Trick Flow 21 Degree LT1's - Info & Pics

[Puck]

Apologies for reviving a dead thread, and sorry if its been said but I searched and could not find it...what is the max lift of the 1.3" double springs being used on these heads?

I noticed AI's tests go all the way to .7" but I am assuming that is just for the sake of testing and not using a spring, but I cannot find an actual answer on the out-of-the box max lift of those "LS-Style" springs. I am interested in running a set as-cast before I send them off to port, but my build needs more then the common .6" lift that most springs offer.

Would be nice to not have to get a new set of springs/locks/retaingers right off the bat for the more aggressive combos...

[Alvin@Tick]

I might have to put a set of these on my FI 355 build.

[taner]

Originally Posted by Advanced Induction

Outlaw/Taner - We have yet to determine what to do for a reasonable all out configuration. The 215cc 23deg version will likely be best for most guys wanting an 11.5-12:1 383-396 that exhibits excellent drivability and manages to make power to 7k or more depending on valvetrain. A larger version is something I'd personally like to do, but we need to determine if there is really a good reason to do it. It will be done once we determine what would be a significant & safe improvement over the 215cc 23deg head.

Serious business requires a serious top-end . We have (on the shelf) a set of reverse cooled AllPro raised runner 23deg heads, but have yet to produce masters in them. They would be an option for someone who wouldn't revise their shortblock, but we may just sell them as-is. If one is willing to go through the expense of going to a purpose built top-end, then I can not imagine staying with any of the 2Xdeg heads. We had considered putting a racier LT specific package together by altering existing 13deg setups, but do not know what kind of demand there is for something like that.

Have a nice Christmas, guys.

i realize i am part of a minority, i am at the point where i am trying to get the last bit of power out of my combination. if it means swapping heads, then i am interested in reviewing what is available, i run a jesel shaft mount rocker system on my top end. top quality valves and lifters working in conjunction.
i still like the idea of going fast with the 23 deg. stuff, sorta kinda why i stick with a six speed in my car, it is still a street car and i wouldn't have it any other way.

any conversion i do at this point is 3k plus. i know i could sell my junk for a few bucks but yes it still involves alot of changes.

pistons, fully assembled heads, intake, throtle body, fuel rails, plumb new fogger or sell and buy a plate kit, etc....

thanks for the response! i personally would love to do a 13 deg. setup if money permitted, who wouldn't, lol!!! a set of all pro's sounds pretty interesting as well. my heads were used from abortion racing engines, they were hand ported, flow was shit, there was even reversion at higher rpm. i sent them to Erik Bradby, he made improvements for me, and they do flow 300 at .600 and 309 at .700 lift, but that is of course all relative. in my eyes there is still better options out there for 23 degree cylinder heads.

look forward to more updates.

[Advanced Induction]

GIZMO, I was wondering how long it would be until relief location was mentioned.

Originally Posted by joelster

A 13 degree head will not be a cheap starting point no matter what. That will also require offset rockers, offset lifters, etc......I made a thread titled "Brodix?" and I think the best bet would be their 18 degree heads which allow all of the valvetrain components of a 23degree setup.

I think I am speaking for a lot of guys here, when I say that we need a bolt-on head/intake package that can flow over 330cfm (at least), support an easy 550+ N/A hp, and cost $2000-$2500. If someone were to develop a 13 degree setup with heads that cost $3000, shaft rockers that add $900, lifters that run $500, headers that run $600 a custom intake that runs $1000, the grand total would cost more than a VERY strong LS1 motor, which is simply unacceptable.

Joelster, with an increased budget, the first thing we look for is increased durability & performance via improved valvetrain. Regardless of valve angle, getting away from budget oriented components & modified stock rocker systems is going to represent an appreciable increase in cost. However, relative to overall project cost it represents great value for the insurance & longevity it affords. If you want a set of Brodix 18xsp's, we likely have a set of those floating around here somewhere. They are better than an average 23deg top-end, but less than ideal for an LT application in our opinion.

Expensive and unacceptable are relative . Online, few are able to distinguish between price and value. If we cannot meet a performance goal consistently and reliably, then we wouldn't have a product we could put our name on. Whether it is an LS based engine or LT based engine, when you get into the 550-650rwhp range on pump fuel it is relatively costly to retain reliability.

Originally Posted by joelster

Someone needs to sell a top-end package that includes a converted set of SBC heads with a single plane, fuel rails, and an elbow.

We currently do sell all manner of top-end packages that can be adapted to the LT1. However, if the project budget is so strained that the user cannot afford components that are capable of reliably extracting the potential out of an improved head/manifold then the feasibility and/or goals of the project should be re-examined. That is, of course, our opinion.

Originally Posted by engineermike

With good low-lift flow, you get power in the midrange (<6500 rpm) where most of us need it, and don't have to sacrifice response or spend $$$ on special intakes, shaft rockers, valve covers, headers, etc...

