Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?

I wanted to quit derailing Brad's post .

Serious question. If we are limited to a standard port configuration how much power is a Victor head worth? +/-? Are the raised exhaust ports worth anything when paired with the standard intake port size? I think it is probably 25-35 hp at best and I'm being generous. All thoughts are welcome. J.Rob

Not sure how you would propose testing that. If you run the heads OOTB then that is one test but if you allow someone to port the heads then you end up with a completely different answer.

Even though this is the race forum I'd wager that most of the guys on here run heads out of the box. If you include the TF240 heads in the OOTB category then I think they are a good contender. I suppose Indy might have a good standard port head too although most of their stuff is MW size with a necked down face to make it standard port.

The other issue with your question is that it all depends on the size of the engine, the cam and the compression ratio. I'm pretty sure a guy could build two different engines to get two different results.

The sr Indy head in standard ports were generally dogs in most applications I saw over the years.

Exactly.

Maybe Edelbrock revised/ruined the Victors recipie (just thinking out loud here) to the smaller bowls because (human nature being what it is) maybe a high percentage of people (i.e., their 'real world' customers, not our tech saavy Moparts guys) bought big port Victors expecting "big" gains immediately bolted them onto their stock 8:1 440 shortblocks and maybe stuck in a 509 cam and now their cars would immediately have trouble falling out of a tree!!

By finishing them small they would still thoeretically work on a 440 at least comparable to/slightly (25hp) better than an OOTB RPM but then at least have the meat/potential to be ported? This way they could claim victory in the marketplace and still have the CNC market for the Real Race crowd?

What was the driving force behind the downward revision? Cost? or was it the "average Chevy mentality...bolt-on and go" customer?

There’s really only one way to know.

If it was only 25-35hp.......that’s still 25-35hp.

Dwayne, yeah, I think that's the point I was trying to make....It doesn't matter to their mass market approach if fully ported they may be 60-70HP better, if Edelbrock can show there are a clear (if only) 25 hp better, then (marketing wise) it's still a "Victory".

To be clear, I’m talking about a set of ported Std port Victors(350cfm, like what are on BradH’s 452) vs ported RPM’s(something like a MCH CNC job), or the ootb TF240’s.
I feel on a motor in the 650-700hp+ range the Victors would be the best of the three.

I can’t see the point of running the Victors ootb with the way the bowls are cast now

The arrival of the TF heads on the scene has certainly made a big impact on the std port head market.

What kind of cfm do porters get out of the std port heads? I know that’s not the end all be all but it’s a pretty good indicator

I guess I'm a troll for trying to initiate a discussion?

I'm guessing you are a Victor cylinder head owner venting some frustration over your choice. J.Rob

Your trying to say that Victor heads are very bad. This is old news. Everyone already knows this who cares. Next.

I'd like to see a standard port Victor compared to the Trick Flow 240. They both have the smaller chamber design. I think the RPM heads would be at a disadvantage in port and chamber design to the other heads?

I think in OOB, the Trick Flow heads have the advantage of being CNC ported, and flow more than the OOB Victor heads, but I don't know how different the port velocities are?

Not sure with ported heads?

They are trying to have a discussion.. if you
dont want to be in it.. dont post

In ootb form, IMO the TF240 is the clear choice for builds where a std port opening is preferred and you’re looking for over like 550hp.

As has been discussed before, the primary determining factor for that at this point is the quality, flow..........and price.

If the heads all cost the same, the choice wouldn’t be as clear.........but they don’t, and it’s pretty difficult to approach the potential of the TF head for equivalent $$$.

The highest I’ve seen from a “true” std port head is around 350cfm........and that’s been with the Victor/Pro Comp heads.

I haven’t done one in a long time, but I’ve had std port SR’s flowing in the 340’s.

Actually, now that I think about it, I had some nicely ported std port EZ’s in the shop, done by Hughes, that had the transition in the roof filled in, and those went about 350 as well.

Sometimes I wonder why I even bother. You are right, but in this case I felt compelled to be a little crass. Sometimes people make comments without having all of the facts. When they do I think they should be called out.

I have dyno and flow tests with standard port, ported Victors, and OOTB TF240s on 440 engines, both with dual plane intakes. One a small solid roller and the other with a larger solid flat tappet. I will try to get the information organized and to you RAMM.

