The Trick Flow heads might be too new to tell but based on the little bit that I know now I'd say the engine you are describing would be better off with ported Edelbrock heads. If you're willing to go with a solid flat tappet cam and rev the engine up past 6000 rpm then maybe the Trick Flow heads would be a better deal. The porting on the Trick Flow heads is super nice but the extra volume in the runner might kill off too much torque for what you want to do.

Did Trick Flow ever dyno that 408? I haven't seen any published numbers from Trick Flow yet.

Those heads look really good and if OOB they are flowing over 300 they work too! I bot a new set of eddys MRL worked over and he only got 280 out of them.

A Comp 292H flat hyd cam runs pretty good in a 10-1 stroker with enough head. It comes on around 2500. That is what I was running in the 416 before I switched to a solid roller and those new eddy's. Have not ran it yet with the new heads.

Not that i have heard

I would go with the Trick Flow. I once ran the Indy 360-1 ported flowing 325@.700 with a large roller cam 268* .700 lift and I had no problem with low or mid power. I did run a loose vert@5400 stall. Not sure what's required in stall for your style of racing, but if you can run 8" similar to mine I don't see a problem with Trick Flow. My 67 Barracuda with a 408 ran 10.38@130 at 3300lbs on pump gas(11.3:1), so it was about 580+hp. Best top speed in quarter was 131 on drag radial. I would be willing to bet the Trick Flow heads have much better flow numbers down low and mid lifts than my Indys had. Hope this helps

Not seeing 302 cfm.
Out of the box.
.100=75cfm
.200=136cfm
.300=201cfm
.400=251cfm
.500=280cfm
.600=283cfm
.700=283cfm
.800=283cfm

Modified port and chamber
.04 removed from common wall from .15 behind intake face to behind headbolt buldge.
Raised roof .175 tapering to nothing right at the guide boss.
TF 2.08 X 8Mmm valve and 8 mm guide.
Widen comb. chamber to 4.06 and move back chamber on intake side
.100=80cfm
.200=151cfm
.300=219cfm
.400=263cfm
.500=291cfm
.600=293cfm
.700=290cfm
.800=290cfm

Still trying to tickle it's belly to get around 310 at .650
Valve job from TF was hanging off the edge of the valve on the supplied 2.02 valve.
Flow test was done with 2.08 valve and guide change with valve seat as it came from TF
seating on inside edge of 45 on 2.08 valve. So valve job to center seat in 45 will probably pick up 1 to 2%
A 2.055 valve would center the valve with valve job as shipped from TF

Not complaining. I think these are as good as the best ported eddys out there, out of the box. Plus with a different port entry plate as TF uses they may make 300cfm. Just posting what I have observed. Dan

Thanks for the info.

Would you happen to have used a 300cfm test plate on that bench at some point?

As I’m sure you’re well aware...... different benches often = different numbers.

Did you test the exhaust?

Exhaust on un-modified chamber was avg 5cfm less than TF flow chart. On modified chamber it ran 5-8 cfm more than advetised, as there is .06 more room on the shrouded side. Exh. port flows so good I will not change it at all. Exh. was 250cfm at .700". My old 587 cast iron heads couldn't muster 190 cfm, with a pipe and car ran 9.60s so I see no need to do anything to exh, except to put in a 1.60 8mm stem valve over the 1.57--11/32 valve supplied to save a little weight..
An interesting note, the TF ford 2.08 x 8mm intake valve weighs 109.5 grams, which is what I bought to put in the TF mopar head vs the as shipped 2.02 valve that weighs 123 grams. Bigger and lighter. Sure seems like a win--win scenario.

The exhaust might flow too well for most off the shelf cams.

Why would you make the exhaust valve bigger?

When you flowed the ex did you use the same size flow tube TF did?

So it looks like OOTB the TF small block head flows very similar numbers to what a BIG BLOCK Edelbrock or even a mildly cleaned-up W2 flowed when they were first introduced. Pretty impressive IMO for a true bolt-on head even if it takes a little bit of clean-up and an inexpensive 2.055" valve ( I presume they are 11/32 stem +~.100 SBC valves) to get a true 300CFM.

If your .400 lift numbers are anything close to 260-265 on a wedge motor it's going to be a really good broad torque street head, the valve stays open at .400 or above for a lot more useable duration than it does at .500 or .550.

Sometimes I think it would be good if Mopar guys would be thankful and realize just how far the aftermarket has come for a market that is probably 1/5th the size of the total SBC/BBC market.

Look like just the right size for any 390+cube Small block, probably a better overall value than a Victor in that to really wring all the power out of that head you're typically going to overstress a stock 59 degree block, not to mention all of the piston/valvetrain/header flange mods and expenses required to get there.

( I presume they are 11/32 stem +~.100 SBC valves) Valves are 5.200 length. TF uses same lenghth valve in some ford and LS applications. I am putting the Ford 2.08 intakes in mine. Also 1.60 Exh for the Ford in mine. They are 8mm stem instead of 11/32" so are a little bigger but lighter.

[When you flowed the ex did you use the same size flow tube TF did?] 1 7/8" tube was used. Same as TF uses

[Why would you make the exhaust valve bigger?] Just to save a little weight. Valve opening and closing 60+ times a second, valve weight reduction could only help. I run solid flat tappet cam so adding spring pressure not an option.160/370 spring pressure.

I’ll be interested in hearing what your car does with those heads.

I think your car works well enough so it’ll be a good test for them.

Anything new to update or add on these heads?

got a set going on a 422 for our duster