Gauging Interest - Tunnelport Heads

[cammerfe]

As I said up above, I got a TP upper end from the LeMans trials. Many years later, When I was working with Jim Dove, I borrowed three manifolds from him, all factory pieces. I got a single plane dual quad and both single carb manifolds as well. With help from  Wayne Kuchtyn at Headwinds Porting, we ran all four manifolds over his Superflow, and I reported the results in the series I did for Mustang Illustrated.

I can, therefore, tell you that all four specimens we played with were quite well balanced from one cylinder to another. As you might expect the numbers were a bit larger for the single planes. But we were well pleased with what we found. Since having a fairly serious street machine was the goal, we used the dual plane on his car, and he used a 4.44 DL in the rear. The combo provided outstanding torque at all times. We used, ultimately, a pair of Holley throttle body EFIs instead of the 652s that we got originally.

KS

[Henrysnephew]

As Mr. Conley has stated above, the 1x4 dual plane casting looks very much a (nearly) one off exercise.  To me it looks like an sohc/tunnel port hybrid.  Is it possible that Dove had the resources and skillset necessary to do that level of mold development?  Randy M

[427FeWedge]

The one in the picture is mine. It has a hand stamped SK 001$. I know they made more than 3, including the Ebay one I know of 5. Mine definitely has a some what crude finish to it compared to most Ford OEM intakes. I agree that it looks similar  to the 1X4 SOHC.
I ran mine on my 496 and found it to be 50 hp off from the single plane 1x4. I think it would be a good intake for a 454 combo,
may give it a shot on a iron headed 482 I am thinking doing later this year.

Rob

[428kidd]

Very cool Rob! 001that is awesome!

[PLemoine]

My intake has the same buggered runners on the same two ports as the one pictured.

[cammerfe]

As Mr. Conley has stated above, the 1x4 dual plane casting looks very much a (nearly) one off exercise.  To me it looks like an sohc/tunnel port hybrid.  Is it possible that Dove had the resources and skillset necessary to do that level of mold development?  Randy M

Yes he did. He had, for example, a very large pole barn directly adjacent to his house. There was a second story enclosed overpass from his bedroom to the upper level of the pole barn. He not only had extensive design space there, he was complete with a Superflow. He'd get an idea and go for several days without sleep while chasing it. There were stacks of one -of-a-kind castings there that had started out as an idea in his head.

KS

[GJCAT427]

OK guys, I managed to get into the home shop this morning. I have in my collection 2 TP manifolds and 2 sets of heads. 1 manifold is a 4150 single plane 4bbl  carbed unit. This is on my new TP going in my 63 fastback. The other manifold is a dual 4150 single plane  that resides on the shelf for now. I had at one point a single plane Dominator manifold that I sold several yrs ago, wish I hadn`t sold it now. I do have one of Jay`s adapters with a hand built tunnel ram, waiting to see how the single 4bbl works out on the new motor.  When I sold the single 4 single plane Dominator, the guy who got it said it was reworked for the carb, I told him it was not, You could see the mold marks and I  looked inside the throat and it didn`t have a weld line in it. So if it was patterned off the other style it was a good job of factory rework on the molds.

[pbf777]

.............I  looked inside the throat and it didn`t have a weld line in it.

     Not disputing you at all;  I just wanted to say that we have executed several Dominator conversions of Edelbrock Victor Jr. 302 intakes, and when we've finished with the welding, porting/blending, patterning and finish abrasive blasting with the re-machining, you'd be hard pressed to determine that it wasn't as received from Edelbrock.     

     Scott.

[gt350hr]

Cushman doesn't have one, and if I find one first, I will NEVER let him forget it.  Not only are they the rarest TP intake, they are without a doubt one of rarest Ford intakes period, quite possibly the top of that list. Jay sent me a picture of one not to long ago, so they are out there, in the wild, hidden amongst the tall grass, waiting to be found....

        Jack ,
      The Epay manifold is out here in So Cal. A friend of mine bought it and will not let it go. Typical Ford experimental manifold casting quantity was 6 pcs minimum. This information came from a well known retired Ford "paper signer" heavily involved with the prototype stuff. I have found it to be true in many cases over the years.
       Randy

[cammerfe]

Has there ever been any experimenting with push rod passage shapes?

At one time when I was writing for Super Ford Magazine, Jim Dove and I had a lengthy discussion regarding 'modern' TPs. While mulling over the idea I had discussions with Mose Noland and others who had been involved with both the FE TPs and later, the Trans-Am small block iterations.

Jim was game to do about anything. The Ford guys told me that the idea of reshaping the PR tube, using various protrusions in the runners and other such ideas had produced absolutely nothing of benefit---ON THE INTAKE side. I was advised to pay attention to the exhaust.

The end result was a set of Dove TP heads with the FoMoCo intake lay-out and Dove's 'Type Two' exhaust runners. The exhaust side was changed so radically that the head lost most of the FE identifying characteristics. The runners were raised, spread further apart, and reshaped.

Jim's design had the angle of the exhaust runner re-done to such an extent that the runner opening was markedly 'up', almost pointing at the edge of the hood when bolted to a block in the car. The exhaust port shape had one lower corner filled-in quite significantly.

The heads went on Brother Lon's '67 Mustang/427 SO. In order to have room for the necessary custom headers, we removed the spring towers entirely. Coil-overs and tubular suspension arms out in the wheel-well took over. We also lowered the attachment points for the upper arms significantly and shortened the arms so that the attachment points moved outboard. It was also necessary to redo the steering shaft and replace the (bulky) rag joint with a Borgeson universal.

We worked with Holley to be able to use a pair of their TB EFI units on the factory dual-plane TP manifold. Worked a charm.

The project was spelled-out in a series I wrote for SFM, and the car was featured on the cover.

Lon ultimately sold the car. The new owner lives in New Zealand.

KS

[BigBlueOvalFan]

Wondering if these Alum TP heads have been produced as of yet or an idea of when they might be available ?  You can put me down for 4 sets of heads, 2 stock version and 2 max effort versions.

[gt350hr]

      Ford Experimental Engine Engineering ( in conjunction with H&M) made made different push rod tube configurations ( airfoil and ovals) in an attempt to make more HP. I know of one variation that used "O" ring seals ( didn't work) on the pushrod for obvious reasons. None of the "odd " tubes showed power on the dyno despite "some" airflow gains.

[frnkeore]

With today's aerodynamic technology, I think it would be a different story and if the TP had remained in production, more than two years, I believe that Ford would have found the path to much better air flow.

I think there is much more to be had with the TP port, especially with a 4 3/8 bore and 480+ engines.

The basic Ford port tech in those days, was bigger is better but, Bill Elliott, in the '80's, with his head porters work on the 351 (smaller valves and ports), showed that to be wrong.

With the PR tube and extensions to it, you can completely control the air flow, after the PR. There is power to be had!

[Dumpling]

Ford offered a tunnel port package for the Windsor in the 90s.
Required a unique block.

Then they abruptly pulled it from the market and bought back parts that they had delivered.

Why the special block, and what other development work was done for that package?

[Eken1]

So what were the airflow and power gains of the 351 tunnelport effort over the 302 tunnelport?  Perhaps that data could be extrapolated to potential gains on the FE.  The bragging rights and eye appeal of owning a tunnelport would be nice, but would gains justify converting over?