Is the true about Edelbrock heads with TFS intake?

gt93mustang · 03-02-2001, 06:57 PM

I was talking to my buddy today on the phone and he said that he recently read something about how the TFS lower intake doesn't match up to Edelbrock 6037 heads very well. He said that in the information he read, they started out with the TFS Street heat on a set of 6037 heads and ran it on a dyno. Then they switched to an Edelbrock series intake (he couldn't remember whether it was the RPM or Performer)and picked up something like 40 HP. He said it was because the ports don't line up very well from the TFS lower to the ports on the Edelbrock heads. Now I know that TFS would make their intake match much better to their heads to help promote the sales of their product, but when I switch to the Street Heat next week, am I looking at losing power because of this? If this is true, is there any way I can port match the intake to the heads? What are the techniques you guys use to go about doing this? Thanks in advance.

------------------
MAC equal length headers, MAC Off-Road H-Pipe, Flowmaster mufflers, 373's, March ram-air kit, underdrive pulleys, 73mm MAF, 75mm TB, Saleen Intake (ported), Edelbrock 6037 heads (ported, polished, 3 angle valve-job 255CFM @.500), 1.6 FMS RR's, Wolverine 1087 Cam, 24lb injectors, MSD 6AL, Subframe connectors, Griggs Adustable Lower Control Arms, Lakewood 50/50 shocks, SSM Upper Control Arms... and probably some more in there I forgot

WADS56 · 03-02-2001, 09:17 PM

This could be true. I am having the same problem with my Canfields and a gt-40 lower.
The intake ports are raised on the heads so when I put the intake on the ports are a 1/8 inch off. I was thinking that I could fab up a spacer from aluminum on each side of the intake to lift it up some. It should work, I have seen it done on small block chevys when they run a taller deck but want to keep a stock looking intake. Another way is to use epoxy and do a good gasket match.

------------------
Blown 347 W/Canfield heads, solid roller cam, track times this spring mid 10's or bust

93lx 5.0 daily driver

jonnyk · 03-03-2001, 03:12 AM

That's generally where staying with the same brand heads/intake is a good idea, TFS and Edelbrock match them up nicely so you don't have to worry about fit. I wouldn't doubt it if they didn't line up well. Anyone else know?

------------------
1991 LX Hatch 5.0L

Don Nichols · 03-04-2001, 12:32 PM

I agree with staying with the same brand.My GT40 intake ports are much smaller than the Trick Flow Twisted Wedge head ports. I'm sure it would be much better if they matched.

------------------
1987 mustang gt
stock short block
tftw heads
gt40 intake
nos stage 1

Mach 1 · 03-04-2001, 02:23 PM

Picked up 40 horsepower? This is not likely. Most of the heads have the ports in a standard location, including edelbrock and the Trick flow twisted wedge. Some heads have raised exhaust ports, but I would think the intake ports would more than likely match. Some of the heads and intakes have different size ports, like my edelbrock heads and my cobra intake(the cobra ports are a lot smaller), but, they are centered inside the larger edelbrock head port.

Five0 · 03-04-2001, 03:21 PM

I used to have the trickflow track heat and I have canfields and the ports did not match up on them either. They were about 1/8th of an inch off.

------------------
James Cox
nochevy@hotmail.com
1991 Mustang LX
12.565 @109.38mph 1.764 60ft

gt93mustang · 03-04-2001, 03:25 PM

MACH 1 - The 40 HP is most likely an exaggeration on his part, but I would think that due to turbulence, 10-15 or even 20 would not be out of the question. I do not doubt that this is possible, I am just curious if this is really such a big problem when using the TFS intake with Edelbrock heads.

My heads have been milled .030, so this would cause the smaller ports of the 6037 heads to sit even lower then they normally would against the TFS intake. After doing a bit more research on this, I am almost sure that this is going to be a problem, now I just wonder how to go about fixing it. Could I sit the intake on the heads, and then spray a light mist of spray paint into the runners to make an outline of where the intake runners match up to the head runners? or is there a better way?

93CobraR · 03-04-2001, 07:28 PM

Could you have the intake shaved a little on the sides?? Never heard of it being done but it could possibly work.

------------------
87 GT, 4 inch cowl hood,17x9 Cobra R's/255/45's,GT-40 heads,long tubes headers,h-pipe,Flows,BBK cold air, Mass air,70mm MAF, 1.7's, 1" spacer,underdrive pulleys,Pro 5.0, King Cobra, Adj. fuel Reg., Lakewood Lift Bars,50/50's,subframes, 4.10's.
Best time 13.012
Best MPH 104
Best 60' 1.816

Visit my site at:
http://www.geocities.com/cobrar93_2000/MyPage.html

rtz · 03-04-2001, 08:27 PM

Just mill the heads down.

gt93mustang · 03-04-2001, 09:23 PM

Yeah, I am probably going to have to have the intake milled a bit. I am not sure exactly what dimensions just yet, but I am trying to find the best way to go about figureing this out. Anyone have any suggestions?

moosejaw · 03-05-2001, 01:34 AM

These heads both specify the same fel-pro gasket and having seen both heads I really doubt it was port alignment unless the deck height was out of wack.

