FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: Joe-JDC on October 19, 2016, 05:36:38 PM
-
I received my new BBM Tunnel Wedge intake today, and it looks very clean and well made. I was surprised at the size of the intake ports because I was under the impression the ports were going to be high velocity and smaller than stock. They are quite a bit larger than the original C8AX-A Ford Motorsports intake, and I wanted to see how it compared with the original in flow numbers. Standard procedure to tape the seven ports not being flowed, block off the power brakes fitting, and use two open spacers with tapers to reduce turbulence when flowing. Here are the flow figures from a Ford intake as cast, and the new BBM as cast.
Ford C8AX-A tunnel wedge
1. 374.35
2. 385.94
3. 372.57
4. 365.44
5. 370.79
6. 369.01
7. 380.59
8. 380.59 for an average of 374.91 cfm.
BBM tunnel wedge as cast:
1. 478.56
2. 484.54
3. 479.76
4. 472.58
5. 466.60
6. 479.76
7. 483.35
8. 496.57 for an average of 480.215 cfm
Flowed on SF-600 in air conditioned room at 70*, 38% humidity. 10-19-2016 Joe-JDC
-
Wow.....
So, fantastic intake for the full on racer... maybe not the best choice for the street/strip guy.
Happy I snagged my BT 2x4 MR instead of waiting for the tunnelwedge (I too was under the impression it was to be a high velocity intake)
Thanks as always for the information sir!
-
Wow indeed. Over one hundred CFM average increase.
Probably a bit much for our 390 GTs.
lol
Bob
-
Question for Joe or anybody really " are there any medium riser port heads that can flow ~ 400cfm ?
-
sweet intake for a big incher .... I guess some future track and dyno testing time will tell the rest of the story
-
Question for Joe or anybody really " are there any medium riser port heads that can flow ~ 400cfm ?
I don't know of any. My high riser heads just snuck in to the 400 cfm range; best medium riser's I've seen have been 360-370. Some of the Pro-Port stuff may be better, but they are not really medium risers...
-
Here are some pictures that Joe sent me of the new BBM tunnel wedge, compared to an original:
(http://fepower.net/Photos/Posts/BBM-TW-10-19-16 037.JPG)
(http://fepower.net/Photos/Posts/BBM-TW-10-19-16 039.JPG)
(http://fepower.net/Photos/Posts/BBM-TW-10-19-16 040.JPG)
(http://fepower.net/Photos/Posts/BBM-TW-10-19-16 042.JPG)
-
I wonder how it compares in volume? Maybe an opportunity to fill the floor and run a 375-400 cfm charge higher in the port even faster that the stock one and mate it to a good set or worked FElony heads?
Might get something that brings the airflow in at a better position to make the turn at the valve, but still flows big numbers. Sort of like an "upper-half" med riser
-
It will be interesting to hear what Blair says after some dyno pulls
-
I wonder how NHRA will view this as a replacement for SS racers? That's quite an increase over the factory piece. On the upside, originals should hold their value seeing as how they would be better suited for street/strip use, at least unported ones.
Thanks for the data and effort, Joe.
-
Nice looking intake Mr Joe. Did it come with the valley cover?
I really like the way they did the push tube holes. They look pretty similar to Jay's intake adaptors.
It looks like it's gonna take some filling in spots to get a nice sexy port match. But it certainly will be a deep breather without much messin'.
-
I wonder how NHRA will view this as a replacement for SS racers? That's quite an increase over the factory piece. On the upside, originals should hold their value seeing as how they would be better suited for street/strip use, at least unported ones.
Thanks for the data and effort, Joe.
It would be theoretically legal for NHRA Super Stock, NHRA basically allows any intake that fits under the original hood and retains the original configuration, in this case 2-4V carbs inline. NHRA doesn't care about the runner volume size on the intake manifold, just the heads. There would be pretty limited applications for this though - it would have to be a car, like a 427 Galaxie or 427 Fairlane / Comet that came with 2-4V's and a low riser or medium riser style head, or the '67 Shelby 428. The '64 Thunderbolt uses 427 Hi-Riser heads, so I think it would take too much rework for that. The thing is, that rule also allows custom built sheet metal style intakes and I think for any max effort Super Stock car that would still be the way to go. Hopefully Blair let's us know his thoughts.
And yes, thanks Joe for the info.
-
I really like the way they did the push tube holes. They look pretty similar to Jay's intake adaptors.
I noticed that too; they stole my idea LOL! Maybe it will be a trend...
