AFR 185 vs Edelbrock Vic Jrs?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Nicholas Anthony - 10 Oct 2006 20:13 GMT

Which is a better head of the two, AFR 185 or Edelbrock Vic Jr's? I know the
Vic's flow a little more intake wise but is it better over all? Which is
better made? Which needs less upgrades? I was told the AFR's would need
better springs. Also any issues with spark plugs, headers, etc...? Lastly I
am using a small supercharger, and thinking of going with an E cam any
advice which head to go with or suggestions on cam/ rocker/ intake? Thanks.

Reply to this Message

Michael Johnson, PE - 10 Oct 2006 20:29 GMT

> Which is a better head of the two, AFR 185 or Edelbrock Vic Jr's? I know the
> Vic's flow a little more intake wise but is it better over all? Which is
> better made? Which needs less upgrades? I was told the AFR's would need
> better springs. Also any issues with spark plugs, headers, etc...? Lastly I
> am using a small supercharger, and thinking of going with an E cam any
> advice which head to go with or suggestions on cam/ rocker/ intake? Thanks.

What kind of blower are you installing and how much horsepower do you
plan to make? This will have a bearing on the heads I would recommend.

Reply to this Message

Nicholas Anthony - 10 Oct 2006 21:02 GMT

>> Which is a better head of the two, AFR 185 or Edelbrock Vic Jr's? I know
>> the Vic's flow a little more intake wise but is it better over all? Which
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> What kind of blower are you installing and how much horsepower do you plan
> to make? This will have a bearing on the heads I would recommend.

Blower on it atm is weak a Powerdyne BD11 with a 6lb pulley. Depending on
dyno numbers after this work is done I am either going to put the 11lb
pulley on it with bypass valve or upgrade to the XB1-A with Anderson pipes
which handles allot of boost. Hp any where from 350-450 depending on the s/c
set up I use.

Reply to this Message

Ted Mieker - 10 Oct 2006 21:43 GMT

>>> Which is a better head of the two, AFR 185 or Edelbrock Vic Jr's? I know
>>> the Vic's flow a little more intake wise but is it better over all?
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> which handles allot of boost. Hp any where from 350-450 depending on the
> s/c set up I use.

With a good blower, you don't really need to do heads.
I would go with Keene Bell Super charger, far more torque at low RPM.

you dont need springs unless you are going to wind it up into high RPM,
racing full tilt, not daily driver stuff.

you need to match up your cam with the blower, more lift? why bother if you
have boost ?

Reply to this Message

Nicholas Anthony - 11 Oct 2006 01:28 GMT

>>>> Which is a better head of the two, AFR 185 or Edelbrock Vic Jr's? I
>>>> know the Vic's flow a little more intake wise but is it better over
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> With a good blower, you don't really need to do heads.
> I would go with Keene Bell Super charger, far more torque at low RPM.

You know that itch you get when you get a classy Mustang? When I got my car
I said I was going to leave this ASC McLaren totally stock, then I said a
Ford Motorsport Powerdyne is the simplest bolt on bang for the buck no oil
tapping quietest around no other mods, but then decided I am going to create
the car I would have wanted them to make. :) I allready have the Powerdyne
s/c installed for the last 4 years, if anything it would be more cost
effective to swap an XB1-A or Procharger on the matching brackets and create
an oil line then a KB at this stage. I figured with improved heads, intake,
and cam plus the s/c better breathing and even more power and in the future
option for more boost. I know I can go for more boost now and then upper
motor later but choose to do it this way.

> you dont need springs unless you are going to wind it up into high RPM,
> racing full tilt, not daily driver stuff.

AFR suggests you upgrade your springs with higher spring pressures to reduce
chances of valve float in the high 5k to low 6k rpm range. I just dont want
any problems down the road.

> you need to match up your cam with the blower, more lift? why bother if
> you have boost ?