Mike, may I ask if you don't mind sharing the data you have that leads you to make that assertion? PM if you like, just curious.

Originally Posted by Beaflag VonRathburg

I also want to see the LT1 aftermarket step up in valve sizing and down in stem diameter. There's no purpose what so ever to run an 11/32 valve with the wide variety of 8mm LS stuff out there. 8mm valves cost the same and there's tons of good spring packages out there that cost less and perform better than most of the stuff that is currently commonly being used. There's no purpose to having a 2.02 intake valve with a 4.03 bore or a comp 918 with a steel retainer on an 847 sized cam.

If someone made something like a 230cc as cast head that flowed well out of the box...

On the surface it seems simple, but in reality there is far more than stem diameter to getting this "right." Some of the common 8mm setups have more reciprocating mass than the custom light-weight 11/32" valves we currently run.

Originally Posted by Puck

Apologies for reviving a dead thread, and sorry if its been said but I searched and could not find it...what is the max lift of the 1.3" double springs being used on these heads?

I noticed AI's tests go all the way to .7" but I am assuming that is just for the sake of testing and not using a spring...

Puck, it isn't dead, we're just waiting on pricing and gathering ideas . I cannot speak for TFS, but we typically sell heads set up to accomodate .620-.650" net valve lift.

Originally Posted by taner

thanks for the response! i personally would love to do a 13 deg. setup if money permitted, who wouldn't, lol!!! a set of all pro's sounds pretty interesting as well. my heads were used from abortion racing engines, they were hand ported, flow was shit, there was even reversion at higher rpm. i sent them to Erik Bradby, he made improvements for me, and they do flow 300 at .600 and 309 at .700 lift, but that is of course all relative. in my eyes there is still better options out there for 23 degree cylinder heads.

look forward to more updates.

Taner, absolutely. I'm sure you could see gains starting over and retaining the 23deg valve angle. I would bet EB told you that one thing most head guys dislike is attempting to tune up something that may have already been taken in the wrong direction. The probability (obviously) is that it would be more economical and represent a better value to start over and net 80-100hp for your investment vs. tweaking the existing setup for another 30-50 .


Thanks for the responses, guys! We'll keep checking in as time allows.

[engineermike]

Originally Posted by Advanced Induction

Mike, may I ask if you don't mind sharing the data you have that leads you to make that assertion? PM if you like, just curious.

A while back, my friend did an interesting dyno test. He built a Late Model dirt track engine (~650 hp SBC) and ran 2 sets of heads, both starting life as nearly identical Brodix castings. One set was ported for max flow at high lift, while the other was modified concentrating on low lift flow (flowbench results verified). The heads with more low lift flow outperformed the other set across the board. The bonus is that the ports didn't need to be modified as extensively to get low lift flow versus high lift.

I'm just saying that the average enthusiast (and thus, the aftermarket, who caters to the ones spending the money) shoots for max high lift flow. I wonder sometimes if we aren't neglecting some power to be gained by developing a port that maximizes low lift flow to simulate a 4v head.

[Puck]

Originally Posted by Advanced Induction

Puck, it isn't dead, we're just waiting on pricing and gathering ideas . I cannot speak for TFS, but we typically sell heads set up to accomodate .620-.650" net valve lift.

Thanks for the responses, guys! We'll keep checking in as time allows.

That sounds perfect - my cam was specced to right at .6 with 1.6rrs, and I of course do not want to run on the ragged edge of the springs rating and would rather have the leeway of a ~.625 rated spring then run a .6 one at exactly .6.

Thanks for the great post that answered so many of our questions!

[ZeeTwentyFate]

Ai ftmfw!

[rickreeves1]

Originally Posted by Advanced Induction

Thanks for the responses, guys! We'll keep checking in as time allows.

I am a little confised as to which heads are the new ones and which flow numbers are correct. Maybe you could clear it up. See thread below.

New Trick Flow 21 Degree LT1 Heads

[pooogy]

Are these still on schedule to be released in Feb/March?

[Evaporate]

Originally Posted by Alvin@Tick

I might have to put a set of these on my FI 355 build.

So, is it better to go with the older 23* head for FI for compression purposes or can the 21* be set up by TrickFlow to an individual's tastes?

[Puck]

Originally Posted by Evaporate

So, is it better to go with the older 23* head for FI for compression purposes or can the 21* be set up by TrickFlow to an individual's tastes?

I would lower compression by the piston dish instead of chamber size, and go with the better flowing 21* heads.

I'm sure they can customize the chamber size for an individual user to be smaller or larger then what they are standard though.

Even at 55cc chambers you can easily get below 10:1cr with a stock thickness head gasket and a -20+cc dish piston. SRP makes forged blower pistons that work on LT1s with a -30cc or more dish for almost 9:1CR on stock head ccs.

