FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: jgkurz on September 23, 2019, 07:40:37 PM
-
Hi All, I have a 488ci Side Oiler with BBM heads, hydraulic roller cam, and a Ford MR 2x4 intake in my 69 Mustang. It runs great and is used for street and occasional strip duty. A couple years ago it made 568hp @ 5600rpm on a Super Flow dyno. I have always thought I could have eeked out more power if I spent more time on the dyno. When I installed the engine in the car I found a few improvements, but that's a different story. One of the things I wondered was how the engine would have performed with a Tunnel Wedge intake. Jay Brown's book, Intake Comparo provided some valuable info here. Out of curiosity, I graphed a few engines and came to the conclusion I am probably better off with the dual plane MR 2x4 given that I am on the street 80% and strip 20%. Notice the 2x4 wins below 5000rpm and the Tunnel Wedge wins everything above 5000rpm. My engine would only have 600-800 rpm more before power is done so a Tunnel Wedge doesn't make sense for me. The Tunnel Wedge makes it's power on top while losing at the lowend, especially with smaller cubes. I thought this was worth sharing since this is a topic I hear discussed often. I like the look of the Tunnel Wedge and the peak power "potential", but power-under-curve is more fun to drive. Thank you Jay for the info and to Blair for not letting me make a bad decision.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48785330252_ea63b07a50_c.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48785330277_b00abd8169_c.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48785167886_3eefdd9c1f_o.jpg)
-
Thanks for posting that up. I think most - maybe nearly all- know the TW is not as competitive at low rpm but it helps to see it in black and white. But it's probably not bad enough for folks to not want to bolt down a TW just because it looks badass.
If HP was your ultimate goal, you'd ditch the MR and go with a Victor single plane. But those don't have the same cool as a dual quad MR.
-
Thanks for posting that up. I think most - maybe nearly all- know the TW is not as competitive at low rpm but it helps to see it in black and white. But it's probably not bad enough for folks to not want to bolt down a TW just because it looks badass.
If HP was your ultimate goal, you'd ditch the MR and go with a Victor single plane. But those don't have the same cool as a dual quad MR.
All true! Also, if I had a 521ci FE a TW might make more sense on the street to tame down the torque. I wish I had that problem...
-
do you have access to a dominator vic intake...like to see what that would make
-
As above.. I don't think the power loss is enough to make me not want one but then I like T-Wedges and wish I would have found one back in my early days. Currently have a Dove T-Wedge on my 428 and a BT 2x4 on the 390 just because. I have contemplated putting the Dove on the 390 but it just runs good the way it is and while I doubt it would hurt it's likely a waste of gaskets.
I also have a BBM T-Wedge for another project and no idea how well it's going to work. And while we're on the subject.. has anyone seen or heard news on the much vaunted Trick Flow T-Wedge? That sounded promising for smaller cube engines and I had thought of getting one for the 390.
-
Clearly the only logical thing to do is build a larger engine
-
Clearly the only logical thing to do is build a larger engine
It does show that huh? In fact, if you looked at a drag racer that stays in the upper end, the torque difference doesn't enter in the calculation, and the gains favor the TW and climb in the range of peak and shift recovery with each engine. That being said, good info and well presented to show a pattern, and for the street, it would be hard to beat a medium riser
do you have access to a dominator vic intake...like to see what that would make
I love Victor intakes, but they have their own demons LOL In fact, without a bunch of grinding, they are pretty poor. Even on my street 489 and my truck 461, both far more mild than Jay's strokers in the graphs, I had to work the port hard to even get close to a med riser port, they were cast sloppy and all over the map from one port to another. Likely because they think racers will port, the RPMs aren't like that
However, even with work doubt they would out power either deep breathing dual quad, on the same engine. However, they are certainly cheaper and that money could be put toward porting and more head work which could make them worthwhile for power per dollar.
Neat thread, I am a TW fan though regardless, especially if you are going to spin it hard.
-
FWIW - I can produce graphs like that comparing a dual plane Air gap intake + 600DP on a 302 vs a 2x4 tunnel ram 2x600VS on the same motor. Same with the mild 450 HP 351C with a 650DP vs a 840DP on a tall single plane. In the real world, the car preformed exactly the same with either intake on the 302, same ET/MPH with the carb switch. Bench racing, racing dynos. We race cars, not dynos LOL. Once in the car the entire combination bumper to bumper comes into play and the dyno sheets are good for the first shot at a converter and shift point settings. After that, all the data is in the time slip.