I would like to match the cam with the heads and the rest of my motor while
its all apart. I need some input from people in this area. So just to repeat
some key things I need to know, best cam to use so far of the Fords I was
told the E cam for my set up but there are better out there, but which are
they? Are there any changes with the sparkplugs angles with either heads,
would traditional headers work I am using Bassani exhaust from headers to
tail pipe, which head is better quality? Will Cobra intakes work well with
this? Thanks for your help. :)

Reply to this Message

Ted Mieker - 11 Oct 2006 01:55 GMT

>>>>> Which is a better head of the two, AFR 185 or Edelbrock Vic Jr's? I
>>>>> know the Vic's flow a little more intake wise but is it better over
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
> cost effective to swap an XB1-A or Procharger on the matching brackets and
> create an oil line then a KB

KB dosen't need an oil line. And with KB you have the torque at low RPM,
you dont have to wind it upto 3K to even get started.

> at this stage. I figured with improved heads, intake, and cam plus the s/c
> better breathing and even more power

If you are running 6 pounds now, it is a waste of time to do heads. There
are lists of improvements to engines in many build ups to see what ads HP
and what dosent. Heads is improving airflow, but if you have boost your
pushing the air into the engine already. (heads are $2,500?)

>and in the future option for more boost. I know I can go for more boost now
>and then upper motor later but choose to do it this way.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> reduce chances of valve float in the high 5k to low 6k rpm range. I just
> dont want any problems down the road.

Right that is high RPM, I never take mine above 4k, no need, and not enough
clear highway doing 130 mph at 4,000 RPM (1993 8# Keene Bell )

I would pick a HP range for the car and design to that, with stock parts
you can do about 330 HP mustange 5.0 and a blower. Bone stock.

>> you need to match up your cam with the blower, more lift? why bother if
>> you have boost ?
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Fords I was told the E cam for my set up but there are better out there,
> but which are they?

Cams make the engine breath better, but so does a supercharger, most
superchargers are fine with stock cams.

>Are there any changes with the sparkplugs angles with either heads, would
>traditional headers work I am using Bassani exhaust from headers to tail
>pipe, which head is better quality? Will Cobra intakes work well with this?
>Thanks for your help. :)

Reply to this Message

Michael Johnson, PE - 11 Oct 2006 15:19 GMT

>>>>>> Which is a better head of the two, AFR 185 or Edelbrock Vic Jr's? I
>>>>>> know the Vic's flow a little more intake wise but is it better over
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
> and what dosent. Heads is improving airflow, but if you have boost your
> pushing the air into the engine already. (heads are $2,500?)

Actually breathing improvements like higher flowing heads make a big
difference on a blown car. The trick is to not have any bottle necks in
the intake and exhaust or it won't be money well spent. Mega flowing
heads are worthless with out an intake to feed it or an exhaust system
to let the gas out efficiently.

I have a KB Blowzilla/Flowzilla combo on my Mustang and improving
airflow paid big dividends regarding horsepower. The other thing it
does is lower boost pressure which reduces intake air temperature and
the risk of detonation. I put extremely ported GT-40X heads and a Cobra
lower intake on my car and was able to make more power on less boost
while running a more aggressive tune. It was a win all the way around.
I just had to make sure all the parts were in place like MAF sensor,
throttle body/EGR spacer etc. that would support the ported heads, lower
intake and fuel system, which wasn't cheap.

The approach of building an engine that is a high rpm screamer is a
proven one for KB blown cars. After all it makes sense. There is no
low rpm penalty with this type of build like there would be on a N/A or
centrifugally blown engine. No downside, only an upside. ;)

>> and in the future option for more boost. I know I can go for more boost now
>> and then upper motor later but choose to do it this way.
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>> pipe, which head is better quality? Will Cobra intakes work well with this?
>> Thanks for your help. :)

Reply to this Message

Michael Johnson, PE - 11 Oct 2006 00:07 GMT

>>> Which is a better head of the two, AFR 185 or Edelbrock Vic Jr's? I know
>>> the Vic's flow a little more intake wise but is it better over all? Which
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> which handles allot of boost. Hp any where from 350-450 depending on the s/c
> set up I use.

You might want to look into a set of AFR 165's instead of the 185's.
With a centrifugal blower you will want to choose a head that will keep
low end torque near stock to improve off-boost performance and
drivability. The 185's have larger intake ports and this promotes high
rpm performance at the expense low end torque. IMO, the 165's (maybe
with a little port work) are better fit for the engine displacement and
blower type you are planning to use.

