455 Intake Manifold comparison
January 21st, 2012, 04:07 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,888
455 Intake Manifold comparison
Hi Everyone,
This may be a bit premature but in the next few weeks I will be finishing a build on a 455. I'm looking for feedback/ideas. The owner has given me his blessing to allow me to spend a little more time on the dyno. Here's the build;
Ga Heads 2.07/1.68, crossovers filled, divider welded, very minor bowl work
.040 over Icon IC886 pistons, .005 in the hole
Eagle H beam rods
N crank
Erson Hyd Roller (what else
) Adv. 288/294, 230/234 @ .050, 110 lobe sep, lift .584/.568
Full roller rockers 1.6
New Quick Fuel 750 Vac secondary
HEI
1 3/4 Flowtech Headers
O.K. here's the fun part. It will be broken in on the dyno with a stock Performer intake. I have already purchased a new RPM Air-Gap for comparison as well. The test will be done back to back using the same carb etc. Both manifolds with have the center divider cut down the same amount. Time permitting we will make multiple pulls, each manifold with and without a 4 hole tapered spacer and with and without an open spacer. Both are 1".
Also if time permits I have a Holley SD single plane as well. I'd like to compare that one too but we'll have to see how it goes.
I've already put the Performer and RPM side by side, I'll reserve my findings but for the record based on those findings, I expect the RPM to equal or maybe even outperform the standard Performer, even at lower rpms, but we'll just see.
Unfortunately I don't have another size carb available right now but I'm working on it, maybe something will come up before dyno day. I've already contacted my guy at Edelbrock, they're interested in the results as well.
I'll keep you posted, we'll just have to wait a few weeks!
Thanks!
This may be a bit premature but in the next few weeks I will be finishing a build on a 455. I'm looking for feedback/ideas. The owner has given me his blessing to allow me to spend a little more time on the dyno. Here's the build;
Ga Heads 2.07/1.68, crossovers filled, divider welded, very minor bowl work
.040 over Icon IC886 pistons, .005 in the hole
Eagle H beam rods
N crank
Erson Hyd Roller (what else
) Adv. 288/294, 230/234 @ .050, 110 lobe sep, lift .584/.568Full roller rockers 1.6
New Quick Fuel 750 Vac secondary
HEI
1 3/4 Flowtech Headers
O.K. here's the fun part. It will be broken in on the dyno with a stock Performer intake. I have already purchased a new RPM Air-Gap for comparison as well. The test will be done back to back using the same carb etc. Both manifolds with have the center divider cut down the same amount. Time permitting we will make multiple pulls, each manifold with and without a 4 hole tapered spacer and with and without an open spacer. Both are 1".
Also if time permits I have a Holley SD single plane as well. I'd like to compare that one too but we'll have to see how it goes.
I've already put the Performer and RPM side by side, I'll reserve my findings but for the record based on those findings, I expect the RPM to equal or maybe even outperform the standard Performer, even at lower rpms, but we'll just see.
Unfortunately I don't have another size carb available right now but I'm working on it, maybe something will come up before dyno day. I've already contacted my guy at Edelbrock, they're interested in the results as well.
I'll keep you posted, we'll just have to wait a few weeks!
Thanks!
January 22nd, 2012, 05:04 AM
#6
Paul Dodd, 10 sec Old's
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Surrey, England, U.K
Posts: 49
Hi mate, from London, England. I have a 72 Old's Cutlass supreme and use the Eldebrock Torker manifold with a 1 inch spacer as Car Craft did an Old's 455 build up some years back and reckoned the spacer gave the motor another 30 bhp. My Olds has run 11.83 @112 on the motor and 10.73 @125 with a 200 shot of nos, good luck with yours.
February 1st, 2012, 04:56 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,703
Hi mate, from London, England. I have a 72 Old's Cutlass supreme and use the Eldebrock Torker manifold with a 1 inch spacer as Car Craft did an Old's 455 build up some years back and reckoned the spacer gave the motor another 30 bhp. My Olds has run 11.83 @112 on the motor and 10.73 @125 with a 200 shot of nos, good luck with yours.