[Evaporate]

Thanks Puck.

[engineermike]

Yes, but when you start increasing stroke, the big piston dishes really weaken the piston a lot.

[Evaporate]

Unless I go to a high quality piston, yeah? If the benefit of the 21* over the 23* is significant enough, I'd like to have this head option in the future as well.

[Puck]

Originally Posted by engineermike

Yes, but when you start increasing stroke, the big piston dishes really weaken the piston a lot.

Good point. I guess questions are always easier to ask when the goals and details are clearly stated.

How much boost do you expect to run, how much power do you want to make, and how much money do you want to spend?

You may find that a cheaper option may be mroe then enough for what you want.

[Beaflag VonRathburg]

Originally Posted by engineermike

A while back, my friend did an interesting dyno test. He built a Late Model dirt track engine (~650 hp SBC) and ran 2 sets of heads, both starting life as nearly identical Brodix castings. One set was ported for max flow at high lift, while the other was modified concentrating on low lift flow (flowbench results verified). The heads with more low lift flow outperformed the other set across the board. The bonus is that the ports didn't need to be modified as extensively to get low lift flow versus high lift.

I'm just saying that the average enthusiast (and thus, the aftermarket, who caters to the ones spending the money) shoots for max high lift flow. I wonder sometimes if we aren't neglecting some power to be gained by developing a port that maximizes low lift flow to simulate a 4v head.

The first post is anoter example of correlation data:
The "recipe" to 500 rwhp with heads and cam.

[Advanced Induction]

Originally Posted by engineermike

A while back, my friend did an interesting dyno test. He built a Late Model dirt track engine (~650 hp SBC) and ran 2 sets of heads, both starting life as nearly identical Brodix castings. One set was ported for max flow at high lift, while the other was modified concentrating on low lift flow (flowbench results verified). The heads with more low lift flow outperformed the other set across the board. The bonus is that the ports didn't need to be modified as extensively to get low lift flow versus high lift.

I'm just saying that the average enthusiast (and thus, the aftermarket, who caters to the ones spending the money) shoots for max high lift flow. I wonder sometimes if we aren't neglecting some power to be gained by developing a port that maximizes low lift flow to simulate a 4v head.

Mike, thank you for taking the time to share. . Based on our experience, it is our belief that focusing on any one aspect of flowbench racing is unlikely to produce the best results over a broad rpm range for applications like street/strip cars. That is certainly not to imply that I doubt what your friend saw & relayed to you.

Originally Posted by rickreeves1

I am a little confised as to which heads are the new ones and which flow numbers are correct. Maybe you could clear it up. See thread below.

New Trick Flow 21 Degree LT1 Heads

TFS put up the numbers they saw in that thread. Because we have a different flowbench, different fixturing, possibly different procedures etc. Data from one setup to another is incomparable. That is the reason we did not put up the actual number that we saw on our test setup. In instances like this, it is only the difference that is of any consequence, so that is what we posted. Hope that helps clear things up .

Originally Posted by pooogy

Are these still on schedule to be released in Feb/March?

We have been told that we will have final pricing info in a couple of weeks. At that point we will be able to finalize our CNC'd packages & share pricing/info. Hopefully castings will follow shortly thereafter & we can get to making chips.

Originally Posted by Evaporate

So, is it better to go with the older 23* head for FI for compression purposes or can the 21* be set up by TrickFlow to an individual's tastes?

It will depend upon the shortblock. If you have 383cid+ we would recommend the 23deg CNC'd 215cc TFS head for forced induction applications more often than not. Mike is correct regarding piston limitations. The 21deg valve angle is primarily going to help stock displacement & high CR stroker applications. If you have a basic forced induction or 11-11.8:1 NA stroker then the 23deg version is likely what you need to run.

Originally Posted by Beaflag VonRathburg

The first post is anoter example of correlation data:
The "recipe" to 500 rwhp with heads and cam.

It may seem like it on the surface, but in practice you will find that is not the case. With Mike's example there is no quantitative data to really compare. Even if there were, with different benches, setups, engines, cars, dynos, and a litany of other unqualified variables the data would be incomparable. It is a great deal of theory, but without multiple data points collected on the same equipment, conditions, etc. with respect to scientific method all that can be made are assumptions.

Thanks guys, we'll update as we are provided info & castings!

[Vicious95Z28]

Can't hurt to keep this one alive!!!!

[Advanced Induction]

Update:

The as cast assembled 21deg head from TFS will be $1500 and we have been told to anticipate castings in April...

It will likely be May-June before we are able to ensure our complete CNC'd packages based on this casting complete testing & become available to you guys. While none of us want to wait, TFS taking the time to ensure their product is truly ready for public release is for the best.

We'll attempt to update you guys as we make progress & time allows. Thanks!

[kgkern01]

Any word on pricing for bare unassembled castings?