Overall, I think you should be careful about turning the engine into a
high rpm monster because it might not be very fun when running around
town or in stop and go traffic. I have a Kenne Bell blower on my car
and have the heads/intake ported to the max to promote high rpm
breathing. Low end torque is never an issue with a twin screw blower so
there is no penalty to setting up the engine to be a high rpm breather.
There is a penalty when doing this on a N/A or centrifugally blown
street car.

Reply to this Message

Nicholas Anthony - 11 Oct 2006 01:35 GMT

>>>> Which is a better head of the two, AFR 185 or Edelbrock Vic Jr's? I
>>>> know the Vic's flow a little more intake wise but is it better over
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> work) are better fit for the engine displacement and blower type you are
> planning to use.

Good thinking but long term wouldnt it be wiser to go with the higher flow
intake in case I upgrade boost down the road? Also when ever I intend to
rebuild the motor the lower end will be redone perhaps with a stroker kit.

> Overall, I think you should be careful about turning the engine into a
> high rpm monster because it might not be very fun when running around town
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> to setting up the engine to be a high rpm breather. There is a penalty
> when doing this on a N/A or centrifugally blown street car.

This wont be a daily driver just to car shows and track when ever I get a
chance. As far as your comment on blower types do you have any where I can
reference your remark? I would like to do some more reading on that. Thanks.

Reply to this Message

Michael Johnson, PE - 11 Oct 2006 03:45 GMT

>>>>> Which is a better head of the two, AFR 185 or Edelbrock Vic Jr's? I
>>>>> know the Vic's flow a little more intake wise but is it better over
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> intake in case I upgrade boost down the road? Also when ever I intend to
> rebuild the motor the lower end will be redone perhaps with a stroker kit.

If you plan on using a stock 302 block then you are going to be limited
to around 400-450 rwhp at the most. More than 400 rwhp and you run the
risk of a split block. Also, IMO, running more than 12 psi of boost on
a stock 302 block doesn't promote proper head gasket sealing due to the
heads lifting. I ran 16 psi and the slightest bit of detonation would
blow a head gasket.

It you are OK with poor low rpm performance then go for it. Personally,
I think you will make all the hp the block can handle without a stroker
kit. My advice is if you want to do a stroker then use a 351W block and
stroke it to 392, or more, cubic inches and forget the blower. My next
engine will be a 427W stroker with no blower. Cubic inches is a less
complicated and much more reliable way to make horsepower. Plus you get
plenty of low end torque.

Trying to use parts that are for a future engine configuration means you
will have a half a.s setup until you do it right. I guarantee that in
the end you will spend much more money this way and won't be pleased
with the intermediate results. I've been there and done that.

>> Overall, I think you should be careful about turning the engine into a
>> high rpm monster because it might not be very fun when running around town
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> chance. As far as your comment on blower types do you have any where I can
> reference your remark? I would like to do some more reading on that. Thanks.

I learned what I know through trial and error and reading on Mustang
based web sites like The Corral. Sign up there and start reading the
different forums. There is a wealth of information to be mined out of
these types of web sites. Plus, you are getting real world feedback on
what works and what doesn't work. I trust the information I get from
these sites far more than what I have heard from local speed shops. It
will take you quite a while to get up to speed but in the end you will
be much better informed to make decisions. Do this before you buy
another speed part.

It doesn't matter if the car will be a daily driver or not. It sounds
like this will be a mostly street driven car and having the proper setup
will mean the difference between a satisfying ride and one you will
continually be throwing money at to "get it right". You will not get
the knowledge you need from reading a few posts in this newsgroup. You
need to understand how forced induction works and what are the pitfalls
from using it. Also, look into the different types of blowers and
turbos while considering their complexity and cost. You may just find
that a 392W/427W stroker motor will give you everything you want with a
high degree of reliability and for the least cost in the end. This is
what I have determined after years and years of fiddling with a blower
and more than $15K in modifications along the way. I could have spent
$6k-$7k on a nice stroker engine in the beginning and been more than
happy with a lot less frustration.

Reply to this Message