-
Yes, it has a cover, and is machined for an "O" ring seal like Jay's adapter. The cover is a simple 3/16" aluminum plate with no engraving. The seal is not continuous, but a rope seal. I haven't installed mine yet, since I may be doing some additional port work like a very simple gasket match to see how much that affects the flow, and I may bolt it up to my Survival heads that flow 350+cfm to see how it affects them. Lots of projects in the works, just so many hours in my energy level at my age. LOL. Will be interesting to do a back to back with both tunnel wedges on a big cubic inch and decent compression and camshaft. Headers may become the bottleneck for shocktower cars. Joe-JDC
-
Can the airflow be cheated/sped up with small carbs? 450 cfm maybe? How do you get a manifold like this to idle at 800-900?
-
Can the airflow be cheated/sped up with small carbs? 450 cfm maybe? How do you get a manifold like this to idle at 800-900?
Buy a gallon of splashzone :P
Seems like the air would just get slow under the carbs and the fuel would fall out of suspension.
I would think this would make a killer port injection manifold.
-
Good point on the sheet metal intake, Kevin. I forgot those were allowed. Still, this would be a fair chunk of change less, and just may prove worthy of the effort.
I'm no professional engine builder, but if it has some taper, which it probably does, and match that up with a decent head port taper, I don't see why it wouldn't work on a street engine and maintain a decent idle, with the correct cam. Not saying it would be ideal, just doable.
-
Can the airflow be cheated/sped up with small carbs? 450 cfm maybe? How do you get a manifold like this to idle at 800-900?
Buy a gallon of splashzone :P
Seems like the air would just get slow under the carbs and the fuel would fall out of suspension.
I would think this would make a killer port injection manifold.
I guess I'll let somebody else mess with this thing, then. Too much for me. At least I learned what Splash Zone is today. 8)
-
SplashZone is handy stuff. We keep 6 gallons or so on the boat. Nice stuff in a pinch.
FElony, there is always this option:
(http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i6/DeepRootsNursery/12368984_805295599616007_9128875717491041630_n_zps3pyvjx2n.jpg)
Edelbrock Air Gap with adapter plates for fitting Holley carburetors. Was my plan during my build, but at the last minute someone offered up a BT MR 2x4 so I used that instead.
-
First, let me say that I think the tunnel wedge/tunnel port intakes are the most impressive/aggressive looking intakes on any engine outside of possibly the high riser 2 X 4 intakes or SOHC 2 X 4 intake. It is my all time favorite Ford intake, and I will keep mine to the end. The new BBM will be very popular, and it will work on a high performance build of just about any cubic inch with the right heads, camshaft, compression, headers, and carburetors or throttle bodies. It is a very nice piece. I would have liked to see the ports just a bit smaller and less flow so that it could be ported to help the smaller engine guys. Would have been simple to add material on the inside walls of every runner to increase the length of the air column, and decrease the cross-sectional area, setting up the air to turn into the head for a better transition. It could then be ported to whatever flow needed. However, it meets a need, fills a gap, and is available for sale which is a plus. Price is a bit of a shock, but again exclusivity has to drive that to some extent as well as demand. Joe-JDC
-
SplashZone is handy stuff. We keep 6 gallons or so on the boat. Nice stuff in a pinch.
FElony, there is always this option:
(snip)Edelbrock Air Gap with adapter plates for fitting Holley carburetors. Was my plan during my build, but at the last minute someone offered up a BT MR 2x4 so I used that instead.
Putting anything "Edelbrock" (or any other aftermarket name) on my CS is not acceptable. A ZX will have to do. Decades of looking for a cherry TW for this particular car, and I can't express the level of disappointment I have with this BBM junk.
-
... The new BBM will be very popular... It is a very nice piece... and is available for sale which is a plus. Price is a bit of a shock, but again exclusivity has to drive that to some extent as well as demand. Joe-JDC
Well, good. Mine was one of the very last ones they had, and there will not be another run for who knows. I should have no trouble selling it, or perhaps I may just return it. Still unopened in the box. In the trunk.
-
Mr. Joe Craine,
You ported my Dove Tunnel Wedge. How would you say it compares to the BBM Tunnel Wedge?
I don't remember the unported flow numbers, but I do think I remember that the ported flow numbers were 470-474 cfm for each runner. That sounds close to the as-cast BBM in terms of flow. I think the unported numbers were in the 410-415 cfm range. I can find the flow sheet. It will just take some digging through my garage.
I sent you an intake gasket that was cut to match my cylinder head intake openings. I believe your ported the intake to more or less match that. I think you said it basically resembled a moderately ported Medium Riser head? My heads are ported Edelbrocks.
I think what I am trying to ask is, how do you think the factory Tunnel Wedge, the ("regular") Dove Tunnel Wedge, the Dove "High Riser" Tunnel Wedge, and the BBM Tunnel Wedge fit in the Tunnel Wedge hierarchy?
