afr engine combo

Discussion in 'Classic Mustang Specific Tech' started by WantaGT, Dec 13, 2004.

  1. WantaGT the crossover is an emmissions thing. You definitely want a post-header exhaust crossover, like a H or X pipe, but they have nothing to do with the head.
  2. So, now AFR and Canfield have the "same" numbers? I thought you said the Canfields outflowed the AFRs...

    Canfields make 5 more CFM at the top..but are behind the AFRs in both peak and average power/tq numbers. With more .76 compression.


    Why is it that every article shows the AFRs beating the Canfields? Perhaps because they're better?

    Attached Files:

    • A-P3.jpg
      File size:
      236.2 KB
  3. No, could be it's because they buy more advertising space in the mags? Seems the two go hand in hand. You hardly ever see ads for Canfields ( come to think of it, I can't recall ever seeing an ad) But AFR's are plastered all over the place. Seems they're as popular as Chevy's :lol:
  4. They never paid me for any advertising.
  5. I think you nailed it. When they told WanaGT that he needed an exhaust crossover they did not mean the manifold they meant the pipes, I feel better now.
  6. The ultimate in bench racing. Airflow numbers.

    Almost as misleading as numbers on your Pentium chip.

    Boss 302 heads probably clean up on the whole lot of 'em, and they didn't work that well on the street. There is a lot more to an engine than airflow numbers from bench testing heads.
  7. While there is truth in what you say about advertising dollars making the mags favor certain parts, I don't believe they would alter dyno results to make a loser a winner because they spend more on ads. That is reaching a little. Hell, that's reaching a LOT. Come to think of it, I don't exactly remember seeing a slew of full page AFR ads either....

    And while I am sure that canfields are great heads, the reason AFR has EXPLODED in the marketplace is not because of an advertising budget, (hell Trickflow spends at least as much as they do and has for almost 15 years and you can't even buy AFR in Summit or Jegs which are the largest sources for aftermaket heads in the country) It's because they are great heads.

    My engine builder (Steve @ Powertrain Dynamics in H.B., CA) first told me about 5+ years ago how great the AFR's were. And he dynos cars EVERY SINGLE DAY. Almost exclusively Fords. I just saw him last week and you know what his hands down favorite head is? That's right. AFR. And no one is paying him to choose them. Cream rises to the top. This is no, "poor little best performing head can't get a break and gets passed over by lessor heads even tho it's better" story, gimme a break.

    Chris Barton

  8. The Canfields get the best ratings, hands down anywhere I look... they even outperform TW-R heads at any streetable lift or rpm.
    Until now, I have never seen them tested along with AFRs though.
    Personally, I have planned to use the AFRs. I look at the port runners and just like what I see. The numbers can be misleading, but I plug them into my engine modeling program and it calculates 10% better flow characteristics on both sides of the head then any streetable brand. This is the 185 or 205s... I have not considered 165 or 225.
  9. Usually you can find the AFRs advertised in the back of the mags. They have the little black and white quarter page add. AFRs were a Chevy staple for years. They have always been on top of their game, even when they were porting factory heads in the late 60's.
  10. Well, I'm sure AFR's are good heads, but the point I was trying to make is, they're not the only good heads. There's lots of others too. Y'all go ahead and blindly run em, I'll stick with my Canfields. As for dyno and flow numbers between the two, I've yet to see a dimes worth of difference between em certainly not after I factor in the purchase price I got mine for, which was way less than AFR's go for. As for dyno operators, I'm sure they're not all pure as the driven snow. And numbers being posted have been known to be doctored too, if you don't think that's not possible, then I've got a bridge to sell you.
  11. Those numbers are basically the same in the article. I'm sure 5 HP / TQ / CFM could come down to random variations. Those numbers are close enough to be equal. Wasn't D.Hearne originally comparing them to 165s not 185s? Also don't you save a considerable amount of dosh for that 5 CFM / HP / TQ kick in the pants?
  12. Just an observation: The Canfields were on their way to making more power in the MM&FF dyno pull, but power fell off rapidly, probably due to loss of valve control. Check out the spring rates on the Canfields and you'll see only 290 over the nose. That ain't gonna get it done using a HR cam like the XE274HR. Considering that the torque number was essentially the same as the AFR 185, the Canfield should have put out similar HP numbers if the springs had been right.

    And yes, I know that the Canfields had a compression advantage, but they weren't CNC ported either. Canfields are good heads. I read on another board that the Z304 Ford head is supplied by Canfield. Can anybody confirm this?
  13. Hell, even I can't recall, this thread's gone on so long now :D My Canfields are probably closer to the 165's with the 1.94 intakes. The flow charts posted show the 2.02 heads. Either way they stack up to the AFR's anyway you put it.
  14. 5hp, OK, but how about 25hp? 165 vs Canfield.



    Attached Files:

  15. Now 25 is something. 26 less torque for the AFRs is also something. The average shows 9 HP and TQ over the Canfields, not exactly worlds apart.
  16. Wow, an 8hp gain for "only" $100 extra. What a bargain. :D
  17. AFRs are still my favourites though :p

  18. Well, one thing is for sure...if I had canfields I sure wouldn't waste my time pulling them off just to put on AFRs. Even if I had Edelbrocks or Trickflows. On a mild street motor I don't think you would be dissatisfied with any of the above results. They will all make an easy, streetable 350hp on a 302.
  19. Those MM&FF results are full of typos. Check out the curves on the AFRs. No way torque is 342! Heck, average torque is 354! You really have to read those articles carefully and correct the mistakes as you go along. I suspect that the curves are correct, though.
  20. Thats a typo, if you look in the paragraph below, it says 378lb-ft.

    8hp for $100? I guess you never spent $300+ for a dual exhaust system on a stock V8 that might have netted you 10-15hp??? Or 600 for an intake manifold and carb that might have netted 25hp? 8hp/$100 sounds pretty good now doesn't it?