NX_CaGEdApE00

iTrader: (7)

Very much considering running this on my Cam only car...
Car is used mainly for full race.......
2800 - 3000 lbs 4.56 gears, th350 5500 stall

Anyone done this???

Right now the car has a TRex camshaft in it.. (bigger AZPS cam Soon)
will be pulling 7200 + RPMs.........

i really wanna run this setup over the fast setup....

Thoughts PLease


Thanks
David

The Juggernaut

iTrader: (7)

The fast 90/90 will make more power.
Unless you have a blower/turbo or a big solid roller that you can spin to 8500+
the LSX90 will make a few more horses.
I've already tested it on a 402 and lost a few.

Fireball

iTrader: (21)

I think you can make more power with it based on my testing...but you can't run a LS1 cookie cutter cam.

what works with a Fast won't work with the vic

NX_CaGEdApE00

iTrader: (7)

what exactly do u mean by cookie cutter cam????

explain why i would lose power????


anyone tested this on a big cam only car????

The Juggernaut

iTrader: (7)

The heads DO flow more though the vic than the FAST 90.It must be the
unequal/short runners combined with less plenum that it losses power.
I did notice that it made
power higher.It was still making power at 7200 where as with the FAST90,
peak was 6800ish. The problem is that the motor lives around 6k-6400 for most
of the run, if you get a playback tach , you will see what I mean.
This is on a ported head/hyd 402.I think a cam only car would suffer more.
Not to mention find a low profile/restrictive elbow, or cut the cowl, and maybe
get a bigger hood, or run a carb style TB in speed density.
God bless if you wanna try it, I'm just trying to warn you.

Ls1LikeNoOther

i have a built ls1 all forged internals 3.905 big hyd roller,ported and polished ls1 heads, i know the heads are my weak point but im going with the vic jr and the msd setup i think its gunna work very well especially with a set of good CNC;d heads..

The Juggernaut

iTrader: (7)

uggg.... why do I even bother sharing info.
Let me say it again.
I have a 402 with a MONSTER hyd cam, heads that flow 330cfm +
IT LOST POWER OVER A FAST 90mm all things being equal.
For all the headaches to put this intake on you get rewarded by losing HP.
I'm not guessing, speculating or hoping. I've done and tested it on the dyno
and the dragstrip.
I guess that's all I can say.

stang90gt50

iTrader: (6)

I think the problem causing it to lose power is the camshaft selection is great for the fast long runner intake and very bad for a short runner intake.

Unless it is a forced induction motor, you will want to run a camshaft that is has a much lower LSA and different valve open/closing events...

If you had a custom grind done for the victor jr i think it will easily make more power than the fast 90

The Juggernaut

iTrader: (7)

Interesting. What kind of specs would work better for the short runner.
The typical cam selection that makes the most power is say-
238/246(ish)(@.050) .60x/.61x (ish) 110-112 LSA typically 108ICL
on a 346 cube LS1 motor for drag racing/narrow power band applications.

How would you manipulate the cam specs for the short runner and how much
power could be gained?
I know the Vic gets more air to the heads, therefore it *should* make more power and I'm trying to find out why it doesn't. Maybe this is the key.
Fireball- I'd be interested to know if you are doing a back-to-back comparision
with NO other changes, or just a cam and intake change.

Ls1LikeNoOther

how monster was your monster cam I got a .650 .654 251 254 @050 and on a 108 lsa

The Juggernaut

iTrader: (7)

Mine is more duration, about the same lift.

DAPSUPRSLO

iTrader: (14)

I don't believe the traditional "cookie cutter" late IVC late IVO cams work well with the shorter runners of those intakes, and there in lies the problem. This is speculation on my part ofcourse but based off of the wave tuning the intake valve needs to open sooner with these shorter runner intakes as the waves will travel up and down the shorter runner faster obviously so i'd think the intake valve needs to open sooner for this reason to take advantage of the arrival of compression and expansion waves at the right time.

I don't really see how the lsa itself has anything to do with it as the intake flows well so it's not like it needs help via exhaust tuning (or more of it) in that regard. I think it's the normally earlier ICL that is an off shute of tighter lsa's that people get caught up in. that's my opinion though and I have not tested it yet. I have an sb2.2 manifold i'll be running on my motor, although it's runners combined with the longer runner of the c5r heads may skew my results a little.

383ss

iTrader: (14)

I think it would be a waste of time on a cam only car. the FAST 90 flows more than enough air for stock heads.

I converted to a vic on my 408 and picked up 7rwhp while also converting to SD tuning. I call that a wash. BUT, that was with the same cam and a non-ported Vic, now it is ported and I swapped to an appropriate cam. will have results in the next week or so.

NX_CaGEdApE00

iTrader: (7)

did u finally go with an ED curtis cam????

he is the man....

GueSS Who

We dynoed the Victor Jr tonight...........
12.1:1, hydrolic roller (RPM 6), 408...It has stock rockers with ported 241 castings with 1/2 studs with the Victor Jr and and acufab 1250cfm TB with a compucar plate. It made more rwhp on motor with this intake then the Fast 90/90...This is not a daily driver and so drivablity is not needed on this car. I don't know if the driveabilty was any better with either intake.

Motor= 497/560
Sause= 754/880

Fireball

iTrader: (21)

changed heads too so it wasn't back to back. Unfortunately, found my motor was leaking down pretty bad so my power wasn't up to par. Did find that a typical 110 lsa cam wanted to rev to the moon, even when advanced significantly.

I had an interesting cam in on a 105 LSA and it made more power from 5500-7000 rpm than the 110 LSA cam

383ss

iTrader: (14)

just started it up about 15 minutes ago

DanZ28

iTrader: (5)

I did a comparison as well between the FAST 90/90 and the Vic Jr/Accufab 1250. This was on a forged bottom end 347 CI, every bolt on out there, Ported heads, 230/234 cutom cam (114 straight up) and an 11.0 CR. FAST 90/90 set up was a full SD tune as well. With no other changes except intakes/TB, I got:

FAST 90/90 = 462 RWHP and 425 RWTQ
Vic Jr/Accufab = 439 RWHP and 389 RWTQ fully tuned.

Actually spent many hours trying differnent tuning scenarios to come up with the best above.

MAYBE if I ported the Vic Jr and used a different cam with a different ICL, I could of equaled the FAST setup in HP.

I really don't think the Vic Jr is worth it over the FAST for a 346 CI engine at all, maybe bigger CI engines spinning high RPM would benefit. Also be aware if you use the carb style TB, you will have to cut the cowl to get a air filter on. So that was my experience with doing an actual before and after test on my car...

Dan

383ss

iTrader: (14)

IMO, its pretty pointless to get a vic jr if your not going to port match it. it is WAY off as far as matching and you will gain a lot of cfm by doing so.
interesting resutls anyway.
I think the most valid test would be with both intakes port matched and both have appropriate cams.

DanZ28

iTrader: (5)

It's not well known that the ports out of the box are so far off you HAVE to port them, I think it's a crock to have to do that, but it's part of the mod game I guess. Lets see what yours does (although not a direct comparison since you swapped cams) now that you ported it and have before numbers to compare to.

I think when you start porting and changing cams the test/comparison will not be valid, to many variables. With the amount I lost, even with porting and a cam change, it would have alot to make up just to become even let alone out perform the FAST on my engine.

BTW, there was another test done on a corvette at the shop I did my comparison at. He used four different FAST intake manifolds. My stock one and three ported ones by sponsers here. Only one ported one out performed my stock one. I thought that was pretty interesting as well.

Dan