Thanks,
paulie
edit: I have no agenda here. I am just asking for Joe's opinion on how all these Tunnel Wedge intakes fit into the FE spectrum. I was astounded at how much more (and balanced) flow Joe got out of my Dove Tunnel Wedge. That's where I'm coming from.
I am mainly thinking about flow vs. cross sectional area between the intake manifolds. Do you see any significant trends?
-
I think what I am trying to ask is, how do you think the factory Tunnel Wedge, the ("regular") Dove Tunnel Wedge, the Dove "High Riser" Tunnel Wedge, and the BBM Tunnel Wedge fit in the Tunnel Wedge hierarchy?
Thanks,
paulie
Paulie, I think the factory Tunnel Wedge can be ported to 500 cfm, but not necessary in any current builds. The BBM will probably be capable of quite a bit more, especially if used on a CJ type head opening, and the Dove TW is also capable of 500+ cfm. The Dove HR TW is humongous. When matched up to a BT HR head opening, it hits 585 cfm with ease. I have ported the Dart Pro Stock intakes, Olds Pro Stock heads, and some of those heads flow 490-540 cfm with a 2.450 intake valve, and can use the Dart intake at 585-600 cfm. They make in excess of 1200 hp with those heads and those flow numbers on 632-738 cubic inch BBCs. We don't have a FE head that even comes close to 490 cfm or 540 cfm, so why do we need an intake that is designed for that flow????. Just my opinion. On your intake, just to match the ports up, the Dove flow goes up really fast, proving it is too big in volumn for the best performance. Yes, it works, but it could work a lot better with less intake runner volumn. Joe-JDC
-
I have the first prototype manifold that BBM cast. It is very nice. It was sent to me for fit testing before he did the production run. The last three inches of the runners were shaped and sized to match the BBM heads with little or no effort.
In general, the Ford, Dove MR, and BBM tunnel wedges are very similar. The main reason Joe got bigger "flow" from the BBM is that the cross section of the last three inches or so is a fair amount larger than the OEM as cast.
The modern application for the TW in my shop for a long time has been high revving OR big cubic inch engines. That is no different with the BBM. If you have a combo that wants a tunnel wedge, the BBM will be a darn fine piece. I asked Doug to add material above the top of the ports to allow us FEers to raise the port very high without having to add weld, which he did. I also asked him to produce several with the intake pushrod holes not drilled to allow a person to move the port without having to weld, which he also did.
I have done many engines with the earlier Ford and Dove units. Depending on where we are trying to go, I modify them as needed. Yesterday we dynoed a Dove that I heavily modified, welded, moved the pushrod and port, and filled the floors, etc. We made 838 hp, 736 tq at 511 cubes. The torque was at 4700, the power at 6800. With a smallish solid roller, this is about where they shake out. With very large cams, I have seen 880 hp from a worked tunnel wedge with an iron block. In these type builds, the added material, and unfinished intake pushrod option will save about $1200 worth of welding and milling in future builds. That is a HUGE time saver for me, and a huge cost savings for the end user.
For milder engines, the intake will do well. On big inch street strokers, the BBM will save me (and the customer) a fair amount of grinding. A tunnel wedge just is not a great choice for a smaller inch street piece. It never was, and it isn't now. For any case where an "old" tunnel wedge was the correct choice, the new offering will be just fine. A person just needs to be sure their combo is one that should need the tunnel wedge in the first place.
I am very glad to have them available. For several years, my customers and I have had to beat the bushes and look high and low for quality tunnel wedge cores to work with. Now, we can buy a new one and have it in a few days. We should all be happy about that!
-
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the most obvious use for the BBM intake yet.
-
Paulie, I think the factory Tunnel Wedge can be ported to 500 cfm, but not necessary in any current builds. The BBM will probably be capable of quite a bit more, especially if used on a CJ type head opening, and the Dove TW is also capable of 500+ cfm. The Dove HR TW is humongous. When matched up to a BT HR head opening, it hits 585 cfm with ease. I have ported the Dart Pro Stock intakes, Olds Pro Stock heads, and some of those heads flow 490-540 cfm with a 2.450 intake valve, and can use the Dart intake at 585-600 cfm. They make in excess of 1200 hp with those heads and those flow numbers on 632-738 cubic inch BBCs. We don't have a FE head that even comes close to 490 cfm or 540 cfm, so why do we need an intake that is designed for that flow????. Just my opinion. On your intake, just to match the ports up, the Dove flow goes up really fast, proving it is too big in volumn for the best performance. Yes, it works, but it could work a lot better with less intake runner volumn. Joe-JDC
Thanks Joe!
