Another Super Victor?

As some of you guys may know, I'm putting together another bullet this winter as I ran into some nice parts and a bit of unexpected cash.

Currently running a ported Super Victor in a 560 horse engine and I really don't have a problem with it. It's only downfall is torque. Just not much there until 3500 RPM. No big deal, but once in awhile that "Airgap" type low end torque would be nice. I think it's the short runners...

I was looking into the plenum of mine and thought about lengthening the runners with epoxy, but not sure how exact this has to be. I know this has been done, somewhere....

Another thought was one of the Indy 360 intakes. Have zero experience with them and really haven't heard of many people running one. Couldn't even find a picture on Indy's website.

Basically if an Airgap had 600 HP capability I'd port one and throw it on. I just don't think it does.

Since I barely move without checking with you all, what are your thoughts?

Are you looking for an Indy intake?

Don't know yet..

Have a look at the 360 degree view on this Chevy intake. I believe this is what you mean by extending the runners. I recall reading articles in Car Craft or other similar magazine about John Lingenfelter doing these mods to a big block Chevy intake and seeing torque improvements. This was before companies case them like the one below.

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/bro-hv1000/overview/

Do you have a build thread on this engine already? What is the bore and stroke combo? Cam specs? Etc...

I do not see a RPM being a 600hp intake as cast, but then again, a lot is why, how and where that number is made. Even after modifications, while 600hp is possible, it seems more like trying to make power with incorrect parts.

The Victor is a high RPM intake. To read a lack of power below 3500 seems normal really. This why you always hear & read to use a dual plane intake on the street with appropriate cams. If your sacking out 500+hp with a RPM, your doing good IMO. Real good.

Food for thought, if it can be applied;
#19---Smallblock Big Mouth Ports on the Dyno

Seems I read that this is a street car driven hard. How often are you in the 600 HP range with a street car? You know, full load, full throttle, maximum rpm? I'd go for the ported RPM intake, it's going to accelerate quicker and feel like you have the 600+ bragging horsepower.

That's my thoughts in a street car. I left the link to show the RPM is NO slouch and produces excellent low end torque to get the heavy car moving well.

If it is a race car, it will be ignoring everything down low. The amount of torque may be acceptable with a single plane. The best way to know if it is OK with you is to try the intake. Dual or single plane.

No real build thread yet. 11.25 to 1, Full CNC Eddy'S. 4.040, 4 inch stroke. Scat forged bottom end.
Very similar to what I'm running now, but way better head flow.

Dont get me wrong, I love the Super Victor I'm running now and can't give up top end, but it would be nice to have bit more down low. Just wondered about the Indy 360 intake. Can't seem to find any info or pics anywhere. Even on Indy'S website.
I want to have my cake and eat it, too!

Ill snap a few shots on mine in the morning.

I'm not an expert, but here's my thoughts.
I was surprised that you have 4.00" crank, after you wrote: "there's not much under 3500rpm". So i think your camshaft must be at least 260°+ @.050", and power range starts at around 3500rpm, and doesn't "work properly" under ~3500rpm. And replacing the intake, it doesn't help much JMO.

560Hp, what rpm??

Auto or manual, if auto, what torque converter and stall?? Bad/wrong converter kills the whole combination...

And what carb, down-leg booster or annular booster?

Above,agreed... Stick.automatic?.. If automatic,what converter ,& flash point...? The right carburetor, will absolutely make you smile, first turn of the key....

Stick car, Holley HP950, which is a downleg booster carb. Unfortunately...

I snapped a pic of an old Super Victor I have laying around, and I took a "picture of a picture" of one that a guy lengthened the runners. It's blurry as hell, but I think you can see what he did. Said was very happy with torque even just off idle. Believe the cam was 260/266 @ .050. Very similar to mine.

I don't mean to say it's WEAK down low by any means, but I ran an Airgap years ago and it was BRUTAL down low. Been doin this long enough to know you can't have both, but no harm in searching for the most

Reminds me of a W7,8,9 intake with the extended wings on the runners.

Ironmike said:

No real build thread yet. 11.25 to 1, Full CNC Eddy'S. 4.040, 4 inch stroke. Scat forged bottom end.
Very similar to what I'm running now, but way better head flow.

