I tell the dyno numbers from the two different heads. I also show many other things with the two heads like flow numbers, cc, and measurements. Contact info: www.wengines.com weingartnerracing@gmail.com
Thank you for doing these tests Eric! I would have loved to see a SBF test with those 205 heads you had a while back. I appreciate all the information you put out.
I run a 385 with a holley stealth ram on the project x215s and a smallish hr cam(232°/.580") in a 3400lb car. No complaints about low end/street driving
Possibly, if you are comparing generalized port volumes that are offered in shelf designed heads. It's not about overall advertised volume, it's about how you achieve that volume.
Pushing the RPM up before peak is easily explained by the larger ports. Bigger ports, higher RPM before it hits the sweet spot in velocity. You have to match the heads for the rest of the engine. If you stick those big heads on a stock 350 short block, you'd find out pretty quick that velocity does matter. You didn't reinvent the wheel, you just left out the cuin vs runner size equation.
Its all about matching your combination correctly imo The only time where I have seen anybody successfully argue that the smaller runner head would make it more torque down low was when the engine couldn’t use a bigger cylinder head and in another instance where both heads flowed about the same amount of air but the one with the smaller runner did better below torque peak.
Yes, for sure. You will most likely need a bit more rpm the smaller you go with displacement. I am a dealer like Eric, and ProMaxx products and service are great.
What's crazy is when you talk about the victor jr intake you test is does outstanding vs engine masters I didn't do that well and the only difference in the heads is a 220 head vs your 215 so I was like what the heck what's going on. I would like to see the other manifold like the 2892 and see if it finally takes the top spot with the big head then see how Motown, super victor, afr, bm1000 and all the others you test to see if it changes positions at apl just curious. But cool testing I really like it makes us learn more and more as we go
It looks like he's using a early design of the 2975 Victor Jr and they may have different flow characteristics than the latest design 2975. There's definitely a difference in the shape of the runner
Sizes aside, the ProMaxx 215 is a nicer design of head than the AFR Enforcer. I have a CNC version of that head from the same supplier, it's a great competitor to AFR Eliminator for a lower price.
port energy is key, there must be factors of a little bit a tumble, a lil' bit a swirl, efficient movement around the valve, and good chamber. 300 feet per second is your magic number where all the magic happens. Doing all of this with more volume that suits the rpm and cubic inch and cam, you got a combo. And these things i am would say outperform many other size promaxx heads just the same. Th e project X 215cc heads are something really special in my book. Thanks a ton Eric. Also one of if not the best intake manifold also, Did you test the super victor II against it?. Great goin Eric. i am cannot thank you enough for doing this. i am surely going to get that book. Valuable inteL there for all of those without dyno sessions galore.
I agree, a lot more going on with heads. And when I hear people talk, I just let it go because it's always an argument trying to explain velocity, cfm, cross-section flow. Port shapes, runner lengths, valve size, and on and on and on. Great stuff! Glad to see someone on youtube doing this kind of stuff is keeping it real, and not making things look better than they are.
Velocity = more throttle response. And how fast the engine reacts. If a larger port is able yo get more cylinder fill. It will be able to make more torque. It also helps if swirl can even out the fuel mixture in the chamber as well.
The only time a "Bigger" port loses air speed and torque, or power down low, is when it is "Bigger" than the optimum port for the application. Most people run a cylinder head with too small of an area than what they actually need. The correct port makes more everywhere in the curve in an apples to apples comparison like what is being shown. Even down low. Larger doesn't always mean less and in fact smaller usually always does, regardless of what a bench tells you. And for those that think "velocity" is key, keep in mind, you CAN have too much. Air speed, and Gradient air speed, or air speed over time, has to work for a given port design, and must be balanced. Too much or too little of anything will always hurt power.
I have been watching all the testing on the promaxx heads. Its great stuff. I love all the info. Would the Project X 200cc heads be a closer comparison to the AFR 195's than using the Promaxx Project X 215's. Just curious. I'm up in the air on the 200 or the 215 Project X for my 406. (550 lift max). Thanks for your hard work and info!
