|
Post by mercmaster on Dec 20, 2012 14:12:59 GMT -5
Anyone ever see a true increase in rear wheel power using a air-gap manifold vs a regular duel plane intake. 4 barrel?
|
|
|
Post by w2zero on Dec 20, 2012 14:55:21 GMT -5
There have been claims of 4 to 8 hp that are probably true. As far as something you'll feel, probably not. They are pretty.
|
|
LER
Junior Member
Posts: 70
|
Post by LER on Dec 20, 2012 15:19:29 GMT -5
I switched from a dual plane to victor jr. an picked up a half a second in the quarter mile, but your power band doesnt start until 3000 rpm.
|
|
|
Post by roy on Dec 21, 2012 11:50:05 GMT -5
Switch from a cast iron factory manifold to an air gap, i could feel mid range power for sure, 3000 to 6500 noticeable Plus, once i stopped hammering it, i saw a good 3-5 mpg increase, depending on how i handled the go pedal, which was a surprise!
|
|
|
Post by w2zero on Dec 21, 2012 12:03:48 GMT -5
So you have the difference stated between a dual plane (assumed to be aluminum aftermarket) to a Vic jr and between a stock cast iron and an air gap.
If you make it breathe in better, are allowing it to breathe out better?
|
|
|
Post by roy on Jan 4, 2013 12:18:58 GMT -5
Of course, good air in, bad air out! I orignally installed the hooker long tubes #6134;s but i decided to switch them out as i may want to change my plugs one day! I don;t know how real these hot rod books are when it comes to dyno #'s but, according to one mainstream car mag,(Car Craft) when they installed the hookers on their 64 Fairlane 289 they saw a 90hp increase in power! That # to me is very um, aggresive & i wondered if Hooker sponsored the mod. I certainly felt a seat of the pants increase in power after installing the Hookers, no doubt at all, but, 90hp? Anyway,after a notching (RRS shock tower notch kit) i switched out to a set of Hedman long tubes, (# 88300)that make plug changes a 10 minute breeze & allow clearance for power rack & pinion & much better suspension bits.
|
|
|
Post by w2zero on Jan 4, 2013 14:46:30 GMT -5
I recall that the Mustangs and Fords mag that had a 64 Fairlane with HiPo cast manifolds got 90 hp out of a swap to the 6134's on the dyno. Their conclusion was that the Hipo manifolds were no better than the stock manifolds. Never mind that they had Edelbrock aluminum heads on there and they didn't bother to port the exhaust manifolds to match the heads. There would still have been a major increase in power with the swap but it would not have looked nearly so good for the advertisers that rule them. That particular mag had a project car that was done up by one of their editors, Cook I believe was his name, who did not have a clue. He made the claim that nothing was available for the car so He made some really stupid substitutions of parts along with bogus claims for performance.
|
|
|
Post by roy on Jan 9, 2013 16:28:31 GMT -5
Yes, it was quite a few years ago, there wasn;t many early fairlanes making print, but, he did make out like he was the Fairlane guru, breaking new ground like he was the first guy to think of soupin up the early Fairlane! I do recall his comments on the use of Hi=po manifolds, wriitng them off as duds, pissed me off thinking about the damage the guy was doin in one sentence. You know, if you don;t have access to a dyno or expierenced friends for that matter, allot of guys look to mags for inspiration & guidance, heck, their supposed to be giving us direction & real world figures/best parts, not comments guided by what sponsor spent the most bucks or gave em the best gear! I did send them an email - protesting muchly about their comments & asked them , if i recall ,to post their dyno numbers, not just drop top end figures in a paragraph, i never got a response. Should have said i worked for Edelbrock!
|
|
|
Post by w2zero on Jan 10, 2013 1:15:25 GMT -5
I sent them emails about their bogus claims and misidentified parts with no responses as well. They were still doing articles on that car and spewing bum info when they let slip that he had sold it three years prior.
|
|
|
Post by ca on May 7, 2015 1:27:26 GMT -5
I bought my 62 from one of the writers at Hot Rod mag. and let's say that he knew a lot about journalism but not a lot about cars. A UCLA grad so he wasn't a dummy.
I had an instructor in a smog/emissions class in the mid 70s and he left his job at Edelbrock to become a teacher. Our FIRST argument was over the finish of intake runners. He was adamant that smooth, polished was best on the intake side and I claimed that the finish should be the now accepted slighted roughened surface.=Be careful of what's written in magazines.
When I was younger I was in a college racing program that was pretty hot for it's time. We had a couple of dynos that were given to us by Go Power, and they were state of the art then. Needless to say a bunch of young hot rod freaks with a lot of equipment is a great testbed for any theory that we had ever heard of. We had engines to play with from Ford's Muscle Parts program all the way to Toyota Racing Development waaay before there was a TRD. A couple of the guys got into some serious racing with Indy Car, NHRA/AHRA, Trans Am and CanAm series'. We as a team won Pike's Peak overall one year plus we had a Trans Am entry for a couple of years.... AND some Bonneville records. Paul Newman and AK Miller were very close to the program. It's was a lot of fun for a couple of years. RAMBLE, RAMBLE, RAMBLE...........
|
|