390 short block ????

[scott foxwell]

I'm pretty familiar with what's available for FE intakes. The adapter is a nice piece, but not one of the intakes that work with it are made for an FE so I'll stand by my statement. I don't even consider a $650.00 adapter, so I can use another $4-500.00 intake, a viable option. Like I said, not many GOOD intakes made for an FE. Lots of 60's technology. About the only real "modern" intake for teh FE is the Edelbrock Victor and it's hardly modern. The design has it's limitations.

Just to correct any misconceptions, my intake adapters are $569, not $650, assuming you buy them through my web site (not ebay).  No one has done more FE intake testing than me, and after all the intake testing I've done, I'm confident in saying that the adapter plus a 351C Weiand tunnel ram is top of the mark for an FE intake.  There is nothing better (outside of a sheet metal manifold), and that includes a tunnel wedge or a Victor.  Plus, there are other advantages of the adapter, including options to use intakes that are just not available for the FE (the Trick Flow EFI intakes come to mind), access to the valley without removing the valve covers, distributor, or breaking the water jacket, better clearance to the pushrods (or custom pushrod hole locations, if you need that), custom porting options, and ease of swapping from one intake to another.  Its true that the adapter plus a 351C intake is going to be more expensive than a straight up FE intake like a Performer RPM or a Victor, but it would actually be cheaper than a lot of the older intakes that you see advertised (the crossram intakes and factory tunnel wedge intakes come to mind).  Induction systems can get expensive for the FE; we don't have the options that more mainstream engines have.  As a result the intake adapter fills a niche for FE enthusiasts, and offers intake flexibility that otherwise wouldn't exist.

Do you have any idea how OLD a 351C TR is from a modern design stand point? Talk about 60's technology. If that's the "top of the mark" for teh FE, that's sad. I understand all the other benefits of your adapter but to say it's no more expensive than some of the other OUTDATED exotic intakes isn't much of a selling point...since they're also WAY overpriced. But, like everyone keeps saying...it is what it is with the FE when it comes to cost.
The biggest problem with the intake on an FE is 1) bore space on an FE limits displacement, and 2) deck height calls for LONG runners. It would be difficult to build a "correct" intake for an FE given runner length and positioning constraints.

[Joe-JDC]

You are on the wrong forum if you keep bashing the FE, and Jay's adapter.  I have ported all the intakes for a FE over the years, and most every Cleveland intake, small block ford intakes, and even EFI intakes and cut apart EFI plenums and ported them and welded them back together.  A Cleveland Tunnel Ram is not '60s technology by any means, and the cross sectional area promotes good velocity on a larger engines.  A Victor 427 intake will flow over 500 cfm when ported properly, and the RPM 430+cfm, Streetmaster 360+cfm, Street Dominator 370+, Blue Thunder 4V 390+ cfm, Ford Sidewinder 375+cfm, Ford PI 360+ cfm, CJ iron 350+, Ford 6V 340+, 8V MR 430+, 8V Tunnel Wedge 500+, Performer 300+, Blue Thunder 8V 430+, Dove 4V 500+, Motorsports Victor 500+, and Jay's adapter with Cleveland 4V over 500+cfm.  Need I go on???  There are more intakes I have ported over 45 years, but those came to mind for the FE after reading your cutting remarks about the FE.  I like other Ford engines as well as the next guy, but I do not bash the FE, especially on a FE forum.  Not cool!  Joe-JDC

[fekbmax]

we can only use whats available for us to use or have a custom manifold made. id dare say that since lets say 1970 the FE has less than 1% of RnD compared to the BB cheby by the major truly high performance parts manufactures so its up to a hand full of awesome FE engine builders, another hand full of awesome intake and head guys and a ton of dedicated garage and back yard guys to get all we can get and ring all the power we can out of this amazing , iconic, nostalgic FE engine. people forget that in its day, it went toe to toe with every american V8 as well as the best the rest of the world had to offer and 8 times outa 10 the FE KICKED THERE ASS ..                                  its been a slow, long, and expensive journey but i only see things continuing to get better for the FE.

[blykins]

Scott, in my years of being in the business, I've learned to be straight to the point to people....which means I sometimes come across as crass. 

With that being said, I may indeed come across as crass, but I'll echo Joe's comments.  Some of your posts have been a little inflammatory.   It's really not common courtesy to just pop onto a forum one day, speak over everyone with an assumption of authority, then proceed to knock on the shortcomings of the FE.  It's sort of a family here on this forum and on the other FE forum and we are all aware of the design issues of the FE.   For a Chevy guy to pop on and remind us of it and then take some pot shots at the forum owner's intake adapters, well.....it's just not in good taste.

[shady]

surely you googled him, right?

[blykins]

I knew of Scott way before he was ever on this forum. 

Doesn't really excuse him from taking shots at Jay's intake adapters or coming on here to tell us how lacking the FE design is. 

That's kinda like knowing that your sister is ugly, but hearing a stranger walk up and tell her so.   

