Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
270 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm building a 347, and am considering going from the Stealth intake that I had on it before I pulled the 302 appart. The engine will be about 11.0:1 compression, afr 165 heads (yeah I know small, but better than nothing), scat superlight forged crank, rods, and srp pistons. The cam is a solid crower @ .050 242 int./250 exh. and 0.538 int./0.557 exh. lift. Should I keep the stealth, or run an x-celerator, OR is the Victor Jr the way to go? How in everyone's opionion would this engine perform?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
If it is a street vehicle--stealth. Strip only vehicle--Victor Jr. The Jr intake is a great manifold but you will loose some bottom end torque. I changed to a Jr from a RPM on my 302. I raised my shift point and got more ET out of the car. But driving it around the track, I could tell it did not respond as well at low rpms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
I've got the Xcelerator on my 289, but it's a lot more mild combo and a lot less cubes than you've got. I'd definitely go with the Vic Jr. over the Xcelerator on your engine. I think with that much cam and those heads, you will gain a LOT of top end power switching to the Vic Jr... but like ponyexpress said, you'll probably loose power below 4000rpm and might not be as nice to drive on the street. What RPM are you shifting at now? I'd expect with the Vic Jr. you'd be shifting at least at 7000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
I have less cam (232/232 @ .050) and had the X-cellerator on it. Was kind of dissapointed. Got a good deal on a Victor Jr and wow, what a difference!! Definately the Victor Jr.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,233 Posts
Vic Jr. Great All round manifold, Not just for Racing !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Another option would be the Air Gap manifold. I've seen a few tests where it actually out performs the Victor Jr across the board in torque, and only falls like 3hp short, at a similar rpm range as well. All around a great design. Do some searching about them. Personally, I'm going to be using a Parker Funnelweb.

Cris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
On 2006-05-06 09:52, admin wrote:
Vic Jr.
xcelerator didn't fair too well on some of our dyno tests.
Which dyno tests? I don't remember seeing any intake dyno tests here...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,662 Posts
On 2006-05-06 15:46, Motorhead wrote:
On 2006-05-06 09:52, admin wrote:
Vic Jr.
xcelerator didn't fair too well on some of our dyno tests.
Which dyno tests? I don't remember seeing any intake dyno tests here...
I haven't seen that either?I'm running an Xcellerator so I'd like to know if I'd be better with something else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
Also I'm running my X with a 1" 4-hole tapered spacer... I MIGHT have enough hood clearance for the Vic Jr., but only without the spacer (and would still be about 1/4" taller) so I wonder how the X with tapered spacer would compare to the Jr without...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,233 Posts
Funnel web is a great intake but you need the motor to go with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,662 Posts
The only dyno tests I've seen is on the Jason Fletcher carb'd 5.0 site where the Xcellerator is about the best one tested on a fairly mild 5.0.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
240 Posts
For a 347 like you have listed above go with the vic jr. no question!! I just went from a performer rpm air gap to a vic jr on my combo and it made a big difference. The top end is WAY stronger and I didn't lose much of anything down low. Still pulls very nice around on the street. Only thing is my power brakes don't like that intake. It seems I have less vacuum now since I switched. I really wasn't expecting that. I am going to try a vacuum reservoir.

_________________
1968 protouring Mustang 342 stroker, 205cc CNC ported TEA Trick Flows, Vic Jr. Intake, AOD/3000 stall, 4.11 9inch posi.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: EricButler on 5/8/06 12:40pm ]</font>
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top