JUST HOW GOOD IS MY FACTORY, JUNKYARD INTAKE MANIFOLD? SHOULD I UPGRADE? CARB VS EFI INTAKE TEST!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ก.พ. 2022
- IS A STOCK INTAKE BETTER THAN AN AFTER MARKET DUAL PLANE INTAKE? HOW GOOD IS A STOCK, CAST-IRON, DUAL PLANE INTAKE? CAN A STOCK INTAKE MAKE MORE LOW-SPEED TORQUE THAN AN AFTER MARKET ALUMINUM INTAKE? IS A WEIAND INTAKE A GOOD UPGRADE FOR MY 460 FORD? HOW TO UPGRADE YOUR BIG BLOCK FORD! HOW TO UPGRADE YOUR 350 CHEVY? WILL A DUAL-PLANE LS INTAKE MAKE MORE LOW-SPEED TORQUE THAN A FACTORY EFI TRUCK INTAKE? CHECK OUT THIS VIDEO WHERE I COMPARED TWO FACTORY, CAST-IRON INTAKES TO ALUMINUM INTAKE UPGRADES ON A 460 FORD AND 350 CHEVY. I THEN COMPARED A DUAL-PLANE EDELBROCK (CARB) INTAKE TO A FACTORY, LONG-RUNNER, EFI TRUCK INTAKE? WHICH ONE MAKES MORE LOW-SPEED TORQUE?
- ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
Yay, old school stuff. God, I'm tired of turbos, V6s, and LSes. I don't care how well they work.
I'd like to see a 390 fe Ford build thats for sure a other guys motor super good motors
Good content Richard you wouldn't think that the standard inlets were as good as they . No use in throwing them away. Always awesome content 👍💯
I find this quite interesting... I've run BBF for few decades now, always with RV range cams, and found absolutely no loss on bottom end with the Stealth intake. But, I never ran a stock cam, either. I have went too big on heads where I needed to run a smaller intake (Performer) in order to bring low end torque back, but with proper heads, the Stealth always held excellent low-end torque.
Pulled the weiand off the F250 mild 10.0/1 motor for the stock intake and yes more torque.
Should have tried adding a 1" 4-hole spacer under the carb on the aluminum intakes. The cast iron intakes have it built in plus somewhat smaller runners probably account for just about all of the low torque gain over the open aluminums. Larger runners in the aluminums and higher rise account for the extra top end HP. I would think anything bigger than the stock cams would have made the HP difference more pronounced as the rpm goes up.
Love it!! For grins and giggles, try an Edelbrock intake for a full comparison since the Holley and Edelbrock products are more common
Good video, like these dual plane intake tests on the SBC and LS engines. A test on the Edelbrock Performer EPS with and without spacer would be nice. For mild street cars and 4wd pickups and jeeps they seem to work very well.
I was just asking myself this question because of a build I will be doing. Perfect timing. 👍
Thank you for this comparison. Being a long time muscle car guy, there’s certain, “laws,” that get ingrained as gospel that go right out the window when you buy an rv. Seeing these tests and knowing my personal desire is to keep rpm’s as low as possible for the sake of fuel economy is going to save some money keeping the factory stuff.
thanks for running tests like this. I have an OEM intake my former boss gave me when he hot rodded his son's 1979 Z28, sitting amidst my Q jets (i remember when these were $5 if on the ground at a swap meet, $10 if they were on the folding table. now they are "restoration" pieces) and today I nabbed a complete "cease fire" intake setup from an 84 Corvette--ECM, bolts, everything for $100--which would make a nice DZ301 look for one of the 4 bolt 350's i've got lying around. The thing to consider when replacing stock with aftermarket is that your engine is a system--the engineers spent millions to get it to work together, so if you come along and change one thing that's meant to feed 262-400 cid, you might not get the results you wanted.
LOL been years since I last heard about the "cease fire " injection from GM. It was a fitting nickname back then!