-
As above.. I don't think the power loss is enough to make me not want one but then I like T-Wedges and wish I would have found one back in my early days. Currently have a Dove T-Wedge on my 428 and a BT 2x4 on the 390 just because. I have contemplated putting the Dove on the 390 but it just runs good the way it is and while I doubt it would hurt it's likely a waste of gaskets.
I also have a BBM T-Wedge for another project and no idea how well it's going to work. And while we're on the subject.. has anyone seen or heard news on the much vaunted Trick Flow T-Wedge? That sounded promising for smaller cube engines and I had thought of getting one for the 390.
Saw the Trick Flow Tunnel Wedge intake manifold up close and personal at the Trick Flow display in Reno during Hot August Nights. When quizzed about availability, the TF guy said they'd be on sale in a couple of months. I bet that TomP has a picture.
-
Trick Flow Tunnel Wedge video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2ZH5A_qjpg
-
When you look up "cool" in the dictionary, right under Steve McQueen is this.
-
I have a Joe Craine ported Dove Tunnel Wedge with medium riser size ports that flows 470-475cfm. Dang!!!!!! That's a lot of flow. I don't know if I can build enough engine for it.
On the other hand, as a street racer, killing off some low end power (and using an automatic trans.) is how you win races on street tires, on street surfaces.
…...hmmmmm
paulie
-
Does anyone believe the Trick Flow TW will flow any differently then a Ford, BBM, Blue Thunder TW? FWIW, I can't find it on the Trick Flow website yet.
-
Does anyone believe the Trick Flow TW will flow any differently then a Ford, BBM, Blue Thunder TW? FWIW, I can't find it on the Trick Flow website yet.
Believe? I dunno.... I wish it would. I would absolutely love a velocity tunnelwedge for street usage.
-
Does anyone believe the Trick Flow TW will flow any differently then a Ford, BBM, Blue Thunder TW? FWIW, I can't find it on the Trick Flow website yet.
I haven't had one in hand, but supposedly the BBM Tunnel Wedge has larger ports than a factory Tunnel Wedge. Hopefully the Trick Flow will have factory size or maybe even smaller ports.
paulie
-
I have compared single plane Victor and Dove intakes to dual plane single four barrel intakes on a dozen FE engines for EMC. Within the RPM and cubic inch limits of that particular competition a serious worked over dual plane has outperformed a similarly prepared single plane pretty much every time. In a couple cases I left the single plane on the engine when it was "close" and I knew I did not have a real competitive entry just 'cuz they look so damn cool. I regretted that decision one time when it turned out I had a better chance than anticipated. This year I am trying a JDC modified small runner single plane (Street Dominator) to see if we can find an advantage - something I should have done a long time ago.
For those that do not follow that dyno competition, the rules change yearly, but generally hold us to a 3000 - 4000 wide RPM band peaking between 6500 or 7000 RPM. Scores are calculated with average power and average torque over the full range - not just the peak values, and they are divided by cubic inches to equalize the various displacements. We run with limited compression and on pump gas level octane fuel. These rules favor efficient, somewhat street oriented builds over race type builds.
I believe that the advantages of the dual plane on a street FE are accentuated in part because of the really short center runners compared to the long outers. A Victor or Dove single plane works best in an application where it can be tuned into a narrower RPM band - as in a racer where the spread between shift RPM and drop down RPM between gears is 1500-2000 RPM. So far in my experience the dual quads generally outperform the single fours, and the dual planes will out perform the single planes in broad power band street stuff. Makes the Ford medium riser dual quad (or the BT iteration) a darn tough hombre on the street. Ford had it figured out a long time ago.
-
On the other hand, as a street racer, killing off some low end power (and using an automatic trans.) is how you win races on street tires, on street surfaces.
…...hmmmmm
paulie
You're givin' away the store there. 8)
-
On the other hand, as a street racer, killing off some low end power (and using an automatic trans.) is how you win races on street tires, on street surfaces.
…...hmmmmm
paulie
You're givin' away the store there.
Whoopsie! :)
-
I don't have one and have never run one, but I think the 2x4 MR Ford or BT must be one of the most amazing and versatile intakes for an FE Ford. This is judging by Jay's book and other dyno results. It really kicks butt in the 400-600 hp range.
I have a JDC ported 1x4 BT dual plane intake and a JDC ported Dove Tunnel Wedge. the 1x4 BT flows in the 375 cfm range and the Dove TW flows in the 470-475 cfm range. I feel like a 2x4 MR dual plane might bridge the gap.
