Victor Jr vs Holley Strip Dominator - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Engine
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2004, 05:00 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Illinois
Age: 40
Posts: 105
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Victor Jr vs Holley Strip Dominator

Finally got my Chevelle to the dragstrip with my 408 BBC. It ran 12.85 @104mph on a slippery track. I'm hoping I can get it down around 12.4 on a good track with a few tweaks. Right now I'm running a Holley Strip Dominator intake as that's what came with the engine when I bought it. The Holley Strip Dominator powerband is rated between 4500-8500rpm and I was thinking about switching to an Edelbrock Victor Jr as it is rated between 3500-7500rpm. I was shifting at 6500rpm but I'll probably bump that up to around 6800 once I get it dialed in better. Here's my question: Do any of you guys have any experience with these intakes? and do you think it would be worth the money to switch to the Victor Jr. for the slightly lower powerband. I considered an Edlebrock Performer RPM but didn't know how that would react with the rest of my combo.

Specs:
9.5:1 CR
750 Mighty Demon
ported GM rect port heads
solid roller cam 248/254 dur @ 0.050
3600 stall
4:10 gear
MT ET Drag slicks

Also feel free to give me any feedback on the combo. Be advised this is a street/strip car. Thanks.

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2004, 06:31 PM
DoubleVision's Avatar
Not Considered a Senior Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Heart Of Dixie
Age: 40
Posts: 10,654
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 15
Thanked 58 Times in 55 Posts
Why not try the Edelbrock Torker II? it has longer narrow runners, and it`s power band is 2500 - 6500. if you needed a little more upper RPM breathing room with this intake, just add a 1 inch open carb spacer. this intake would likely give you a better hole shot, and it wouldn`t run out of breath in the upper rpm band when you shift.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2004, 07:55 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Illinois
Age: 40
Posts: 105
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quoted from the Edelbrock webpage:
Torker II 2-O (2500-6500 RPM)
"Designed for street 396-502 c.i.d. Chevy V8s with large oval-port cylinder heads (1975 & earlier)....."

I'm running rectangular port heads so the Torker II would not be a good choice unless they make a rect port version.

I didn't mention it on my first post but the Holley Strip Dominator places my air cleaner too high to fit under my hood even with a drop cleaner base and low profile air cleaner. I'm sol on the factory hood with this intake. I figure an intake will be cheaper than a new hood and paint. Plus I'd like to find an intake that will fit my application better. Any more ideas?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2004, 08:36 PM
DoubleVision's Avatar
Not Considered a Senior Member
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Heart Of Dixie
Age: 40
Posts: 10,654
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 15
Thanked 58 Times in 55 Posts
I didn`t notice you were running rec ports, my mistake.
How about a Weiand Xcellerator, avalible for rec port heads, RPM band 2000-6500. WND - 7513, summit carries it for $169.95
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2004, 09:02 PM
WV hillbilly
 

Last journal entry: PTL 220CC
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: WV
Age: 39
Posts: 784
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
its hard to beat your current intake, I had a 402 BBC in a 67 ss impala (heavy 4080lbs with out driver) the comp cams XE 274 3.73:1 rear gear and a B&M 3200 stall that ran 8.30's in the 1/8 N/a with 26x10 McCreary rear tires...the carb I used was a DP holley 800 CFM with 50cc secondary pump, all with the intake you have...bone stock standard bore bottom end with the good oval ports but still oval...

That intake produced (even though it was a single plane) gobbs of torque, and If I had it to do all over again I would have went with the 284 XE grind, the problem I had with the 402 is that on the passenger side, the 402 liked to eat the back two lifters...and what eventualy lead me to pull the 402 and drop the original 427 back in there and ofcourse I then sold it...

if you can keep those back two lifters in there the 402 is pretty awsome...2wld4
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2004, 09:17 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Illinois
Age: 40
Posts: 105
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
What was the problem with the back two lifters? I'm assuming there was insufficient oil flow? Your 427 didn't have the same problem? I thought the only real difference between a 402 and a 427 was the bore size. Both internally balanced with same stroke.

What was your 60'? I could only manage 1.88 last weekend. It was a pretty chilly night and a lot of folks were having problems with traction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2004, 10:53 PM
WV hillbilly
 

Last journal entry: PTL 220CC
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: WV
Age: 39
Posts: 784
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 1
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
well lets just say I know 402's and this is something to be aware of....

the 396 and the 402 are simular, the 427 and the 454 are simular...the 427 had problems with the cam bearings flaking...now Im talking race motors here, the original 427 that came with the 67 was untouched, I just pulled it out to play with the imp some...and thats when I started messing with the 402's...

the first 402 I had in thier had the exact same problems, and eventualy cost me the entire longblock with some nitrous...

the second and last 402 I had in their I had line honed and used main studs and it was a real screamer, but also had the lifter problems, I could have maybe fixed it but I would have had the lifter bores honed and bushed and at the time I couldnt justify the cost...so I rebuilt it and sent it out to the Mud bogs for some final flogging...

Im not sure if all 402's are of this nature but I know of a couple more around here with the same problems...but like I said earlier they are very surprising when they are running right....2wld4u



my 60, was a laughable 2.0 the 67's suspension wasnt the best....









Quote:
Originally posted by 68chevelle_ss
What was the problem with the back two lifters? I'm assuming there was insufficient oil flow? Your 427 didn't have the same problem? I thought the only real difference between a 402 and a 427 was the bore size. Both internally balanced with same stroke.

What was your 60'? I could only manage 1.88 last weekend. It was a pretty chilly night and a lot of folks were having problems with traction.
well, let me tell you a lil more, I used Erson roller rockers and comps full boogie push rods as well, honestly, the heads were untouched other than eye browing the top and sides of the chambers to help unshroud the valves...

I turned more RPM than youd think by using an old pro stock trick, with the hdy lifters...maybe you know this?

anyways, I could have bettered the time easily but the 67 was pristene and I didnt want to mess with it much...it was an original 67 ss impala 427! pretty hard to find now days I gather,
and lined up beside a nova, the impala looked like a giant, most of the time when I launched the hood was as high as the other guy's roof line...lol and no it didnt pull the wheels, maybe slightly with nitrous a time or two but I never ran it at the track with nitrous, no need...it got plenty of attention with the little 402...

this was a show car that my father bought and he lend it to me for some giganic fun...I did have some great fun out of that car...

so thats the whole story behind the 67, and the 402's that I played with...now I have a 10 sec 72 chevelle...lol with a solid roller............................. 355 yep a measly 350 .030 over...but its a bottle baby

hey! good luck!

Last edited by 2wld4u; 05-13-2004 at 10:53 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Engine posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.