Victor head update

[Chryco Psycho]

Well after a lot of problems the engines is running
First the availability of the heads ,waited 6 months to get them
then they are designed for a rocker Mopar is not producing so we had to buy intake rockers from hughes $300
then the pedestals & spacers were not correct os we had to have them CNC machined [fabricated] to the correct widths $250
I then bolted the heads to the block only to find the pushrods will not clear the heads so off come the heads & approx 5 hrs is wasted opening up the pshrod holes to allow the pushrods to clear the heads
Then I bolt in the Eddy valley tray , this part is Made by Eddy for the Eddy Victor heads & none of the bolt holes into the heads line up so more time wasted
I then have to have custom pushrods made in 2 different lengths , 1 length for intake & different for exhaust , I carefully measured & cut the pushrods   but had to have them pressed together so another 4 hrs + $150 in costs
So ultimatly the Cheap Eddy heads do not work out as being very cheap once you add on the $700 in extra parts & 10 hrs of labor to make them work
also std headers do not fit with the raised exhaust ports so more expense
Be warned this are NOT a bolt on head & Indy should be cheaper with a proven parts package to go with the heads

the rest of the build is a production 440 block balanced& built with custom pistons , 10.6: compression , Comp custom .620 lift roller cam , gear drive , Eddy RPM intake with 950 Holley Hp carb , Hooker 1 7/8" headers ,  Mezeire Water pump , Alum Rad , twin electric fans with 3600 CFM , fluid damper , March Serp pulleys
the engine will be dynoed as is & as soon as we have some #s from it it will be converted to EFI   

[Rocky]

That really sucks.  I thought there would be a big problem when Edelbrock started advertising something that clearly wasn't a bolt on product.  Do you think they were using guinnepigs to deferr development costs, or to judge a market?  Either way, it seems pretty sleazy to me, especially to play off the "out of the box performance"  of their other heads.  Do you think they did it just to test the market?

     Rocky

[Chryco Psycho]

no idea what they are thinking or even If they are thinking , but most of the R&D is left to the customer

[Mike DC]

 
That sucks. 

Seems unusual for Edelbrock to sell something so far from advertised.  Nobody in the aftermarket parts industry has a perfect rep, but I usually find that most of Edelbrock's stuff is a lot closer to the mark than what you're describing. 


Have you talked to them about the whole mess, Chryco Psycho?
What to do they say about the problems?  Are they talking about doing any reinbursing or making any other amends?

 

[firefighter3931]

Geez.....that's rediculous !! 

Guess i'll stick with the ported RPM's or step up to an EZ-1 if a max wedge intake port is needed. Thanks for the heads up Neil 



Ron

[Chryco Psycho]

I saw a magazine article showing step by step how easy they are to "bolt on" , I looked carefully at the pix in the ariticle & they had to make the exact same notch in the deck approx 1/4" deep for each pushrod to clear but Nothing is mentioned in the article about doing this
I have not wasted even more time to Phone eddy & discuss this with them maybe my customer will if he is bored [not likely], he did call about other problems & got nowhere with them

[Mike DC]

   
That's a load of crap.   Since when is grinding notches on the block a "bolt-on" operation?  Edelbrock should know better. 

The Magazine world is another matter.  Seems like they're mostly sold-out these days no matter what I read.

 

[Chryco Psycho]

it wasnt the block deck , it was the overly wide deck on the heads that had to be ground away

[Rolling_Thunder]

seems like typical planning from Edelbrock....     

[Challenger340]

Geez thats the pits !
I'm converting a set of VICTOR's for a Rocker setup right now, I'll try and keep posted as to the results.(not hughes)

But so far so good. I haven't encountered anything abnormally goofy, or, that I didn't expect. Everything works fine now after Mock-up.

I'll post the part numbers and ordering info to get 'em when I'm finished.

The pushrod assembly thing is easily done, when chucked & cut, then brass pneumatic the cup in, quick & fast.(smith bros.)

The pushrod relief in the head deck, is also done easy with a Chevy "louie tool", similar, as doing the Small Block Chevy Head pushrod hole elongation.

Also, we found a nice "port intruder" setup, thats works slick on the Victors.

So far, I'm not finding them too bad to work with, maybe I got some of a "later" run of rough castings, that are better to work with ?