February 1st, 2012, 05:21 PM
#10
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,888
February 1st, 2012, 05:55 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,703
After fixing all of the shortcomings on a Popular Hotrodding "Build" I feel a little jaded by the crap that the magazines put out.
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/fea...ang/index.html
The harsh reality is that magazines don't make enough money by the ads placed in the pages...they have been supplementing the formal ads with "article ads". Read the above article on the 1966 Mustang a buddy of mine owns. It reads like a Summit parts overview.
On that same car mentioned above, I found 2 bolts missing from subframe connectors, a solid motor mount loose at the frame and engine with LOCK NUTS on the through bolt (never torqued), front bumper bolts didn't even have nuts on them, headlights didn't work, NO lights worked, speedometer didn't work, weatherstripping was hanging down, window crank handles were stripped...do I need to go on?
They throw these cars together to get a pic for a magazine and advertise for sponsors that donate parts to the project. The reason you don't see many Oldsmobile engine builds is because vendors don't produce new parts often enough to justify the article "ad". I was really into Car Craft when I was younger, and then I grew up and realized that my quality of work was well above what they produce... Car Craft sucks.
http://www.popularhotrodding.com/fea...ang/index.html
The harsh reality is that magazines don't make enough money by the ads placed in the pages...they have been supplementing the formal ads with "article ads". Read the above article on the 1966 Mustang a buddy of mine owns. It reads like a Summit parts overview.
On that same car mentioned above, I found 2 bolts missing from subframe connectors, a solid motor mount loose at the frame and engine with LOCK NUTS on the through bolt (never torqued), front bumper bolts didn't even have nuts on them, headlights didn't work, NO lights worked, speedometer didn't work, weatherstripping was hanging down, window crank handles were stripped...do I need to go on?
They throw these cars together to get a pic for a magazine and advertise for sponsors that donate parts to the project. The reason you don't see many Oldsmobile engine builds is because vendors don't produce new parts often enough to justify the article "ad". I was really into Car Craft when I was younger, and then I grew up and realized that my quality of work was well above what they produce... Car Craft sucks.
February 1st, 2012, 05:58 PM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,703
Mark...let's get to reckoning which intake makes more power so I can throw some coin down on an Air Gap...500HP here we come
February 1st, 2012, 07:23 PM
#13
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,888
But I'll bet your Torker will actuallly turn out to be better for upper end hp and the RPM will be better for midrange torque.
We'll see.
February 2nd, 2012, 07:40 AM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Erie,PA
Posts: 3,814
You guys are finally reading BETWEEN the lines of the magazines.
As for the intake & spacer issue,it depends on what spacer you run.I run the tapered 4-hole,from Wilson Manifolds.I DID gain from that.You also need to address the opening of the intake itself.The Torker has a funny Q-jet shape,that needs some tweaking & blending,to channel the air down through there correctly.I ran a Port-O-Sonic,Torker,and Street Dominator all on the same engine,with no modifications to any of those intakes,or any other changes to the engine,and the car ran down the track the same.Some had better short-track compared to another,but the end results were all in the same tenth range.I then took the Torker,air-gapped it,straightened the runners,welded-up the carb throat & machined it for a 4150 opening,then blended the opening into the runners.I then matched the spacer to the opening on the manifold,so everything had a nice transition.I did try this intake without the spacer,and with another open spacer,and it went slower with both.
As for the intake & spacer issue,it depends on what spacer you run.I run the tapered 4-hole,from Wilson Manifolds.I DID gain from that.You also need to address the opening of the intake itself.The Torker has a funny Q-jet shape,that needs some tweaking & blending,to channel the air down through there correctly.I ran a Port-O-Sonic,Torker,and Street Dominator all on the same engine,with no modifications to any of those intakes,or any other changes to the engine,and the car ran down the track the same.Some had better short-track compared to another,but the end results were all in the same tenth range.I then took the Torker,air-gapped it,straightened the runners,welded-up the carb throat & machined it for a 4150 opening,then blended the opening into the runners.I then matched the spacer to the opening on the manifold,so everything had a nice transition.I did try this intake without the spacer,and with another open spacer,and it went slower with both.