The most likely culprit was the difference in the intakes. The TF street intake makes loads of torque across the rpm band (good) but its peak power capability leaves something to be desired. Switching to any other intake that has better flow capacity will net more peak power but at what cost of torque.

I use a TF R series intake that would be a peice of crap for around town cruising (read no bottom end torque) but makes great peak power. Beats every other intake I have used, but I wouldn't use it for low rpm cruising. There are trade offs to almost every combination.

This particular "test" sounds like the editors were close to deadline and needed to fill some space in the mag. Conversation probably went like this " Hey we need a story. Lets go test two different intakes, get different numbers and write it up. No one will know any better, they think we are gods. Sounds good to me, lets do it."

Mike

------------------
Live near St.Louis?
Check out Mustang Muscle and Dyno in High Ridge, MO
Check out my ride.

Mach 1 · 03-05-2001, 01:26 PM

gt93 - are you saying the ports are different sizes, are they just dont line up, or both? I would expect some misalignment to be present, but the ports should be the same size on the edel. head and the trick flow intake.

How much will your compression raise with the .030 shaved off your edels? Are u using stock pistons? I want to shave my edels. also. so any help would be appreciated.

The best way for you to match yours up is to bolt the intake onto the heads with the heads mounted on the block. If you do it on a bench and not on the engine, it might not be the same as when its mounted, due to differeces in the deck height. Use an old gasket if u have one. I would put some rtv on the intake side of the gasket, so it will stick to the intake when you remove it, then outline the gasket opening with a scribe or something, then port the intake to match the gasket opening. The gasket opening will be lined up with the head, so you are basically gasket matching your intake to your head.

------------------
1993 GT/AOD
'93 Mustang GT

gt93mustang · 03-05-2001, 06:28 PM

I really appologize, Mach1, but I don't know what the compression is with the heads milled .030. My combustion chambers have also been polished, so that took more material out, thus possibly negating any rise in compression that I gained. I am running the stock pistons, so there is no P/V clearance problems even with the 1087 cam that I am using, although I did have to shim the rockers a bit. As far as what I was saying about the ports was that my buddy was simply saying they didn't line up well from the E'brocks to the TFS intake and this caused turbulence, which, in turn caused a decrease in both HP and TQ. From what he was saying, the TFS is larger than my E'brocks, causing somewhat of a 'lip' or ledge that the air has to pass before entering the combustion chamber. I then went on to say (but not explain very well) that because my heads have been milled, this would cause the roof of the ports on my heads to sit even lower then where they normally would if not milled, causing this 'lip' to be even worse.

Again, I appologize for not being more help. I really need to have my compression checked...

moosejaw · 03-06-2001, 02:20 AM

You can have your heads CC'd and then use this # to calculate compression. Like Mach 1 said it should be easy to port match the top of the head to the intake or vice versa.

Just as a estimate if you take .030 off a 64cc open combustion chamber you would lose about 4cc.

Mike

------------------
Live near St.Louis?
Check out Mustang Muscle and Dyno in High Ridge, MO
Check out my ride.

Skyman · 03-06-2001, 07:01 PM

Im running the opposite. TFS heads with edelbrock intake. Everything matches up fine.

sky

------------------
-1989 Saleen Mustang #406-TFS Heads, E-303 Cam, Edelbrock Intake, and more. Added Eibach drag launch springs and 70/30's w/ 50/50's.
0-110MPH In car view (963k)
All Throttle through 3 gears! (497k)
<A HREF="http://members.aol.com/lskymanl/burnout.mpg" TARGET=_b

03-02-2001, 06:57 PM	#1
gt93mustang Registered Member Join Date: Feb 1999 Location: Kennesaw, Georgia, USA Posts: 252	Is the true about Edelbrock heads with TFS intake? I was talking to my buddy today on the phone and he said that he recently read something about how the TFS lower intake doesn't match up to Edelbrock 6037 heads very well. He said that in the information he read, they started out with the TFS Street heat on a set of 6037 heads and ran it on a dyno. Then they switched to an Edelbrock series intake (he couldn't remember whether it was the RPM or Performer)and picked up something like 40 HP. He said it was because the ports don't line up very well from the TFS lower to the ports on the Edelbrock heads. Now I know that TFS would make their intake match much better to their heads to help promote the sales of their product, but when I switch to the Street Heat next week, am I looking at losing power because of this? If this is true, is there any way I can port match the intake to the heads? What are the techniques you guys use to go about doing this? Thanks in advance. ------------------ MAC equal length headers, MAC Off-Road H-Pipe, Flowmaster mufflers, 373's, March ram-air kit, underdrive pulleys, 73mm MAF, 75mm TB, Saleen Intake (ported), Edelbrock 6037 heads (ported, polished, 3 angle valve-job 255CFM @.500), 1.6 FMS RR's, Wolverine 1087 Cam, 24lb injectors, MSD 6AL, Subframe connectors, Griggs Adustable Lower Control Arms, Lakewood 50/50 shocks, SSM Upper Control Arms... and probably some more in there I forgot

