All else being equal, what power gains could be expected from Trick Flow 240s over Edelbrock heads on a 500 cube mill ?

[Kern Dog]

Sometimes, I've found that Engine Masters has already dyno tested a part that I was wondering about. They've done hydraulic roller cams VS flat tappets, headers with a variety of different mufflers, all sorts of cool stuff.
I don't recall seeing them do a back to back test of the popular Trick Flow heads versus Edelbrock heads.
Lets say a 500 cube engine makes about 550 flywheel HP with Edelbrock heads. Any idea of how much more the Trick Flows would make?

The Edelbrocks have the same intake valve size but the Trick Flow has a slightly smaller exhaust valve. The Trick Flow has 240 cc intake ports, the Edelbrocks have 210. The TFs have a 78 cc chamber, the Edelbrocks are 84. (At least the most popular ones are)
Now, I'm not coming out to say I'm going to buy the Trick Flow heads....But if I can sell a few things around here to justify the costs, I may do it.
I just want to know if they are worth the expense. A pair of the TFs will be around $3000 !

DODGE Trick Flow Specialties TFS-6161T783-C00 Trick Flow® PowerPort® 240 Cylinder Heads for Big Block Mopar | Summit Racing

 

[33 IMP]

A few years back, EM did a dyno of stock 906, 440 source, RPM, and TF240. On a fairly mild 440, each improved head was about 20 hp better than the previous. So tye 240 was about 60 better than the 906, 20 better than the Rpm.
For a stout 500, I would expect 30+ from a 240 over a rpm. But if a person is willing to use a dedicated matching intake, a 270 would be a superior choice for a 500" engine (EM did a 240 vs 270 test too. 270s better everywhere, even torque at the beginning of the pull).

 

[451Mopar]

For a rough and easy comparison, just double the airflow the head has at the cams max lift to estimate the potential engine HP (V8).
This is a bit lower than the normal 2.2 HP per cfm, but makes comparisons pretty easy as most engines are not optimized combinations.
https://www.hotrod.com/how-to/airflow-research-cylinder-power

The main difference in flow is the Trick flow heads are CNC ported and the Edelbrock heads are as cast which is why the Edelbrock heads are less expensive. Ported, the Edelbrock heads can flow about the same as the Trick flow heads.
Other nice thing about the Trick Flow heads is you can order them with different valve springs to better match your cam. If your running a roller cam, the Edelbrock springs will need to be changed.
The Trick Flow heads also have a better chamber design than the Edelbrock heads, usually need less ignition advance.

 

[hunt2elk]

Not exactly the same swap, but similar enough to mention. I kept everything else the same, but swapped out Stealth heads for Trick Flow 240's on my 550hp 451 a few years ago. Ended up with a gain of 29 hp & 9 ft.lbs.
Trick Flow 240 vs Stealth heads

 

[Rusty knuckles]

Thread is relevant to my interests. I've always expected about 30hp and 15ftlbs better from trick flow vs anything else out of the box. But if I did some home shop porting I'm curious what I could get back. I'm a budget conscious builder too.

 

[4mulas]

Don’t know, but more! I think where they perform best is when higher lift and flow is required. If one has a tame engine and puts them on you probably wouldn’t expect much making it not worth it. Bigger cubes, and more cam, like from the sounds of what you’ve got or got planned they would likely add a lot over the eddy head. You seldom hear people complain about trick flow….
Life’s can be short, get creative, sell some crap, and DO it! Then report back.

 

[padam]

$100 per HP? Yikes.

 

[451Mopar]

You need the rest of the system sized to match the heads air flow if you want the extra power they can make.
Many intakes don't flow more than 290 cfm so that could be a intake restriction along with too small a carb, air filter and then there is the exhaust side restrictions.
If your building an engine to take advantage of the 300+ CFM heads, your usually looking at a good single plane intake, 950+ CFM carb, (the 6-pack is also good) and a cam with 0.600"+ lift.