@@robertwest3093 it was--and i've nabbed a second one for $100 at an estate sale. two ladies clearing out their "ex brother in law" house, they want to get it on the market since its hot right now, and apparently he was a camaro guy--passed on a complete first gen camaro interior, just got the twin throttle body setup and a complete trunk pan for another $100. Its amazing what folks are letting go just to get a house on the market. Now interest rates'll go up and cool that off.
I figure i'll play with one and sell the other--restorers seem to be paying $800 right now.
Back in the day Mopar used to spend millions testing different products for performance use and actually sold race manuals through their direct connection program to help the consumer set up the mopars for drag racing and what parts to use and the speeds and et to be expected out of each combination of parts of the drivetrain when combined.
I remember back for like the 340 cid engine with the factory Thermoquad intake and carb that the race manual said that the only dual plane aftermarket intake which offered any performance gain at all over the stock factory cast iron 340 intake was the Edelbrock LD340 manifold which did offer slight performance increases.
Just an example where just buying an aluminum aftermarket manifold does not always result in a performance increase.
I’d love to see a better brand than weiand be used. They’re the dollar general of performance parts.
Other than the bling factor and weight loss, many aftermarket intakes have not lived up to the hype for decades! Thanks to David Vizard and Richard here for putting them to the test! Remember the Streetmaster, SP2P, single plane Street Dominator, and many others that are suspect.
I have an old article written by Vizard. He Made some simple modifications to a GM sbc dual plane manifold and Made some good gains with The modifications. And if You are lucky to have an aluminun original GM manifold in The car You have The weight problem solved. We like to use our pocket more than our brain.
@@reginofung6028 I have seen an article of Vizards where they modify an iron Qjet intake. A fair bit of work but it did well.
I have an original dual plane cast iron quadrajet Chevy Big block intake manifold with The same modifications that Vizard did. However, I haven't tested The manifold yet. In this case it is not a Bad idea to replace it For an aluminun one. The iron manifold it's pretty heavy.
@@reginofung6028 there's also some good factory marine intakes, a cast iron Qjet Vortec marine piece, taller than a typical iron small block factory intake, marine dual plane 460 Ford intake, wow, it was a serious piece!
Unless you're running full blown stupid in a race car, max hp does no good..... you want the bottom end torque for around town and highway.......
Hell, even in a race application, that low end grunt is important unless you're running a loose converter. Can't get to 7,000rpm if you're stuck at 3500 trying to get out of the hole.
This is so true. Every time I hear people complain about OHV motors I laugh. They drive around in a Honda Odyssey Minivan and think the DOHC motor is something special. For 99.9% of street use an OHV motor will perform all tasks the same as an OHC counterpart yet it's lighter, smaller, cheaper and simpler. Ford fanbois cracked me up when the 7.3L came out and they were all shouting FINALLY THE BIG BLOCK IS BACK and with pushrods. Yet for 20 years before that all everyone heard was OHC or nothing! Pushrods are a thing of the past, Ford has moved on! 😂
Circle track quarter mile. Different intake.
My dad's C10 lives between 2-2700 rpms I think for non overdrive cars need the midrange
Good test this was interesting and I'm actually surprised a bit.
all your videos are awesome!
Basically, in these examples, the cost/benefit ratio doesn't justify the aftermarket. Put the money into a better cam, then see if a different manifold wouldn't enhance the cam's performance.
But first, go to the basics & make sure you're getting everything from what you've got already. That's always been the right place to start, and is usually not where people start.
I'd rather have a good cam and springs with a stock intake. And people wonder why my car is fast.
I think the problem is a lot of times we want to use a different set up I have a 350 with a q jet I'm going to a dual plane with spread bore and square drilled
Its all time but it would have been great to test each factory intake with a 1 or 2 inch open or even 4 hole just to show the effect for the real budget minded. Great testing 👍👍
Interesting info on the sbc.
I'd love to see a ported cast iron vs the aftermarket intakes and see if it can compare with the likes of the performer rpm on a small block
Seems impractical to me, unless you're in a class that requires a factory manifold.
extrudehone
Actually I would love to see this. I am big on making power with factory and or factory looking parts.