February 2nd, 2012, 08:20 AM
#19
Telecom Guru
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 172
Wow.. I mean, you have a point and everything, but you didn't have to be such a jerk to the guy who posted it. Completely uncalled for. There's more than one way to make a point.
February 2nd, 2012, 08:42 AM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,703
I never said anything negative about Paul Dodd...was I a jerk to him? I didn't mean to be. And I'm sorry that you think I was. But, did you notice that you are the only one in the thread that took it that way? Did you read my long literary masterpiece about magazine cars? If you did you might understand why I say Car Craft sucks. In any case "...This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker and argue over who killed who".
February 2nd, 2012, 08:54 AM
#21
Telecom Guru
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
Posts: 172
I never said anything negative about Paul Dodd...was I a jerk to him? I didn't mean to be. And I'm sorry that you think I was. But, did you notice that you are the only one in the thread that took it that way? Did you read my long literary masterpiece about magazine cars? If you did you might understand why I say Car Craft sucks. In any case "...This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker and argue over who killed who".
February 2nd, 2012, 09:10 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,703
I really don't know what to say...really? I guess the military ruined me...or made me a little more of a man. Who knows, either way we'll probably never see eye to eye. Some have thick skin, and some get "boo boos"...sorry dude.
February 4th, 2012, 08:12 PM
#23
Texas Jim
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Killeen, Texas
Posts: 437
- u lost 22 hp w/ a one inch spacer... yes, the magazines do sometimes, not all the time, exagerate, but your lost 22hp is over-stating it, surely you want us to take that as sarcasm. I have to say that thirty five plus years of reading different car magazines, I've come across some good info. I've seen builds that were copied from magazines that came out right on point. I built a 383 that Chevy Power Magazine built w/ AFR heads Comp Cam, etc., and got 3 hp less than what they quoted inthe article. Let's keep it real everyone. Comedy shows are great as long as no one states their info as real factual news.
- If you guys think that all car mags are BS, then you must get all your info from the pros and spending/wasting alot of money on trial and error builds. PLEASE...
February 4th, 2012, 08:44 PM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,703
- u lost 22 hp w/ a one inch spacer... yes, the magazines do sometimes, not all the time, exagerate, but your lost 22hp is over-stating it, surely you want us to take that as sarcasm. I have to say that thirty five plus years of reading different car magazines, I've come across some good info. I've seen builds that were copied from magazines that came out right on point. I built a 383 that Chevy Power Magazine built w/ AFR heads Comp Cam, etc., and got 3 hp less than what they quoted inthe article. Let's keep it real everyone. Comedy shows are great as long as no one states their info as real factual news.
- If you guys think that all car mags are BS, then you must get all your info from the pros and spending/wasting alot of money on trial and error builds. PLEASE...
I appreciate your attempt to reign in the magazine bashing but please don't attempt to mitigate real world experience as in my case. With regard to your final comment, I do consult the pro's and will continue to do so. I built a 455 based on "PRO" advice and my own experience for the same amount of money that Horsepower TV did. Unlike HP TV we didn't struggle to make 1 HP per Cubic Inch. I'm really happy I didn't blueprint an engine off of their example...
Steve
February 4th, 2012, 09:10 PM
#25
Texas Jim
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Killeen, Texas
Posts: 437
The military did make you a jerk. ... I've met your kind in the Military. The "know it all" pilot. Everything 1st. class. A seriously sickening MF. I've read your posts in the past, but you didn't come on as arrogant or big-headed as you have here. You should be-little some of your all-pro buddies, and now guys who are still looking for answers . Paul surely knows you're the "Ugly American," if you're old enough to fully understand where that came from.
February 4th, 2012, 09:47 PM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,703
CutlassEFI, I sincerely apologize for my comments in this thread that do not pertain to the subject. I did not realize that I would be offending anyone when I made them. I am also not going to acknowledge any more of them so that this thread can stay on track.
If anyone else would like to call me a "Seriously sickening MF" I would ask that you use the new chatbox feature so that we can talk in real time...and so that you might get a better idea of who I am before making bold statements about me. Thanks!
Steve
If anyone else would like to call me a "Seriously sickening MF" I would ask that you use the new chatbox feature so that we can talk in real time...and so that you might get a better idea of who I am before making bold statements about me. Thanks!