The Maxx 200s would be a closer comparison to the 195 Enforcers. I bought a set a few years ago before the Project X heads were available. I don’t think you can bet the Project X heads for the price and I wouldn’t hesitate to put them on a 406
14:00 If you look at the air flow numbers compared to the two tests it looks like the air turbine wasn't sealing well to the carb, so with the same fuel flow but a reduced measured air consumption, the mechanical AFR will look rich on the second engine even though it's perfect in reality. At 6600 RPM, the AFR test shows 100 CFM more flow than the other which we know is incorrect by way of the output. Pretty serious numbers for both engines. 👌
It looks like that column for CFM showed at most about 680CFM. Does that mean that a 700CFM carburetor would have been enough for those Power and Torque numbers?
This really makes me wonder how much power I'll lose trying to keep my C4 hood stock. Eric's dragon slayers and matching bmp dominator vs a tpis miniram. Lol.
Just went with an older weiand stealth on top of some home ported sportsman 2's under the stock 84 c4 hood. With the fitech I have at best 2" between the underside of the air cleaner lid and the top of the injection unit. But man does it make power compared to that crossfire!
At @7:00 you show different flow#s for different cylinders (intake+exhaust - awesome to see this level of detail, btw!). (1) Is that within the tolerances/variances of the flowbench? (2) Is it better for the parts to have all flows equal, or are the variances irrelevant for undue stress? (3) is it better for power to have equal flows? (4) do different flow#s change the way you approach an exhaust system? (4) Would it be beneficial for exhaust scavenging to have a higher flow# paired with a lower flow# on the collector side? How "far away" in the firing order would that be? (BTW: all of that totally irrelevant when driving on the street :))
Eric, it would be interesting to compare the fully ported Victor Jr to a few other fully ported intakes to see if it still dominates the competition. It would also be cool to see how a set of your fully ported Dragon Slayers compare so we can see the cost/benefit of having you port the heads.
Thats a good point. I will be testing my ported promaxx 215cc heads the next time I change the heads. I don't have any plans to do the dragon slayers anytime soon.
A larger port doesn't always equal slower velocity either. Again that would come back yo throttle response. And how the engine handles under light throttle.
Exhaust ...Rust... and collect Carbon over the Years, making Pipe INNER Dia's SMALLER CSA Areas ?? Ever thought of Using New Pipes-Headers, back to back Testing ? Rusting Pipes are a Poblem? Rust builds up Slowly, a Slow Choke ?
Great video as usual , one intake that i always thought was good but never got to try it is the Victor E designed for hood clearence on super stockers, have you ever tryed one? Thankyou . I think it is now just a victor 2978
This information helps guys using their engines between 4500 and 6500. Typically a dirt track car a 3/8-1/2 mile track where aluminum heads are allowed. Starting last year we can go to aluminum but are penalized weight that must mount between the front of the head and radiator. The pro max on a 400 to 425” would really be an advantage.
Hey Eric, Tim here, ur mule has a camshaft that wud like the 215's from the git go......so, i'm not surprised in any way......just sayin.....with the 215's, ur combo is workin in harmony......hard to build a "mule" cuz combo DEEPLY effects outcome......the cam is a bit lumpy for a 195 head......you shud maybe clarify a bit......i own 3 of ur t-shirts for a reason, but sometimes, ur tryin to make all these other folk happy, and ur cam likes the 215's........i got a Pontiac, my ports are around 220.....fairly small.....my cam is in the 250 range (@.050)....my point is, combo is EVERYTHING, it all must work......i'm a S.E. buff.....my stick Eliminator due always preaches COMBINATION!!......i'm just sayin, 195's on a 406, with a lumpy cam wont really be happy, 215's WILL!!.....just sayin........hope i didnt mangle that thought i had.....PEACE to you sir!!
The 215 heads have obviously larger port entrances. So what was the manifold port exit size vrs the AFR and Promax. If the intake matched the 215's then the 195's would be at a disadvantage or the other way the AFR would be at a disadvantage. There is a substantial difference there.
