those shorty's didn't lose too much to full headers, 18 horse for the cool factor is worth it on a 62-61 Galaxy .

Blair how much more power would a single 4 make over the 3x2 in this application ?

Eric,  I don’t think a single carb would be as good in this combo.  The 3x2 manifold is sized pretty well for an engine this size, and the injectors in those three throttle bodies are tuned individually.  We checked AFRs in all eight cylinders, and we were able to get distribution pretty darn nice in this set up.

It only has 222 duration at .050.  It’s designed to run DAILY.  If it was a toy, I would like to see what would happen if we threw some camshaft at it……

This little engine was so neat I had to post it.  It is a daily driver, 352 + .062 overbore.  Low lift, short duration, 16” idle vacuum.  3x2 EFI on top of the new BBM heads, cnc 2.100 intake ports. Static CR is 9.2:1 and built for 91 octane California gas. 

We made 438 hp/456 torque with dyno headers.  We swapped on a set of Kugel Komponents cast shorties at the end, as that is what will be used in the ‘65 pickup it is going in.  It didn’t hurt it much, and would likely be even closer, but they had a hard bend in the 2.5” pipes between the headers and my exhaust tubes.  Still had 415 hp/ 437 torque!!   

Daniel put a short dyno vid on YouTube @captcobrajet.




Performance Summary:
      Cubic Inches:    362          Dyno brand: Stuska
      Power Adder:     None           Where dynoed: Blair Patrick Enterprises
      Peak Horsepower:  438 at 6120 rpm
      Peak Torque:   456 at 3800 rpm

Horsepower and Torque Curves:


Engine Specifications:
   ‘64 390  3-web block   4.062 bore
     
   OEM 352 iron crank 3.50 stroke
     
   Molnar rods 6.540 FE big end

   CP full skirt heavy duty custom pistons.  1-1-3 mm

   King main and rod bearings

   Mahle. 1-1-3

   M57B with BPE mods

   Aviaid Cobra pan modified for ‘65 F100 chassis

   Camshaft: hydraulic roller .520 lift, 222 @ .050, 110 lobe separation

   Lifters brand, type: Morel short travel

   Timing chain and timing cover: Cloyes double roller

   Cylinder heads:  BBM  C8OE-BP castings  2.100 cnc intake, 1.665 as cast exhaust

   Cylinder head flow in cfm at inches of lift (28" H2O pressure drop):
      Intake               Exhaust
      .100    105      .100     70
      .200    170      .200   135
      .300    225      .300   180
      .400    280      .400   210
      .500    305      .500   225
      .600    320      .600   235
      .700    330      .700   238
      .800    335      .800   238

   Flow bench used, location:  Quadrant Scientific,   BPE

   Intake valve:   2.100 REV 11/32

   Exhaust valve: 1.665 REV 11/32
   
   Valve springs brand, part number, specs: PAC beehive

   Retainers and locks brand, part number, specs: 10*

   Rocker arm:  Rocker Arms Unlimited adjustable

   Rocker shafts and stands, brand, material:  HD  Rocker Arms Unlimited

   Pushrods brand, type, length:  Manton  3/8

   Valve covers, brand, type:  CJ plain fin reproduction

   Distributor brand, advance curve information:  Holley/MSD dual synch

   Harmonic balancer brand:  Powerbond

   Water pump brand, type (mechanical or electric):

   Intake manifold brand, material, porting information: 1961 OEM Ford 3x2  BPE light mods

   Autotrend EFI 3x2 throttle body injection with Holley HP ecu

   Dyno headers and Kugel Komponents cast shorties

All of these examples posted are all different combos.  Just looking at where peak torque happens on each one, you can conclude that Mike has the smallest cam, and Mr Woody has the biggest one. Curious how many of these engines had a dual plane manifold……..that also can affect it.  If the cam isn’t big, and the engine is, it will run out of plenum past peak and taper off.  The strength of the dual plane is it will have nicer power where you want to drive a street car.  Happy and peppy below peak torque. 

I'd say Mike's data is pretty accurate.  The power curves correspond pretty well to the flow he witnessed.  The iron EMC heads I sell have nice  11/32 stem valves.  The contest heads did have a rather expensive set of 5/16 stem valves with some back angles that I don't sell, just in case I ever go racing again, lol.   The valves size is 2.150 in the iron.  Bigger than that gets pretty thin around the spark plug hole.  It would respond to a 2.200 valve, but it wouldn't live long before it would leak beside the plug hole.

That back-up in the TFS head is a real thing.  I have noticed over 20 years of flowing on my bench, that it is more finicky about turbulence than a Superflow.  Mine seems to expose the turbulence and it affects the flow more than the Superflow benches.   I am not smart enough to know why, but I know it happens.  The crutch for the turbulence is most likely wider lobe separation, but it will take torque away through most of the curve, as it helps it hang on up top.

Mike's more than likely had a tighter lobe sep than Brent's examples, and the torque was there bigger and sooner, and then it ran out of breath.  Overlap will aggravate the sonic problem in the TFS head.  If the exhaust isn't pulling it through as hard, the turbulence is less pronounced.  The downside is the loss of usable torque by going wider.  Torque is king unless you plan to drive one around at 6000 rpm, so chasing a peak power number that loses you torque at lower revs isn't how I would do it.   This has turned into an interesting thread.  It brings to light the fact that different heads have different personalities, beyond just flow numbers, and they all won't like the same cams.

When I won the Engine Masters, I used a C4AE-G casting.  We digitized the EMC stuff, and it will work on any of the “Low Riser” castings like the C4AE-G, C6AE-R, Cobra Jet, and 427 LR.  I’m 90% sure it will work in the C0AE-D that Brent mentioned, which has the small, heart shaped chamber.  I think there isn’t much difference between the Trick Flow head and my iron EMC head.  I have a version of the new BBM head that we put a small exhaust valve in, that has a really nice chamber, and is better than the EMC iron and the Trick Flow.  The EMC iron would cost a little less than the TFS, and the BBM would cost a little more.  I guess it depends on your goals.

Brady, it made peak power from 6400-6600 but was pretty broad over the top.  When we were looking for peak, I ran it past 7000 and it wasn’t falling off much.  I think a person would want to shift it at 7300.

Cody, same result head-wise using an F head, because the port would be the same with the floor filled and the program run through it.  The single plane 1x4 intake would be interesting if only there was one.  Dove made a few but they need a half gallon of Z-spar in the floor of the plenum and they are hard to find.

From what I understand, they plan to run the car some.  It has good brakes and Cal Tracs, etc.

Gene, we did a 511 several years ago with a .700 lift cam, Pond heads with some more work, and still the F manifold with two 850-ish carbs that made 796 hp and over 700 tq.  We had the paired shaft T&D on that one.  It surprises me how well that High Riser 2x4 intake will support pretty big power.

Seems like there are three production 1x4 castings and an XE one.  Probably 20 years ago I tested three different manifolds on the same engine.  I don’t think any were the XE version.  I still have the E and G but the other one is long gone along with my memory of it.  There were subtle differences in the ones we had here and they all ran about the same on a 650 hp, 416 cube engine.