An old racer buddy of mine who ran Pontiacs used the stock intake all the way up until the Edelbrock Performer RPM intake came out. Now he ran a 455 engine with a hydraulic flat tappet cam, standard style D port heads in a heavy '71 LeMans station wagon. He was super meticulous with his testing. He had separated the front water crossover so he could quickly change intake manifolds at the track to get a real comparison. He never once dyno tested anything but every aftermarket intake he tested against the factory cast iron intake lost E.T. and MPH until the Edelbrock RPM came out. All intakes were port matched and he tested everything conceivable. He used 5500 rpm shift points. I'm sure in other applications this wouldn't be the case but for a Pontiac engine with a hydraulic flat tappet cam and a 5500 rpm redline the factory was hard to beat. The RPM was only about 1/10th better but it was an improvement. The old guy's name is Jim Hand. He has a few videos of his wagon in it's last iteration with a 474 stroker. He unfortunately had a stroke a few years back and has given up racing. But check out his wagon, it was always a killer at the track!
I just took my intake off to plug the heat riser. Someone ported my stock intake before I bought the car.
Ran the 8004 intake on a 327. The ports are slightly bigger than the stock intake. I had to trim the stock gaskets
So basically, if you're pulling stumps in your F-250 with the BBF, the stock intake is probably what you want. More torque, and torque a whole lot sooner. But you sacrifice top end to get it.
Same with the LS, the SBC,stick to the Stock QB intake or go EFI.
But if you want to change gaskets on your factory BBF you may need to phone a friend to help you lift it off the engine. Those suckers weigh a ton.
I actually have used my truck to pull stumps. Dodge Ram diesel. I found that brutal torque was not needed. I was using nylon straps that were stretchy, so all I had to do was accelerate the truck gently with the straps in slack, then the momentum of the truck would rip the stumps out of the ground when the straps tightened up. I was sort of disappointed that I didn't get to use my 940 lb*ft of torque to get the job done, but the momentum method was easier on the truck.
no substitution for momentum-trucks are heavy
Here in the country, eastern Kentucky we use old steel rims!! Just run your chain or strap over the rim and place against the stump and hook it low as possible!! Pulls out so so much easily!!
The qjet intake really shines with a comp cams 268h cam and L98 heads
I'd like to see the factory truck manifolds tested stock versus extrude honed.
I’m surprised how much torque was lost on the big block Ford. But also I think the 2 inch headers were overkill. 1 3/4 or 1 7/8 may bring the torque up again. Small block Chevy again interesting. The LS always seem to better with the truck manifold. Great job as always.
Love that BBF!!
I think a lot of the extra torque comes down to smaller ports and higher velocity into the cylinder head. It creates a ram air effect.
The smaller runners cannot keep up with the higher airflow demands at higher power levels, but they are more efficient at lower rpms.
Basis of Edelbrock's grunter SP2P.
Not always true. Cam is 💜 heart of every engine.
Be cool to see a dual plane on a tq build with a 6.0.....but fuel injection on the dual plane. Do something like a point more compression or so, truck norris cam and this dual plane on a 6.0 lq4 to see if 50lbft could be gained in the 2k-3500 rpm range.
Joe sherman said in most st cars intakes..dont need much. My uncle would take me to cruise nights/st races in the 70s and id see fast cars with the hood popped and a crusty old intake,,,some with a Q jet. No giant single plane...they usually had a hidden Nos system though
the weiand vs. factory 2bbl is a nice gain on the 350
What would happen if you compared stock dual plane manifolds to Edelbrock performer stock replacement manifolds, instead of aluminum hi-rise manifolds?
I've heard the Dodge 360 4bbl intake manifolds flow good
Would like to see him test 1983 4 barrel Ford intake from GT Mustang versus aluminum performance intake
I put a big two-barrel Holley on the stock manifold on the 400m in my 77 ltd and it had LOADS of torque. Granted I'd also corrected the factory retarded timing (necessitating the bigger carburetor) but both I and my uncle who gave me the carburetor were pretty surprised just how much power it had.
