460 Ford Forum banner

New AFR BBF head

175K views 457 replies 72 participants last post by  bob460 
#1 ·
#2 ·
Yup, I talked to an AFR rep at SEMA and he said they're planning on three new heads with different intake volumes and different amounts of port relocation on the exhaust. He said they're largely focused on increased performance with minimal increases in port volume (high velocity). Should be interesting to see what actually hits the market.
 
#7 ·
another set of small valve heads which may be good for the street cars but with valve relocation you don't have the luxuary of a "bolt-on" upgraded head without changing pistons or modify pistons if possible, and for the performance increase they claim its not different than the P-51's. to build a complete new motor around these heads i'm not sure that it will be any different than what is already available, performance wise. i would bet that dollar for dollar a good set of TFS streets would flow just as good with less work and you don't have to change pistons or buy different valve train. but on the other side of the coin another set of heads for the BBF is great addition and gives every builder an option he did not have before.
 
#8 ·
Another cylinder head option is always welcome imo. With regard to efficacy and ease of use... Time will tell.

If I didn't know better I would swear I was looking at a CHI cleveland casting...



:D
 
#9 ·
AFR desperate

AFR is very late to the party and is just trying to jump on the bandwagon. In my opinion they are not welcome. To make a street head is a good indicator of this. To me they are just a US copy of Pro Comp. and are trying to make a buck in the BBF world. Their Chevy business must be dead.
 
#10 ·
I've always had very good results anytime I've used AFR... I bet their big Ford head will be very good if used for the intended purpose, whatever that might be.
 
#12 ·
Not sure what Vandy dudes problem is but I welcome AFR into the BBF world. They produce very nice cylinder heads.
What "Vandy dude" is saying, DGS, is that there are plenty of street wedge heads on the market and he wants to see more serious racing heads for the Ford--there aren't enough racing wedge heads out there to suit his specific needs. C heads, Thor heads, etc don't quite cut it when compared to the non-Ford competition, they're just not going to be able to support 5000+ horsepower.

Paul
 
#14 ·
DGS, your response looks sarcastic to me. I'm only explaining where Van is coming from in regards to his response to this cylinder head, as you didn't understand.

In regards to building enignes that generate thousands of horsepower: that's nothing new over in this camp, it's been going on for decades and with several makes. But multiple thousands with a Ford wedge head is extremely difficult indeed. Hence, why more BBF race heads are being desired (Van prefers wedge over hemi).

Paul

(p.s. All: Did not intend to highjack :rolleyes: )
 
#15 ·
Paul, your response didn't make much sense. Why would AFR make a cylinder head good for 3000+ HP? How many customers would they have? If you and Vandy would have us believe that all other companies are out there to develop cylinder heads only for the end user and profit be damned, you better get your head out of the sand.
 
#16 ·
How is this response
It's going to be a second rate street head, just like there small block stuff. If they spent the time and $ to build a good head to compete with the TFS A heads which is great stuff, but older technology, Then think about building a street head based on there reputation that was earned. Thank you TFS for still making great Ford heads for a great price.
Airflow will treat the Ford as second rate, not as an equal to their Chevy line of products. You can belly up to the counter and buy it but I'm going to pass.

Vandy DUDE
 
#20 · (Edited)
Given the AFR headed SBF's loss's (and not by significant points) to the CHI headed clevors / clevelands which ruled in EMC's past, the assertion that they offer a second rate head is imo incorrect and unfair.

I would be interested to see what the BBF offerings are all about and what if any improvements they can offer over the P-51's which with a 265+ cfm exhaust port will support 1000 hp with a 2.300" intake and port work. That might be hard to match... ( yes I am aware of the intake used in that combo)

In addition the SCJ-A's with bowl work make wicked street heads any way you try to slice it.

I will take a wait and see attitude here...


:D
 
#23 ·
As I was reading this, I thought to myself..."how cool it would be to have Ford vs. Chevy engine shootout, using as much equal componentry as possible, (make verything as equal as possible, such as displacement, compression, induction flow rates, cam specs, etc, etc."

The AFR small block Ford heads would be going up against the AFR small block Chevy heads.....inline vs. inline (a CHI headed SBF would most likely kill both of em powerwise!!)
 