What facts am I missing? J.Rob

Thankyou Jim, I am seriously interested, as I have never had eyes on a set of TF240's yet. J.Rob

Read your posts.

[quote=ccdaveYour trying to say that Victor heads are very bad. This is old news. Everyone already knows this who cares. Next.
[/quote]

Well I didn't know this way back when and I wish there were HONEST threads LIKE THIS about them so I would have prevented myself some time/$$$$.

Actually now that I think about it I guess I wouldn't have learned nearly as much because you don't really learn from your successes.

Like Mr.P body said--Don't like the thread don't step in. Move on--next. J.Rob

I'm calling you out, because it's a fact that not everyone knows about the victors.

There have been quite a few posts highlighting Eldebrock Victor issues and the respective solutions.

Like anything else, it all depends on what you are trying to accomplish. From what we have seen I think we can all agree that OOTB TrickFlow is the best thing going right now and they have everything covered from the RPM's to the Indy EZ line up.

That said my second 511" low deck is getting a set of 440 -1's with a paired rocker setup. Simple and proven.

Well I didn't know this way back when and I wish there were HONEST threads LIKE THIS about them so I would have prevented myself some time/$$$$.

Actually now that I think about it I guess I wouldn't have learned nearly as much because you don't really learn from your successes.

Like Mr.P body said--Don't like the thread don't step in. Move on--next. J.Rob [/quote]

So your telling me that you being the engine master, the master of all things Mopar, the king of telling people how it should have been done just found out by viewing this thread that the Victor heads have some design flaws??

Time for some ice fishing and some pond hockey. Take a break

Actually ccdave, you should probably take some of your own advice.

Danny,

Not good on skates and the ice is not out on the lakes here in Michigan. I do enjoy Ice fishing however. Thanks for your input

This is an older post that is should be relevant to the question above, if the OP is asking about standard-port Victors.

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/1955306

I think JohnRR's Chapman VI's also went right at 350 peak too and with better .200-.600's (from Fast's bench) than any other standard ports I can remember. I think below .350 or so they were even better than my MW 285's. Wish I'd have known when he was selling those...and those numbers were more than 12 years ago. I was thinking at the time....300 cfm at only .450 lift is pretty amazing if you think about it, even a stock replacement Mr sixpack cam in a 10:1 440 would make some serious power and have 14" at idle and a still streetable .557 or .590 purple shaft in a hot 470 would be killer with those .500-.600 numbers.

from the Tech archives:


Chapman CNC'd MP Stage VI 260cc's:

Lift" I/E

.100--71.5/58.2
.200-150.0/118.6
.300-219.4/180.0
.400-278.7/219.4
.500-323.6/233.9
.550-338.9/240.3
.600-352.3/243.5
.650-348.5/246.7
.700-348.5/249.9
.750-348.5/251.5
.800-348.5/253.1

Remember Dave, if no one agrees w/you, you are WRONG and sent to your room w/out dinner........lmao......Or, they will pm each other about you like in high school........... I'm never right so we're good to go here............

I'm sorry... can't help it... must... post... more... cylinder... head... data...

------------------------------------------------------

MP (Mopar Performance) Stage VI heads vs Edelbrock Victors (both prepped & ported significantly from "as cast"):

-------------------- MP --- EV
Intake valve ------ 2.14 - 2.20
Exhaust valve ----- 1.81 - 1.81
Intake runner cc -- 245* - 294
Intake Avg CSA ---- 2.39 - 2.76
Intake Min CSA ---- ~2.2 - 2.66

* Includes volume from intake spacers required to use on RB block (440)

III. Flow data from same Saenz 600-class bench tested on 4.375" fixture:

INTAKE - MP --- EV --- Delta
0.100 -- 69 --- 75 ---- 6
0.200 -- 143 -- 151 --- 8
0.300 -- 213 -- 220 --- 7
0.400 -- 262 -- 280 --- 18
0.500 -- 293 -- 326 --- 33
0.550 -- 305 -- 338 --- 33
0.600 -- 307 -- 346 --- 39
0.650 -- 307 -- 350 --- 43
0.700 -- 307 -- 355 --- 48
0.750 -- N/A -- 347**