-
I think this intake does fill a niche in the FE scheme of things. But it sure would be nice if there were some new blocks available to make building something like this a viable proposition. The only block I have inquired that had a firm delivery date is from Shelby.
-
I am very happy to see this manifold available and receiving attention - I also hope it stays available. In January Doug put me on his list for one of these intakes but no email yet. Not sure if it matters because like Katz427 I think I would like to secure a good aftermarket block first. BBM's cast block was to be back in stock by the 1st quarter of 2016 and the aluminum by the 2nd quarter.
-
I did a simple gasket match on the BBM tunnel wedge today using a Fel Pro 1246 and checked it against the Edelbrock 7224 to make sure of the sizing. The flow came up to 506 cfm average. I only went into the ports about an inch and simple straightened up the walls without squaring up the corners. I blended the plenum edges out to open spacer size, and reworked the opening to #1 and #5 ports from the plenum. The #5 port came up from 466 cfm to 502 cfm with minimum work. Joe-JDC
-
One last note of caution for anyone using the new BBM tunnel wedge is the oil drain back at the front of the intake manifold is not cast for clearance, and the water passage is paper thin where you would normally clearance it for the oil to drain back. If you are not careful you will break through into the water. One side is thicker than the other. Just a caution, since many folks are having trouble with oil pooling in the valve covers, and slow drain back. The BBM at the front will only have the gasket thickness as a drain hole on one side. Joe-JDC
-
SplashZone is handy stuff. We keep 6 gallons or so on the boat. Nice stuff in a pinch.
FElony, there is always this option:
(http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i6/DeepRootsNursery/12368984_805295599616007_9128875717491041630_n_zps3pyvjx2n.jpg)
Edelbrock Air Gap with adapter plates for fitting Holley carburetors. Was my plan during my build, but at the last minute someone offered up a BT MR 2x4 so I used that instead.
Drew, I saw those adapters a while back, a guy from the FE Reunion facebook page was making them. I inquired and never got a response. How do I get my hands on a set??
-
You'd have to ask Danny on that Reunion page.
I can pm you his name if you'd like as he's a facebook friend of mine, I'm not comfortable putting his name out here in the open.
I have no idea if he made any more, as stated I bought a BT MR and didn't need to go the airgap direction.
-
Bump to the top... I have a question for Joe or anyone else with the new BBM tunnel wedge. What is the measurement between pushrod "tube" holes, above the runner. Like the shortest distance (width) between the two holes. Also that dimension for a stock FORD tunnel wedge too if you have it. Just wondering if they drilled them outboard just a bit, for wider spacing and/or wider ports before breaking through into the pushrod tubes. I know they talked about having some without the pushrod tubes so a person could drill them wherever if needed for offset rockers/lifter seats etc.
Thanks.
-
Interesting question. I went out to the shop and measured my Ford Tunnel Wedge, and the pushrod holes varied from 1.500", 1.520, 1.540, 1.570 on different ports. I installed brass tubes to get the distance between the tube holes. On the BBM TW, the holes are tapered on both the top and bottom of the holes, but going into the pushrod holes a ways and measuring the distance between them showed a minimum of 1.600" to 1.700" on several ports. I turned the manifolds over and measured the bottom distances to see if there was any angle involved, but they seem to conform to the above measurements. The BBM definitely can be widened more than the Ford TW without having to install tubes in the pushrod holes. At 500+ cfm with a simple gasket match to the MR size, there is no need to have to widen the ports anyway. Joe-JDC
-
The one I checked today was +/- 1.570 checked down past the taper at the top. If you wanted to move the intake pushrod over, the option of no intake pushrod hole would be the one to use.
To Joe's point, if the port in the head is shaped and moved to a non-stock position, a person might need to widen, raise, fill, etc. Just depends on the head....
-
Thanks for the info Joe. The only reason I would widen them is if I was "stuffing" or raising the port floor. Just wondering how much room before having to sleeve with brass tubing. The Victor for instance is very narrow, not sure what they were thinking...
So Blair, on the manifolds that are to be "un-drilled" that Doug was talking about doing a few... was it the intake pushrod tube only that was to be deleted? Thanks.
-
Yes. I asked him to delete the intake hole only on a few of the manifolds. I usually leave the exhaust alone, except for radical ports, which would not work with the manifold anyway. My first test of one of these is coming up in the next couple of weeks.
-
Cool! Thanks for the info Blair, I appreciate you sharing. Yeah, might as well only have to "fool" with 1/2 the pushrod holes LOL. I have spent some time on making chips for clearance and it is no fun!
Looking forward to hearing how it does. I am sure it will make some big steam, looks like a nice piece. I'll be using one on a future build, planning on it.
-
For the person who ask about carb adapters to put a holley on a air gap intake use offenhauser part number 5880.