SLowETz

iTrader: (12)

All I can tell you is that on my 416" stroker, I made better power with the FAST on top of good heads and a single pattern 254/254, 599/599 112 +3 stick.

If you are only spinning it to 7000(which I am), I'd go w/the FAST. My junk comes in at 3555 #'s wet and I just wasn't willing to give up what was lost down low to gain only half of it back spinning to 7500+(again, on MY application). I wanted all the tq. I could get down low to get this tank off the line hard.

You say your RW will be light. Imagine stump pulling tq./and very respectable rwhp ALL THE WAY to your shift points in a light car.
Traction problems can be dealt with, and once they are, insane 60' numbers should be the norm.

JMHO..... but again, as was previously mentioned, others with the "right" cam/TB are doing well with the jr.(and are generally on larger ci's 400+).

Maybe you should consult VH5150's experts for the right answer?

Good luck w/the build!

Tony Mamo @ AFR

iTrader: (13)

Your maturity level seems to shine thru with every post....impressive.

The Vic Jr LS1 intake is not a very effective piece IMO....besides the obvious shorter intake runners there really isnt very much trick about it. An LS1 is very similar to a SBF in alot of respects concerning port relationships (sorry guys....its true). You want to see a bad *** single plane intake for a Ford SBF that an LS1 intake could practically be copied from, check out the Parker Funnelweb intake.

http://parkerracing.com.au/funnelweb.html

Its bad to the bone and is very effective on the dyno and out in the field (the two go hand in hand about 99.9% of the time). Its tall, has ample runner cross section to be very effective at high RPM, a clover leaf plenum to remove some of the dead air space (in a carb application), extended runners for more TQ.....its just a well designed intake manifold.

Also, If you decided to use the search feature to investigate some of my other comments concerning this intake you will see that the main problem with it for most of the crowd reading these threads is packaging....meaning that without a fairly abrupt 90' elbow, you wont fit the intake under the hood unless you run a 4" cowl etc. The air rushing foward doesnt like making an abrupt 180" turn to feed the front bank of cylinders and makes the intake that much less effective at the RPM level your jumping up and down saying how well it will work. Plus the intake runners are too small and have absolutely zero taper which is always preferred (ask your engine buddies uncle's nephew about intake runner taper).

Lastly, a properly ported FAST is a pretty impressive piece all things considered....helps the engine generate a fair amount of low end TQ, great midrange grunt, and the right package can still shine even in the 7000-7300 range.

Note the engine dyno results attached below of my 383 CID 11 to 1 solid roller engine. And this is with a small solid roller with only a 242 intake lobe. With another 10 more degrees at .050 the top end charge of this combination would have looked even better.



Next time try to peddle your thoughts and ideas on their own merit....not by trying to pick out some of the more respected members on this board. Or better yet, have your friends Uncle post himself and try growing up a little.

By the way, this post is for the benefit of others reading this trying to get a better handle on things....not to try and sway you and all your experts.

Tony M.

SVC707

iTrader: (33)

my opinion to the original poster being i had/have both. for a non FI car go with the FAST 90. my 408 longblock was built for FI and so was the cam, and this setup loves the gmpp carb style manifold. idles and runs much smoother than the FAST90. but take that for what it is.
as they say you will lose tq down low with the carb style manifold, but for me having 460tq at 3000rpms is still too much tq

VH5150

Well I guess the only way to find out for sure is to take the car or car's to the track... MPH is power, not what some stupid dyno sheet says....

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

Tony has a full and I mean full weight C5. What is it Tony, like 3600lbs with the stereo gear? And it ran an impressive number at the track 11 @ 128.6 MPH. That seems like pretty decent power to me with an IRS. Link here.

VH5150

Yep nice car for sure... But my 346ci a4, ls6 head, c5 ran 11@122 so whats youre point... oh wait im just some dumb backyard ls1 person....

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

My point is, you'll need to make up nearly 7mph if you are comparing similar DA conditions if your car is as heavy (plus it's an A4, so that helps in the Quarter and it being a 383 vs 346 actually doesn't help). So, the faster you go, the more power it takes to go faster and faster. It's like Einstein was right or something... Not to mention aerodynamic drag affects even the sleek C5 above 100 MPH.

VH5150

If I had a 383 it would be in the 10's without a question, with alot LESS dyno time.. If any at all....

