Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Anybody flow a recent set of these heads? This is all hear say - the intake runner is slightly re-configured, mostly at the runner to bowl junction, affecting the short radius. One comment was that they did not flow as well as the older ones.

Have tried to reach Edelbrock for comment but have yet to get thru on the phone. No answer to my email either.

Has anyone actually observed this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,551 Posts
Hmm. Interesting. I'd like to know as well. I have an early set...they work...but as always, they could be better.

Wish I had the $$$ for a set of Sr's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Hello sir

I have not flowed a set of Vic jrs....but I am working on a set of the Procomps which are knockoffs.

these do not flow well compared to the Edelbrock book #'s for a vic jr.

these were un cnc'd heads. I know one thing - I did not like the port velocity - these are not for a small motor. I am filling them in in places to bring up port velocity and get rid of turbulence.

Short turn definatly needs to be fine tuned and they need a good multi angle valve job.

these out of the box heads seem to be down at least 20 cfm at each lift point from about .200 on.

My concern is not so much flow #'s but to control the port velocity and turbulance that is going on - the rest will come in

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
On 2006-11-21 13:22, TALONS wrote:
Hello sir

I have not flowed a set of Vic jrs....but I am working on a set of the Procomps which are knockoffs.

these do not flow well compared to the Edelbrock book #'s for a vic jr.

these were un cnc'd heads. I know one thing - I did not like the port velocity - these are not for a small motor. I am filling them in in places to bring up port velocity and get rid of turbulence.

Short turn definatly needs to be fine tuned and they need a good multi angle valve job.

these out of the box heads seem to be down at least 20 cfm at each lift point from about .200 on.

My concern is not so much flow #'s but to control the port velocity and turbulance that is going on - the rest will come in

Jim
What bore are you flowing them on, radius inlet? Flow tube on exhaust?

If they seem 20cfm down, realize they're working with almost 1/2" of shrouding on the intake valve, for one. Also realize that Edelbrock isn't very specific with their 'book numbers' regarding test conditions, but I guarantee it wasn't the day they had a 'headwind'. If you catch my meaning. I'll put money on a big bore to unshroud the valves, nice 2" flowtube, etc etc.

Something to think about when comparing ANY flow numbers on cylinder heads =).

Cris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
4-1/8 bore dia with 5/8 rad on intake inlet

I have not dealt with the ex yet.

I beleive the numbers in the Edelbrock book might be on a CNC'd port not a bare casting- and probably a little tweeked.

The procomps I have are at least 1 yr. old. they put a big dia intake seat 2.188 wish it was a little smaller so they would not have to cut the cbore so big - I heard they are doing things a little different now - dunno
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
659 Posts
I have a set of ProComp heads 210cc 2.05/1.60
I just did a bowl blend on them.
They have been performing fine. But i would like to port them.
Talon can you post some pictures of your work?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
I just cleaned up the exhausts on my Pro Comps, I've got a few pictures if I can dig them up.

Realize this wasn't a 'port' job. I just straightened out the exit on the exhaust to get rid of that goofy 4 way thing they did, and then worked the guide bosses a tiny bit, blended the bowl at the seat, and brushed up the whole port. On the intake, I just blended the bowl in at the seat.

I'll see what I can find when I get home.

Cris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
good morning

I haven't got things down yet - still in the discovery mode - but I can tell you that - out of the box they are waaay down compared to the postings of a Edelbrock vic jr.( no idea if those are acurate )

Out of the box the pushrod pinch is so severe that there is a huge amount of turbulance as the port diverges behind it.

the air speed at this point is higher than over the ssr ( that is not good ) - I am going to check into just breaking into the pushrod hole and then sleeving it - I want to get that air speed and turbulance under control.

these ports need/want wings/vanes ( directional devices ) what ever you want to call them - to smooth out the turbulance.

I am going to experiment with a 50* seat config also.

I'll keep you posted.


Keep in mind these are some of the first set of heads they made. I dont know if they are still making them the same way.


Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Are those 190cc's or 210cc's? My understanding is the 190cc versions are pretty tight at the pushrod area of the port. My 210's look almost identical to the victor jr's I used to have, other than the port isn't cnc matched.

Gonna have to dig up these pictures!

Cris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Here they are:


Untouched intake ports.


Rough cleaned up exhaust ports.


As delivered exhaust with the goofy four corner clean up they did.


Another as delivered exhaust.


Rough cleaned up exhaust.


Intake bowl blend.

Not sure if my intake ports are the same as yours. Realize though, these guys have no intentions of changing anything about their product. If it sells, it sells...if not they'll discontinue it, even if it is only a minor sticking point causing it not to sell. NO free thinking whatsoever.

Anyhow, keep us posted on what yours do! It'd be good to know. I've got mine sold as of Thursday, so I'll be out of it for a performance test =/.

Good luck!

Cris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
yep...those look like my 210's

You should keep the exhaust a little on the small side if you are intending on putting these on a 347 or smaller - I have not got to the exhaust yet.

On the Intake the air is REALLY lazy till about .3 lift - this is bad for a long rod motor.

If you can keep the ex. speed up( dont confuse this with unspent gasses in the chamber) - it should help on overlap to help initiate the pull on the intake.... in theory.

we shall see

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
These heads are actually sold to a kid who's going to be using a power adder. So I told him I'd clean up the exhaust a bit with the bowl blend. I've got about 2hrs in the set, including the bowl blend and exhaust cleanup. Just have to run them over with a flapper wheel, and finished =).

Cris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
377 Posts
Low lift flow has little to nothing to do with long or short rods. Infact, if the valve lift will be over .600, you would be better off working the port for good flow numbers from .400 to .600 lift and lessening the turbulence.
Small exhaust ports or large, cid does not really dictate the exhaust size. Rpm, the entire exhaust system, compression, and other factors dictate exhaust port size.
The pull on the intake port that you are referring to is called scavenging, during the overlap phase. This should be done with the camshaft. The ports should flow as much as possible, with the smallest port size to prevent choke.
This is what sets you up to make more than 1.6 HP/cid.
Brian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
192 Posts
These are 190 cc I just got from Alex´s autoparts.

http://kuvablogi.com/blog/3570/

I´m just all over them with dremel... Bowls are starting to look decent, still rough, sanding etc...

Just measured the hood clearence; plenty room for Air-Gap, so FelPro 1262 are next in line.

Sorry About the Hijack, Some one could change the header...


...and thanks for all the folks at Ford Muscle Forum, you make this forum the best source of REAL info in the net!

As Borat says: SUCCESS!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mosse on 12/1/06 6:16am ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,662 Posts
How old are we talking when we are comparing vic jrs to old and new?Is there a part # or something that you can actually tell how old your heads are?..I just bought a set that are at about 2 years old so I don't know if that would make them the old style?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,551 Posts
I think the old style were 4 digit part numbers and the new style are 5 digit. Might be wrong...someone correce me if I am.

I know my RPM heads are like that. Old ones were 6025 and are slightly different than the 60259s which are on my Mustang. There isn't a whole lot of difference, but the spark plug location is one of the differences. The 60259s are a little deeper into the chamber, which causes a clearance issue with some dome pistons (specifically the TRW L2249NF)
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top