Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I suffered oil starvation at the road course in June and wiped a main and rod bearing on my 331. I thought I had a road race pan but it was just a 7 quart Canton T pan without trap doors, etc. I'm getting a new 9 qt road race pan and i may get an Accusump also.

Anyhow, since i'm taking things apart to get my crank turned down .010, I am considering replacing my port matched Stealth with a port matched single plane. This makes a lot more sense now that I have a manual trans as long as I don't mind less fuel economy and less bottom end.

My '70 351w heads are fully ported with 1.94/1.6 valves. The ports on them measure 2.10 x 1.25. Intake volume is 160cc. I'm sitting right around 400 HP @ 6400. The weiand x-cellerator strikes me as having smaller runners than a Victor jr...is that correct? Power range is advertised as 1500-7000 vs 3500-8000 for the Victor Jr. 1500 is pretty low for a single plane, but OK. If the runners on an x-cellerator are smaller, I would prefer it to keep the charge velocity higher. Which single plane would you recommend?

By the way, no I am not changing my heads...please don't recommend a head change.

I figure that a single plane will increase my usable power up to 7000 or so (I get usable power into the high 6000s currently). Should my engine be able to hold up to frequent spin ups to 7000? I've taken it to 7000 once or twice, but I don't make a habit of it very much. It has a high nodular crank, H beam rods w/ 7/16" ARP cap screws, ARP main studs, KB hyper pistons, '68 302 block.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
991 Posts
I like the vic jr with a manual and road racing in the future. The manual really makes it worthwhile IMO. The weak link in your rotating assembly as far as rpm goes is the KB hyper piston. Cracked skirts would be a concern at constant 6500-7000 rpm running
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,499 Posts
I'd skip the Accelerator on your car, and either go with a Victor Jr. or a (don't laugh) Offy Port-o-Sonic. The Offy was king of the hill before the Victor Jr came out around 1990 or 1991. It sort of looks like a mini Vic Jr. It DOES need some work in the plenum right under the carb flange into the runner roofs, but it's a nice piece.

On your car, the Vic Jr will indeed feel STRONG from around 3700 rpm or so, on up. It will outrun the Stealth over 4500 rpm. If you NEED more power at a slightly lower rpm, look into a smoothed out Offy. Else, go with the Victor Jr.

Accusumps are often used on dirt track cars that bounce around a lot, which is total hell on an wet sump oiling system. It would probably be good insurance on your car at the track. You can even use it as a pre-luber on initial engine start-up.

I'd probably just put a Victor Jr. on it.... unless you want to be different. Then go 'period correct' with the Offy.

Good Luck!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,305 Posts
Im no expert but I think your set up could easily handle 7000 rpm's and use a Vic JR... I do wonder about the 3.50's maybe a bit short for the intake?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
373 Posts
I have many 1/4 mile slips where I have run 109mph in my 347 with Pro Products Dual Plane Air Gap intake. This past Friday I raced for the first time with a Victor Jr. All passes were 112 mph. No carb tuning/jet changes/ timing changes. I did have to use a very short spacer ( 1/4" )with the Vic Jr to clear my hood where I had a 1" spacer with the Air Gap. This mph increase equates to about a 25hp increase. I vote for the Vic. Jr!

_________________
1966 Mustang, Vinyl top, 347, 650 VS, Pro. Products Air Gap, AFR's, 3.55 gears, 235/60 drag radials. 12.01 @ 109.70

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Vinyl66 on 8/29/06 10:13am ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Vinyl66 on 8/29/06 10:13am ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
My 289 is about 350hp, stock crank, H-beam rods and KB Hypers, and I take it to 7200+ every shift at the track. You've got quite a bit longer stroke with the 331, but I still think you'd probably be safe for an occasional trip up to 7000rpm, just don't keep it there forever. I'm also running an Xcelerator intake, and it pulls really well past 7000rpm. That being said, I'm sure the Vic Jr. would make more top end power, but I originally chose the X because of price (got it used off eBay) and for better low-end torque since it's in a Ranger pickup. Also hood clearance was a concern of mine, although I think the vic Jr. would clear by about 1/4", if I really wanted to change it out. If I were you, with the extra cubes of the 331 I'd definitely go for the Vic Jr.

edit: Mike, did some searching on the web and you've got me thinkin about the POS... Found one good pic on eBay, but the only dyno comparison I can find compared a bunch of older intakes on a relatively mild 5.0 (214 duration cam, 600cfm carb, stock heads), and in that the Xcelerator did slightly better than the POS through most of the curve... although it only made 240hp, so I wonder how they would fare on something that made 100hp more. Do you have any links or old articles you can scan for me to check out? What about specs... how tall is the POS?

