AFR Enforcer 195cc Vs Promaxx Project X 215cc Which Made More Power
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 07. 2023
- 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 - Auta a dopravní prostředky
This is good stuff. Thank you Eric for putting in the time and effort!
I am definitely learning a lot about intakes here. Thank you sir.
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.
Thanks for all that you do Eric
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.
Thank you for all the effort to test and share the results. I love the sbc stuff!
Thanks Eric I appreciate the information, I have always believed that velocity isn't everything you just proved it. Take care brother.
Love the info great work.
Another good one my man!
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.
its the cubic inch. 400 works great with 200+cc heads. 350? not as good, for torque that is.
@@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'.
@@jrdmotorsports9718how can I figure out what heads are good for my application?
@@Kemothebarber What's the application? Target power and rpm? What is the goal?
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.
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.
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
Thank you, great content here!
I’d also really like to see you port that Vic Jr and try it!
Great video Eric!
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.
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.
I thought for sure the truck flow I take would be better . Nope lol Great info as always !
Great video and info
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.
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.
Holdener kinda debunked that with his intake pier volume test on CZcams
What were your results?
@michaelherman2207 any luck on the swap?
Great info! Tunnelram on project x 215s?
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
Would love to find an untouched Victor E. But Im thinking it would be next to impossible to find one.
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.
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.
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 :))
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. 👌
Same engine.
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.
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.
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.
Do u think the older vic jr like you tested works as well as the new versions u can buy now?
Looks like you have the best Victor JR ever cast
When i bought a set of
afr 210 race heads they were $1375 but that was over 20 years ago
Dos the Trickflow beat the Victor when we get to 230cc heads and 274 int duration ?
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
I tested those intakes the first round. I probably will not test them all with these heads.
@@WeingartnerRacing ok sounds good
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
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!
I’d go with 215 gives you head room to grow and won’t hurt you.
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
Would the project x heads be too big for a 383 stroker with 10.7 to 1 compression? I see lots of 383s with the afr 195
Now where some of the larfer port makes less torque came in is if you have a poor intake. Then yes it probably would be quite a bit worse.
Nice, love the information. What cam is in the 406?
I show it at the beginning of the video.
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.
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.
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
Trick flow has a set that looks like double humps.
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
Thanks for your efforts. Would the CNC version of the Promaxx head have the same port irregularities volume wise as the stock version?
Depends on which one.
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.
@@donavan2676 and which heads are best? That was my question. Not everyone wants a race car
So the 215 head is not for you.
@@hankclingingsmith8707 but maybe they are... without testing, who's to know?
@@johnb7430 ‘big’ head, and have bullet cut a proper cam for the combo and desired rpm range.
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.
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.
Its said that promaxx is an afr eliminator copy. Enforcer is another Dart knockoff
Where ya get em??
Do you have any LS intake testing
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.
Right on
This cat is in Enid America. Sweet!
Just ordered book
Great content 👍🏿
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?
Carb flow is rated at 1.5hg vacuum. So it’s not a direct comparison
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
They are trick flow twisted wedge GEN 1
Have you ever done an AFR Enforcer vs an older AFR Eliminator in both 195? Whats the difference?
Huge difference, but would be fun to see some real data on this comparison.
Where’s these books can buy?
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.
@@jrdmotorsports9718I believe that the softening is important on nitrous motors. All the nitrous engine builders do it
@@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.
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!
Victor Jr is about as short as it gets for carb height. I had an '84 with one and it fit under the hood
Will you be testing the Promaxx with you digitized cnc port on the 406 dyno mule?
Yes
@WeingartnerRacing I'm definitely excited for that !!!
Cant wait for that. Should be interesting to see if the other racy manifolds improve with that CNC head or not.
Have you done tests comparing dual vs single plane intakes?
Many they are in other videos
What do you think would happen if you tried a set of the AFR 195 comp heads. Smaller port but with flow numbers nearly as high as the 215 project x.
Wouldn't it just depend on thr bore and stroke. Like an overbore vs underbore situation?
I don’t understand what you are asking.
Eric what are the cam specs on this engine?
I believe they are in the video.
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.
Could you use this promaxx head on a 383 even a 350?
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.
I am now convinced that the people who came up with the smaller port story. Was because they new they could beat everybody with larger ports.😂😂😂
Which do you think would perform better with a smaller cubic inch like a 355.
the enforcer 195. or better yet a promaxx 200. that project x 215 seems to work better o the 383-406 stuff for sure
@@KingJT80 Hey thanks for the reply!
I wonder how the pro max project x 200 cc heads would compare to the enforcer .
Maybe I will get to try that.
So the old school intake that’s been around forever is better.
How do u think a AFR Eliminator 195 competition would go against the 215 Promax ??
Be very very interesting .....
I would like to do that but I don’t want to buy the afr195 heads.
@@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 ...
What cam was used?
It’s showed and said at the beginning of the video.
What was the cam specs?
It says at the beginning of the video.
195 cc heads are all right for a street car, but not for a race engine! Too small head for the 406...
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.
Pro max how come you did not go 185 pro max heads or put afr 210 heads
Because I wanted to make more power not less and they offered these up.
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.
Why wouldn't you use an 215 cc AFR head so you would be testing equal products . The 195cc is coming up short to the 215cc of the X pro .
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
I don’t agree entirely.
@@WeingartnerRacing I know you don't that's why I posted ... I have done videos on my CZcams 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
I respectfully disagree. Sorry to say, that's just not how it works.
@@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.
ProMax Sent you a set of ringers.
I doubt it because I have flowed many other identical sets and they flow about the same.
@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.
Wow a 20cc bigger head did better not surprised
A victor Jrs work better than they look like they would
Don't forget, BIGGER Valve, ... 2.08" v 2.02" Valves, .....2.08" has... 2.81sq" CSA.. vs ..2.65sq" CSA....for 2.02" Valve
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 Those CSA # are ...91% Throat CSA...
@@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...
2892 2892 2892.. on the 215..
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 ?
Then you need afr 235 or 245 make more power!!!
I'm surprised the promax has didn't come apart and ruin your motor.
They are a good head.
afr 210 will be closer 195 to a 215 you can get hp afr will make more 210
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.
The head cost difference between the two was $100. I don’t know where you got three times from.
@@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.
@@scottc74the $1429 was for a pair not a single.
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.
Dart copy vs afr copy.
Never seen a good torque st build with the afr 190 vortec & intake.
Moral of the story…spend the money, buy real AFR’s…
Or save some money and buy the Promax head's! We just seen they're capable of over 600hp n/a on a small block!
@@lollipop84858
My point is real AFR 195 Eliminator head would’ve far out performed the enforcers…
I have the 195 Eliminator’s and the numbers are less.His videos of Eliminators maxed out at 270 and pulled less even at 5000rpms….?.why is that?
@@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.
Don't waste time showing printing you can't read.😊
Good info
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.
Yes the 750 would gain a bit at wot but at a loss of throttle response below that.
Promax probably made more than The enforcer
Cylinder head part number please