Okay so, some this maybe obvious, that the 195 AFR are not CNC ported , and AR Does have fully ported at 195 cc , that are higher cfm . i am wondering if a test could be or has been done to compare those two you have shown, to the AFR C.N.C.Fully ported version.the numbers for the 195 cc AFR are much higher then they post on their site also, i wonder what my 190 TFS heads would flow on 4.155 bore compared to 4.030. being .125 larger bore
I was going to make my 406 a 421 but I think I'm going to just keep it a 406 and do this same combo was that camshaft a off the shelf cam or is it a special grind? Very nice combo very impressive.
The one thing I am trying to figure out since I am going to run my 2 engines at around 8000rpm 2 barrol deal. You put 215 heads and it carries the rpm way higher about 500 longer about so peak at 6500 and kinda held also 7000rpm and your duration is 260 and 270 I and kinda like I know your 108 LSA I kinda wonder if you did a 106 and did 265 272 just my guess would it try to rev 8000? I am just curious because it seems like that 406 would want a lot of overlap to rev that high.
Funny I have a mild 350 with performer rpm. Technically A Holley 600 DP is all I should need. I put a Holley 750DP just out of curiosity. Couldn't believe I could feel a slight increase by seat of the pants. Don't think was placebo affect because I new carb was too big and if anything expected to be slower. Then saw a dyno and that big carb made about 5 more peak hp on a 350 with a mild cam.
Please in your future dyno run with the tunnel ram and air gap I'd be interested to see you run a Pro-Comp 22025. PISS-CUTTER Performance had a 383 w/515 ft/lbs a little while back and stated that the procomp 22025 had more flow and less variation between runners than Edl. air-gap, but he didn't share his flow sheet.
Id like to see a test with the brodix hvh intakes. The division i race you have to run iron heads. On one motor i have big port chevy performance vortec 22:37 heads and the other has dart 215s. The vortec head motor has a super victor and the dart 215 motor has the hvh. Builder said i shouldnt see a difference.
What has softening the chambers turned out to be worth on the dyno? I don't recall you doing a test, followed by dyno results but if you've got some examples I'd like you to talk about the advantages however minor.
It's not done for power results, it's done to slow down flame speed. Critical for power adder engines. As a builder, I just control quench with the head gasket so to me, softening is kind of pointless. However, what would be the difference on an N/A engine with tight quench and no quench? You'd be very surprised.
@@hankclingingsmith8707 I know why it's done.. Point being, a thicker head gasket does the same thing... but better. The fact that not every engine with an adder needs it done however, is a different conversation entirely.
It's a package deal, with a smaller, typical street HR cam 235°/.550" the smaller head may have made more torque down low. I'm swapping from Flotek 200cc to ProjectX 215cc on my 406 as we speak. Also going with a bigger HR cam. Love the info you put out, keep the videos coming.
Nice..cubic inches also plays into everyone's ideas that the common man doesnt always consider. As does aplication of where will the engine be used. Tow, street, race.
The fact you only show the dyno numbers above 4500 rpm makes this whole video totally worthless to those of us who drive on the street. The port velocity and combustion chamber design make the engine more efficient and fun to drive for daily street driving. Also, I not sure if anyone else noticed, but the cooling passages to the intake manifold are waaay smaller on them pro heads. If you are building a sprint car or modified engine, the pro heads might not be something to seriously consider.
I made a pull down at 2800rpm. I just didn’t show it in this video. Besides I have said before unless you are a boat you are not full load at low rpm. Making low rpm dyno tests pointless.
As you were explaining the results I was thinking in my head that the combination has so much to results. I’ve always liked a smaller intake runner but your test has changed my opinion on a lot of things. Thank you for all your time and effort that you put out for all of us.
