Ported Edelbrock Victor flow numbers

-
RAMM said:
Dwayne is spot on with his comments. It's the .400" flow that always underachieves with these heads--best I've seen is 270cfm and that's still weak IMO. Usually I see around 350-357cfm peak at best no matter what size they are or who did them--in fact I had a set of CNC'd Victors that were claimed to go 390's-400's and they went 330 something. The height of the S.S. and the bowl shape won't allow much over 350cfm-they are a weird animal for sure.

@ PBR--How does your friend plan to put .750" lift into them when the install height is so short?

If I ever get/have to do another set I will mill the rocker stands off and get T&D to send me paired shaft rockers so I can fix the stupid short install height and put a longer valve and spring in it. J.Rob
Click to expand...
.400" lift number is 279. not sure if that is good or bad.
 
ryan stuckey said:
no disrespect never really messed with rb engines much but is this all the flow you can get from a cnc head? I have ported big block chevy stock 990 heads that flow a lot more than this. the lack of parts for mopars is a joke
Click to expand...


Flow numbers are very low on the scale of how to rate a cylinder head.
 
Kinda explains why big block chevies and most Hemis were always DOGS on the street. To much of this and not enough of that. My little small block ate them both for lunch on the streets in the 70’s and 80’s.
 
bluefish said:
.400" lift number is 279. not sure if that is good or bad.
Click to expand...
Yes, Dwayne is correct. My VMW heads were cnc'd by Hughes Engines. I can not find the program they used at the time. All they offer now is the Big Mouth cnc program that cost $1500 and i'm not sure how effective it really is. They claim over 400cfm flow. My intake ports measure 330cc if this helps.
 
pittsburghracer said:
Mopar doesn’t really offer anything stock with a 325cc intake runner before porting. You should start a post of your own and tell us about them on some “Chevy site”.
Click to expand...
what a surprise another smart *** answer to a simple question I run into people like you a lot more on mopar sites than I ever did on any other car forum being an *** must be a requirement to own a mopar
 
RAMM said:
That is best I've ever seen at the cross sections I am used to. J.Rob
Click to expand...
One thing i have found with this head is it responds very well to compression increases. I know most engines increase performance with more compression, but this 511 responded way better than i would have guessed. I gained 4 mph and 3.5ths in quarter in a 3400# A body. Went from a 10.40@130 to a 10.06@134. There were several changes, so not real apples to oranges, but thought the compression increase from 11.25 to 12.5 was big. I also ported the plenum of the Indy 400-3 and added an electric water pump. I'm now thinking about bumping it up to 13:1 on next freshening. This head likes compression in a big way, I think it might be giving it a boost to lazy air flow.
 
ryan stuckey said:
what a surprise another smart *** answer to a simple question I run into people like you a lot more on mopar sites than I ever did on any other car forum being an *** must be a requirement to own a mopar
Click to expand...

buddy first off we, us, I, and the members are here because we love Mopars. I don’t dislike chevies but being in my right mind I as a Mopar owner would not go on a Chevy website and show them their miscomings, of which there are many. All your contributions to this post does is derails what has been a post we all (Mopar guys) can learn from. Do we know we are outgunned in certain areas??? Yes we do, but most of us are capable of showing the “Chevy boys” a thing or two each and every weekend. So if my comments made you upset and in need of some therapy please let me know. Have a great weekend.
 
bluefish said:
One thing i have found with this head is it responds very well to compression increases. I know most engines increase performance with more compression, but this 511 responded way better than i would have guessed. I gained 4 mph and 3.5ths in quarter in a 3400# A body. Went from a 10.40@130 to a 10.06@134. There were several changes, so not real apples to oranges, but thought the compression increase from 11.25 to 12.5 was big. I also ported the plenum of the Indy 400-3 and added an electric water pump. I'm now thinking about bumping it up to 13:1 on next freshening. This head likes compression in a big way, I think it might be giving it a boost to lazy air flow.
Click to expand...

ohhh Joe is well over that compression figure. If I remember right he monitors his engine very closely and run 112 fuel. I was thinking where he is at he would need better fuel but it’s working great for him.
 
