Cleveland intake flow numbers
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Joined
·
856 Posts
What do these intakes flow when attached to a decent Cleveland cylinder head?
That would be a better comparison - as well as dyno testing with a test mule engine.
A large toilet roll tube by itself flows alot too
In fact a 3" sewer pipe flows even more!
I wouldn't want a toilet roll or 3" sewer pipe intake manifold.
That would be a better comparison - as well as dyno testing with a test mule engine.
A large toilet roll tube by itself flows alot too
In fact a 3" sewer pipe flows even more!
I wouldn't want a toilet roll or 3" sewer pipe intake manifold.
Joined
·
21,923 Posts
Well...in the late 1970's I switched from the lowest flowing manifold the torker, to the highest the Weiand tunnel ram and picked up 5 tenths of a second......and another 2 with an airpan that was not even sealed to the hoodscoop. the best performing carb on the torker was a worked 750 better than a single 850 and so on the ram had box stock 660's..everything was jetted accordingly 351C 4v' 3200 mustang 4 speed gearing from 514 .543 and 5.83... in other words each combo was "tuned" for best et that is real world results from back thenWhat do these intakes flow when attached to a decent Cleveland cylinder head?
That would be a better comparison - as well as dyno testing with a test mule engine.
A large toilet roll tube by itself flows alot too
In fact a 3" sewer pipe flows even more!
I wouldn't want a toilet roll or 3" sewer pipe intake manifold.
so just saying big sucks and small rules the world....... its all relative
Joined
·
32,328 Posts
Well it may save you some beans. Typically the better the flow the more hp capabilities. Ive had similar results with tunnel ram. 50hp gains with no other changes. This is merely some info for all of us. Use as you like. The chi intake i did flow test on another setup bolted to a3 head. It maintained the same flow the ur19 tunnel did the same its not on this test.What do these intakes flow when attached to a decent Cleveland cylinder head?
That would be a better comparison - as well as dyno testing with a test mule engine.
A large toilet roll tube by itself flows alot too
In fact a 3" sewer pipe flows even more!
I wouldn't want a toilet roll or 3" sewer pipe intake manifold.
Joined
·
856 Posts
In my mind the best intake is one that has the minimum turns, correct CSA for intended use (rpm range, CID), length and the taper that works for that rpm range.
Turns in a manifold create losses. Minimize turns and power goes up. Tunnel rams (even without correct taper and sizing) shine in most cases.
Modern very high rise intakes (like NASCAR) have minimized turns that the air/fuel have to make. These do tend to be very tall manifolds - to increase runner length for tuned power range.
JMO of course.
Turns in a manifold create losses. Minimize turns and power goes up. Tunnel rams (even without correct taper and sizing) shine in most cases.
Modern very high rise intakes (like NASCAR) have minimized turns that the air/fuel have to make. These do tend to be very tall manifolds - to increase runner length for tuned power range.
JMO of course.
Joined
·
32,328 Posts
Very true. That is where the 3v and roush are better. Less turns. Fyi the torker and tunnel are the only two with a cross section as big as the original 4v cast head.Those other manifolds wont fit stock 4v without mods. If you look closer at ported 3v manifold you will see the mods i made to get it to fit old head.
Joined
·
856 Posts
The Edelbrock Torker is an example of how not to design a racing intake.
A classic example of reverse taper. The plenum openings are small and then get larger to get to Cleveland 4V port size.
I think this was originally an attempt by Edelbrock to add some port velocity to the overly large Cleveland port size (overly large for 6000 rpm stock 351)
Perhaps helped on a lower rpm 351?
A classic example of reverse taper. The plenum openings are small and then get larger to get to Cleveland 4V port size.
I think this was originally an attempt by Edelbrock to add some port velocity to the overly large Cleveland port size (overly large for 6000 rpm stock 351)
Perhaps helped on a lower rpm 351?
Joined
·
32,328 Posts
Ive seen gains with torker over strip dominator intake on engines peaking below 6500 in 1/4 mile times. The torker i had also gained from 750cfm over 850. But it depends on rpm and power pk. On a 7300rpm engine the dominator intake gained.
On another test we did the 2v airgap intake picked up 11hp through mid and 18 up top over torker. How ever this 357 inch 4v Cleveland peaked at [email protected] So not singing that hard.
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
Why do people still waste time flowing intakes?
Joined
·
32,328 Posts
Not sure ask Kaase
Joined
·
856 Posts
An intake manifold that flows 280 cfm without the cylinder head will not help a 380 cfm head.
The restriction would be the intake.
That being said - bigger area flows more - but too big is no help either.
The intake manifold is part of the intake tract. They function together.
Yes some information is gained by flowing an intake by itself. Same goes for flowing a head by itself.
But how they function together is most important.
An intake by itself can show high flow numbers - but if the approach angle to the cylinder head is wrong/severe
the result is poor performance. There are examples where approach angles on some sheet metal intakes made for less than stellar results.
How the air/fuel is directed into a specific cylinder head port is very important. Manifold flow by itself will not show this - nor will intake by itself. (dyno/1/4 mile testing will show what works)
The restriction would be the intake.
That being said - bigger area flows more - but too big is no help either.
The intake manifold is part of the intake tract. They function together.
Yes some information is gained by flowing an intake by itself. Same goes for flowing a head by itself.
But how they function together is most important.
An intake by itself can show high flow numbers - but if the approach angle to the cylinder head is wrong/severe
the result is poor performance. There are examples where approach angles on some sheet metal intakes made for less than stellar results.
How the air/fuel is directed into a specific cylinder head port is very important. Manifold flow by itself will not show this - nor will intake by itself. (dyno/1/4 mile testing will show what works)
Joined
·
15,745 Posts
I have never flowed an intake.
Porting an intake to flow more air on a flow bench is a good way to f'k up an intake.
Porting an intake to flow more air on a flow bench is a good way to f'k up an intake.
Joined
·
32,328 Posts
None of these were ported for this combo. As stated its going on a Fe adapter. The guy doesn’t have any ideas to what Cleveland intakes flow. They will take this data and adapt to head and see what they get. They only own two of those intakes. The rest were loaners as mine were. Then they can buy the intake that they deem close to head. You may or may not know Cleveland intakes are not overly available so weeding out the poor ones before spending.I think the information helps them a ton. For us guys who’ve already tested on track not so much. Jay brown told me on his dyno testing the torker intake was the biggest surprise out of quite a few.
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