[jayb]

For my part, I have no objection to any of Scott's comments, and welcome his contributions to the forum.  Sorry if my previous post seemed a little defensive, but the fact remains that the intake adapter plus Weiand tunnel ram outperforms any of the other readily available intakes.  Now, if you start thinking about putting lots of hours into hand porting an intake, I'm not sure that this statement is still true.  I've never done that with the intake adapter + tunnel ram setup, so I don't have any data to share on that.  But I think I'd still bet on it, given equal amounts of time in preparation. 

One issue that we all deal with in the FE world is that the basic cylinder head design was done in the mid 1950s.  Its not modern by any means.  Couple that with the unique design, where essentially part of the cylinder head is contained within the intake manifold, and your options for improvement of the basic induction design are pretty limited.    Despite that, a lot of folks are making real good power out of the FE.  I've seen several 850 to 950 HP versions (my high riser made 860), and of course there's Jim Gonia's max effort engine, which made 1100+ on the dyno.  With a sheet metal intake bolted to one of my intake adapters, I might add...

[Joe-JDC]

I would be glad to port a tunnel ram for you with adapter and let you do a back to back comparison between a stock one and a ported one.  Gratis!  Joe-JDC

[My427stang]

So late to the game here, but I think a lot of this is "master of the obvious"  Long runners, small CSA, wedge chamber, tight bore spacing, nothing we haven't talked about before.

A couple points I'll bring up are:

The intake was a bottleneck right behind the heads, when better (not BBC/BBF/CHI better, but better) heads came available, the available intakes became a problem, Jay's offering fixed that cheaper than sheetmetal and allowed those who want sheetmetal to not have to build a complex (and wet) custom intake. Good on Jay ......despite a C not being mainstream either, having the wet section of the intake separate uncomplicates things.

However,  overall intake runner length, taper, CSA (not so much volume for me other than recent discussion of some small fast ports), piston speed and acceleration, valve events, etc, these are not new things to many of this crowd, in fact I think this forum more than the other sort of supports that fix. I don't love the choices I have to work with, but some of us even play with water hammer theory intake tuning and plenum sizing to the best that we can.

Good luck on the 422, I think you will like a rocker design that doesn't take a posi locks and girdles, a crank that doesn't hang below the block casting and I am looking forward to see what you come up with.  Of course overlap in a wedge chamber behaves differently,  valve inclination is different, low flat intake ports are different, the chamber behaves differently than a dome.  No doubt with your experience you'll build a good engine, but I'd be cautious to think guys on this forum aren't thinking that way already.

Whatever you do, be sure to post your results

[scott foxwell]

You are on the wrong forum if you keep bashing the FE, and Jay's adapter.  I have ported all the intakes for a FE over the years, and most every Cleveland intake, small block ford intakes, and even EFI intakes and cut apart EFI plenums and ported them and welded them back together.  A Cleveland Tunnel Ram is not '60s technology by any means, and the cross sectional area promotes good velocity on a larger engines.  A Victor 427 intake will flow over 500 cfm when ported properly, and the RPM 430+cfm, Streetmaster 360+cfm, Street Dominator 370+, Blue Thunder 4V 390+ cfm, Ford Sidewinder 375+cfm, Ford PI 360+ cfm, CJ iron 350+, Ford 6V 340+, 8V MR 430+, 8V Tunnel Wedge 500+, Performer 300+, Blue Thunder 8V 430+, Dove 4V 500+, Motorsports Victor 500+, and Jay's adapter with Cleveland 4V over 500+cfm.  Need I go on???  There are more intakes I have ported over 45 years, but those came to mind for the FE after reading your cutting remarks about the FE.  I like other Ford engines as well as the next guy, but I do not bash the FE, especially on a FE forum.  Not cool!  Joe-JDC

I'm hardly bashing the FE or Jay's adapter. Just stating observations. I'm a non denominational engine builder. I don't see labels and don't have loyalties that blind me to what's at hand. I'm sorry if that offends you. And I've never ported an intake for cfm. Quick way to ruin a good intake.

[scott foxwell]

we can only use whats available for us to use or have a custom manifold made. id dare say that since lets say 1970 the FE has less than 1% of RnD compared to the BB cheby by the major truly high performance parts manufactures so its up to a hand full of awesome FE engine builders, another hand full of awesome intake and head guys and a ton of dedicated garage and back yard guys to get all we can get and ring all the power we can out of this amazing , iconic, nostalgic FE engine. people forget that in its day, it went toe to toe with every american V8 as well as the best the rest of the world had to offer and 8 times outa 10 the FE KICKED THERE ASS ..                                  its been a slow, long, and expensive journey but i only see things continuing to get better for the FE.

I completely agree other than to say I doubt it's even been 1%.

[scott foxwell]

Scott, in my years of being in the business, I've learned to be straight to the point to people....which means I sometimes come across as crass. 

With that being said, I may indeed come across as crass, but I'll echo Joe's comments.  Some of your posts have been a little inflammatory.   It's really not common courtesy to just pop onto a forum one day, speak over everyone with an assumption of authority, then proceed to knock on the shortcomings of the FE.  It's sort of a family here on this forum and on the other FE forum and we are all aware of the design issues of the FE.   For a Chevy guy to pop on and remind us of it and then take some pot shots at the forum owner's intake adapters, well.....it's just not in good taste.

