Sheet Metal Intake on Tunnel Port Intake Adapter

[jayb]

One of our forum members, Garry C,  recently purchased on of my tunnel port intake adapters and is a building a sheet metal intake for it.  He asked me to post these pictures of it in process, and ask for any comments or suggestions.  I'm sure he will chime in with a better description of what he is trying to accomplish; here are the pictures:

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

[KMcCullah]

Looks cool Garry. The runners look short to me. Is this for hood clearance issues? What kind of car is this going in?

[edgarval]

I like.

[e philpott]

Looks cool Garry. The runners look short to me. Is this for hood clearance issues? What kind of car is this going in?

it's just the adapter for a sheet metal manifold , runners are not done yet

[GJCAT427]

Okay guys, What you see is a rough idea. I plan to set this up on my 63 Galaxie or my 64 T bolt clone wagon. I`m hoping to keep it under a bubble hood if possible. The runners now are at 2" into the ram box. After studying other designs I wondered about the width of the floor. Jay has suggested that they should be longer to help with low end RPM. I wondered if an inverted "V" the length of the box would help or hinder the air flow. The V would be as wide as the floor up to the port openings to allow for blending the runners.  The plan is for a removeable top plate for single or dual carbs. The box sides are going to be 1 1/2 to 2" high at this point I`m thinking. This is based on a Cleveland tunnel ram I have for some reference on another of Jays adapters. Will it be streetable , I`m not sure but I plan to try it on both the street and strip. I have some othe thoughts but I want some imput before deciding. I plan tp bring the finished manifold to the Beaver next spring to show off my handy work. Oh ya the carb covers are for another project 2x4 intake I`m planning to install in a 56 COE with a 410 setup.

[e philpott]

how many cubes are you feeding ??

[ScotiaFE]

I think I would bend the sheet.
The weld will pull it hard and you may have to go back and touch up a pin hole.
Looks great.

[GJCAT427]

427/454 possible, using a C8AX-D cam.  Bending the bottom is a possibility, welding it doesn`t bother me as I can control my heat.

[ScotiaFE]

I can't so I avoid as much welding as I can. 

[e philpott]

427/454 possible, using a C8AX-D cam.  Bending the bottom is a possibility, welding it doesn`t bother me as I can control my heat.

the bigger cubes you go the more streetable it would be with same set up , might be a good time to go with a 482 , just a thought ,,,, sweet project for sure with either car !!

[Heo]

I have seen a few intakes that was made for turbos.
Where they have the runners protruding in to the
plenum and the runners was...beveled? ..Like a
velocity stack. Supposed to be the hot stuff for
turbo plenums.But then they inject the fuel down
stream in the runner

[Joe-JDC]

I started to answer this morning, but decided to wait and see what develops with the answers.  Not trying to be a naysayer, but you are building an intake that uses a 1 3/4" venturi going into what looks like over 2" diameter round tube.  Unless you intend to install Dominators and spin it to very high rpms, I think you are way too big.  Whatever your heads flow, whether a mild porting of 340 cfm, or radical at ~370 cfm, you only need a runner size for those intakes that is about 1 3/4" diameter at the head, and only slightly larger in the plenum for a small taper.  You also will need to contour the opening into the ports quite a bit to prevent any turbulence and loss of flow.  A smooth tube that is 1 3/4" diameter will flow over 400 cfm in case anyone is doubtful.  We build things too large for optimum filling in my opinion.  Otherwise, have fun, and keep us posted on the results after you get it running.  Joe-JDC

[GJCAT427]

Thank you Joe. Jays adapter is 2" all the way to the head, and I think the head opening is a 2 1/8"-2 1/4" semi oval. I will check the heads  today to see. I just happened to have the 2" tubing so that is what I used.  Any suggestions on the floor, flat vs taper into the ports? I`m going to play with template today at work and see what it looks like.

[jayb]

I started to answer this morning, but decided to wait and see what develops with the answers.  Not trying to be a naysayer, but you are building an intake that uses a 1 3/4" venturi going into what looks like over 2" diameter round tube.  Unless you intend to install Dominators and spin it to very high rpms, I think you are way too big.  Whatever your heads flow, whether a mild porting of 340 cfm, or radical at ~370 cfm, you only need a runner size for those intakes that is about 1 3/4" diameter at the head, and only slightly larger in the plenum for a small taper.  You also will need to contour the opening into the ports quite a bit to prevent any turbulence and loss of flow.  A smooth tube that is 1 3/4" diameter will flow over 400 cfm in case anyone is doubtful.  We build things too large for optimum filling in my opinion.  Otherwise, have fun, and keep us posted on the results after you get it running.  Joe-JDC

Joe, can you explain a little further?  What are you referring to when you say a 1-3/4" venturi?  Is this the neck under the valve?  If so, with a tunnel port (2.25" valves) its going to be bigger than that, probably a hair over 2".  Also as Garry mentioned the ports on the tunnel port head are large, and if you put a 1-3/4" diameter tube up against the tunnel port head you would have a pretty extreme port mismatch.  Just trying to understand your comments...

[ec164]

Wouldn't the runners need to angle in towards each other as to look more at(toward) bottom of carbs?, better fuel distribution. Also with the floor so low and flat I would think raw fuel will lay and puddle..... Al