It's all relative. You can have too small, small, correct, big, and too big. All depends on what is considered as "small" and "big". The correct port will make more everywhere. Too large is what kills air speed and torque down low, which usually translates to higher torque and power. Too small does the opposite, but can also kill power. Knowing that will help people realize, a "bigger port" or, bigger than what most think it would need, doesn't always mean less torque and power, even down low. And a "smaller port" doesn't always mean more down low and kills up top. A small head for the application WILL kill power everywhere. The only way to determine that factually, is by knowing which head is correct for the application, and adjust from there according to application and rpm/power goals. No such thing as a head being too large or too small for the cubic inch, but there IS for the application. I will add, valve events play a role as well.
@@frigglebiscuit7484 That is the generalization I was referring to. Not only is it 100% false but it's also the complete WRONG way to go about it. The engine doesn't know what cubic inch it is, nor does it recognize a specific "cc" runner. And for an FYI, a 200 cc runner will work on many different cubic inch combinations, it just depends on how that "200cc" is achieved. Just sayin'.
Hey Eric what are best aluminum heads that I could make look like double hump 461’s on a 406? I may go to the Victor junior “that son of a gun” and a big carb. Thnx
Good data. I would love to see "pure street" rpm range test. Us guys with heavy vehicles and stock converters would like to pull hard from idle. And yes... we only use 1000 to 5000 rpm range.
Engines that pull from 1000 to 5000 are stock, GM builds lots of them, most people want more power in their performance vehicle, which is simple, if you want more power you have to move the RPM range upwards. Even GM's high powered engines like the past like the LS7 427, were weak down low. If you have a heavy vehicle, and stock converter you have strike a balance, but usually more cubic inches is the right answer to your performance question.
More importantly, THROAT cross sectional area. Bigger valve isn't always the answer, since it is bore limited, but if that throat for the bigger valve is the same as the smaller valve, the bigger valve will do nothing.
@@jrdmotorsports9718 2.08" valve is on a 4.150" Bore, ...+.125 ... from Wall, and Valve @ 23* Angle moving Away from Wall ? Valve shrouding should not be problem ????
@@MrKawa74 That's fine, but that wasn't in the original comment, hence why I commented. Additionally, those CSA's do not include valve stem area. Removing the area of an 11/32" stem would make a 2.080" valve with a 91% throat a 2.718" cross sectional area. These numbers are pointless unless people actually know what they mean and what they do. Throwing general dimensions out there doesn't even begin to tell the story. Just sayin'.
@@MrKawa74 .125" off the bore wall but how how far from the chamber wall through the lift range from off the seat? That is where most shrouding occurs. And to me, .125" is tight even off the bore. Not a whole lot you can do in a non-canted wedge design, but I have found the more room you give it, the more power it makes. Bore limits the valve, valve limits the throat, throat limits everything above it...
I gotta set of heads that are staggered valves like a big block with no name they look good but I cannot figure out Who makes them to look them up Would you be interested in checking them out
I’m not seeing anywhere in this where I’m convinced to buy anything but the promaxx 215 project x head. Definitely not convinced to buy the big name when these are less expensive, flow better, decent components and make the bigger number. If you are that concerned, buy the name brand components like arp studs, guide plates and name brand valve train components. And now that we can look back at these tests. The big power number was made using these 215 promaxx project x heads and a 40 year old victor jr. intake.
those project Xs are more $$$ BUT OOTB the enforcer for up to 6500 RPM redline not one overseas head uses a 8mm lsx valve setup. only AFR does that. thats where the value is. lower RPM strokers personally id buy the projext Xs for a ford because i have a 302
I bought the books. The pro maxx 215 project x heads flowed fine on this 406, even past 6500. But the flow numbers show they will flow much more rpm. Now since I run a 350 cid these heads would run great probably to 7500. And the dyno numbers show 614hp with the pro max 215 project x heads with the old victor jr intake. So far this is the strongest combination. Later episodes show the larger 235 heads making more.
@@WeingartnerRacing Just to see how good the afr 195 comp product is ""suppose to be "" [there claim] . Be interesting at what size head makes streetable power and strip power band The Vic JNR is definitely surprising . WHY because there are many magazine test with similar motors that rate it in the lower half of the listings . Once again thanks for the honest answers ...
