Jesse, I guess we look at the Victors through different eyes.
It seems like unless you take them “to the max”, and bolt them onto a similar type of short block, to get every last possible hp out of them, then they aren’t worth using.

I see them differently.
Again, “if” they had the bowls sized correctly(or using the Pro Comp head)it wouldn’t take any more time for me to port them into the 340cfm range than it would to port an RPM to 300.

They aren’t that much more money, you get away from the valley pan gasket, and the chambers are better.
If you bought TF240’s and used the recommended HS rockers for the TF heads, or something like T&D’s......then the cost difference of the rockers is diminished considerably.
Like I said previously, the big hurdle in using them for me is the way the bowls are cast.
One thing I do like about them is they are a true std port head. Not a MW head with a reduced port opening at the flange.
If, in your words, flow is velocity......then at 350cfm from a true std port head.......they should be pretty good.
IMO, if they made 30hp more than a set of CNC RPM heads on the same motor, same cam, same compression.......I’d be fine with that.
I don’t feel like I need to make 800hp out of them to have them be worthwhile.

With regards to Brads combo, there is no way the two cams used in his motor would be 50hp apart......with either set of heads. Maybe 1/2 that.
As for whether or not his stage 6’s could have been improved today......that wasn’t really part of your original argument. You said your 298-299cfm RPM heads would have made the same power as the Victors.
If that’s the case, then the Stage 6’s would also be just as good, since they flowed a little more than 300, and have a better chamber(although those heads required way more work to be made usable than the Victors).

Also, at 350cfm @.700 Victors have a better discharge coefficient than the RPM’s at 300, or the TF’s at 325(what they flow on my bench).
A 251cc MCH CNC ported RPM flows 315@.700 on my bench.

If the flow doesn’t matter, and the c/d doesn’t make any difference........we might as well stop testing heads, since the numbers must not have any bearing on power output.

Until someone does “the test”, it’s all just speculation.

It’s easy.......don’t like ‘em? Don’t use ‘em.........plenty of other choices.

As for the carbs.......couldn’t disagree more.
I tried my HP950 on his motor as a point of reference to gauge how well the other carbs were doing their job. It’s by no means my best carb, yet was basically as good as the others we tried.


You totally lost me here.
By that logic I guess I could have put a 650 on it and made the same power with even less flow through the motor.

I’m confident that had I run the motor with my ported annular 850(which flows about 40cfm more than the HP950) it would have made 8-10 more HP........and picked up most of the lost 20cfm.