Dont get me wrong, I love the Super Victor I'm running now and can't give up top end, but it would be nice to have bit more down low. Just wondered about the Indy 360 intake. Can't seem to find any info or pics anywhere. Even on Indy'S website.
I want to have my cake and eat it, too!

Click to expand...

Tried this with an X-celerator. Lost power everywhere. Tried all sorts of things with spacers and jetting to recover power--nothing worked. Removed extensions and power came back. IMO you need the right cam to get what you want. J.Rob

RAMM said:

Tried this with an X-celerator. Lost power everywhere. Tried all sorts of things with spacers and jetting to recover power--nothing worked. Removed extensions and power came back. IMO you need the right cam to get what you want. J.Rob

View attachment 1714989489

Click to expand...

Yup. The problem is when the stroke gets that long you are out of plenum volume and out of runner. You lengthen the runners and you give up plenum. You can put a spacer on it, but when I tried it, the BSFC went through the roof and I always has 2 lean cylinders, always opposite each other. So 3 and 4 or 5 and 6. It was a nightmare.

I think you have some options. A cam with faster ramps. Reduce the LSA a bit. And a single pattern cam. Hell , maybe up the intake 10* so you would be 270/266 and pull the LSA in a bit. You can't get enough intake to it.

yellow rose said:

Yup. The problem is when the stroke gets that long you are out of plenum volume and out of runner. You lengthen the runners and you give up plenum. You can put a spacer on it, but when I tried it, It was a nightmare.

Click to expand...

Exactly this ^^^^

The problem could simply be, wrong intake. This is normally the issue when you try and use a Performer, Torker, Street Master, Street Dominator etc.... on a hot and/or a big engine. The Super Victor should be enough IMO. It is a hell of an intake. Best for the application? IDK. Wish I could help there. You need ether a "Been there and done that guy" or money and dyno/strip time to test the 2 intakes. IF you can afford an intake purchase just to cut up, weld on, grind on, great. Not my suggestion to do, but if you could and didn't mind......

I've never ran a Super Victor but ran a Victor on my pump gas 408 and was very happy with it. The cam was a 260/264 @ .050' flat solid and with 4.10 gears it pulled from everywhere.

When I dynoed my 434 it made 13 more hp with a HVH Super Sucker, the guys at the shop told me they had sold a bunch of them after they were tried on the dyno.

IM, did you ever post stall speed and gear ratio? Just curious.

justinp61 said:

I've never ran a Super Victor but ran a Victor on my pump gas 408 and was very happy with it. The cam was a 260/264 @ .050' flat solid and with 4.10 gears it pulled from everywhere.

When I dynoed my 434 it made 13 more hp with a HVH Super Sucker, the guys at the shop told me they had sold a bunch of them after they were tried on the dyno.

Click to expand...

Did you test the super sucker against an open spacer the same height? My experience with all those tapered spacers were that an open spacer priced similar results, and if a spacer made power, it was a plenum issue.

Darin Morgan wrote a bit about this on speedtalk.com and he had some interesting thoughts on tapered spacers.

yellow rose said:

Yup. The problem is when the stroke gets that long you are out of plenum volume and out of runner. You lengthen the runners and you give up plenum. You can put a spacer on it, but when I tried it, the BSFC went through the roof and I always has 2 lean cylinders, always opposite each other. So 3 and 4 or 5 and 6. It was a nightmare.

I think you have some options. A cam with faster ramps. Reduce the LSA a bit. And a single pattern cam. Hell , maybe up the intake 10* so you would be 270/266 and pull the LSA in a bit. You can't get enough intake to it.

Click to expand...

YR, ya lost me on upping the intake.....I always thought we use split cams to make up for the lower flowing exhaust side. Can't say I ever saw a split with the intake being longer. Would you mind educating me on your suggestion?

Have to spec out a cam soon. Definitely going to tighten the LSA to the 106ish range.

Oh...4 speed. 4:10's

RAMM said:

Tried this with an X-celerator. Lost power everywhere. Tried all sorts of things with spacers and jetting to recover power--nothing worked. Removed extensions and power came back. IMO you need the right cam to get what you want. J.Rob

View attachment 1714989489

Click to expand...

Wow! This surprised me. If I remember right, the X-cellerator has pretty short runners, right? Would assume the extentions would have upped the whole range.