20 cfm gain .... .26 HP per cfm ... 8 cylinder... Camshaft Z of 1.04 ... So 20 x .26 x 8 x 1.04 = 43 HP gain ..... Just like you got ...... Airspeed and low end is about the intake runner not the port Cross section.... The port is already high speed because it's at the end of the runner Rpm gain was because of the increase in valve size .... Peak rpm is about the closing of the valve not the total flow
@@WeingartnerRacing I know you don't that's why I posted ... I have done videos on my RU-vid channel explaining it better.... Interesting thing is that it's all in your super flow flow bench manual it's just almost everyone did not understand it .... Took me years to finely understand
@@jrdmotorsports9718 it is how it works as it predicts how the engine will behave .. this is not a new way I have been using it for 20 years and it backed up with math not guesswork... I did a video on this engine and why it made what it did and it is now backed up with the head swap ...
@@scotthatch4548 Don't care what math your using or how many videos you make, doesn't make it correct. 1. There is NO way you can say that .26 "cfm" makes "x" amount of power. Hence why cfm numbers are for entertainment purposes only. Only used to fill in a blank in a mathematical formula in an attempt to prove a point. 2. The air speed is NOT automatically higher in the head, especially if the area in the port is larger than the the area in the manifold. Running a smaller manifold with much less area may speed the air up, until it enters the cylinder head with larger area, it does the opposite. Since the air speed changes over time, or length of the ENTIRE runner, or intake tract, there 8s no way a properly design intake runner will speed up air going from small to big. Period. 3. Increases in valve sizes alone will NOT raise rpm alone. Larger area in the port, combined with a throat that is sized CORRECTLY for the larger valve WILL raise rpm. The only way an intake with less area will create higher airspeed is IF the port is too small to begin with, and didn't need the larger area a bigger intake offers. I am basing my comments off what is written, not what people meant to write so do not take this as disrespectful. I try to be as specific as I can as to not be taken wrong. Yes, math is involved with everything when it comes to building engine, but that last thing ANYONE should be doing is trying to factor in cfm numbers into a power prediction formula. It doesn't work. It's theory math AFTER power is made to add in to a formula but cannot be used to be predicted. However, 35 years building race engines, I will say, experience never lies. If you know HOW things actually work, you can better understand how things WILL work, and how they can be manipulated to work better. So again I will disagree respectfully on everything you said based on my experience and what I have seen, worked with, tested, etc... Certainly not telling you what to do or convince you otherwise. You do you.
@WeingartnerRacing I was kidding. Serious though. It's nice to see ProMax making some heads that actually compete with the big dogs. For a long time you knew you were saving money when buying ProMax but you always had a question of what you were leaving on the table. I appreciate your work👍👍and love the videos.
Uh, so you have definitively proven that bigger heads, with bigger valves, that cost three times as much, make more power. Thanks for clearing that up.
@@WeingartnerRacing It looked to me, on their site, the price was $1500 ea., as it shows "1x Project X SBC 215 - $1429" + TTL, and I bought a pair of AFRs at just over $500 ea. Btw, thanks for the reply.
Hot Rod had an article comparing the Boss vs DZ 302s a long time ago. Boss made more torque at a lower rpm and carried power to a higher rpm...w/ a significantly smaller cam. Richard Holdener did a vid of same topic a few years ago. Intake port is generally sized too small w/ conventional thinking. Camshaft is what matters to make things work.The csa matters a bit for ‘velocity’, but not as much as delta p which is dictated by valve events.
@@lollipop84858 Absolutely buy what you can afford and have fun, but the point of this video is a head to head comparison between two different heads just to show what they’re capable of, not hey if you’re poor buy this head. 😄
@@joshuagarvey9362 I don’t know anything about your combination so I don’t know why it’s down on power, but I’ve seen the 195 Eliminator on a wide variety of engines that all ran very well, even a pump gas 421, in a full interior all steel 69 Chevelle, that thing pulls like a freight train.