Steve
February 5th, 2012, 06:45 AM
#28
Paul Dodd, 10 sec Old's
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Surrey, England, U.K
Posts: 49
No Spacer no worries
No offence taken guys we brits are a hardy bunch, but maybe I am naive to beleive all I read. All I do know is my 455 features edelbrock ally heads and torker manifold, with one inch spacer, which I chose above all others for a bit extra top end rpm and the carb is a Barry grant 750 speed demon. It all seems to work as 11.83@112mph on the motor and 10.73@125DPP07DA0501140E36[2].jpg with a 200 shot of Nos ain't too shabby.
February 5th, 2012, 07:13 AM
#30
Paul Dodd, 10 sec Old's
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Surrey, England, U.K
Posts: 49
I like your Supreme Brian, I would swap my cowl induction hood for your twin scoop anytime, here is another shot of itPicture 014.jpg
February 5th, 2012, 09:26 AM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,703
No offence taken guys we brits are a hardy bunch, but maybe I am naive to beleive all I read. All I do know is my 455 features edelbrock ally heads and torker manifold, with one inch spacer, which I chose above all others for a bit extra top end rpm and the carb is a Barry grant 750 speed demon. It all seems to work as 11.83@112mph on the motor and 10.73@125Attachment 39983 with a 200 shot of Nos ain't too shabby.
And thanks for the email, I appreciate you going out of your way to let me know that I am not a jerk as was previously stated. It's funny, the one guy calling me an A-hole looked like the biggest A-hole of all in his comment. Anyway, thanks Paul!
Steve
February 5th, 2012, 01:50 PM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 473
eesh, cant get a word in anywhere here without some kind of argument breaking out haha. I feel like people would do well to proof-read and think about how their words say before they say them, not saying anyone was at fault in this specific instance but still...ive been there before and it really does get on your nerves feeling like you've gotta walk on eggshells all the time
Aside from that lol, im interested in the outcome here. Ive been wanting the RPM for my 455 build, ive heard two sides of the story to the torker, one side says its decent but its ancient and out dated, the other says its recommended nearly 90% of the time. I feel like William Wallace at the end of the movie here
haha
Aside from that lol, im interested in the outcome here. Ive been wanting the RPM for my 455 build, ive heard two sides of the story to the torker, one side says its decent but its ancient and out dated, the other says its recommended nearly 90% of the time. I feel like William Wallace at the end of the movie here
haha
February 5th, 2012, 03:14 PM
#33
Texas Jim
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Killeen, Texas
Posts: 437
ah,
I also stated that I had not seen you come off in the past like you did heret. I also realize that you want to" save face" which is why you're trying, in your last post, to put it all on me. You started this,came off wrong, ******* out this guy about taking supposed good info to the bank which you insist is pure BS. I do agree that the car mags use build articles to promote mfgs., but when a mixed number of parts are used from diff. mfgs, and changed out as they go and dynoed each time, they sometimes make good points. You have to, like in any situation, take and keep what's worth keeping, and w/ the breath of good judgment, blow the rest away. I have seen build articles, ie; in Chevy Power Mag., where the numbers were right on, from my 1st. hand experience, due to having numerous SBC parts on-hand and having done a series of similar builds and afew same builds. NO, I've never seen a carb spacer give up 20 or 30 straight out HP, but I'm still not going to laugh in a person's face who suggests that it's a true thing. I wasn't a pilot in Viet Nam or in Iraq, but just another Ranger, who used what I could when the situation called f/ it, and at times was, as I had to be, flexible, so as to cause things to go smoothly rather than start a fire storm, or to treat a person respectfully even when I disagreed, as that person may be different than what that first impression showed me. My specific wording last night was harsh, but that was the impression I got from your post,and as I previously stated, you hadn't come off that way in the past. I DO tend to look out f/ the under-dog. No hard feelings here. I do feel that if you "sift" through the mag articles, you'll find some good stuff. Sincerely, Jimmy.
