Intake Manifold Flow #'s

-
perfacar said:
hi, question time!! are they flow testing one port at a time or whole manifold upside down on bench?? just curious.
Click to expand...

One port at a time. I only posted the average for simplicity. They offer the scatter numbers on their site.


Rusty, They flow better on hughes bench, they performed better in the Mopar Muscle test. Use whatever you want. I'll take floww numbers that jive with someone elses dyno numbers all day.

I myself have seen the perf RPm and the Victor beat the SP indy dual plane intake on a dyno. This jives with the issues hughes found.

Anyone selling parts or services has money to be made. However, if the money you make comes from max performance, you aren't going to lie about which intake is better.

Even further on this note, I've talked to 4 different head porters thus far in my journey towards getting my heads and intake ported. Evey one of them recomended either keeping my Perf RPm or swapping it out for a Victor. Are ALL OF THESE GUYS STUPID OR GETTING GREASED?
 
Follow along one more time with me......if you can.

Again, I never said the Eddy stuff was NOT better. My whole point is that the Weiand stuff ain't the JUNK that Hughes paints it to be. Period.

roccodart440 said:
One port at a time. I only posted the average for simplicity. They offer the scatter numbers on their site.


Rusty, They flow better on hughes bench, they performed better in the Mopar Muscle test. Use whatever you want. I'll take floww numbers that jive with someone elses dyno numbers all day.

I myself have seen the perf RPm and the Victor beat the SP indy dual plane intake on a dyno. This jives with the issues hughes found.

Anyone selling parts or services has money to be made. However, if the money you make comes from max performance, you aren't going to lie about which intake is better.

Even further on this note, I've talked to 4 different head porters thus far in my journey towards getting my heads and intake ported. Evey one of them recomended either keeping my Perf RPm or swapping it out for a Victor. Are ALL OF THESE GUYS STUPID OR GETTING GREASED?
Click to expand...
 
RustyRatRod said:
Follow along one more time with me......if you can.

Again, I never said the Eddy stuff was NOT better. My whole point is that the Weiand stuff ain't the JUNK that Hughes paints it to be. Period.
Click to expand...

I can agree with that and if on a true budget build it might be worth considering.
 
elevensies said:
anything for the mopar single plane one?
Click to expand...

Edelbrock Victor 440 Single Plane
Stock average 314 CFM

Edelbrock Torker II 440
Stock average 297.5 CFM

Weiand Team G B/B with 4150 base
Stock average 339.5 (This is not a misprint)
Thsi intake doesn't make the power of the victor despite it's flow. Why? This intake falls into what we call the square corner intakes. The fuel/air separation is bad in them, so more power is lost in the separation than is picked up in the greater airflow. Use an Edelbrock Victor!



M-1 Intake Single plane
Stock average 298 CFM
The stock 440 Victor intake, Stage 1, would be a better choice from both a cost and power standpoint. The Victor is a lower-cost way to get equal or better power.
 
Got my M1 single used and in excellent shape for a bed good price. This makes it worth while for me and the target goal.
 
Here is a little test we performed.

While we were working on an Edelbrock RPM head, we took a break to test it with some manifolds and an 850 cfm Mighty Demon carburetor. 1st column is the OOTB Edelbrock RPM head, 2nd column is the RPM head after some blending and the following columns are the indicated OOTB intakes all using the same 850 Demon. The M1 is a single plane and the 4bbl iron is from a '69 Road Runner

Lift....OOTB RPM...blended...stock iron...RPM....Torker II...M1....Victor

.100.......70...........72...........69...........71.........71........72.......72
.200......143..........150.........131.........145........148......148.....150
.300......201..........212.........172.........195........201......201.....202
.400......243..........254.........187.........228........242......234.....240
.500......271..........276.........199.........240........254......254.....261
.600......285..........290.........203.........251........264......266.....271
.700......293..........302.........204.........256........269......273.....280
.800......295..........315.......................261........273......276.....285
 
While those numbers are lower than Hughes tests the end result is the same.
 
Man my phone has the numbers jumbled all over the place, dang!
 
IQ52 said:
Here is a little test we performed.

While we were working on an Edelbrock RPM head, we took a break to test it with some manifolds and an 850 cfm Mighty Demon carburetor. 1st column is the OOTB Edelbrock RPM head, 2nd column is the RPM head after some blending and the following columns are the indicated OOTB intakes all using the same 850 Demon. The M1 is a single plane and the 4bbl iron is from a '69 Road Runner

Lift....OOTB RPM...blended...stock iron...RPM....Torker II...M1....Victor

.100.......70...........72...........69...........71.........71........72.......72
.200......143..........150.........131.........145........148......148.....150
.300......201..........212.........172.........195........201......201.....202
.400......243..........254.........187.........228........242......234.....240
.500......271..........276.........199.........240........254......254.....261
.600......285..........290.........203.........251........264......266.....271
.700......293..........302.........204.........256........269......273.....280
.800......295..........315.......................261........273......276.....285
Click to expand...

These flows should be lower. I believe the Hughes flows were through the manifold only.

I'm not sure that I made it clear. These manifold flows are through the head and carburetor. By comparing them to the flows through the head you can see the flow loss through the manifold and carburetor.
 
IQ52 said:
These flows should be lower. I believe the Hughes flows were through the manifold only.