_________________
'86 Bronco, 300hp 460, E4OD
'85 Ranger, 350hp 289, T5, [email protected] (1.96 60') on street tires


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Motorhead on 8/29/06 2:38pm ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Over here in Australia Most go the Vic Jr Sr seem,s to be the pick of manifolds for the Windza, if you have the money I would get a Custom sheetmetal one made up Cheers
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,959 Posts
I am with 2bav8, however if your heart is set on it, leave the Stealth on the shelf until you decide if you like the Vic Jr

Its not a tough swap and then you'll have your answer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
On 2006-08-28 23:38, admin wrote:
What cam is in this?
Also, do you have a dyno sheet to verify you are making power that high?
His sig says he has a 282S cam, which is the same as I'm running, with 236 duration and 528 lift. Should be able to make power to 7000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I myself would go with the Parker Funnelweb. After having bought one of these intakes for my 331, and doing some dyno pulls on the motor, I would never put any other single plane on a car.

My set-up was as follows.

Keith Craft 331 (used to work for Keith)
10.4:1 Comp. (still using pump gas)
TFS Twisted Wedge Heads (stage II by Brian-TEA)
Lunati 51012 Hyd Roller. (.544/.560 232/242 *112)
Victor Jr. (had) / Parker Funnelweb (will keep forever)
Davinci/Holley 650 HP.


The results were astounding !!

FW- HP/TQ

3K- 237/414

3.5K- 294/440

4K- 352/462

4.5K- 410/478

5K- 464/487

5.5K 509/486

6K- 544/381

6.5K- 552/446

7K- 555/416


VJ- HP/TQ

3K- 244/428

3.5K- 296/444

4K- 348/457

4.5K- 401/468

5K- 445/467

5.5K- 474/452

6K- 503/440

6.5K- 502/406

7K- 505/379







<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: NealMobley on 8/29/06 11:42pm ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
On 2006-08-28 23:38, admin wrote:
What cam is in this?
Also, do you have a dyno sheet to verify you are making power that high?
What's wrong "admin"...you doubt me? Didn't you ask me this once before? This should remove all doubt.

dyno sheet


Here's the real one

dynosheet2

The dip was caused by maunally opening the vacuum secondaries when there was a secondary problem. Have mechanical secondaries now.

_________________
Tracy Blackford: Corona, Ca
'65 FB Mustang 331, 282S cam, ported 351W heads. T5z, 3.50 9" posi.
346 [email protected] on a warm spring day (335 RWHP SAE corr.)



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: blkfrd on 8/30/06 5:21am ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,030 Posts
On 2006-08-29 09:09, blkfrd wrote:
On 2006-08-28 23:38, admin wrote:
What cam is in this?
Also, do you have a dyno sheet to verify you are making power that high?
What's wrong "admin"...you doubt me? Didn't you ask me this once before? This should remove all doubt.

dyno sheet


Where can I get my car "dyno'ed" like that?

That dyno sheet is sick!!!!!!!!!!!

LOL

_________________
Dennis

65' STANG, 3160 lbs

393W NA, 2.78 Toploader 4 Spd, 9" 3:70 Posi
Pro Comp Heads, Vic Jr. Intake, 750dp, 236/561 Solid Cam, 9.6CR, 1 3/4" Headers, Lakewood, Subframes, Caltracs



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: dennis111 on 8/30/06 12:41am ]</font>
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,758 Posts
Tracy,

Easy there buddy - I was just trying to get basic information (cam and dyno) to help you determine what intake would be best! Hopefully you understand that if I did ask you that question before I certainly don't memorize everyones dyno sheets.

My opinion is the stealth will give you more overall power (area under the curve) The Vic Jr will increase top end, but based on your dyno sheet I don't think the Vic Jr will add another 600 rpm of power.

Chirag
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: blkfrd on 8/30/06 5:19am ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Hello blkfrd

how are you through the corners with the current manifold? If you are loose off - the vic jr might help - if you have big brakes and can make use of the xtra top end that the vic will make - go for it.

You can always fill the vic if you feel that this is too much runner volume and you are loosing torque.

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
On 2006-08-29 08:40, NealMobley wrote:
I myself would go with the Parker Funnelweb. After having bought one of these intakes for my 331, and doing some dyno pulls on the motor, I would never put any other single plane on a car.
Those numbers are impressive.

I just checked out the funnel web. I like the longer runners to help promote more low/mid range torque but it is tall!...over 7". Is the top angle cut to take into account the driveline angle or is it straight cut?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,617 Posts
I'm pretty sure the carb pad is level (not angle cut), just like the Vic Jr. is also I believe. The longer runners would build more torque, if it weren't for the fact that they are much larger as well. If you look at his hp/tq below 4000 the Vic Jr. actually outpowered the FW, but up at peak power it was no contest! If I didn't care about cutting a hole in the hood, I'd run a FW just for the "holy $hit" factor, regardless of whether or not it made more power on my combo. That is just an awesome looking intake... like a tunnel ram designed for single carb.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,892 Posts
http://bbs.hardcore50.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=34999

Link to a thread that has some more results from the FW. Even Joe Sherman shares his experience with that manifold.

I run a Vic Jr. with runner extensions welded in. They really brought back the bottom end. Seems to be a little stronger down low than my Stealth and still pulls hard up top. Runs fastest times when shifted at only 6k, but I'll buzz it up to 7k when having fun. On my mild 289 it runs almost identicle to my stealth in the 1/4 mile (was slower before the extensions).

You see runner extensions in what seems like many chevy single plane manifolds.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: 289nate on 8/30/06 7:26am ]</font>
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top