Victor Jr. Intake under GT 350 hood 66 Mustang?

Fits just fine under my GT 350 hood.

I would think it would fit with a lower profile air cleaner.

Are you trying to run a 9k rpm 289? The Performer RPM made much better overall power on the new 351 I am doing for my mach 1, I would think the Victor would be way too much manifold for a 289.

Just my 2 cents

a vic jr with high flow heads would do power to 7200, which is perfect for a 289 (at least a built one)

I have a Vic Jr on my 347, with a stock hood, a 3" air filter with a drop base.

It will fit fine with a drop base air cleaner, that is what I had on my 65.

I know one member who has a Vic Jr under a Shelby type hood scoop in a 65' Mustang with a 393w . . . . . . .

dennis112 said:

I know one member who has a Vic Jr under a Shelby type hood scoop in a 65' Mustang with a 393w . . . . . . .

Click to expand...

i'm calling BS on this. does he run an air cleaner? I have a 351W in my 66 with custom motor mounts that drop the engine even lower than the early style mounts, and an edelbrock rpm air gap with 4160. I needed a 2.5" cowl hood to fit a drop base air cleaner on it.

mrmustangman357 said:

i'm calling BS on this. does he run an air cleaner? I have a 351W in my 66 with custom motor mounts that drop the engine even lower than the early style mounts, and an edelbrock rpm air gap with 4160. I needed a 2.5" cowl hood to fit a drop base air cleaner on it.

Click to expand...

Call it what you want, as I am the owner of that particular 393w car and I have had it this way for years. It is all in using the right combination. I use the 65' mounts, a Holley HP chokeless carb, a modified 14" drop air cleaner, and I angle milled .300 off the front of the carb pad of the Vic Jr, leaving the rear of the pad as close to the factory height as possible (which has the same rear height as the Stealth from the factory.) The car still uses the stock tubular crossmember and Mustang suspension and the hood is not raised at the cowl or the front of the car.

It is in my street car and it runs mid-to-low 11's at the track with the 14" air cleaner installed (with a standard 2 7/8" tall filter.) All that is in my Shelby hood is my fancy 3 prong wing nut. If I wanted, I could remove the tri-bar wing nut (actually it isn't really in the open, but would be close) and use a regular nut and EASILY put the whole thing under a stock Mustang hood. I also run about 1/4" of gaskets and an aluminum spacer under my carb to cut down on the heat.

No BS.

A few pics:















This pic shows the aluminum spacer under the carb. I recently changed my fuel system to be electric and use a fuel log instead of the mechanical pump shown in the other pics.











Here is my 11.27@122.88 NA run last weekend, again using the above pictured 14" air cleaner (which is the same exact combo that I use on the street.) I simply bolt on the slicks, drop the turbo mufflers, and go racing:




I rest my case.



I can see how the Air gap could have problems since its rear is taller than the Vic Jr. On the other hand, my angle milling job would have also raised the rear, according to the Edelbrock measurement technique. My Vic Jr's closest points to the hood are on the front, about 6" or so to the left and the right. Even there I have about 3/8" of clearance. The only time I have hit the hood was last year at the drags when I launched and the torque of the engine bent the metal part of the driver's side rubber part of the motor mount out of shape. This year I've added a torque strap to help keep the motor in place.

I think Mr. Mustang was kidding you. Thanks for the pics anyway. Your ride is nice.

CraigMBA said:

I think Mr. Mustang was kidding you. Thanks for the pics anyway. Your ride is nice.

Click to expand...

Thanks Craig.

Yes, I agree he was more than likely kidding and I realized that when I re-read his post after making mine. I missed the smiley the first time. Sorry MrMustang if I came on too strong--my post was really meant to inform and not to offend. I guess sometimes I get overly proud of my accomplishment . . . . . . .