Correcting the timing was huge. I did that to the swapped-in 400 in my 78 F-150. I figured that, since the cam is GROUND 8 degrees retarded, I could crutch it with a 9-keyway timing set, installed in the 8 degrees ADVANCED position. Which would, in reality, make the factory cam "straight up". That was my reasoning, right or wrong, and, combined with an ancient SP2P manifold, 600 Holley, and headers, I had a really snappy, torquey truck off the line.
What carb did you use ? Thanks,
No dodges? I would then have to assume the same would apply to stock 340/360 intakes, vs say performer RPM, but a plain perfomer intake would be pretty equal to stock, only lighter? A good informative video anyway!
Great video Richard! It would have been interesting to see if the factory exhaust manifolds made any difference with the factory intakes on the BBF and SBC. It would have been especially interesting on the Ford since you had 2" headers on it. I would think the exhaust manifords would have boosted low speed torque as well. Just my take.
stock manifolds never boost low speed torque compared to long tube headers
It's funny what the factory does on some motors. I have a little old 3.1L GM 60-Degree-V6, with TBI. It is cammed like a smog motor of the 90's, it has vanes in the port floor to boost port velocity and a dual plane manifold. All good things for torque. However GM put the shortest runners I have ever seen. They are maybe an inch to inch-and-a-half long. However, if you look at the port injected motor like the V6 Camaro had then the runners are a foot long!
Given the loss of low end torque observed, does the lighter weight of an ally intake balance it out? Or is the weight loss not enough to compensate?
It's almost like the OEM stuff was designed to do what it was designed to do. Weird
A test I would like to see is a screen under the carb to see if it helps or hurts?
Right on
I really wish they did a test on bbc 😕 to see if it's down on power down low....
I guarantee you if he used an eddy performer he’d have better results
Weiand intakes are upper to top end only
They don’t make low rpm spin
Never have
I would love to see a comparison of the low-rise intake vs high rise intakes. the best example can think of is the old L72/L78 high rise intake #3933163 or 3885069 vs the L78/LS6 low rise intake #3963569 vs an old Edelbrock Tarantula/Torker 2-R #2745 vs Performer vs performer RPM vs Performer RPM Air Gap, on something similar to a LS6 454 or L78 396. I am just interested to know how bad the old low-rise was considering it was on both the 450HP 454, and 375HP 396 when compared to the high rise L78 that was use on the earlier 375hp 396, I have like to see how it stacks up against the old single plane and how the 3 different Performer manifolds stack up against each other.
Look, you have to talk to and listen to the manufacture's Reps and any other really knowledgeable Engine guy you can find.
Everything has to work together. The
heads, the Cam, the manifolds the cards or either system. It's the real world interaction of the TOTAL package of mod parts you use. But once you have everything. right, THEN you can explore super power measures like turbos, dual supercharges and nitrous. Get the basics
Then laboriously tweek everything for the best result in your engine. Itvtakes work and time to tune every stage of induction and ignition. But that's the only way you get the power you really want.
Good for wheel spinning torque.
Would like to know if carb spacers would be of any help on a stock manifold. I am rarely above 4K rpm so any help down low would be noticed right away. Good video!
Depends on the type of manifold and the type of spacer. The general rule is 4 hole for low end torque and open spacer for top end power but keep in mind you shouldn't put an open spacer on a 4 hole intake. I put a cheap one inch tall 4 hole heat resistant phenolic spacer on my stock Qjet dual plane on my 305 in my 84 Trans Am and it woke it up big time! Peak power still happens at about 4K but the 4 hole spacer massively increased low end torque. When installing the spacer I also switched to a 160 degree thermostat, a K&N filter for the stock air cleaner assembly and an Accel coil, cap and rotor for the stock distributor and the car went from 11.50 in the eighth mile to 11.16.