EXHAUST - MP -- EV --- Delta -- EV w/ 2" pipe added
0.100 -- 52 --- 55 --- 2
0.200 -- 108 -- 116 -- 8
0.300 -- 146 -- 155 -- 9
0.400 -- 181 -- 194 -- 13
0.500 -- 211 -- 223 -- 12 ----- 238
0.550 -- 222 -- 233 -- 11 ----- 249
0.600 -- 231 -- 241 -- 10 ----- 259
0.650 -- 237 -- 247 -- 10 ----- 267
0.700 -- 243 -- 252 -- 9 ------ 274
0.750 -- 255 -- N/A ---N/A ---- 278

** Drop-off above .700" is suspected of being due to the chambers' CNC work laying back the plug-side wall too much. The same drop-off resulted when tested at 15" / 28" / 35" H20, yet without any change to relative flow #s for each depression level. A hand-ported casting that was used as a flow bench "guinea pig" didn't have the chamber pulled back as much as the CNC'd chamber program, and it did NOT have the same issue w/ dropping off at .700".

------------------------------------------------------

I don't have any buddies here but I do get tired of assholes egos running contributing members off.

Yes, me too. I’m glade we agree on something

they "copy" iron heads to cast them in aluminum,
they copy rpm heads, they copy Victor heads,
why the hell is nobody copying these Chapman heads????

or the Brewer heads!

Because there wouldn't be enough market for them to cover the costs

These arent from Brads stage 6's, but a set of the same vintage....... ootb with Ferrea 2.14/1.81 valves:

Lift--------in/ex
.100---67.4/52.3
.200--126.3/108.5
.300--181.3/137.7
.400--215.0/144.8
.500--235.0/149.1
.550--236.9/149.1
.600--238.8/149.1
.650--240.8/149.1
.700--242.7/149.1

Ootb second gen Victor(the ones with the bowls cast .300 too small, like what Brads were):

Lift-------in/ex
.100---64.2/51.0
.200--126.1/104.1
.300--183.4/143.8
.400--238.8/174.8
.500--281.6/176.0
.550--297.4/176.0
.600--311.8/176.0
.650--302.4/176.0
.700--308.7/176.0

Just some numbers to give you an idea of the starting point for using either of those heads.

And for something else to compare to.....
Ootb Indy SR std port:

Lift--------in/ex
.100---69.0/54.1
.200--132.9/99.2
.300--189.5/135.1
.400--236.2/165.4
.500--264.6/188.9
.550--272.9/196.7
.600--279.7/203.2
.650--284.2/208.1
.700--287.2/212.0

Pro Comp "Victor", std port, valve job and back cut valve, no porting(intake test only):

Lift-----in
.100---71.9
.200--147.6
.300--204.2
.400--255.1
.500--289.1
.550--295.5
.600--304.2
.650--309.9
.700--309.9

I've often wondered that myself. It seems the folks at ProComp and other such places aren't smart enough to design their own heads so they copy existing heads. Okay, I get the fact that they aren't smart enough to design new stuff but why don't they copy the good stuff?

Even if they aren't smart enough know good from bad aren't they smart enough to hire someone to help them? If they are too dumb to hire someone to help them then how do they stay in business at all? Just one of the mysteries of life...........

So r u referring to me...........

These guys are looking at what moves off the shelf fast
(not what is good).. they are selling mass (or trying)

EDIT
there is probably no more than about 5 or 6 people that
even work there and I doubt they have any design engineers
working there

In this case, the same could be said about Edelbrock.
If they would just cast the ports and chambers of the BB victor in the right shape/size to begin with they'd have an off the shelf unported std port head that would flow 340/240 ootb.

Yet the two "revisions" to that head have actually resulted in poorer flow ootb, and require even more rework to get decent numbers out of them.

Probably not a concern for the shops with cnc porting machines, but for the guy looking to not spend $1000+ on porting, they've taken the Victor head out of the picture for most buyers.

It's really just dumb.

If the shoe fits...

A few "off the top of my head" comments that -- sort of -- fit w/ the nature of this thread...

- Regular (non-Chapman) MP Stage VIs and the current Edelbrock Victors are both in the "unfinished parts kit" category compared to new heads like the Trick Flows. The intitial buy-in cost is reasonable, but the rest of the $$$ to have someone else make them "right" quickly offsets the lower purchase price.

