Dan,
Thanks for taking the time to compile this info for us. Could you comment
on where you think the F4B would rank relative to the other intakes you
list? I realize, as you point out, that the peak HP numbers are somewhat
simplistic and the area under the curve, especially between the shift
points, is a better basis for comparison. Also, I assume your comment about
the Stealth and RPM means you think they would be better in every respect
than any of those on the list?
Bob
At 10:31 PM 5/8/99 -0500, Daniel Jones wrote:
>I dug up the Super Ford article mentioned earlier. It appeared in the
>July 1988 issue and was titled "Small Block Intake Manifold Survey".
>In the article they flow bench and dyno test 10 different intake
>manifolds on a mild 5.0. The engine was a 1985 1/2 5.0 crate motor
>fitted with factory shorty headers, factory Holley 600 cfm carb, stock
>heads, and an SVO M-6250-A311 flat tappet camshaft. No clean-up was
>performed on the intakes. The carb and ignition were also left alone.
>The intakes tested were:
>
> Intake Peak Flow Flow
> HP Center End
> Port Port
>
> Offenhauser Tunnel Ram 213.1 196 196
> Stock Ford 215.1 160 176
> FPP Tiger 215.5 184 172
> FPP Cobra 231.0 192 190
> Edelbrock Performer 233.7 201 180
> Holley Street Dominator 233.9 191 183
> Edelbrock Torker II 234.7 211 207
> Weiand Tunnel Ram 236.7 196 196
> Weiand 7515 X-Celerator 240.9 203 188
> Offenhauser Port-o-Sonic 241.6 207 201
>
>The Offy Port-O-Sonic pulled the highest peak horsepower but the
>Weiand X-Celerator had more area under the curve, generating more
>power at each test point from 3000 to 5500 rpm, except at 5000 rpm.
>The Port-O-Sonic apears to be slightly taller than the X-Celerator
>but it's hard to tell fronm the pictures. The Torquer II and Street
>Dominator were down across rev range, compared to the Offy and
>Weiand single planes. Note that the plenums on single plane intakes
>are intentionally under-sized on the assumption it's easier to add a carb
>spacer than it is to mill a manifold. The tunnel rams were run with a
>single carb plenum adapter.
>
>The FPP Cobra was the only high rise dual plane tested. The Weiand
>Stealth and Edelbrock Performer RPM were not yet introduced when
>the article was published. Surprisingly, the Performer did slightly
>better than the Cobra. I'd expect the RPM and Stealth to turn in a
>better showing. If you're considering the Stealth and RPM, I've heard
>the Stealth has larger volume runners and plenum and is somewhat
>better at higher rpms than the RPM.
>
>I would have liked to have seen this test with a more highly tuned
>engine. I believe the differences between the manifolds would have
>been more clearly established that way.
>
>Dan Jones
Robert L. Palmer
Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego
rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu
rpalmer@cts.com
|