[Mike DC]

Theoretical questions/thoughts about the new Victors:

How big are the passages in these heads as-cast?
Of course the Victor's port turn-radius is more gradual than the Eddys & stockers (hence the Victor's taller head casting overall).  But how is the Victor passage's actual cross-section size compared to the RPMs?

I ask because I wonder how the Victors would work on a midrange street torque motor rather than a higher-rpm screamer. 
It would seem to me that the more gradual turn radius (on the Victor) would be a big advantage in holding up port velocity even for a low/midrange-RPM torque motor.   

Yeah, of course the Victors are surely bigger than the stock heads and probably even the Eddy RPMs.  But how much bigger?  It seems pretty hard to go wrong with making the heads at least somewhat bigger on any BB mopar engine, no matter what you do with it.  However, I would expect this theoretical velocity/turn advantage to be canceled out if the actual passage size in the Victors is also cast really huge compared to the Eddy RPMs. 

Once again, I know a huge port size is great for "big displacement + high RPM."  But I'm wondering about what the Victors would do for the torque numbers on a 440-500" street motor at 3500 rpm.


Any thoughts you guys?  Thanks.

 

[firefighter3931]

How big are the passages in these heads as-cast?

Yeah, of course the Victors are surely bigger than the stock heads and probably even the Eddy RPMs.  But how much bigger? 

Once again, I know a huge port size is great for "big displacement + high RPM."  But I'm wondering about what the Victors would do for the torque numbers on a 440-500" street motor at 3500 rpm.


Any thoughts you guys?  Thanks.

 

Mike, the Victors have a standard port window....just like a 906/452 or Eddy RPM, but the ports are raised so the runners are longer.


A stock intake port is in the 190cc range. The Rpm's go around 210cc. My ported Rpm's are 228cc. The Victors are 280cc out of the box.


The Victor is a race head and is advertised as such. At 280cc it will have much less velocity than a smaller RPM head so throttle response will be weaker at lower engine speeds on smaller (440 ci) builds. Strokers make so much bottom end power that a big head doesn't hurt throttle response too much so a 280 cc intake port will work pretty good. The added port volume will also allow the larger displacement to make power at a higher rpm than would be possible with a comparatively smaller head. Inmo, the Victor is a race 440ci and street/strip stroker 500ci piece.

Personally, i wouldn't be afraid to run a ported RPM head on a pump gas 500ci combo....it'll make 600+hp easy and you won't have to rev it to the moon to get there. 




Ron

[Mike DC]

     
Yikes!  The Victors are flowing 280cc as-cast? 
Eddy wasn't screwing around when they designed those things. Sounds like a dedicated race head.

That's about what I expected to hear.  So it's not just the gradual turn/longer runners that helps the Victors over the RPMs, it's the flat-out port size too.
Too bad (at least for my case).  I'd be curious about what you'd get from a head with Victor-style runners/turn radius, but with the smaller RPM-sized passages. 
I'm guessing it would probably give you torque/midrange from hell on a 450-500" mild street stroker motor that doesn't see over 6000 rpm.



Thanks for the input, Firefighter3931.
 

[firefighter3931]

     
Yikes!  The Victors are flowing 280cc as-cast? 

Mike the 280cc is the runner port volume...not the max flow for the intake port.  The RPM's are 210cc so there is a 70cc volume difference between the two. Bigger port volume will reduce velocity....especially at lower engine speeds.

My ported RPM's at 228cc flowed right at 300cfm @.600 lift.  The Victors out of the box flow 308cfm @.600 lift but with a larger 280cc runner. Wanna guess which head is more efficient ?  These numbers come from the same flowbench, fwiw. 

On a smallish 440 pump gas type build, the RPM's are gonna feel a lot more responsive.....throttle response will be much stronger, inmo. 


Member R2 just had his 446ci Edelbrock RPM headed race motor on the dyno. The heads are ported and he has 13:1 compression with a flat tappet solid cam....it made 640hp.  Those are pretty descent numbers for a 3.75 stroke combo with what many consider a "street head" !  


Ron

[Mike DC]

 
Yeah, the RPM sounds way better as a mild-motor street head.  Even on a 500" stroker.

[firefighter3931]

 
Yeah, the RPM sounds way better as a mild-motor street head.  Even on a 500" stroker.

Yep....much easier to work with and a descent selection of rocker arm choices to choose from. 

The Victors also have a raised intake port so this will put the carb closer to the hood and can create clearance issues....with a stock hood the manifold selection will be limited. 


Ron