Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: ccdave]
#2416455
12/10/17 10:12 PM
12/10/17 10:12 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,057 The Great White North
RAMM
OP
super stock
|
OP
super stock
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,057
The Great White North
|
[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/$$$$.
Actually now that I think about it I guess I wouldn't have learned nearly as much because you don't really learn from your successes.
Like Mr.P body said--Don't like the thread don't step in. Move on--next. J.Rob
2009 PHR\EMC Competitor 2010 PHR\EMC Competitor 2011 PHR\EMC Competitor 2012 PHR\EMC Competitor 2013 PHR\EMC Competitor 2014 HotRod/EMC Competitor 2015 HotRod/EMC NoShow 2016 HotRod/EMC 3rd place SPEC Bigblock 2018 HotRod/EMC 7th place G3
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?i
[Re: ccdave]
#2416479
12/10/17 10:39 PM
12/10/17 10:39 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,698 jersey
Spaceman Spiff
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,698
jersey
|
[quote=ccdave] I guess I'm a troll for trying to initiate a discussion? I'm guessing you are a Victor cylinder head owner venting some frustration over your choice. J.Rob Your trying to say that Victor heads are very bad. This is old news. Everyone already knows this who cares. Next. Sometimes I wonder why I even bother. You are right, but in this case I felt compelled to be a little crass. Sometimes people make comments without having all of the facts. When they do I think they should be called out. I'm calling you out, because it's a fact that not everyone knows about the victors.
526 cubes of angry wedge, pushbutton shifted, 9 passenger killer!
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: RAMM]
#2416635
12/11/17 03:36 AM
12/11/17 03:36 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,807 Mopar Country, Mi
ccdave
The Ultimate
|
The Ultimate
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,807
Mopar Country, Mi
|
[quote=ccdaveYour trying to say that Victor heads are very bad. This is old news. Everyone already knows this who cares. Next. Well I didn't know this way back when and I wish there were HONEST threads LIKE THIS about them so I would have prevented myself some time/$$$$. 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
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: RAMM]
#2416706
12/11/17 12:08 PM
12/11/17 12:08 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,160 Texas
dannysbee
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,160
Texas
|
Actually ccdave, you should probably take some of your own advice.
Getting old just means you were smarter than some and luckier than others.
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: dannysbee]
#2416711
12/11/17 12:23 PM
12/11/17 12:23 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,807 Mopar Country, Mi
ccdave
The Ultimate
|
The Ultimate
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,807
Mopar Country, Mi
|
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
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: fast68plymouth]
#2416770
12/11/17 02:29 PM
12/11/17 02:29 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439 Val-haul-ass... eventually
BradH
Taking time off to work on my car
|
Taking time off to work on my car
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439
Val-haul-ass... eventually
|
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 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. 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
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: BradH]
#2416789
12/11/17 03:31 PM
12/11/17 03:31 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,924 Weddington, N.C.
Streetwize
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,924
Weddington, N.C.
|
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
Last edited by Streetwize; 12/11/17 03:38 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: ccdave]
#2416826
12/11/17 04:43 PM
12/11/17 04:43 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318 State of confusion
Thumperdart
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318
State of confusion
|
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 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............
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: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: Streetwize]
#2416874
12/11/17 06:07 PM
12/11/17 06:07 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439 Val-haul-ass... eventually
BradH
Taking time off to work on my car
|
Taking time off to work on my car
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439
Val-haul-ass... eventually
|
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 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". ------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: Thumperdart]
#2417099
12/12/17 12:55 AM
12/12/17 12:55 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,160 Texas
dannysbee
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,160
Texas
|
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 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 don't have any buddies here but I do get tired of assholes egos running contributing members off.
Getting old just means you were smarter than some and luckier than others.
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: RAMM]
#2417211
12/12/17 07:44 AM
12/12/17 07:44 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 214 Hamburg / Germany
Den300
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 214
Hamburg / Germany
|
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????
Hamburg/Germany
69 Chrysler 300 446cui Dual Quad 12.64 @ 110.7
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: Den300]
#2417315
12/12/17 01:35 PM
12/12/17 01:35 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 760 Canada
CTD5.9
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 760
Canada
|
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!
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: CTD5.9]
#2417327
12/12/17 01:52 PM
12/12/17 01:52 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,272 PA.
pittsburghracer
"Little"John
|
"Little"John
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 20,272
PA.
|
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
1970 Duster Edelbrock headed 408 5.984@112.52 422 Indy headed small block 5.982@112.56 mph 9.38@138.67
Livin and lovin life one day at a time
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: RAMM]
#2417328
12/12/17 01:54 PM
12/12/17 01:54 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,531 So. Burlington, Vt.
fast68plymouth
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14,531
So. Burlington, Vt.
|
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
68 Satellite, 383 with stock 906’s, 3550lbs, 11.18@123 Dealer for Comp Cams/Indy Heads
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: Den300]
#2417359
12/12/17 02:39 PM
12/12/17 02:39 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,200 Oregon
AndyF
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 31,200
Oregon
|
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????
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...........
|
|
|
Re: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: dannysbee]
#2417363
12/12/17 02:47 PM
12/12/17 02:47 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318 State of confusion
Thumperdart
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,318
State of confusion
|
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 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 don't have any buddies here but I do get tired of assholes egos running contributing members off. So r u referring to me...........
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: Standard port RPM/TF vs Standard port Victor-HP gain?
[Re: AndyF]
#2417367
12/12/17 03:01 PM
12/12/17 03:01 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
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????
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........... 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
Last edited by MR_P_BODY; 12/12/17 03:05 PM.
|
|
|
|
|