Well if that's how it comes across I apologize. I have a habit of just saying what's on my mind. I realize there is a pretty strong emotional attachment to the FE so I'll try to keep that in mind from now on. For me, it's just an engine but I will say this; my first car was a 69 Ranchero with a factory 428 CJ. It's what I learned to drive in. I was raised on Fords and hardly a Chevy guy. Sorry about that.

[scott foxwell]

OK, everybody take a deep breath here.
I apologize.
I meant nothing personal at all toward anyone or anything. I was simply discussing tech and didn't mean to offend anyone and I do sincerely apologize.
I've been doing this a LONG time now. I've been building mostly BB Chevs because that's where my bread and butter is. My personal love and preference is Fords. I just bought my childhood dream car which is my 67 Fairlane GTA. I could build any engine I want for it...it's not a restoration worthy car. I could go 385 series or big cube Windsor but I really love the FE, for all it is, and even for what it's not but I sure don't want to get off on the wrong foot here and piss everyone off. I do primarily induction development. I do things a little different, even from the main stream Chevy guys and I seem to usually get really good results. I'm hoping to take some of what I've learned about induction and bring it to the FE table. Maybe I just need t shut up here and do what i'm going to do.
Again, I really apologize. Good people here, good minds, good talent. No doubt about it.
Thanks.

[blykins]

Thanks for the apology. 

It's often hard to read a post and hear the intent behind it.   Sometimes it's easy to get off on the wrong foot with that being the case.

There's a lot of good guys on this forum and a lot of real sharp cats.  Joe-JDC is a head porter from WAY back and has done developmental work for all the builders on this forum, including myself, Jay, and Barry.   He's also retired from the USAF and will be very blunt in how he answers someone.  My427stang is also high rank in the USAF, but is an FE guy from way back and is a very sharp guy on EFI, troubleshooting, and wrench-turning in general.   I've been building FE's for a long time (they are 75% of my business) and have FE's across several continents, but when these guys speak, I listen to what they have to say. 

As all of us have tried to subtly point out, a 650+ hp small inch FE on lower compression with a hydraulic roller will be extremely challenging but short of offering up secrets, all of us will try to help out.  My first attempt at helping was PM'ing you about ditching those Icon pistons and using something more modern. 

The hydraulic roller camshaft will be a hurdle for you and if Straub doesn't have a lot of experience with FE's and hydraulic rollers, feel free to pipe up here.  It takes the correct combination of lobe shapes, lifter tweaks, valve springs, valve/retainer weight, and even rocker arm weight to get them to pull any rpms at all past 6000.   You can't just throw in a lobe that has worked for another engine family and expect it to fly. 

[scott foxwell]

For my part, I have no objection to any of Scott's comments, and welcome his contributions to the forum.  Sorry if my previous post seemed a little defensive, but the fact remains that the intake adapter plus Weiand tunnel ram outperforms any of the other readily available intakes.  Now, if you start thinking about putting lots of hours into hand porting an intake, I'm not sure that this statement is still true.  I've never done that with the intake adapter + tunnel ram setup, so I don't have any data to share on that.  But I think I'd still bet on it, given equal amounts of time in preparation. 

One issue that we all deal with in the FE world is that the basic cylinder head design was done in the mid 1950s.  Its not modern by any means.  Couple that with the unique design, where essentially part of the cylinder head is contained within the intake manifold, and your options for improvement of the basic induction design are pretty limited.    Despite that, a lot of folks are making real good power out of the FE.  I've seen several 850 to 950 HP versions (my high riser made 860), and of course there's Jim Gonia's max effort engine, which made 1100+ on the dyno.  With a sheet metal intake bolted to one of my intake adapters, I might add...

Jay, I re-read my response to you earlier and I can say it did sound a bit offensive. Sorry about that. I really didn't mean to take a dig at your adapter. It's a really nice piece and does open up a lot of options for the FE. And thanks for not taking anything personal.
The 351C TR is light years better than most anything else available for the FE, yes, but none the less, the plenum design is what makes it so archaic. If it had a more modern sheet metal box type plenum like a Dart BB Chev intake, or the Edelbrock Vic Ram, or Profiler, or even the TFS BB Ford TR for the A460... any of the modern (and we're still talking 20+ years old) cast TR's, imagine how THAT would work! That's all I really meant. Unfortunately, there has been no reason for anyone to come up with that type of "improved" TR for the Cleveland or the FE. The "spider" design of the single plane is quickly becoming a thing of the past as designers are learning more about plenums and trying to equalize runner length- even in a single plane- like some of the new intakes from John @ CID in Australia. These are what I call "modern" intake designs and I've had some pretty lengthy discussions with John about his intakes.
I'm trying to pick up Victor 427 and hope I can get it for a decent price. I'm going to start doing a little R&D of my own.
One of the tings about the FE is they will always be displacement limited. (A 500 ci BB Chev these days is a small motor.) This means that cross sections for runners will always be on the small side especially compared to their length. If you try to shorten the runner or stand it up, the plenum becomes problematic it seems. Just something I'm beginning to see about FE induction.