 

[RemCharger]

You need the rest of the system sized to match the heads air flow if you want the extra power they can make.
Many intakes don't flow more than 290 cfm so that could be a intake restriction along with too small a carb, air filter and then there is the exhaust side restrictions.
If your building an engine to take advantage of the 300+ CFM heads, your usually looking at a good single plane intake, 950+ CFM carb, (the 6-pack is also good) and a cam with 0.600"+ lift.

Excellent points. Go fast or go home type of deal. Personally I'd get into the MW port hobby. It's like big boobs.

 

[Kern Dog]

You need the rest of the system sized to match the heads air flow if you want the extra power they can make.
Many intakes don't flow more than 290 cfm so that could be a intake restriction along with too small a carb, air filter and then there is the exhaust side restrictions.
If your building an engine to take advantage of the 300+ CFM heads, your usually looking at a good single plane intake, 950+ CFM carb, (the 6-pack is also good) and a cam with 0.600"+ lift.

I agree and that does make sense.
I have a dual plane intake (Edelbrock Performer RPM) and want to keep it for the low and midrange power. I'm switching to a hydraulic roller cam with the following specs:

The lift is actually higher since I have 1.6 ratio rocker arms.... .582 intake and .579 .
The headers are 2" full length and I have 3" exhaust with an X pipe.
Part of what is tempting here is that my Edelbrock heads could be used on another engine which sort of justifies the expense....

 

[RemCharger]

Justifying is a big part of moving fwd and fulfilling the bucket list.

 

[Kern Dog]

Justifying is a big part of moving fwd and fulfilling the bucket list.

Ha ha....
The tactic of Justifying the expense is a common one for me. The Tremec swap of 2021 freed up the 727, drive shaft and floor shifter linkage for my other Charger, Jigsaw. The seats and carpet in Jigsaw came from the red car too. The Edelbrock heads from the red car would be set aside for Jigsaw. I am considering a 440 crank in the 383 in that car so the Edelbrock heads would be a good fit for the 383/431 build.

 

[451Mopar]

Excellent points. Go fast or go home type of deal. Personally I'd get into the MW port hobby. It's like big boobs.

I have the Hughes CNC ported Victor MW heads. The valve train parts get pricy (for me anyhow) pretty quick with those offset rocker and 0.750"+ lift valve springs, retainers and such. Then there is the matter of just how much power a stock block can reliably hold, and how much to spend upgrading a stock block before going to an aftermarket block makes sense? Like, do you spend $1,500+ on aftermarket caps, girdle, and the machine work to install them, or put that money as a down payment for an aftermarket block?
Also, the single shaft rocker system, and the 5 hold down bolts/studs are really stressed with near 800 pound open spring pressures. The paired shaft system looks nice. I haven't tried it yet, but I think it is around $3,000+?

 

[451Mopar]

I agree and that does make sense.
I have a dual plane intake (Edelbrock Performer RPM) and want to keep it for the low and midrange power. I'm switching to a hydraulic roller cam with the following specs:
View attachment 1857942

The lift is actually higher since I have 1.6 ratio rocker arms.... .582 intake and .579 .
The headers are 2" full length and I have 3" exhaust with an X pipe.
Part of what is tempting here is that my Edelbrock heads could be used on another engine which sort of justifies the expense....

Thats the same cam I have in the Convertible 505" stroked 440. 440 source 4.25" stroker kit with the 17cc dished pistons and stealth heads (minor bowl and port clean up with valve job, flowed a bit over 290 cfm) with HS 1.6:1 rockers.
I used the ISKY 8005A valve springs and Comp 748-16 retainers. The springs are about 20 pounds more on the seat than the Comp 925-16 springs, and the spring rate of the ISKY is 400 vs 395 for the Comp 925 springs. With the 505" engine the cam seems a bit mild with alot of low mid range torque.

 

[RemCharger]

I have the Hughes CNC ported Victor MW heads. The valve train parts get pricy (for me anyhow) pretty quick with those offset rocker and 0.750"+ lift valve springs, retainers and such. Then there is the matter of just how much power a stock block can reliably hold, and how much to spend upgrading a stock block before going to an aftermarket block makes sense? Like, do you spend $1,500+ on aftermarket caps, girdle, and the machine work to install them, or put that money as a down payment for an aftermarket block?
Also, the single shaft rocker system, and the 5 hold down bolts/studs are really stressed with near 800 pound open spring pressures. The paired shaft system looks nice. I haven't tried it yet, but I think it is around $3,000+?