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How do compare heads and intake.	GodStang	Windsor Power	4	02-01-2003 11:37 PM
gt-40 heads and cobra intake	homeroV8	Windsor Power	0	11-05-2002 06:17 PM
ported stock intake and heads	explicitone	Windsor Power	0	04-18-2002 06:22 PM
Edelbrock Heads	6t6stang	Classic Mustangs	1	02-26-2002 02:38 AM
Edelbrock spec's and intake question??	jerryIII	Windsor Power	0	05-24-2001 12:49 PM

03-02-2001, 09:17 PM	#2
WADS56 gear banger Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: CHICAGO Posts: 1,144	This could be true. I am having the same problem with my Canfields and a gt-40 lower. The intake ports are raised on the heads so when I put the intake on the ports are a 1/8 inch off. I was thinking that I could fab up a spacer from aluminum on each side of the intake to lift it up some. It should work, I have seen it done on small block chevys when they run a taller deck but want to keep a stock looking intake. Another way is to use epoxy and do a good gasket match. ------------------ Blown 347 W/Canfield heads, solid roller cam, track times this spring mid 10's or bust 93lx 5.0 daily driver

03-03-2001, 03:12 AM	#3
jonnyk Being stroked is great Join Date: Oct 1998 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 772	That's generally where staying with the same brand heads/intake is a good idea, TFS and Edelbrock match them up nicely so you don't have to worry about fit. I wouldn't doubt it if they didn't line up well. Anyone else know? ------------------ 1991 LX Hatch 5.0L

03-04-2001, 12:32 PM	#4
Don Nichols Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2000 Location: Osceola,Arkansas Posts: 2	I agree with staying with the same brand.My GT40 intake ports are much smaller than the Trick Flow Twisted Wedge head ports. I'm sure it would be much better if they matched. ------------------ 1987 mustang gt stock short block tftw heads gt40 intake nos stage 1

03-04-2001, 02:23 PM	#5
Mach 1 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Location: Georgia Posts: 3,866	Picked up 40 horsepower? This is not likely. Most of the heads have the ports in a standard location, including edelbrock and the Trick flow twisted wedge. Some heads have raised exhaust ports, but I would think the intake ports would more than likely match. Some of the heads and intakes have different size ports, like my edelbrock heads and my cobra intake(the cobra ports are a lot smaller), but, they are centered inside the larger edelbrock head port.

03-04-2001, 03:21 PM	#6
Five0 Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2000 Location: middleburg, fl, usa Posts: 1,134	I used to have the trickflow track heat and I have canfields and the ports did not match up on them either. They were about 1/8th of an inch off. ------------------ James Cox nochevy@hotmail.com 1991 Mustang LX 12.565 @109.38mph 1.764 60ft

03-04-2001, 03:25 PM	#7
gt93mustang Registered Member Join Date: Feb 1999 Location: Kennesaw, Georgia, USA Posts: 252	MACH 1 - The 40 HP is most likely an exaggeration on his part, but I would think that due to turbulence, 10-15 or even 20 would not be out of the question. I do not doubt that this is possible, I am just curious if this is really such a big problem when using the TFS intake with Edelbrock heads. My heads have been milled .030, so this would cause the smaller ports of the 6037 heads to sit even lower then they normally would against the TFS intake. After doing a bit more research on this, I am almost sure that this is going to be a problem, now I just wonder how to go about fixing it. Could I sit the intake on the heads, and then spray a light mist of spray paint into the runners to make an outline of where the intake runners match up to the head runners? or is there a better way?

03-04-2001, 07:28 PM	#8
93CobraR Registered Member Join Date: Oct 1999 Location: Cincinnati, Ohio Posts: 1,575	Could you have the intake shaved a little on the sides?? Never heard of it being done but it could possibly work. ------------------ 87 GT, 4 inch cowl hood,17x9 Cobra R's/255/45's,GT-40 heads,long tubes headers,h-pipe,Flows,BBK cold air, Mass air,70mm MAF, 1.7's, 1" spacer,underdrive pulleys,Pro 5.0, King Cobra, Adj. fuel Reg., Lakewood Lift Bars,50/50's,subframes, 4.10's. Best time 13.012 Best MPH 104 Best 60' 1.816 Visit my site at: http://www.geocities.com/cobrar93_2000/MyPage.html

03-04-2001, 08:27 PM	#9
rtz Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Edmond, OK Posts: 180	Just mill the heads down.