#22 ·
So you want everyone on a budget to buy the AFR head and say screw the P51??? So soon the P51 is no longer made and it will be just like Blue Thunder stopped making the CJ style. The rats are already lining up = Abandon Ship !!! Jump over to the AFR raft it will stay afloat
 
#25 ·
I'm glad to see it happening. It means that manufacturers don't view the 385 series as obsolete so that is good for our hobby. AFR is a good company so we will just have to wait and see if what they are putting out there will be competative or not. Anything else at this point is pure speculation so I'll continue to hope for the best. I'm not in the "know" like some of you guys are on the 385 series subject so I'll continue to hope for the best from AFR. I know they make some killer LS series stuff so hopefully they won't sacrifice their reputation by trying to pass off an average casting just to make a buck.

...with all of that being said I still drool over the Kaase stuff. That to me is the "Top Shelf" parts vendor for the 385 series. I'd love a set of the P-51's but my 521 needs other things first. Like 4 bolt mains so that will be a priority. As soon as I have the $2600 bucks I'm going to give Lem a call and get hooked up with an A460 block.
 
#40 ·
Well for my part Chilly, I love the fact that AFR is at least trying to service the SBF/BBF field with this offering. No-doubt that AFR is scanning the Ford forums to gauge interest in the Ford community.

However, i believe that since AFR like all of the other companies that have made the bulk of their profits off of chevrolet heads attract, or at least, are staffed by chevrolet fans, that will not design truly competitive heads for the BBF. Not from hate, IMHO, but from lack of understanding of what we are looking for in the 385 world.

This has been evident in at least two cases recently in my opinion. I.E. the Edelbrock heads and of course, the "pro comp" heads. Now, I am sure that the Edelbrocks and, the procomp heads (to an even lesser extent ) have their fans and can make some good power, but...They seem to have been designed by persons not very well acquainted to the 385's design.

I would like to see good inexpensive cast iron/aluminum heads for the 385, that flow well enough for the general 385 crowd but not exactly the race community. They don't have to be A460's in scope, but, they do have to flow better than P.I. heads etc. out of the box.

The procomps at first, looked like what i envisioned, but, they rapidly turned out to be mus-designed by some one that didn't exactly know what they where doing. Maybe they did, but they wanted to avoid a lawsuit with TFS. Who knows?

The 385 needs all of the heads that we can get so, these AFR's are appreciated, as are the flawed procomps and, the Edelbrocks etc.

What we really need are intake manifolds in more configurations as well as better heads.
 
#30 ·
There are two applications that really need to be filled at this point in time in my opinion.

1 - A serious stock CJ style/shape/height intake head that is easily capable of flowing in the 460+ cfm range that will compare to big serious BBC rectangle port heads(I don't know, maybe it's not achievable with the low entry and low valve angle). Headers would be custom anyway so it really doesn't matter what flange is put on the exhaust so long as it works well. Flanges in this day and age are easy. A real intake manifold will also be needed to match the flow for this head.

2 - A real serious wedge head like maybe a stepped up version of the Thor (just an always available Thor would be good too). Maybe IDT has this covered if they can get production up to speed, although they may need to offer it in the standard valve arrangement for those not ready to change the cam/valve arrangement(this is debatable).

Bashing this or any company that is trying to build us a decent product is competely un-productive IMO!

Bret
 
#31 ·
BBF AFR

I examined the prototype head at the PRI show very carefully. When a new product arrives on the market, it usually addresses shortcomings present in current products. When I saw the AFR BBF head, I didn't see any design features that would make it better than what's already on the market. The Trick Flow street head offered great performance with standard architecture. The P51s provided outstanding "out of the box" performance. Procomp brought us a BBF aluminum head at a reasonable price.
Having waited this long to enter the market, AFR has had a opportunity to examine all of the current heads, and incorporate the necessary improvements into their product. There may be some flow gains to be had with the changed valve angles, but otherwise, I don't see it. I hope that I'm wrong with this.
 
#32 · (Edited)
I examined the prototype head at the PRI show very carefully. When a new product arrives on the market, it usually addresses shortcomings present in current products. When I saw the AFR BBF head, I didn't see any design features that would make it better than what's already on the market. The Trick Flow street head offered great performance with standard architecture. The P51s provided outstanding "out of the box" performance. Procomp brought us a BBF aluminum head at a reasonable price.
Having waited this long to enter the market, AFR has had a opportunity to examine all of the current heads, and incorporate the necessary improvements into their product. There may be some flow gains to be had with the changed valve angles, but otherwise, I don't see it. I hope that I'm wrong with this.
I would think that unless you are a head master (completely different from the worlds oldest profession :D) it could be very difficult to see any potential improvements just by giving them the old eyeball examination. With that in mind I have no idea what you do for a living or how much experience you have with such things. You could be a total guru so if that is the case please forgive my hesitation in being a believer. Part of the proof will be when users get their hands on them and then get them on a flow bench. The real proof will be in measured E.T.'s and trap speeds. In other words we just need to get our hands on them and give them a real world test to find out for sure before we bash them and write them off.
 