Later I would end up using the exact same type of spacer on my friends truck after swapping it to a Qjet and it had the same effect on his truck as it did on my car giving it way more low end torque. With that spacer both vehicles will absolutely destroy one tire with no help from the brakes.
The cast iron intakes are better than most think. With a bit porting & polishing plus match porting, it does damn good. And they don't warp when taken off hot like aluminum. That 68 460 is great for the street just because of the torque factor. That would just shred the tires off the rims on a 23 bucket roadster. And that's a stock engine. The new Long Runner intake you can't compare fairly because of the electronics involved.
Stocker had 365 HP. No small wonder.
at the 7:00 min mark, I was not ready for that result
I would have liked to have seen a comparison between a dual plane and a true long runner intake like a TPI on a sbc. I've always thought the L98 TPI engine was the best truck engine that never made it into a truck.
Check his playlist he's done some very in-depth testing with TPI as well as other intakes and aftermarket TPI intakes and mods!!
For me it's all about the weight. To lighten the load.
So true. I pulled off the heads, intake and water pump off of my falter-in-law's 396. Its like the front end got a lift kit. 😂 Aluminum replacements went on and you can really feel a change in the way the car drives. Not claiming it "handles" because, well, 66 Chevelle.
I've wondered if the loss in low end is balanced out by the weight loss? Put a weiend intake on my truck but think that may have been detrimental over the stock cast iron. But it was really heavy, so not sure if they balanced out.
Interesting! I did not expect the no-rise intake to do that good. I don't know if it has been done, but how about an aftermarket TBI (like FiTech, Holley, etc...) test on dual plane vs. single plane intake. Since the TBI does not require vacuum across the venturi for fuel metering, would the dual plane still have the low end torque advantage?
the dual design would do better-that is from the design and not signal
How do you like those adjust a jets?
Let's see the stock mani on boost
It's funny how I said this about the advantages of a dual plane in the "big buck vs low buck" magnum video comments and people tried to tell me I was dumb for it.
Personally I blame squirrels
🐿️🐿️
🐿🐿
Squirrels put there nuts in my BBF factory intake 😮💨
@@waynereid9881 stand clear of the exhaust pipe on start-up, lol
Correct me if I'm wrong, but has anyone tested carb vs EFI on the same intake? I'd like to see a Holley carb vs Holley Sniper (or whatever the higher end TBI unit they sell is called) on the same dual plane or single plane intake. I know many platforms have tried to convince the carb lovers that it's the cooling properties of introducing the fuel higher up the intake tract that makes the power, not the fact it is carbed. A back to back on the same intake seems to be the only way they will see the light lol.
I have run carb vs port efi on the same intake-not a TBI vs carb though
@@richardholdener1727 Do it ! 😁
@@richardholdener1727 I would love to see this test, as I am thinking of running TBI on a mud truck
This is actually great, I have the aluminum version of that SBC iron intake in your test and I was wondering how it would stack up to the basic aftermarket stuff.
Would you ever do a test like this, but testing various exhaust manifolds? I know headers are better but there are guys who want to run iron manifolds for different reasons. It would be nice to see a comparison between a few to see how they stack up against a basic street header... like for a SBC you could test the truck manifolds, the L98 log manifolds, the Gen 2 LT1 manifolds, and the ram horn manifolds, see which ones work and which don't and how they compare to a basic street header? I'd love to see that test
If they differed by 5 hp I would be surprised-but it needs to be tested to be sure
@@richardholdener1727 I'd be really interested to see how they compare to a set of street headers... I see alot of circle track guys argue about these manifolds with no data, so it would be nice to see real data. I keep hearing the LT1 are either great or horrible, ad that the ram horns are as good as a shorty header... would be interesting to see what actually is true
@@richardholdener1727 that argument, plus your intake manifold video, made me really wonder about them cuz I'd love to use a set of cast manifolds in my own car and just not deal with the headaches of headers, but only if they won't completely strangle the motor. To see if headers really are a necessity for a street build.
Hope you see this Richard, have you compared any GM aluminum intakes?