I'm not sure that I made it clear. These manifold flows are through the head and carburetor. By comparing them to the flows through the head you can see the flow loss through the manifold and carburetor.
Click to expand...

I now happen to own all 3, a new victor, weiand, and a torker 2, I`ll surely have to run the best one that will clear the hood scoop w/ a filter on it. ( 68 fast back-505" fish.) no doubt the victor will make more h.p.. and kill a very small amount of low end torque, but I will have more than I need anyway,but will probaly be selling it due to the hood clearance issue. the torker 2 is the lowest of the 3, and probably what I`ll use. the other 2 will be for sale. will follow up on this later.-----------if anyone is interested---------bob:coffee2:
 
I just got thru porting a victor manifold for a 440 and the 4 corners of the plenum were very shrouded and with the carb on the manifold all 4 barrels were at least 1/4 shrouded. I had already looked at the chevy BB victor and several others that were wide open with no shrouding at all. This manifold now has a nice blended entry with no shrouding and sure does look better to me.I'm not a flow bench but I'm not blind either. I have no idea why Edelbrock would make that manifold like that.
 
cracker said:
I just got thru porting a victor manifold for a 440 and the 4 corners of the plenum were very shrouded and with the carb on the manifold all 4 barrels were at least 1/4 shrouded. I had already looked at the chevy BB victor and several others that were wide open with no shrouding at all. This manifold now has a nice blended entry with no shrouding and sure does look better to me.I'm not a flow bench but I'm not blind either. I have no idea why Edelbrock would make that manifold like that.
Click to expand...

Here is the bad news. We have dyno tested the Victor intake you just opened up and you just lost horsepower unless you use a spacer and rev the engine to 6,500-7000 rpm.

I don't know where the dyno sheets are right now but we tested the OOTB Victor, The Victor with the plenum blended to smooth the rough edges right underneath the carburetor without opening the "throat", and we opened the "throat" and blended them right into the intake runners. The best peak and average horsepower was with the throat rough edges smoothed and not opened up. It was a significant difference! The ported plenum Victor with the spacer never gained back the power in the lower rpm ranges it lost by opening the "throat" but it did get an increase by a few horsepower in the upper rpms over the smoothed "throat".

You haven't lost a great deal but the manifold was designed like that for a reason.
 
IQ52, speaking of spacers. In my dyno testing I made 10-15 more HP on the Eddy RPm when I used a 1" HVH super sucker spacer.

Have you ever tried one of these on a VIctor?
 
IQ52 said:
Here is the bad news. We have dyno tested the Victor intake you just opened up and you just lost horsepower unless you use a spacer and rev the engine to 6,500-7000 rpm.
Click to expand...

roccodart440 said:
IQ52, speaking of spacers. In my dyno testing I made 10-15 more HP on the Eddy RPm when I used a 1" HVH super sucker spacer.

Have you ever tried one of these on a VIctor?
Click to expand...

Answer quoted above Rocco! ;)
 
All this is very fascinating. What I need though, is a link to the Hughes site so I can find the compare for the smallblock manifolds. Does anyone have the link?
 
roccodart440 said:
IQ52, speaking of spacers. In my dyno testing I made 10-15 more HP on the Eddy RPm when I used a 1" HVH super sucker spacer.

Have you ever tried one of these on a VIctor?
Click to expand...

Every combination is different and you have to try what you have access to, or be willing to buy and experiment.

I have never tried a 1" spacer on a Victor intake. I gain on a Victor when going to a 2" spacer but I gain a greater % on a single plane M1 than I do on a Victor. I didn't gain enough to spend the money when I used a 2" spacer on the Super Victor for the 426 small block.
 
Captainkirk said:
All this is very fascinating. What I need though, is a link to the Hughes site so I can find the compare for the smallblock manifolds. Does anyone have the link?
Click to expand...

Such a link, on Hughes' site, does not exist for small block intakes. Let your fingers do the walking on Hughes website.
 
IQ52 said:
Such a link, on Hughes' site, does not exist for small block intakes. Let your fingers do the walking on Hughes website.
Click to expand...

the intake bolt (pinch) that is referred to, ain`t that much on mine. and, I`m wondering ,if it`s a fuel separation issue, would it be lessened w/ a throttle body f.i. system??
 
famous bob said:
the intake bolt (pinch) that is referred to, ain`t that much on mine. and, I`m wondering ,if it`s a fuel separation issue, would it be lessened w/ a throttle body f.i. system??
Click to expand...

I doubt there is a fuel separation issue at that point, but if it did exist there, I don't think a throttle body injection system would (not wouldn't) cure it. A better solution would be a multi-port injection system where the fuel was injected down stream of the bolt pinch area.
 
IQ52 said:
Every combination is different and you have to try what you have access to, or be willing to buy and experiment.

I have never tried a 1" spacer on a Victor intake. I gain on a Victor when going to a 2" spacer but I gain a greater % on a single plane M1 than I do on a Victor. I didn't gain enough to spend the money when I used a 2" spacer on the Super Victor for the 426 small block.
Click to expand...

I already have one, so I was wondering if I should or shouldn't run it on the intake you are porting for me.

I suppose I could just make a pass both ways and see which has the lowest ET.
 
IQ52 ,thanks for the feedback. 4 shrouded corners positioned directly under the throttle plates still don't look right to me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top