Ironmike said:

YR, ya lost me on upping the intake.....I always thought we use split cams to make up for the lower flowing exhaust side. Can't say I ever saw a split with the intake being longer. Would you mind educating me on your suggestion?

Have to spec out a cam soon. Definitely going to tighten the LSA to the 106ish range.

Oh...4 speed. 4:10's

Click to expand...

The question I always have is did we add exhaust timing or reduce intake timing? Who knows? If you are burning gasoline and you even have a reasonable exhaust port, and 260*'s at .050 is getting you the RPM you want, there is no reason to add exhaust. I'm still a big fan if asymmetric single pattern cams for most everything.

IMO, that extra exhaust timing is eating up what I call midrange power for an engine like yours. That and an LSA that is probably wider than it needs.

Along that line, if you pull in the LSA, you may need to add a bit of duration to both sides to keep the RPM range from moving down, i.e. what you now feel at 3500 you might feel at max RPM.

Alcohol engines require some split, because the exhaust is heavier. Other than that, no reason to split them, except again, maybe some weird Ford stuff or some unusual, exceptional deal.

If your exhaust/intake ratio is near .78 or higher, you may need to REDUCE the exhaust duration with a split. Say, 265/260 I/E to help the intake side. You have to fill the chamber first.

You need to talk to someone way smarter than me to sort it out, but I'm just not a fan of dual pattern cams unless the cam grinder can tell if he added exhaust or reduced the intake. IMO, most of the time, they reduce intake duration to help with idle characteristics and open the LSA to get the RPM back.

I didn't buy my last cam from Cam Motion or Jones Cams because they both wanted a split duration deal and they gave differing reasons why they were doing it. And both had a wider LSA than I thought was needed. Don't mean I won't use either of them again, just meant with the induction prepped as I did it, looking at my flow numbers in both directions and what the ports looked like at overlap, I couldn't justify a cam like that.

FWIW I ended up with a cam that is 281/255 281/255 .620 .620 105 installed at 105 for 340 CID at 7K shift speed. It lashes at .014/.016 hot.

One of the other cams was something like 240/248 .578/.500 111 installed at 106 and that looked wrong to me. He was stuffing exhaust at it and opened the LSA to get to 7K because it was short on timing. And advanced the cam to make it pull lower by closing the intake sooner. That much was admitted by the cam grinder. IMO, that grind would have been a PIG at 3-4K right at the bottom of my gear change. This is for a car I drive almost any day it's nice.

Hope this clears up some of what I've been trying to get across. It takes a certain amount of time to fill a cylinder. The better the head, the less time to fill the same sized cylinder, so you can run less timing with better heads. The point is, it still takes TIME to fill the cylinder. That is intake duration. Nothing more. You can manipulate the other events to reduce the intake time, but you have to give something up to do it.

Your cam looks like that. I'd like to see the seat timing numbers and the at .200 numbers on you cam if you have them.

yellow rose said:

Did you test the super sucker against an open spacer the same height? My experience with all those tapered spacers were that an open spacer priced similar results, and if a spacer made power, it was a plenum issue.

Darin Morgan wrote a bit about this on speedtalk.com and he had some interesting thoughts on tapered spacers.

Click to expand...

No. I already had the super sucker that was ran on my 408 so I took it when the 434 was dynoed. We made a few pulls without the spacer and the first pull after installing it made 13 more HP. Without the SS the AFR's were about 1 point different side to side, after the SS they were within a tenth all through the rpm range.

justinp61 said:

No. I already had the super sucker that was ran on my 408 so I took it when the 434 was dynoed. We made a few pulls without the spacer and the first pull after installing it made 13 more HP. Without the SS the AFR's were about 1 point different side to side, after the SS they were within a tenth all through the rpm range.

Click to expand...

That makes sense. Exit losses at the bottom of the carb can be nasty to deal with, and th tapered spacer does help with that.

I just read an exellent article written in 2001 by David Vizard.

He covers LSA in a very clear manner.


Damn if I know how to post it here. It's on the Hot Rod website. But the published date is 4/1/2001 and is under the title "Cam Science" or " Cam Lobe Science".

Just don't know how to go there and find it or how to link to it. If someone can find it and link it here, it's worth the time to read it.