pittsburghracer said:
ohhh Joe is well over that compression figure. If I remember right he monitors his engine very closely and run 112 fuel. I was thinking where he is at he would need better fuel but it’s working great for him.
Click to expand...
Couple other things i would like to add is this combo only has a [email protected] solid flat tappet from Dwayne Porter. I think its been a great cam for this combo, but i have to see what a solid roller can do. I try not to over octane it, so only using 101 octane at the moment. Seems to work real well so far. A mix of Dragon 110(113) and 93 pump.
 
pittsburghracer said:
buddy first off we, us, I, and the members are here because we love Mopars. I don’t dislike chevies but being in my right mind I as a Mopar owner would not go on a Chevy website and show them their miscomings, of which there are many. All your contributions to this post does is derails what has been a post we all (Mopar guys) can learn from. Do we know we are outgunned in certain areas??? Yes we do, but most of us are capable of showing the “Chevy boys” a thing or two each and every weekend. So if my comments made you upset and in need of some therapy please let me know. Have a great weekend.
Click to expand...


WTF??? Two posts and that’s one of them? Not cool. I’d say ignore him but why bother.
 
Ive spoken to a guy who has used two sets of the “monster maxx” cnc’d Victors from Hughes.
He had them tested by a shop local to him, and said they did break the 400cfm mark.

I had someone bring me one that was supposedly done using that monster maxx program.
I didn’t CC it, so I don’t know if it was their 355cc version or not, but the program was big enough that it did poke a few holes in the walls that got welded up at Hughes.
As I posted previously, the bowl diameter was 2.235”, and the throat was 1.990, and they used an SI a 2.19” valve.

That head, whatever version it was........didn’t really crowd the 400 number at all.
 
PRH said:
Ive spoken to a guy who has used two sets of the “monster maxx” cnc’d Victors from Hughes.
He had them tested by a shop local to him, and said they did break the 400cfm mark.

I had someone bring me one that was supposedly done using that monster maxx program.
I didn’t CC it, so I don’t know if it was their 355cc version or not, but the program was big enough that it did poke a few holes in the walls that got welded up at Hughes.
As I posted previously, the bowl diameter was 2.235”, and the throat was 1.990, and they used an SI a 2.19” valve.

That head, whatever version it was........didn’t really crowd the 400 number at all.
Click to expand...

not getting your last statement. Are you saying it didn’t hit 400?
 
It did not...... nor did it get very close.

The Hughes site shows the 400+ cfm version uses a 2.25 valve and is 355cc.
The one I had here did not have the 2.25 valve, and I didn’t check the runner volume....... so, about all I can tell you is it was cnc ported at Hughes, at a point in time after they had already been advertising the 400+ cfm program on their site...... and the guy I tested it for was under the impression it was going to flow 400-ish.

The head was right off the brown truck from Hughes, and we unboxed it for the first time here at my shop.
 
Last edited:
PRH said:
It did not...... nor did it get very close.
Click to expand...

my Buddy Joe had a sheet with Hughs flow numbers on it that he was writing his next to. I said don’t be to disappointed if his don’t match up. Lol.
 
yellow rose said:
WTF??? Two posts and that’s one of them? Not cool. I’d say ignore him but why bother.
Click to expand...
not two posts my account deleted and I had to make a new one so sorry. but if this how I can expect a question to be answered I compared knowledge of one engine type and asked if that low of a flow number was common with these heads and im wrong for doing that?
 
pittsburghracer said:
buddy first off we, us, I, and the members are here because we love Mopars. I don’t dislike chevies but being in my right mind I as a Mopar owner would not go on a Chevy website and show them their miscomings, of which there are many. All your contributions to this post does is derails what has been a post we all (Mopar guys) can learn from. Do we know we are outgunned in certain areas??? Yes we do, but most of us are capable of showing the “Chevy boys” a thing or two each and every weekend. So if my comments made you upset and in need of some therapy please let me know. Have a great weekend.
Click to expand...
where did is ay I was going to a chevy site and comparing miscomings I asked if those flow numbers were normal for a cnc head for an rb and compared that to another common engines cyl heads guess asking questions get's you flamed here and I need no therapy but I do thank you for proving my point. at least I learned why none of the few guys that do run dodges in our truck pull class never win
 
ryan stuckey said:
not two posts my account deleted and I had to make a new one so sorry. but if this how I can expect a question to be answered I compared knowledge of one engine type and asked if that low of a flow number was common with these heads and im wrong for doing that?
Click to expand...


I answered it. Flow isn’t everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top