FE Intake Adapter

[jayb]

As Bill Conley mentioned to me via email this week, I am spending time now in G code hell LOL!  Lots and lots of data entering and code debugging in order to get the CNC programs for this project just right.  But having Thursday and Friday off this week really helped.  I had more or less finished the programs for the whole manifold first pass, and needed to make corrections and get the remaining four prototype manifolds machined, so on Thursday I took the 4th axis off my CNC machine and put the first operation fixture back on, and started machining the bottom of the remaining four intakes.  I made some changes to the code based on what I learned machining the bottom of the first intake, so the second prototype intake was the test, and it came out really well.  On the other three prototypes I did some experimenting with tool selection and feeds and speeds, and finally settled on a production program that I think will work pretty well.  I got all this finished up, and the last prototype manifold machined on the bottom, around noon on Friday.

At that point I needed a break from all this stuff, so I decided to start working on the access plate that covers the center hole of the manifold.  I figured cranking out that program would be a 2-3 hour job.  Unfortunately, it turned into a two day job, and I just got it finished up late last night.  But the access cover and road draft tube hole cover that I built look pretty good; here they are bolted onto the first prototype intake:



The picture doesn't really do them justice; they are nice looking billet aluminum pieces.  I put the company logo in the middle of the access cover so that viewing the manifold by itself, it is visible, but when a 351C manifold is put on top, it is hidden.  Here are some photos of the Torker, Weiand tunnel ram, and Performer RPM intakes bolted on with the access cover in place:





Today I'm working on finish machining the second prototype intake, which with luck will be usable on an engine.  I doubt I will get it finished up today as I had hoped, but I should be able to get done sometime this week.  The last thing I need to do is to make a couple more fixtures, one that indexes on the thermostat housing hole and provides a guide for drilling and tapping the holes for the thermostat housing and the water bypass hole, and another one that allows me to seal off the water jacket, pressurize it, and check for leaks.  I'm hoping that I can get those fixtures built next weekend, and then I will have everything I need to be in production with these things.  I'll post another update next weekend.

[Dr Mabuse]

What seals the draft tube cover and the cover plate?

[jayb]

A big O-ring will seal the large access cover.  I'm debating on whether I should also do that for the road draft tube cover, but if I do it might make sealing an actual road draft tube or breather a little dicey.  I think I will be machining one of my prototype manifolds for an O-ring in this location and see how it works out...

[Joe-jdc]

Have you tried fitting a valve cover yet?  Looks like it needs clearancing some for the lip of some of the cast valve covers.  Maybe I am ahead of your program, but just a thought.  Looks great so far!  Joe-JDC.

[jayb]

You have a sharp eye, Joe, and you are absolutely right.  When I test fit the first valve cover I realized that the rail needed to be cut into the body of the manifold more.  I've already modified the code for that particular issue.  All along as I have machined this first casting I've been test fitting and taking notes about what needs to be modified.  I ended up with quite the list in the end, but hopefully the second manifold will get all those problems resolved.

[cjshaker]

Joe has an amazingly sharp eye to catch that!

It's looking really nice. That tunnel ram looks beautiful on there. Like it was specifically made for this application.  I always thought FEs and Clevelands looked amazingly good with the open bottom tunnel rams. Coupled with the flathead, the 3 best looking engines Ford ever mass produced.

I think I would take a sawz-all to the center of that RPM though if I did it. It would look better and remove a couple more unneeded pounds, almost making it look like a dual plane tunnel wedge.

I'm not a huge fan of engines sticking out of the hood, but dang that tunnel ram looks sweet. I could easily see that sitting between the fenders of my '55.

[jayb]

One good thing about that Cleveland tunnel ram is that its relatively inexpensive.  Made pretty good power in my dyno testing...