JMO,
paulie
-
A few years ago, I was very interested in this subject since I have both manifolds. I took the actual numbers from Jay's book on his largest engine figuring at least I have a 600HP engine. Jay was smart enough to publish the actual dyno numbers at each rpm not just the curves. I plotted from 4000 rpm (my converter stall) to 6500 (shift point) and found no difference between the two manifolds. As I remember the average horsepower was within 1 HP !! The numbers are the same all the way up.
Another anomaly, was the fact that the TW had slightly more torque than the dual plane down low (around 3000 rpm by my bad memory).
I am now using the BT MR intake and it idles better in the pits than the TW. It could be my imagination but the idle mixture screws seem easier to tune.
Is the BT intake available anymore? It is well executed.
-
yes, the BT 2x4 MR is available (at this moment).
The nature of BT is to do a batch and not make any more for a few years.
I run one on my car as well, very happy with it.
-
at the drag strip the ET is the only number that matters. I have run both the ford MR and the ford TW on my FE, TW IS .2 TO .3 FASTER in quarter mile and .02 in 60 ft.
-
That is a lot, right there. Definitely worth it.
-
at the drag strip the ET is the only number that matters. I have run both the ford MR and the ford TW on my FE, TW IS .2 TO .3 FASTER in quarter mile and .02 in 60 ft.
What is your combination if you don't mind saying?
I guess I am wondering how much engine it takes to make the TW the better choice. Power? ET? RPM? Combo?
thanks,
paulie
-
As I check up on this thread every day I wonder the same thing. The thought is good.... but it would be nice to see both manifolds run on the same engine.
-
Hard to beat the Wow factor of the TW from a visual standpoint. At a cruise night when those non familiar with FEs see a MR they probably assume it is a stock intake that came on a 427. When they see a TW it is “Holy Shit”, that thing is serious business. So maybe it is not as user friendly down low on a street car, it’s too cool to ignore and wins in my book.
JMO
JB
-
I've run a TW for about 20 years and always felt the look is great. For several reasons I recently decided to remove the TW and installed a new BT 2x4. I like the BT a lot and it will stay on my engine.
With the TW intake the engine began to get edgy at 2,000 rpm. With the BT I can putz around at about 1,500 rpm before the edgy factor is annoying.
My car is street-driven and its hard to find a good place to wind it up to 7,000 rpm which is about where the TW starts showing its advantage over the BT.
-
I've run a TW for about 20 years and always felt the look is great...
That is a nicely screwed together motor.
-
I've run a TW for about 20 years and always felt the look is great. For several reasons I recently decided to remove the TW and installed a new BT 2x4. I like the BT a lot and it will stay on my engine.
With the TW intake the engine began to get edgy at 2,000 rpm. With the BT I can putz around at about 1,500 rpm before the edgy factor is annoying.
My car is street-driven and its hard to find a good place to wind it up to 7,000 rpm which is about where the TW starts showing its advantage over the BT.
If you click on the link as opposed to the actual picture or "thumbnail" then click "open", the picture is sized nicely.
paulie
-
Seeing them side by side, that TW is a big set of shoes to fill!
-
I've run a TW for about 20 years and always felt the look is great...
That is a nicely screwed together motor.
Thanks!
-
Great side by side pic of the two. Dig that VC decal. Very nice.
Thanks for the pics.
JB
-
my comparison was on a 482 w/ iron big F heads, 13:1, factory BU/BT carbs, 600/625 cam w/shell flat tappets, dove rockers, no electronics (nostalgia build)
625hp/590 tq on jay,s dyno originally, (been refreshed since dyno pulls)
10.5x with TW, 10.7x - 10.8x w/ MR in 3300# 56 Ford gasser
-
I've run a TW for about 20 years and always felt the look is great. For several reasons I recently decided to remove the TW and installed a new BT 2x4. I like the BT a lot and it will stay on my engine.
With the TW intake the engine began to get edgy at 2,000 rpm. With the BT I can putz around at about 1,500 rpm before the edgy factor is annoying.
My car is street-driven and its hard to find a good place to wind it up to 7,000 rpm which is about where the TW starts showing its advantage over the BT.
I agree. The TW wins on looks and on an engine that makes power well past 6K. A street/strip FE with a hydraulic valve train will likely be better off with the Ford or BT 2x4. I'd have a TW on an engine that pulled 7K or has BIG cubes. A 521 with a roller hydraulic might work well with a TW on the street.