03-04-2001, 09:23 PM	#10
gt93mustang Registered Member Join Date: Feb 1999 Location: Kennesaw, Georgia, USA Posts: 252	Yeah, I am probably going to have to have the intake milled a bit. I am not sure exactly what dimensions just yet, but I am trying to find the best way to go about figureing this out. Anyone have any suggestions?

03-05-2001, 01:34 AM	#11
moosejaw Registered Member Join Date: Apr 1999 Location: St.Louis,MO Posts: 274	These heads both specify the same fel-pro gasket and having seen both heads I really doubt it was port alignment unless the deck height was out of wack. The most likely culprit was the difference in the intakes. The TF street intake makes loads of torque across the rpm band (good) but its peak power capability leaves something to be desired. Switching to any other intake that has better flow capacity will net more peak power but at what cost of torque. I use a TF R series intake that would be a peice of crap for around town cruising (read no bottom end torque) but makes great peak power. Beats every other intake I have used, but I wouldn't use it for low rpm cruising. There are trade offs to almost every combination. This particular "test" sounds like the editors were close to deadline and needed to fill some space in the mag. Conversation probably went like this " Hey we need a story. Lets go test two different intakes, get different numbers and write it up. No one will know any better, they think we are gods. Sounds good to me, lets do it." Mike ------------------ Live near St.Louis? Check out Mustang Muscle and Dyno in High Ridge, MO Check out my ride.

03-05-2001, 01:26 PM	#12
Mach 1 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Location: Georgia Posts: 3,866	gt93 - are you saying the ports are different sizes, are they just dont line up, or both? I would expect some misalignment to be present, but the ports should be the same size on the edel. head and the trick flow intake. How much will your compression raise with the .030 shaved off your edels? Are u using stock pistons? I want to shave my edels. also. so any help would be appreciated. The best way for you to match yours up is to bolt the intake onto the heads with the heads mounted on the block. If you do it on a bench and not on the engine, it might not be the same as when its mounted, due to differeces in the deck height. Use an old gasket if u have one. I would put some rtv on the intake side of the gasket, so it will stick to the intake when you remove it, then outline the gasket opening with a scribe or something, then port the intake to match the gasket opening. The gasket opening will be lined up with the head, so you are basically gasket matching your intake to your head. ------------------ 1993 GT/AOD '93 Mustang GT

03-05-2001, 06:28 PM	#13
gt93mustang Registered Member Join Date: Feb 1999 Location: Kennesaw, Georgia, USA Posts: 252	I really appologize, Mach1, but I don't know what the compression is with the heads milled .030. My combustion chambers have also been polished, so that took more material out, thus possibly negating any rise in compression that I gained. I am running the stock pistons, so there is no P/V clearance problems even with the 1087 cam that I am using, although I did have to shim the rockers a bit. As far as what I was saying about the ports was that my buddy was simply saying they didn't line up well from the E'brocks to the TFS intake and this caused turbulence, which, in turn caused a decrease in both HP and TQ. From what he was saying, the TFS is larger than my E'brocks, causing somewhat of a 'lip' or ledge that the air has to pass before entering the combustion chamber. I then went on to say (but not explain very well) that because my heads have been milled, this would cause the roof of the ports on my heads to sit even lower then where they normally would if not milled, causing this 'lip' to be even worse. Again, I appologize for not being more help. I really need to have my compression checked...

03-06-2001, 02:20 AM	#14
moosejaw Registered Member Join Date: Apr 1999 Location: St.Louis,MO Posts: 274	You can have your heads CC'd and then use this # to calculate compression. Like Mach 1 said it should be easy to port match the top of the head to the intake or vice versa. Just as a estimate if you take .030 off a 64cc open combustion chamber you would lose about 4cc. Mike ------------------ Live near St.Louis? Check out Mustang Muscle and Dyno in High Ridge, MO Check out my ride.

03-06-2001, 07:01 PM	#15
Skyman I need 110mph Trap Speed! Join Date: Feb 1999 Location: So, CA Posts: 4,315	Im running the opposite. TFS heads with edelbrock intake. Everything matches up fine. sky ------------------ -1989 Saleen Mustang #406-TFS Heads, E-303 Cam, Edelbrock Intake, and more. Added Eibach drag launch springs and 70/30's w/ 50/50's. 0-110MPH In car view (963k) All Throttle through 3 gears! (497k) <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/lskymanl/burnout.mpg" TARGET=_b