605 HP Tunnel Port

[garyv]

Brent was finally able to get my 465 cid Tunnel Port engine on the dyno this past week.
It made 605 HP @6900 RPMs and 588 TQ @ 4700.  was making 600 HP from 6300 RPMs up and gained a few
more up to 6900 to put it @ 605.
The recipe included a Pond cast iron block, at a 4.310" bore, coupled up with a custom machined RPM 3.980" steel crank. Custom Diamond pistons on Lunati 6.800" H-beam rods. Compression ratio was right around the 10.25:1 mark. Cam was a custom Bullet solid roller, 260/270 @ .050", 106 LSA on a 104 ICL, .625/.660 lift, with Morel pressure fed lifters. Rockers are Harland Sharps on a Dove set up.
The TP heads flowed 340cfm on the intake and around 200 exh. @ 600 lift.
Could have probably squeezed a few more HP out of it with a single four intake but I wanted to keep the look of
two fours.
All the details and some pics and video were posted over on the FE forum on 4-25-14 by Brent
I am really pleased with how this turned out considering it is more of a stock Ford stroke and not a 482
and made with 46 year old heads and intake.  Performed right up there with engines with more cubes and
newer heads.
Can't wait to get this thing into my 66 Fairlane.
garyv

[machoneman]

Cool! I did though see your and Brent's comments on the engine maybe making more HP with a single 4-bbl than the duals.

IIRC, your duals are running about 1450 cfm or so and even a large Dominator would be hard pressed to do more than 1250-1300 cfm.  Is the OEM Ford dual intake ancient design the limiting factor here......since duals usually make more HP? 

[cjshaker]

106 LSA? That has to be one mean sounding hombre at idle! Should do pretty well at scaring some old ladies and kids too
As long as the carbs are set correctly, I kinda doubt you would have gained more power with a single 4 set-up. Aren't they QF carbs designed for a 2x4 induction?

So what car is this destined for? Does it have manual brakes, because I'm guessing it doesn't have a lot of vacuum at idle? Sounds like it will get you to the store and back in record time though!

[blykins]

Thanks for posting on this forum, Gary.  I didn't know how many guys were members of both forums and didn't want to wear out my welcome....hahaha

Bob, I don't think the carb cfm is necessarily the issue, I think it's the intake design.  I've never really seen the case where a dual carb intake makes more power than the single carb intakes, at least not on my stuff anyway, and barring a sheet metal or tunnel ram.  I've been able to try similar combinations with both intakes have never gained horsepower with the duals. 

The guy that owns the dyno shop is a big Mopar builder, and he recently dyno'd a 493 inch BBM for himself.  Tried a couple different intakes, and the single carb intake was worth 30 hp over the 2x4 setup that he tried.  Coincidentally, while talking to Robert Pond a few months ago, he told me that he tried a Tunnel Wedge on his SS motor and slowed down...

This one does sound mighty mean idling and at full song.  While dyno'ing, we had guys that would stop by and just sit in their cars outside next to the exhaust to listen to it....hahaha

[garyv]

I recall a while back when Blair did that big TP motor for Fetorino they dyno'd it with
a 2 x 4 single plane and 1 x 4 and I was thinking the single carb made more power.
Maybe Jay can give more details since it was done at his place.
As far as the brakes they are non power 4 wheel discs.
garyv

[blykins]

Actually I think on that one, the dual carb intake made more power, but they didn't have time to tweak on it because of dyno issues. 

[machoneman]

Thanks Brent for the explanation!

I guess from the old days, I like many assumed that a dual intake would naturally make more hp, perhaps not much, but still more hp  in pretty much all applications. But often those old drag tests and even some dyno tests were likely flawed as they probably weren't A-B-A tests. That and a desire by the suppliers to sell more speed parts!

Come to think of it, some local FE racer pals of mine of yore did do some back-to-back swapping of from a single carb to dual carbs on both Tunnel Port and Hi-Riser stock stroke engines in a beautiful all-black '67 Fairlane.  The duals, near identical to your test, I clearly remember did not improve the e.t.'s in either case but I had always suspected Richie Migut's tranny choice as the real culprit (a 11.70ish car with a C-6 and a higher stall convertor, but certainly not optimized for either combination). Interesting to learn all these years later that he probably should have stuck to the single carb set-up and worked to optimize his convertor for better e.t.'s instead. 

Thanks for posting on this forum, Gary.  I didn't know how many guys were members of both forums and didn't want to wear out my welcome....hahaha

Bob, I don't think the carb cfm is necessarily the issue, I think it's the intake design.  I've never really seen the case where a dual carb intake makes more power than the single carb intakes, at least not on my stuff anyway, and barring a sheet metal or tunnel ram.  I've been able to try similar combinations with both intakes have never gained horsepower with the duals. 

The guy that owns the dyno shop is a big Mopar builder, and he recently dyno'd a 493 inch BBM for himself.  Tried a couple different intakes, and the single carb intake was worth 30 hp over the 2x4 setup that he tried.  Coincidentally, while talking to Robert Pond a few months ago, he told me that he tried a Tunnel Wedge on his SS motor and slowed down...

