that EVERY manufacturer publishes. Edelbrock, 440Source, Indy. They all publish ridiculous numbers.

Having the same Flowbench flow multiple different manufacturers not only gives a good comparison but shows how different heads shake out at different lifts. Invaluable information!

That is cool, I didn't know you participated in that flow around. I didn't participate since I'm a bit of hack when it comes to the flow bench. I just have a weeny 110 bench and it is only set up for BB Mopar heads.

My first set of TF heads showed up today and I figured out a couple of things. First of all they need 10x of the longer 5.000 inch head studs. That is a common part number but until TF or ARP build a kit you'll have to source your own. Same stud that is used in the B1 kit so if you have a spare B1 head stud kit laying around you can rob them from it. If you're building your own head stud kit I'd order 24 of the 2.725 short stud from ARP. The 2.725 stud fits better than the standard 2.750 stud that they use in their kits. The 2.725 stud screws in further and clears the header flange.

Even more interesting is the fact that the rocker shaft studs need to be all short ones. No long ones required. I used 10x of the 2.500 ARP stud and it worked just fine.

Good info guys, keep it coming as I am ordering my set when I get home from Sweden.

Excellent reply, and what a refreshing thread to read. Nice to see some technical things being dicussed.

Andy- when can we expect you to delve into the Gen III hemi stuff? A book from you would be an awesome thing!

So, between the two running posts on these heads, here's what I'd use as a check list for new Trick Flow head purchasers
1. Get guide clearance checked and corrected as needed
2. Get valve seat contact pattern checked and corrected as needed
3. Replace titanium retainers, if equipped, with tool steel retainers for street use
4. Fill in stupid square holes in head surface with JB Weld

Nice heads, but not looking like "just take them out of the box and bolt them on" from what I see

Also
5. Buy ARP Edelbrock Victor head bolt kit (I'm not a studs guy)
6. Buy set of ten ARP "short" rocker shaft studs and hardware
7. Rockers? Not sure what I'd use at this point, but there's got to be a better option than a $900 set of Harland Sharps

Yeah, just my 2 cents

I'm surprised ARP doesn't offer a stud kit for the Victor heads yet. I would have thought there would have been enough demand for it that they would have issued a part number for it.

Thanks for posting all the good info and pics Dwayne! Yeah, us Victor guys are left to fend for ourselves sometimes. A stud kit would be great but only after the center rocker stand thread inserts are sunk deeper into the head so the center stands don't break off ... I preemptively pulled the factory Heli-coils out and drilled, tapped and installed new inserts about 1.0 inch further into head as other Victor guys have. Saw it here on Moparts

Would the ARP 145-4012 stud kit work with these? it is for the B1 but also what I used on my Victors as per Hughes recommendations.

Got a call from TF and they are listening because I brought up the these holes and they are going correct this problem in the next castings. They told me if I had my heads and hadn't put them on send them back but if I wanted to use them just fill the holes in with right stuff. He said they had done alot of testing and assured me they were good but they wanted to go ahead and fill the holes in. If you guys have any ideas and suggestions to make to TF I suggest you call them because they are trying hard to make us a very good head.

FWIW, the Eddy RPM have a couple casting pockets in the head mounting surface too. Theses actually go edge on edge with the block water passage, and would appear to be a real potential for a water leak, but they don't seem to, and nobody seems to care either.

That's why I'm buying a set of these heads off of TF. They obviously do care.

And reading this makes me more re assured that I am making the right selection.

Well, here's a start, courtesy of a post from earlier:

Russ, actually I know of several people who had problems with the earlier casting Edelbrocks leaking coolant from that area after they had been in service a while. After it was discovered Edelbrock filled in most of that recess to eliminate that issue.

I'm happy to hear TF is listening and is planning on filling in the squares.
On the heads I had here, if you wanted to use a Cometic gasket you absolutely would have had to fill in the squares since those gaskets didn't seal off either side of the square. It just created an open path from the valley to the outside of the engine.

Dwayne, have you taken a look at how much valve lift a guy can run with these heads? It looks to me that .750 is easy right out the box with a spring change. Not sure if they'll go 0.800 lift or not but it looks really close. I think a set of Manley 221420 springs will fit in there and they should go 0.800 lift at 2.00 installed height.

Has somebody made this call to TF yet and let them know instead of getting on here and complaining? I thought the the ti retainers were an option and the heads already came with steel retainers?

Summit has them listed with steel or Ti retainers.

Info I found from "way back" says there are four different spring & retainer combinations, so the purchaser needs to determine which spring option fits their application:
TFS-61617801-C00 1.460″ dual valve springs
TFS-61617802-C00 1.550″ dual valve springs
TFS-6161T783-C00 1.550″ dual valve springs w/ ti retainers
TFS-6161T784-C00 1.560″ dual valve springs w/ ti retainers

I know the 1.560" is intended for a solid roller up to .700" lift, but don't know what the others are spec'd for.

Somebody who actually intends to purchase the heads (or works on them for a living) is a better person to pass on this info than someone like myself who is not a prospective customer and is simply compiling info for other's knowledge base.

A dyno never has been, nor ever will be, a drag strip. It, too, is a tool to measure gains & losses which may (or may not) translate into real-world performance changes as installed in a given vehcile.

This is the question that deserves an answer - so Dwayne what would be your initial thoughts when comparing these 3 heads and which one would have the most potential out of the box and worked over?


Russ

Don't lie to us Brad, we know you want a set

Does he really need another set of dust collectors?

Yes, I do.

And, no I don't.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I won't lie: I'd already priced it out to see what it would cost to change directions and finish putting my RB 452 back together w/ TFs, and save all my Victor stuff for my fresh RB 451 short block.

Because I've switched to a solid roller, and with having bought offset-intake pushrod lifters and the offset-intake rocker arm setup for the Victors, I couldn't do it cheaply enough to justify trying them out. Especially knowing they're still not in the same league as my CNC'd Victors, it would just be a nice "proof of concept" before putting the other parts I've already paid for into service.

So, unless somebody(s) else wants to pony up a set of heads, rockers & roller lifters to see what they can do on The MoPig, it ain't happening on my dime!

I hear you Brad, these look interesting to me, I'm just running a set of lowly OOTB (essentially) stealths, but the question is do I send them to modern for 1K and get them CNCed or pony up extra and start with the Trick Flows. Flow will be similar but a bigger port with the CNCed Stealth (not exactly sure how much bigger), will have to wait and see, and really investigate the options and the ceiling on the Trick Flows. Plus I may need another set of pushrods. And the money spent at Modern gives me a good VJ, which is sounds like the Trick Flows can use a better valve job like all of the other OOTB heads? I need plenty of other stuff for my car before I even get there though. I know you've invested WAY MORE in that Victor setup how are you doing getting past all of the hurdles?