#34 ·
How many SBF (and SBC, BBC) heads are there out there that are similar or nearly identical in architecture? Tons. There is only benefit to the customer with more options...lower or variable price points, better castings, competition for the customer. These things push innovation. AFR obviously sees a benefit to producing this head. Hopefully, it is partially some BBF enthusiams. Practically, it is more likely profit motive. Either way, the customer wins.

According to the article, AFR said they're going to make an intake for this head, as well.
 
#36 ·
From what I understand the head at the PRI was a plastic prototype. They have not yet cast a head in aluminum and are saying will not be until May that actual product will be avialable. To me sounds like they are gauging interest. So we will have to wait and see.

As far as the head goes I would not speculate as to its potential until they are out and tested out. I would not bet against AFR either. I remember years ago what the SBF market was like.

You had the J302, the eddies, hi port TFS, and the TFS twisted wedge (which btw Vandy had a lot of problems). Anyway AFR came out with 185 and took a chunck of the market. They did because they had a head that plain worked better.

I would say the markets AFR are in are saturated with aftermarket head choices, and they see a market in the 429/460 that is not.

Regardless we will have to wait and see if they actually come to market and then we will see how good or bad they are, but personally I would not bet against AFR.

Steve
 
#37 ·
Given the many Blue Thunder models [when they are available] , FRPP A429, Edel , Pro-comp , FRPP SCJ , P51 , TFS power port , etc. I can't really see the "sweet spot " for another head that takes stock intake and exh. manifolding. I hope I'm wrong but, I'm betting AFR will not 'leap-frog' the field.

I do agree with Mr. Powell..... the void is at and above the A460 style castings.
 
#42 · (Edited)
MP40 I see things similar to you with regards to what many in the 429/460 world want. I do disagree about the AFR not understand Fords. An engine to a degree is just an engine. Where it gets different is limitations like head bolt locations, etc... other than those type of restrictions if you have a port that works well in one head it will do the same if you can fit it to another head.

If you look at many of the high end stuff like Pro stock many times the ports and chambers are same with only difference is what block they bolt to. I will say this for AFR they did their home work when they came out with their SBF head, and I'd say they will with the BBF head too. What they are good at is turning out a "turn key" product that does not require additional work or porting for those applications that they are targeted at.

Now some here just don't see it, much less a need for another head and they may be right, but I've learned that many times it is the guy coming in from the outside that shakes things up as the ones that are on the inside tend to have tunnel vision. Now did they do their homework right I don't know, the one guy who fingered them certainly did not see any magic. Still we will just have to wait and see if there is any magic or not.

Steve
 
#43 ·
MP40 I see things similar to you with regards to what many in the 429/460 world want. I do disagree about the AFR not understand Fords. An engine to a degree is just an engine. Where it gets different is limitations like head bolt locations, etc... other than those type of restrictions if you have a port that works well in one head it will do the same if you can fit it to another head.

If you look at many of the high end stuff like Pro stock many times the ports and chambers are same with only difference is what block they bolt to. I will say this for AFR they did their home work when they came out with their SBF head, and I'd say they will with the BBF head too. What they are good at is turning out a "turn key" product that does not require additional work or porting for those applications that they are targeted at.

Now some here just don't see it, much less a need for another head and they may be right, but I've learned that many times it is the guy coming in from the outside that shakes things up as the ones that are on the inside tend to have tunnel vision. We will just have to wait and see.

Steve

I agree on what you say about the company AFR as much in the way that any, and every, good company seeks to gain market share in a small segment of the racing world. No company or companies want to make a product that doesn't sell. So, they strive to make an acceptable product at a usable price range.

Now, where i am coming from as much as to the design not being as good or better than what we already have on the market for the 385, is that there might not be the interest in making a really good cylinder head for the BBF due to their adherence to the standard 385 architecture in intake/exhaust locations.

You see that i believe that Ford made concessions to the 385 series exhaust ports to clear shock towers and the like. AFR will in the interest of interchangeability, make this new design usable for the bolt on and go crowd. I don't see any flaw with this.

Now, this is normal and acceptable and the smart way to go about making cylinder heads especially for a somewhat limited (small) market.

But, I hate the fact that all but the TFS A/B, the Thor's, and the Blue Thunder bbc exhaust CJ's and others that i have forgotten, use the restricted port locations.

The TFS A/B heads where designed by Ford enthusiasts back in the dark days to compete with out resorting to conventional port locals in their designs. I would like to have some heads in this spirit available.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top