Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads #1275280
07/28/12 11:12 AM
07/28/12 11:12 AM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 427
Cascade, CO
reknapp52 Offline OP
mopar
reknapp52  Offline OP
mopar

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 427
Cascade, CO
Last spring I removed my MP .590 cam, and mildly (non-professionally) ported 915 heads, and replaced them with a set of the Edelbrock Victor heads and a used Comp Cams roller that I have had for a couple years (see attachment for specs). Also installed a set of the Hughes offset rockers (1.6 ratio) to go with the new heads. The intent was to gain a few MPH from my 447 low-deck in Super Gas (throttle-stop) racing. The old combo would run 137-138 in Denver, with a best of 150 in Topeka. Althoough I haven't had time to really flog this new setup, the initial outings are not very impressive, with speeds of 139 in Denver. I swapped out my 4:30 gears for a set of 4:56s, which netted 100-200 more RPM in the lights, and no difference in MPH. I realize that the 850 DP carb may be a little on the small side for what I am trying to do, and the cam being degreed at 106 is not the best (wanted to retard it some, but I couldn't cut valve reliefs as deep as I wanted because of the close proximity to the top ring land). Any thoughts/input would be appreciated.FWIW--I know that low-end and mid-range have improved because I have added .3 to .4 to my throttle-stop timer.

7311093-CompCamSpecs.jpg (277 downloads)
Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: reknapp52] #1275281
07/28/12 11:52 AM
07/28/12 11:52 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,248
Oregon
A
AndyF Offline
I Win
AndyF  Offline
I Win
A

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,248
Oregon
My guess is that the cam is way too big. Unless everything else on the car is matched up to a huge cam, you've probably killed off the mid-range power so much that the car just can't get moving.

For comparison, take a look at a few of the tech articles on my website. My 505 dyno mule made 800 hp with a cam that was only 266 at 050. Your cam is 280 degrees with a smaller displacement. ( www.arengineering.com is the site, then click on tech articles.)

That cam will work in a super stock type motor with tons of rear gear. Or lots of compression, lots of converter, lots of gear, etc.

Give Dwayne Porter a call and have him spec you a different cam. I bet that if you drop 20 degrees off the duration that combo will pick up a bunch.

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: AndyF] #1275282
07/28/12 01:03 PM
07/28/12 01:03 PM
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 774
Midland,Tx
wyldebill Offline
super stock
wyldebill  Offline
super stock

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 774
Midland,Tx
If you went from an iron head to an aluminium head without any other change you effectively lost compression. The aluminum pulls more heat out of the chamber .

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: reknapp52] #1275283
07/28/12 01:09 PM
07/28/12 01:09 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,941
NC
440Jim Offline
I Live Here
440Jim  Offline
I Live Here

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,941
NC
Quote:

The intent was to gain a few MPH from my 447 low-deck in Super Gas (throttle-stop) racing...
I swapped out my 4:30 gears for a set of 4:56s, which netted 100-200 more RPM in the lights, and no difference in MPH.



What compression ratio are you running? What is the shift point and finish line rpm you are seeing?
In a "small" 447 CID and that much duration (280 at 0.050"), it should like 7500+ rpm. But the tight LSA (106) will favor mid range rather than peak hp (hp corresponds to mph). You added almost 10 deg at 0.050"

MP590: 303/303 at 0.020", 271/271 at 0.050", 106 LSA, 1.5 rockers
Roller: 308/308 at 0.020", 280/280 at 0.050", 106 LSA, 1.6 rockers

The unported Victor heads should flow better than your ported 915's (310 cfm vs 290 cfm?). But it is a shame to have heads with potential that is not used since the porting was not done. I assume these are the standard port (not max wedge) heads.


Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: 440Jim] #1275284
07/28/12 01:19 PM
07/28/12 01:19 PM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 427
Cascade, CO
reknapp52 Offline OP
mopar
reknapp52  Offline OP
mopar

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 427
Cascade, CO
Compression ratio is 15.3, but yes, the heads are pretty much OOTB, save for a little cleanup at the intake port face, and smoothing of the runners. I run a Powregliede trans, shift at 7000, it's turning 6900-7000 at the finish.

7311209-0608-00094.jpg (124 downloads)
Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: 440Jim] #1275285
07/28/12 01:20 PM
07/28/12 01:20 PM
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,271
Overpriced Housing Central
RobX4406 Offline
I Live Here
RobX4406  Offline
I Live Here

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,271
Overpriced Housing Central
Changing just the heads and saying you are disappointed is one thing. More than one item changed and saying it's the heads may be a little off base.

I don't think the head is the crux of your issue.

I do know that the latest version of the victor is not as good from a flow standpoint as the prior heads. They changed the runners a bit and not for the better for OOTB use.

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: reknapp52] #1275286
07/28/12 01:24 PM
07/28/12 01:24 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,941
NC
440Jim Offline
I Live Here
440Jim  Offline
I Live Here

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,941
NC
Well, that is plenty of CR for the cam duration.
I just am not sure if the tight 106 LSA would kill the peak rpm/hp, but I still think it will like more than 7000 rpm with the roller cam. But some other component might hold it back at higher rpm (intake manifold, headers, etc.)