I also stated that I had not seen you come off in the past like you did heret. I also realize that you want to" save face" which is why you're trying, in your last post, to put it all on me. You started this,came off wrong, ******* out this guy about taking supposed good info to the bank which you insist is pure BS. I do agree that the car mags use build articles to promote mfgs., but when a mixed number of parts are used from diff. mfgs, and changed out as they go and dynoed each time, they sometimes make good points. You have to, like in any situation, take and keep what's worth keeping, and w/ the breath of good judgment, blow the rest away. I have seen build articles, ie; in Chevy Power Mag., where the numbers were right on, from my 1st. hand experience, due to having numerous SBC parts on-hand and having done a series of similar builds and afew same builds. NO, I've never seen a carb spacer give up 20 or 30 straight out HP, but I'm still not going to laugh in a person's face who suggests that it's a true thing. I wasn't a pilot in Viet Nam or in Iraq, but just another Ranger, who used what I could when the situation called f/ it, and at times was, as I had to be, flexible, so as to cause things to go smoothly rather than start a fire storm, or to treat a person respectfully even when I disagreed, as that person may be different than what that first impression showed me. My specific wording last night was harsh, but that was the impression I got from your post,and as I previously stated, you hadn't come off that way in the past. I DO tend to look out f/ the under-dog. No hard feelings here. I do feel that if you "sift" through the mag articles, you'll find some good stuff. Sincerely, Jimmy.
Last edited by Texas Jim; February 5th, 2012 at 03:20 PM.
February 8th, 2012, 10:26 AM
#34
Seasoned beater pilot.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,468
Hi Everyone,
This may be a bit premature but in the next few weeks I will be finishing a build on a 455. I'm looking for feedback/ideas. The owner has given me his blessing to allow me to spend a little more time on the dyno. Here's the build;
Ga Heads 2.07/1.68, crossovers filled, divider welded, very minor bowl work
.040 over Icon IC886 pistons, .005 in the hole
Eagle H beam rods
N crank
Erson Hyd Roller (what else) Adv. 288/294, 230/234 @ .050, 110 lobe sep, lift .584/.568
Full roller rockers 1.6
New Quick Fuel 750 Vac secondary
HEI
1 3/4 Flowtech Headers
O.K. here's the fun part. It will be broken in on the dyno with a stock Performer intake. I have already purchased a new RPM Air-Gap for comparison as well. The test will be done back to back using the same carb etc. Both manifolds with have the center divider cut down the same amount. Time permitting we will make multiple pulls, each manifold with and without a 4 hole tapered spacer and with and without an open spacer. Both are 1".
Also if time permits I have a Holley SD single plane as well. I'd like to compare that one too but we'll have to see how it goes.
I've already put the Performer and RPM side by side, I'll reserve my findings but for the record based on those findings, I expect the RPM to equal or maybe even outperform the standard Performer, even at lower rpms, but we'll just see.
Unfortunately I don't have another size carb available right now but I'm working on it, maybe something will come up before dyno day. I've already contacted my guy at Edelbrock, they're interested in the results as well.
I'll keep you posted, we'll just have to wait a few weeks!
Thanks!
This may be a bit premature but in the next few weeks I will be finishing a build on a 455. I'm looking for feedback/ideas. The owner has given me his blessing to allow me to spend a little more time on the dyno. Here's the build;
Ga Heads 2.07/1.68, crossovers filled, divider welded, very minor bowl work
.040 over Icon IC886 pistons, .005 in the hole
Eagle H beam rods
N crank
Erson Hyd Roller (what else
) Adv. 288/294, 230/234 @ .050, 110 lobe sep, lift .584/.568Full roller rockers 1.6
New Quick Fuel 750 Vac secondary
HEI
1 3/4 Flowtech Headers
O.K. here's the fun part. It will be broken in on the dyno with a stock Performer intake. I have already purchased a new RPM Air-Gap for comparison as well. The test will be done back to back using the same carb etc. Both manifolds with have the center divider cut down the same amount. Time permitting we will make multiple pulls, each manifold with and without a 4 hole tapered spacer and with and without an open spacer. Both are 1".
Also if time permits I have a Holley SD single plane as well. I'd like to compare that one too but we'll have to see how it goes.
I've already put the Performer and RPM side by side, I'll reserve my findings but for the record based on those findings, I expect the RPM to equal or maybe even outperform the standard Performer, even at lower rpms, but we'll just see.