This one does sound mighty mean idling and at full song.  While dyno'ing, we had guys that would stop by and just sit in their cars outside next to the exhaust to listen to it....hahaha

[blykins]

Can't beat the looks of a dual carb setup though.   

[jayb]

Can't say that I agree on the 4V vs. 8V thing.  Just taking the data from my book, on my 600 HP 427 sideoiler engine, the top five finishing manifolds for peak horsepower were all 8V setups.  Number six was the Edelbrock Victor with the Dominator carb.  For average horsepower from 3000-7000 RPM, the top seven finishing manifolds were 8V setups.

On my 675 HP 427 stroker dyno mule, the Victor/Dominator combo did make the most peak horsepower, but not the most average horsepower, that again went to a couple of the 2X4 setups.

Based on my experience you can usually make more power with a properly tuned 2X4 induction system.

[blykins]

I dyno'd two 487 inch engines, both with the same heads, same cam (but one was 110 LSA, the other 108), same compression, same bottom end.  The only difference was that one was a Victor FE intake, ported by Joe Craine, and the other engine had a Tunnel Wedge ported by Joe Crane (both pairs of heads were ported by him as well).  The 2x4 setup had (2) 725 cfm carbs, the 1x4 had a Holley Ultra HP 950.  It made 16 more peak hp, but less torque.   The 1x4 engine was the one with the longer LSA.

Maybe your dyno is setup to feed air more efficiently into both carbs....  I was talking to Dale, my dyno guy, about this, and he said he had never seen the case where a 2x4 made more hp, unless of course it was a sheet metal intake, or a tunnel ram.   Maybe that's the common denominator. 

[mike7570]

On my super-gas car (452 tunnel port) the 660's were quicker than the single 1050 by about a tenth and one half to two tenths, however the 1050 was quicker in 60ft by a small amount with no other changes.

[cjshaker]

I am certainly not a professional engine builder, but do have some experience in 2x4 setups....and I can say without a doubt that they require more work to get tuned properly. It's not hard work, just obviously more time consuming and most guys aren't really willing to spend hundreds of dollars for hours of dyno time, which is usually expensive. But I have always attributed the ability to make more power to the fact that fuel and airflow is more evenly distributed in a 2x4 setup compared to a single 4, due to the longer uneven runners inherent in the design of a single 4 intake.

I'm sure Ponds single 4 combo was optimized to the max in carb and runner design, so it doesn't surprise me that he slowed down when he switched over to a 2x4 like he did. If he had as many hours of testing, tuning and runner work invested in that 2x4 combo, I'm betting he would have gained that speed and time back.

Not that it really matters on a street engine anyway. At 600+/-hp, would you really notice if you gained 10-15hp without a timeslip? And like Brent said, you just can't beat the looks of a dual carb setup

[blykins]

I fully agree that each scenario would take some intensive tuning.  Fortunately, I have a former Quick Fuel carb designer at my disposal.    I will say that we spent more time on tuning the carbs than anything else, and that usually goes for most of the builds that I do. 

Personally, I just haven't seen the dual carb manifolds outshine the singles.   It could be how the supply air is delivered, it could be me, but I haven't seen it, even on engines with the exact same parts below the intake. 

[afret]

Thanks for posting on this forum, Gary.  I didn't know how many guys were members of both forums and didn't want to wear out my welcome....hahaha

Bob, I don't think the carb cfm is necessarily the issue, I think it's the intake design.  I've never really seen the case where a dual carb intake makes more power than the single carb intakes, at least not on my stuff anyway, and barring a sheet metal or tunnel ram.  I've been able to try similar combinations with both intakes have never gained horsepower with the duals. 

The guy that owns the dyno shop is a big Mopar builder, and he recently dyno'd a 493 inch BBM for himself.  Tried a couple different intakes, and the single carb intake was worth 30 hp over the 2x4 setup that he tried.  Coincidentally, while talking to Robert Pond a few months ago, he told me that he tried a Tunnel Wedge on his SS motor and slowed down...

This one does sound mighty mean idling and at full song.  While dyno'ing, we had guys that would stop by and just sit in their cars outside next to the exhaust to listen to it....hahaha

Does Pond have a SS car?  If it's his stocker Fairlane, he showed up at Pomona a few years ago with a tunnel wedge on his 427 instead of the stock dual quad MR intake and his car was very fast.  The other guy running a AA/S Ford with a HR was quite a bit slower.  Don't know how he got that intake approved for stock class though.   Maybe he was comparing the tunnel wedge to the regular MR intake rather than a single 4?



I have enough trouble with a single 4 and don't want to mess with a dual quad intake.  I'm biased and prefer the look of a single quad on an FE, especially a dominator. 

Hey Brent, have you had a chance to test a QF 4150 style 1050 against a 1050 dommy on the dyno?

[cjshaker]

Fortunately, I have a former Quick Fuel carb designer at my disposal.   

We should all be so lucky!