Do you know what difference if any between the CFM intakes( SOME I've seen are CFM 8, CFM 14, CFM 44)
don't know what a cfm intake is
Factory manifolds doing what they were designed to do. 👍🏻
Weird question, would the aluminum carbureted intakes that have coolant flowing through them dissipate more heat into the engine bay than a comparable cast iron? And if so, what is the impact on IAT?
you are worried that aluminum intakes put more heat into the engine bay?
Dude is to fun for us
Interesting.
That 6-liter, now...I notice it made its peak power at or below around 6700RPM. Would tri-Y headers maybe have been a better match than 4-into-1s for that rev range? We often hear about how 6500-6700 is the zone below which tri-Ys are better and above which 4-into-1s are better for torque production. I wonder what the results would have been on that engine?
that is not accurate-Nascar motor run Tri-Y header designs at 9000+ rpm-both designs can be tailored to work in the desired rpm range
you confirm what i felt when i put the aluminium manifold: original cast iron is better for burnouts :(
fuck
Weiand stocks just dipped like their torque curves
I'd like to see port matched stock intake manifold and port matched and polished stock exhaust manifold against aftermarket intake and exhaust.
IT don't matter what you do to a stock exhaust it will never work as good as a long tube header!
port matching the exhaust does almost nothing and long tubes are way better, I doubt you see much from port matching the intake either-the difference in power between the intakes is design and not port match
I have a stock 302, what would be good options for 4 barrel dual plane intakes? I have seen a few on marketplace for decent price, but also seen some cheapo chinesium intakes for the same price. My budget is $100-$200. What's your recommendation? I'm eventually going to put a small cam in it since I have GT40P heads on it.
lots of good choices
The test results may be skewed a bit by using one of the lamest factory EFI intakes, the original truck cathedral port. On the 6.0, a trail blazer TBSS or a Dorman LS2 might show better against the Edelbrock dual plane, even down low. The Edelbrock already lost out in mid- and high-rpm performance.
none of the factory intakes made more low speed torque than the truck-the lowest performing factory ls intake was the LS1
Sure The factory was looking for low end. AND drivability. Advantage below 4k rpm would be great for 95% of driving.
- but I realize a lot of people like the extra when they put their foot in it.
Another great video! Thanks again for trying to pound some common sense into all the morons out there 😜😜😜😜! BTW what’s the best 🙄🙄🙄🙄🤬🤬🤬🤬 for my junkyard race engine??? 🤪🤪🤪🤪 Also you did a great job with the animation on the video around the 8min25 mark! Because everyone knows you would never burn off tires! Especially the cheapest ones made 😜😜😜😜! Just being a ball 🏀 🏀buster! Have a great weekend!
What did we learn,the stock chev had electric water pump
The Boss 302 and Boss 351 intakes were exceptional for 69-70 and 71. Same with the factory 4bbl Qjet 429 and the SCJ429. After that, Ford pleased no consted to EPA edicts, and lost interest in great 4bbl intakes, even the 83-85's. So for a 5.0 HO, any of the Port EFi intakes from 1986 to 2001 trounce any 1983-1985 4 barrel 5.0 carb intake. For Ford's emissions era 370, 429 and 460 Big blocks, all the 4bbls had potential.
Clevo 4bbl [and 2bbls] used the same intake runners. Here in Oz with no real speed eqip available in the early 70s it was machine the top of the manifold and bolt on a 4 bbl flange. Fords, Mopar LA and even Chevs. Use a Performer for far better low end and mid range. And economy!
Boss 302s were a horrid engine, those humungous no air speed heads and that intake??? Ok over about 5000 rpm though all the Boss clones I know use [in Oz] 302C heads with smaller intake manifolds. And are then driveable.
The 429 460 as is proven as a torque monster to tow around a 2 ton tank.
please see the Boss 302 vs DZ302 test to see how the Boss really did in low speed torque
@@richardholdener1727 boss is boss in that.