[fe66comet]

Will all this machine work need.to be done on any Cleave land intake or will a less radical intake take less work to mount?......Jon

[jayb]

I think every 351C intake will have to be modified to fit.  The good news is that it isn't too tough, and you could easily do it yourself with a hacksaw and/or a die grinder.  The issue is that the front rail of the 351C intake, that goes against the front rail of the 351C block, is in the way of the water jacket passage for the intake adapter.  So it has to be cut out of there.  You can modify the 351C intake yourself (which a lot of people have done over the years with the PSE intakes), or you can send it to me and I'll do it on the mill, probably for $75 or so.  Haven't figured the time/price out yet...

[427Fastback]

Looking good Jay...I wonder if the bottom could be milled/cut off on the performer without worrying about the runners or bolt pattern moving.........


Still sitting at home healing up.....Cory

[482supersnake]

I think that I will speak for most of here when I say that " we can't wait for the dyno sessions to start."

[jayb]

Looking good Jay...I wonder if the bottom could be milled/cut off on the performer without worrying about the runners or bolt pattern moving.........


Still sitting at home healing up.....Cory

Hope you're doing better, Cory.  I'm sure that machining away the Performer RPM bottom wouldn't be a problem; the casting isn't going to move much if that bottom tray is milled away.  The issue is that there are two posts in the middle of the casting, between the underside of the manifold runners and the bottom tray of the manifold.  So you can't just machine down both sides of the intake to remove the bottom tray; you also have to machine the bottom tray to remove the area over those posts.  Probably not a big deal, but when I wrote the program to machine the intake I didn't bother to go that far.  Maybe when I start doing the intakes for real I'll add that to the program...

[427Fastback]

Hi....I am slowly healing but doing ok..I was re-x-rayed last week and all the fractures in my pelvis look good.None of the other fractures affect my movement....I am walking around slowly and doing physio every day to build myself back up...I don't have the strength or desire to do much tho.....

I have looked at the performer as I will probably use one and am comfortable with removing the two rear towers...I will remove the floor as well.Between work and home I have all the equipment needed....The finished product would really show off your manifold....It will add to the WTF when people look....

I too am looking forward to seeing the dyno sheets on the manifolds.I'm not looking for HP but I hope the dyno says its a "happy" combo

Cory

[jayb]

I think that I will speak for most of here when I say that " we can't wait for the dyno sessions to start."

Me too, I only wish that I had a higher horsepower engine ready to go to test on.  The 428CJ is going to be power limited because of the mild heads and cam.  When I did all the testing on this engine for my book, all the real good manifolds clustered at the top within 5 HP or so of each other.  I'd expect the same thing this time; it will take a 500-600 HP engine to really show off the differences in the intakes, and this engine is only about 430 HP.  Nevertheless, it will be interesting to compare a standard FE intake like the FE Performer RPM with the intake adapter and the 351C version.  Any power difference guesses out there?  The standard FE Performer RPM will have an advantage in terms of the runners, because there is no port mismatch between the manifold and the head.  Since the 351C Performer RPM uses 2V ports, there will be mismatch at the manifold and the intake adapter.  Also the standard FE Performer RPM intake has a straighter shot at the FE head ports;  the 351C manifold plus the intake adapter has a little bit of a jog in runners 1 and 8 because of the difference in port spacing between the two engines.  On the other hand, the 351C intake plus intake adapter is taller than the standard FE Performer RPM, and it will be a true air gap design, rather than having the bottom of the runners exposed to the oil like the standard FE Performer RPM.

I'm actually looking forward to seeing how the Torker does; that design will not have a port mismatch since it uses 4V ports, and it is a nice medium performance single plane manifold.  I'll bet it will make just as much horsepower as the Victor on this engine, and do better in the mid range.  We will see...

The real fun will begin after I get my 446" 390 stroker freshened up this fall.  I plan to do a whole bunch of 351C intakes on that engine.

[Dr Mabuse]

For me, the big advantage is no coolant passages, pushrod, rocker assemblies, valve lash, timing, or distributor removal hassles.

=========