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: 440Jim] #1275287
07/28/12 01:31 PM
07/28/12 01:31 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,875
communist bloc of new jersey
J
jamesc Offline
master
jamesc  Offline
master
J

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,875
communist bloc of new jersey
you should give a complete rundown of the car specs. weight, converter, intake manifold, pistons etc. i'm not a big fan of high RPM but even with the mild 451 in my car i trap around 7300, i would think 6900-7000 is a little low for that engine. not that it's the problem but still sounds low. also imho that engine needs more carburetor. that's a pretty stout CR and while i know CR makes HP i think that much is unnecessarily high. the engine in my sig car is around 11.5:1 with edelbrock RPMs and a .585/.585-275°/275° flat tappet. yes it's a lot lighter than your car but it has run 162mph and almost always runs over 160

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: jamesc] #1275288
07/28/12 01:34 PM
07/28/12 01:34 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,875
communist bloc of new jersey
J
jamesc Offline
master
jamesc  Offline
master
J

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,875
communist bloc of new jersey
also i have no experience with stop racing but that certainly factors in regarding how the engine recovers when it comes off the stop and how far you're stopping it down.

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: 440Jim] #1275289
07/28/12 02:06 PM
07/28/12 02:06 PM
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318
State of confusion
T
Thumperdart Offline
I Live Here
Thumperdart  Offline
I Live Here
T

Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318
State of confusion
Quote:

Quote:

The intent was to gain a few MPH from my 447 low-deck in Super Gas (throttle-stop) racing...
I swapped out my 4:30 gears for a set of 4:56s, which netted 100-200 more RPM in the lights, and no difference in MPH.



What compression ratio are you running? What is the shift point and finish line rpm you are seeing?
In a "small" 447 CID and that much duration (280 at 0.050"), it should like 7500+ rpm. But the tight LSA (106) will favor mid range rather than peak hp (hp corresponds to mph).

In addition, the unported Victor heads may not flow much better than your well ported 915's. If that is the case, it is a shame to have heads with potential that is not used since the porting was not done.


This is more on par of what I was thinking. I`ve seen smaller motors w/more cam BUT good comp. and high flowing heads and they screamed...............it`s all about the combo and obviously bigger cams/heads need some r`s to make power plus maybe not as critical w/your combo but maybe a bigger carb.


72 Dart 470 n/a BB stroker street car `THUMPER`...Check me out on FB Dominic Thumper for videos and lots of carb pics......760-900-3895.....
Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: Thumperdart] #1275290
07/28/12 02:56 PM
07/28/12 02:56 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,177
ill
D
dennismopar73 Offline
top fuel
dennismopar73  Offline
top fuel
D

Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,177
ill
Go back to the 430 gears, get a bigger carb ??1050 dom at least

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: reknapp52] #1275291
07/28/12 03:52 PM
07/28/12 03:52 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,941
NC
440Jim Offline
I Live Here
440Jim  Offline
I Live Here

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,941
NC
Which low deck intake are you using with standard port heads? (i.e. not max wedge)

Mopar Perf M-1 (single plane)
Edelbrock Victor 383 (single plane)
Edelbrock TM-6 (single plane)
Holley Street Dominator (single plane)
Weiand Team G (single plane)notches cast into the 3,4,5,and 6 runners to clear the intake bolts
Other?

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: reknapp52] #1275292
07/28/12 03:57 PM
07/28/12 03:57 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,667
Arizona
C
Chris'sBarracuda Offline
master
Chris'sBarracuda  Offline
master
C

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,667
Arizona
Quote:

Last spring I removed my MP .590 cam, and mildly (non-professionally) ported 915 heads, and replaced them with a set of the Edelbrock Victor heads and a used Comp Cams roller that I have had for a couple years (see attachment for specs). Also installed a set of the Hughes offset rockers (1.6 ratio) to go with the new heads. The intent was to gain a few MPH from my 447 low-deck in Super Gas (throttle-stop) racing. The old combo would run 137-138 in Denver, with a best of 150 in Topeka. Although I haven't had time to really flog this new setup, the initial outings are not very impressive, with speeds of 139 in Denver. I swapped out my 4:30 gears for a set of 4:56s, which netted 100-200 more RPM in the lights, and no difference in MPH. I realize that the 850 DP carb may be a little on the small side for what I am trying to do, and the cam being degreed at 106 is not the best (wanted to retard it some, but I couldn't cut valve reliefs as deep as I wanted because of the close proximity to the top ring land). Any thoughts/input would be appreciated.FWIW--I know that low-end and mid-range have improved because I have added .3 to .4 to my throttle-stop timer.






And your mph got better last weekend in Denver.. The DA was around 9400-9700' all weekend.

I would say you are doing fine..

Run it all out, then see the difference.. And put the 4.30's back in, or maybe even 4.10's..