Also, my 346 was setup for the juice and not NA... fwiw

ls1408cp

iTrader: (37)

every intake has its place. I had goodluck with a ported victor jr... I switched to a beck sheetmetal just to try it.

PowerShift408

iTrader: (44)

MPH = Horsepower, I mean you said it.

So you're down 7 mph... Good argument.

VH5150

Correct.... 346 vs 383.. well I would hope a 383 would mph more than my setup... yep 7 mph less w/ a nitrous tune, 1 7/8th headers, big 3in exhaust, 4500rpm stall, heads ported for nitrous, ect.... shall I go on???

Why dont you ask what I have before you make a stupid comment....

Galen

iTrader: (3)

So, with headers designed for top end, exhaust designed for top end and heads ported for nitrous???(would REALLY like an explanation on this one), you still argue that your mph isn't where it would be if you had parts designed for more top end? Hell, the tune is the only thing that made any sense. Yea, I am following your logic now! I don't know what you have...and don't really want to know. I do, however Mr Scarecrow, know what you don't have. Maybe the Great Wizard of Oz will hook you up with one.

Cam02ss

iTrader: (8)

What is the better option for motors that are going to be sprayed with large N20 shots? I currently have the VJ intake and NW 90 TB on my 408 and previously had the FAST 90/90 on my H/C LS1. I was told to expect some loss NA but once the car is sprayed the VJ will be a much better choice. Kinda in the same boat...dunno whether or not to stay with the VJ.

JakeFusion

iTrader: (7)

I hate to say this, but 383s aren't worth jack over 346s. I know, I have one. They are worth maybe 30ft-lbs under the curve, but above 5500, they are really close. The 3.9" bore of the 383 is what hurts it up top.

Ron@Vengeance

iTrader: (51)

FINALLY!!!! We are getting somewhere in this conversation

Tony, I wish I were as politically correct as you in this thread... I simply dont take personal attacks from children very well

ONEBADWS6

iTrader: (22)

under 400 cubes and as a mild strret setup stay with the Fast 90. My 402 is by no means mild (14.5-1 compression, 258/262 on 110 cam, 280 cranking compression). With the Fast I cut a 1.33 60ft as a best and best mph of 133. With the Vic I cut a 1.29 and trapped at 137, and thats HP-HP runs. I know it works for me. Will it work for otheres? If your setup is agressive enough yes. Otherwise you will be slower with the Vic. As for FI setups the vic jr will win every time. I agree with Tony, the out of the box Vic sucks. The runners are like straws and have no taper. When I opened my stock Fast all I could think was what a piece of junk and I can't believe I payed $800 for this. 5+ hours of porting I had a very nice intake. But after 5 hours of porting, the Vic jr flowed more. This is just my experiance take it for what it is worth.

sciff5

iTrader: (1)

Yes my RW will be light.. approx 2600-2700lbs. So dry weight the car should be around 2400lbs. The traction issues wont be fixed in this car.. to really fix those issues would take me goign to a solid rear axle (I would go with a 4link most likely) and I dont really want to do that in the RX7.. which kinda beggs the question why add more power without fixing the traction issue. Well one because I love the beautiful handling of the rx7 and we have some great mountain roads that I tear up on occasion also the car sees the streets alot.. and the races it encounters go on longer than a quarter mile most of the time. So although the launch is important top end is really where I need the power. The car will be sprayed with around a 150 shot so I dont know if that sways the decision at all but I hear the carb style nitrous plates are really good to use with the Vic Jr. Again looking at the prices though... it doesnt seem to make much of a difference which intake I go with I'll be paying the same. So whatever wins me the races from 0-150 or 40-150 thats what I'll be looking for. I am stuck with 4.10s regardless so they arent the best high speed gears but... I'll get over it

The reason I am not more straight forward with the purpose of this car is because taking things to the street is generally looked down appon in this forum.

DiabloFormula

iTrader: (58)

Has anyone figured out what cam to run with the Victor Jr. yet?

PowerShift408

iTrader: (44)

This is what happens when you know you're wrong. You go to personal insults and excuses.

How in the hell do you port heads for nitrous? Maybe you can enlighten Tony...

Ron@Vengeance

iTrader: (51)

Actually, not defending anyone here, but when spraying heavy hits of nitrous valve sizes play a major role. Along with that the exhaust port can be massaged for more of a nitrous friendly flow.... TEA has been doing this for years as Im sure Tony has.