Pretty crazy stock flow #'s.. that's like a 600hp cyl. head.

I don't feel bad. The Victors are what they are, and should be more than enough head for my POS.

Your junk always runs good when it does run. Im sure we lost some good tech advise over the past ?6 years because your car hasnt been running

The plan was to see how doable it was to get these std port Victors to flow an honest 350cfm without making them as big as the Hughes CNC version, which is advertised at 313cc, and had the intake port opening big enough to where Brad ended up having one of his M1 manifolds welded up so he could port match it to the CNC heads.
I wanted to do it without making the port opening any bigger.
The results posted are from a port with a runner volume of 294cc, and the port opening was left untouched.
I also checked the volume of the untouched head and it was 276cc.

It's really a shame that edelbrock decided to fill in the bowls on these heads.
At least 1/2 the time spent porting these things was wasted just getting the bowls opened up to a more normal size.

To confirm my observations about the ootb exhaust flow on #7 vs #1, here are the test results:

#7
Lift-------I/E
.100---64.2/51.0
.200--126.1/104.1
.300--183.4/143.8
.400--238.8/167.4
.500--281.6/174.8
.550--297.4/176.0
.600--311.8/176.0
.650--302.4/176.0
.700--308.4/176.0
.750--317.5/176.0

For comparison, here are some numbers from an ootb early version head from 2008.

Lift------I/E
.100---69.6/51.9
.200--143.8/102.9
.300--194.3/149.9
.400--247.7/184.7
.500--291.8/204.8
.550--311.0/212.6
.600--316.8/216.5
.650--324.5/220.4
.700--330.2/223.1
.750--334.8/224.3

Those early version heads were the best flowing ootb std port heads I've ever seen.
With some minor chamber work and some bowl blending they were easily into the 340's.
Now to get close to those numbers you have to do some fairly substantial porting.
The newer version might be "new", but IMO..... Not even close to "improved".
More like a BIG step backwards in terms of being able to buy a decent piece and getting impressive results ootb, or with minimal reworking.

The end result, IMO, is similar to the Chapman 260 cc Stage VIs. I'd passed twice on opportunities to buy the Chapmans years ago, but always thought they had most of "the right stuff" for my type of build.

Yeah, those Chapman heads were probably the top of the heap. Especially for a car like yours.

I think the new Trick Flows are also good but would be killer by moving the ports up. If they would extend the ports by 1/2 inch and move the ports up the same amount then it would be very close to the old Chapman heads. The ports can be moved up in the Trick Flow heads if a person is willing to do the work.......

The Chapmans always escape my memory when talking about BB Mopar heads.
Probably because of their relative "unobtainium" status.

they were very nice pieces though.

I'd be pretty surprised if there aren't already more sets of TF BB Mopar heads in the hands of consumers than all the Chapman stage VI's combined.

Seems like a lot of work for nothing. I would run what you currently have unless you have a money tree in your backyard🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑

The heads arrived yesterday, but I didn't get a chance to open one of the boxes until this morning. I'll try to take some pics in the next couple of days to show the finished rework of the heads compared to an OOB piece.

OK, starting to upload pics (4:48 PM). Bear (bare?) with me...

Stock OOB 72 cc Victor chamber & stock OOB intake ports w/ SuPerformance standard-port intake gasket.

Hughes' CNC chamber mods vs OOB 72 cc chamber.

Hughes CNC chamber, IMM valve job, PRH-ported bowls & runners.

Ported intake runners w/o gasket, w/ Indy SR (std port) gasket, w/ Hughes Engines gasket, and w/ SuPerformance std port gasket. As you can see, the intake runner entry is a "true" standard opening.

Also wondering why Hughes sells their gasket as a combo standard / Max Wedge fitment when they don't put the sealing bead on the outsides of the ports wide enough for a MW port (only the raised roof can be accomodated).

So, what about the early-version Hughes CNC'd 75 cc chamber heads I have, too? Here's a view of the later chamber w/ their CNC job vs. the earlier chamber w/ their CNC job & full CNC porting option.

How much bigger is the entry of the Hughes CNC'd 313 cc (their advertised volume) "standard" runner than the PRH-ported 294 cc Victors?

Here's the Hughes head's intake entries w/o gasket, followed by the gasket I carved up as a template to match the CNC'd entries, followed by that same gasket shown on the "new" head intake entries.

How close is the Hughes "standard" CNC port to a Max Wedge? Here's a an Indy MW gasket placed over their "standard" CNC port. I'd say it's pretty close in width (1.30" port vs 1.35" gasket), but close to .250" shorter in height.

Ironically, Hughes' own intake gaskets like I showed above aren't designed big enough for their own "standard" Victor CNC port.

Some gasket size comparisons to go along w/ the gasket-on-ports pics
- Indy MW over my "hand carved" Hughes CNC "standard" port
- Hughes CNC "standard" port over SuPerformance standard port

I think that's about all I have for pics.

Also, I just wanted to mention that guys like Dwayne Porter, Brian Hafliger, Brett Miller, and the rest of the people who grind on heads for a living really do seem to blend science & art together when they carve good ports from so-so castings.