Yes I agree, but no need to get greedy. A durability grind will get you extra years minus the few extra peak hp. Do your heads have the rocker stud holes addressed

A good block is always the better choice assuming a never ending hp increase. Imo

 

[451Mopar]

Yes I agree, but no need to get greedy. A durability grind will get you extra years minus the few extra peak hp. Do your heads have the rocker stud holes addressed

A good block is always the better choice assuming a never ending hp increase. Imo

My first set of MW victors was when they were first released, and I broke the rocker stands, so milled the stands off and used MW rocker stand blocks.
Mopar Max Wedge Rocker Stands

Second set was the CNC ported heads and they were a newer casting with more material around the stands and on top of the ports, and the heli-coils were longer in the rocker stands.
Because I had already went to the stand blocks, we milled the cast in rocker stands off, but they did look stronger than the early version of the heads.
I was waiting for the correct length ARP hold down studs, and used some generic advertised "grade-8" studs, but I think they might have been grade-5?
Anyhow, one of the cheap hold down studs broke on the end of the shaft, resulting in the rocker shaft snapping off and pushed into the valve cover, putting a hole in the valve cover.
Got a new shaft from T&D, and the ARP studs, and haven't had any problems. Just saying those 5 hold down studs are under alot of pressure when running high spring pressures.

 

[PRHeads]

I believe the OP’s heads have had some clean up work in the ports, so if that was done correctly then the TF’s will be less of an improvement than they would be compared to ootb E heads.
Also, the overall combo isn’t one that’s going to maximize the hp/per available cfm.

In other words, a combo making in the 700hp range would do a better job of capitalizing on the added flow the TF’s provide(than something making less).

Off the top of my head, I’d say an improvement somewhere in the 30hp range for that combo seems reasonable.

Better heads(that are still appropriate for the application) are one of the few things you can do to increase power output that doesn’t change the basic character of the combo.

 

[PRHeads]

The Edelbrocks have the same intake valve size but the Trick Flow has a slightly smaller exhaust valve.

Not exactly:

Ede valves - 2.14/1.81
TF valves - 2.19/1.76

 

[33 IMP]

I agree and that does make sense.
I have a dual plane intake (Edelbrock Performer RPM) and want to keep it for the low and midrange power. I'm switching to a hydraulic roller cam with the following specs:
View attachment 1857942

The lift is actually higher since I have 1.6 ratio rocker arms.... .582 intake and .579 .
The headers are 2" full length and I have 3" exhaust with an X pipe.
Part of what is tempting here is that my Edelbrock heads could be used on another engine which sort of justifies the expense....

If you wanna keep your two plane, just keep the heads you've got. ROI on the TF won't be there.
IF you went to 270s and a super victor, the answer would be different.

 

[Kern Dog]

This whole idea was characteristic of my over-active imagination. I often like to let my mind wander and think of a variety of what if I did this scenarios.
Most of the time I don't follow through. Sometimes I do though.
I thought for years about a roller cam swap and I finally bought the stuff to do it. The same applies to the 5 speed conversion.
There are points that can be made in a Pro/Con list.
The biggest Con is the cost for the increase in power. $3000 for about 30 HP is hard to swallow.
One thing that got me considering this change is that to make the switch to the roller camshaft, I need to change the springs and seals on all the valves. I'm faced with doing this with the heads still in place so I'll have to pressurize each cylinder, crank down my hand operated valve spring compressor, change the valve stem seals and springs while testing each one for height using a box of shims and I'm not looking forward to that. It seemed like just changing the heads would be easier, though expensive. I considered the fact that I could just pull the Edelbrocks off and do the work on a table.
My better sense tells me to just "man up" and do the work on these heads because the cost of the Trick Flows is so high versus the gains I'd see.
I like keeping everything under the stock hood so that means no TF 270s and the matching single plane high rise intake. Given that, the TF 240s with my Performer RPM intake limits what gains I could have. I'm already close to the hood now.