Those results were unexpected. Now I'm wondering how an old school tunnel ram would compare to an EFI intake?
no!
having run tunnel rams vs dual and single planes on big and small blocks, they don't have the low speed torque of the dual plane but were better than single plane everywhere and made more low speed the single plane
I would like to see more propane content. Lots of off roaders run propane and are very interested in low end power. There's lots of myths about what manifold to use with a propane carburetor. I think the most confusion is gasoline enters as a mist and propane is a vapor. I still think carburetor signal is important.
Called LPG here in Oz and most use a normal carb. Holleys are best as they do not melt or bend. Not really viable though as the quality varies so much and being very dry kills valve seats and bores.
I call it BBQ fuel as it BBQs the engines.
I'm sure RH is open for monetary donations
Would love to see the scientific explanation why the factory cast irons do so well at the low end
dual plane, small ports
Or you could just cut up your factory intake. Port it. Then put it in an oven and weld it. . . . .
460 truck 4 barrel manifolds are a higher rise design than the passenger manifolds. Have you ever tried this manifold to see the results?
no sir
Surprised by truck vs dual plane result. Whatre the port length differences?
I agree. You would think the truck would have the longest ports and highest low speed torque. Maybe they aren't as long as we assumbe they are.
Have you tested a Edelbrock Streetmaster intake vs a modern dual plane like an Edelbrock performer? I have a streetmaster on my 351m that was installed by original owner 45 years ago. When I rebuild to a 400 with decent heads and a hyd roller is it worth changing? What about for sniper 2 EFI?
there are better intake designs, but not sure what is currently avail for the 351/400M
@@richardholdener1727 Edelbrock performer or weiand dual plane for 351m/400. For those of us that have a streetmaster would be interesting to see a test showing what you give up on a mild motor like most of us are building
Can Chevy factory quadrajet intake works with big cam
yes
How about the 300 six efi intake compared to a short runner stock or aftermarket?
I WILL
I still have 2-300's on engine stands....
Right where you drive and use your engine the most idle to 3000……… stock is best. Usually is for the most part.
Did they make 460s in 1968, I thought they were 429 Thunderjet?
The 461 was used in 1966 in 1967 the Lincoln was switched to 460 and the Thunder bird had 429.
On the SBC , if you had used a EGR cast intake, it would have been about
10-15 Hp better..
not that it really matters lol but they are a little better 🤷🏻♂️
egr cast?
@@richardholdener1727 Yer, I've got an Iron EGR manifold on a Boat and an Aluminium EGR stocker on a pickup, drilled and tapped the joining EGR passage though.
Interesting on the EGR intakes. Being that the aftermarket dual planes lose a little low end, I'm wondering if an older design dual plane with smaller runners would equal the stock one down low while being a little better up top on a very mild combo like these? Heck, how bout a test of the original Torker, Xcelerator, Street Dominator on a small block in the 300hp then on a 400+hp range combo? I'd love to see it!
@@richardholdener1727 yep
EGR cast. They came on the later model cars . The Plenum is a little bigger where they drill the hole through the intake it has a big Allen head plug in both sides and a triangle place on the right side that you have to plug or cover up . We use those intakes in a dirt track class where the engine has to be bone stock! 🤦🏻♂️
Divided Dual Plane separates cylinders by 180 degrees reducing plenum dilution/pollution from valve overlap at low speed. that gives a more homogenous and more equal cylinder fill, especially on the side by side cylinders that fire 90 degrees apart i.e. 5 and 7 on a SBC. Got all my old DP's hanging on the wall.
only if the dual plane has a sealed divider-many dual planes have cut dividers (like the air gap)
Need a LS dual plane with fuel injection bosses .
sb chevy ls with cam no fair
Would carby spacers make the difference disappear?
not between these two
More cars have been ruined by edelbrock and aluminum intakes than anything else.
Carb linkage
Ac brackets
Cruise control
Heat sink fuel evaporation
Hood dents
Crappy open air cleaners
Chokes eliminated
On and on and on.
This test just tells ME that Weiand intakes aren't worth the money and effort, unless you're switching from a 2bl.