Unfortunately I don't have another size carb available right now but I'm working on it, maybe something will come up before dyno day. I've already contacted my guy at Edelbrock, they're interested in the results as well.
I'll keep you posted, we'll just have to wait a few weeks!
Thanks!
1 type of dyno, 1 unique motor combo. 1 power range to pull examples from.
It doesn't matter what you have in your car. Not applicable.
By the way, Mark.... You can modify my torker for the experiment if you would like to borrow it. Just don't make it unusable.
February 8th, 2012, 06:05 PM
#35
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central Fl
Posts: 7,888
Hey J,
Sorry I haven't acknowledged your offer, thank you. But here's a question for all;
I may not have time to test 4 manifolds as I plan on doing at least 2 different configurations with each, i.e. with spacer, without spacer etc. So what is everyones opinion, J's Torker or my Holley Street Dominator?
Both have similar runners (except the Torker has those dogleg end runners) and both have similar size plenums as well.
What do you think Gentlemen? No gaurantees but I'll do my best.
Sorry I haven't acknowledged your offer, thank you. But here's a question for all;
I may not have time to test 4 manifolds as I plan on doing at least 2 different configurations with each, i.e. with spacer, without spacer etc. So what is everyones opinion, J's Torker or my Holley Street Dominator?
Both have similar runners (except the Torker has those dogleg end runners) and both have similar size plenums as well.
What do you think Gentlemen? No gaurantees but I'll do my best.
February 8th, 2012, 06:25 PM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,703
Torker definitely...there are more guys using them and more guys contemplating them. This would be a no holds barred Edelbrock intake showdown! And it covers the entire spectrum of offerings from Edelbrock, less the victor. And it would tell a bunch of guys already running Torkers whether or not it would be worth the money to switch over to one of the others.
This is just my totally unbiased opinion of course
This is just my totally unbiased opinion of course
February 9th, 2012, 12:21 AM
#38
Seasoned beater pilot.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,468
No pressure. It's your time, Mark. I'm not offended either way. Just offering another option.
The basic reasons I mentioned the torker series is:
--It is easily double clicked brand new into everyone's checkout basket on summ!t or J3gs.
--some people claim it is crap down low
--some people claim it is crap up top
--some say put a spacer on it
--some say no spacer or the throttle will be boggy.
--It is still in the Edelbrock family, so why not have a showdown? People can buy the right one the first time.
Unmolested street dominators are a bit more elusive, unless you have a chebby.
I always wanted to use one for an experiment like yours though. I have a HSD on a small block here, and the throttle response is wicked.
Basically stock build from stuff floating around the shop. I took a 66 toro cam&lifters, and stuffed them into a 76 350, with #2 heads, for a 9.3:1 go about town motor.
The basic reasons I mentioned the torker series is:
--It is easily double clicked brand new into everyone's checkout basket on summ!t or J3gs.
--some people claim it is crap down low
--some people claim it is crap up top
--some say put a spacer on it
--some say no spacer or the throttle will be boggy.
--It is still in the Edelbrock family, so why not have a showdown? People can buy the right one the first time.
Unmolested street dominators are a bit more elusive, unless you have a chebby.
I always wanted to use one for an experiment like yours though. I have a HSD on a small block here, and the throttle response is wicked.
Basically stock build from stuff floating around the shop. I took a 66 toro cam&lifters, and stuffed them into a 76 350, with #2 heads, for a 9.3:1 go about town motor.
February 9th, 2012, 04:58 AM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: bowman, north dakota
Posts: 280
i'd like to see the holley tested, my past experience with them has been very good... in fact i'm cleaning up one that i just bought on ebay, it's for a small block olds.
i think it'd be interesting to see you dyno an offy 360 equaflo intake as they are still commonly available and have a unique design...
i think it'd be interesting to see you dyno an offy 360 equaflo intake as they are still commonly available and have a unique design...
![DPP07DA0501140E36[2].jpg](/forums/attachments/big-blocks/39983d1328453089-455-intake-manifold-comparison-dpp07da0501140e36-2-.jpg){kind=link}