Bigger carb?? Yes.. Most likely more mph..:tounge:

If I remember, your car is light..


Chris..

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: 440Jim] #1275293
07/28/12 04:00 PM
07/28/12 04:00 PM
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,168
st.cloud fl
D
d-150 Online content
Smarter than a 5th grader?
d-150  Online Content
Smarter than a 5th grader?
D

Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,168
st.cloud fl
carb way to small you moved the powerband up with cam gears and heads

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: d-150] #1275294
07/28/12 05:04 PM
07/28/12 05:04 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,361
Wild West
M_D Offline
pro stock
M_D  Offline
pro stock

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,361
Wild West
I agree with jamesc and 440Jim, more information would help. The intake manifold is one thing I would be interested in, as well as car weight with driver.

You netted about 20+ more hp. In analyzing the before and after numbers the real wildcard here in my opinion is; how good really were your 915 heads? I don't know what your car weighs, but if they went 150 mph they probably weren't terrible for o.e. iron heads, but I have a hunch the Victors and cam should have shown some more than they did unless the iron heads were very good.

But, I think to make substantial gains (8-12 mph) a good port job on the Victors and tweaking of other parts (intake, larger carburetor, and possibly different cam) need to be done. I am a little surprised as your stated compression ratio of 15.3 on that displacement is not common because it generally takes a fair amount of determination and effort to make it happen.

Are you sure the valve springs on the Victors are able to handle the roller lobes?



Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: d-150] #1275295
07/28/12 05:08 PM
07/28/12 05:08 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 976
ontario canada
mac56 Offline
super stock
mac56  Offline
super stock

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 976
ontario canada
Quote:

carb way to small you moved the powerband up with cam gears and heads



Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: 440Jim] #1275296
07/28/12 05:27 PM
07/28/12 05:27 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,248
Oregon
A
AndyF Offline
I Win
AndyF  Offline
I Win
A

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,248
Oregon
I guess I was assuming the heads were MW size. If they aren't MW size then that is a different problem.

A 447 with good MW heads and 15:1 compression will make tons of power if the valvetrain can handle the rpm. Even the 850 carb will make a bunch of power as long as the intake and heads are good.

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: M_D] #1275297
07/28/12 05:38 PM
07/28/12 05:38 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,875
communist bloc of new jersey
J
jamesc Offline
master
jamesc  Offline
master
J

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,875
communist bloc of new jersey
Quote:

I am a little surprised as your stated compression ratio of 15.3 on that displacement is not common because it generally takes a fair amount of determination and effort to make it happen.




that's one of the things i was thinking. i didn't try to crunch any numbers but that would take a very small chamber volume and/or dome piston which i avoid if at all possible.

as mentioned heads like those don't usually shine until they're ported but they should still put the 906 to shame

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: AndyF] #1275298
07/28/12 06:21 PM
07/28/12 06:21 PM
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 427
Cascade, CO
reknapp52 Offline OP
mopar
reknapp52  Offline OP
mopar

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 427
Cascade, CO
One thing I should clarify is that I am not bashing the Victor heads--I am probably expecting too much too soon with the new combination. I probably have no more than a dozen passes down the track since the changes were made, and as Chris pointed out, most all were made in D.A. numbers above 8000'. I know that as I get more runs in, and do some tweaking here and there, I can get some more MPH out of it. That said, here are some more particulars:

Old combo:915 heads with very mild back-yard port job, Venolia domed pistons, Howards aluminum rods,MP .590 flat tappet cam, Crane 1.5 rockers,Torker manifold, Holley 850 DP carb, Dedenbear base-plate T-stop, 2" primary headers, 4:30 gears, PG trans w/1.76 low. Car weighs 1940, add me and 75 lbs ballast, race weight is about 2200.

Changes made:Edelbrock Victor heads, Hughes 1.6 rockers, Edelbrock Victor 2886 intake, the above mentioned Comp Cams cam, Dedenbear linkage-style T-stop. Have tried both 4:30 gears and 4:56s.

Re: A Little Disappointed--Victor Heads [Re: jamesc] #1275299
07/28/12 06:49 PM
07/28/12 06:49 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,361
Wild West
M_D Offline
pro stock
M_D  Offline
pro stock

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,361
Wild West
If I were building an engine (race and high power street) for Denver or any high altitude only street use such as Flagstaff AZ I would certainly add a couple points of compression ratio over the usual, it really helps when the air is thin.

I re-read the o.p. where it was stated the heads have a mild non-professional port job, to me that indicates the flow is likely 250 or under, and compared to the Victors at 310-320 it seems there should be quite a bit left on the table.

Flow numbers aside, for a super gas level engine I believe the larger cross section max-wedge size intake tract is better. I don't have any real experience with the Victors, is the port between the 2 versions the same except the standard port is necked down at the manifold area? I suspect that is the case after looking at the published port volumes. If so, opening them up (assuming the heads are "standard" port openings) and using a different intake manifold with larger runners could really wake it up.



Page 1 of 3 1 2 3






Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1