Why not show the LS from idle for a fair truck comparison?
IDLE? AT WOT?
@@richardholdener1727 idle from 800-1000 Rpm for the start of the pull.
The stock intake picks up horsepower and torque with an open 1 inch or 2 inch spacer you should know this by now , and an edlebrock performer is hard to beat on a stock motor, third the stealth intake is my favorite but not on a stock application and from a 750 carburetor to an 850 is worth about 50 horsepower gain believe it or not
750-850 carb=50 hp gain (no sir)
Not
Velocity for torque.
nothing you sliped a ls in to it
Come on man! Weiand 8004? :D
it's what we had
Would really appreciate if you could do this test with an Edelbrock Air-Gap intake for the 350 and Richard Holdener!!??
350 SBC!!
Just curious. How would the factory cast iron intake react to a spacer plate. I have a 283 sbc that's been rebuilt and is basically stock with a 0.30 overbore and some kind of rv cam with a factory 4 barrel intake. Since it's already out I want blow it apart and check everything out and reuse all I can. I don't know the exact casting number of the heads, but I know for sure they are the double hump fulie heads. Before I tear it down I will check the compression ratio and while the heads and intake are off use a grinder to port match both and do a little blending and polishing but not much if any porting. I don't have a flow bench to check my work to match the runners so I'll keep it simple and just smooth them out and get rid of casting flash. I will go over the block as well and do the same thing to the oil passages and drain back holes. I am going to ditch the cam that's in it to retrofit a hydraulic roller cam and roller lifters and rockers. Getting back to the intake. The holes are too small for a holley or eldebrok carb so to keep costs down I am going to use a spacer plate to adapt the carb to the stock intake.
What I'm not sure about is if I should go with a 1 inch or 2 inch or thicker adapter and how much difference it'll make. I have a 93 Chevy halfton work truck with a 4.3 v 6. Not trying to make a racer by no means just a solid daily driver with a little more umpth. Depending on the compression ratio I might even get a turbo and intercooler from a diesel 6.6 duramax, and run 4-8psi of boost. Has to run on 93 pump gas so the compression ratio will be the deciding factor of that. So far all I need to buy is the master gasket kit, carb spacer, 650 holley, cam kit and rockers. That will cost about 1000 bucks give or take. That's why I want reuse the factory intake. If it gets very much more expensive than that I'd be better off selling the 283 and get a 5.3 from the junkyard and put the truck Norris cam in and spend the rest of the money on the holley stand alone controller like you use in dyno room.
Run that 283! At least for awhile. Not enough of them done nowadays. Sure LS motors are awesome but everyone's running them. It probably wouldn't have much compression with the 64cc heads (or will they be milled? I'd also have the block decked, maybe not quite zero to save it for the future) So a turbo setup would he awesome!
Fuellies on a 283 will give less compression.
Even a 307 as you cannot use big valve ones. Or larger chambers. Even 1.94 valves with decent lift will need the cylinder to be notched,, very carefully. 3 7/8 bore engines are not [in this day and age] performers.
The cost of rebuilding those old heads is not worth th e effort. So many better flowing heads around these days. Though many require the valves to be lapped and springs checked before you use them.
@@ldnwholesale8552. Partly true about larger valves fitting on the 3.875"-3.935" bores. 2.02" valves are no problem AT ALL, have checked them and unless there's some crazy core shift, they won't hit with room to spare. (But some more shrouding vs a 4.0" bore.) So 1.94s are an obvious yes. Carefully notching the bore isn't so the valve won't hit it but to give some unshrouding. Same if using heads made for a 4.00" bore, the chambers overhang the bores on the exhaust side (or intake, it's been awhile) on 283/307 bores. You don't have to, but notching the bores on that side will help overall flow. The 2.02" valve did hit the bore, the wall of the bore, at somewhere around .720" lift on mock up! Lol. It's the 305s much smaller bore where you run into clearance issues with big valves.
that ls not the same
Not a 460, it is a 473 now.
no sb chevy not a ls