- IMO, Chapman 260 Stage VIs shouldn't be considered anything special these days; their OOB flow was really impressive in 2003, but the #s we've seen from standard-port Victors (& Chi-Com clones) are pretty much on par, as the data above shows. Plus, the Chapmans retain the old-style straight-plug chamber (a carry over from the legacy Stage VI design) and still require the "band-aid" intake spacers to use them on RB blocks, both of which the Victors addressed... well, at least to some point.

- Everything available today that's not a full-blown race head is still a compromise. I think it's a case of what compromises are the least of an impact on your performance goals or build limitations: Minimal hood clearnance? Don't use a raised-port head. Can't spend big $$$ on a high-end offset-intake rocker setup? Stick with something that can get away with the more affordable standard-offset rockers. For some "bread & butter" builds, there are off-the-shelf options that pretty much fit the bill. Taking it to another level, even for some semi-junk street/strip pig like mine... and especially for someone like myself who can't leave sh!t alone... means the concept of simply bolting parts together doesn't really work.

- I could probably split the difference between my old Stage VI w/ solid flat-tappet cam combo and my new Victors w/ solid roller cam combo by keeping the roller cam and switching a set of TF 240s with their matching intake (which I use already w/ the Victors). If I kept the SFT cam and switched only from the Stage VIs to the TF 240s, I doubt there would a big difference between them.

Finally... I think I've talked about this stuff about as much as I can. There's a point where you can butt heads or whatever over "What if..." until you're just frazzled, or you can build & test stuff if you really want to know what works (or not). I've had enough experience with my personal hypotheses on how things "should" work getting kicked in the teeth by the real-world results that I can't burn any more brain cells on it.

Carry on.

Seriously??? Can't this sh!t be kept on the playground or in the alley behind the strip joint with the cheap beer (and cheaper dancers)?

That's my take on it as well.

I don't know what went wrong at Edelbrock with the Victor heads. Edelbrock obviously has the resources to design great heads. My guess is that they gave the Victor head to a junior engineer who got lost in the design and for some reason the senior engineers didn't help him out. That is just my guess but it is based on 30 years of experience in corporate America R&D. I worked at places like Xerox where we invented some of the greatest stuff ever as well as complete duds. It was always due to the people on the team. Some people invent cool stuff, some people invent turds. Management is supposed to promote one and fire the other but sometimes they make mistake too.......

Anyway, that is my guess on the Victor heads. The chinese heads I chalk up to laziness. The chinese will copy a good head if you tell them to so someone over here was just too lazy to find a good head to send them.

As for Chapman, I'm not sure what went wrong there. Maybe the founder just got tired and retired? They had killer stuff but then the company shut down. Maybe something else was wrong with the company that I don't know about. That head design could've been sold to someone else but evidently it didn't happen.

Oh well, Trick Flow saw the opening in the market and stepped into it and that works for me. Their heads make enough power to break a stock block so what more do you need? If you have an aftermarket block then go ahead and step up to the B1 or Indy stuff. Seems like there are more than enough choices to go around.

If I won the lottery, and wanted a project to play with in my spare time...... I'd do a cylinder head shootout, like what they did with the intake manifolds years ago.

I'd build a nice 505 with a street roller type cam and test flog a pile of different heads on it.

Andy, the puzzling thing with the Victors is.....if Edelbrock just reworked the core plugs for the runners and chambers it would make that head much more viable.
They'd sell more heads.

I got lucky when I had to replace my W-9 head..
it was the ported version that they sold and
when I blew up the engine it damn near cut one
head in half.. I sent it to them to check it out
and they said it would be more to fix it then
to replace it.. so I ended up buying a new head...
that was only about a year before they closed the
doors

Did TF update the combustion chamber when they did all their other improvements?

I could never understand why companies like Edelbrock would build a new head with a 1959 chamber when they have the ability and modern patterns in house.

Horsepower sells and a fast burn chamber should make more.

Kevin

It will fit up yer azz............

No, people who jab get jabbed back just the way it is......I don't play well w/people who hide behind the keyboard and I do offer lots of free info and help many for zero $$$ so it is what it is..........

Yes, it's a better design.