Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide!



Go Back   Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide! > Technical Forums > Performance Talk

Click here to search for Mopar cars and parts for sale.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-21-2007, 12:44 AM
jordan360 jordan360 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cereal,Alberta,Canada
Posts: 73
Default What intake to get?

I am wondering, what is the best intake for a 360? I was looking at summit racing's web site, and they seem to have a whole bunch of Intakes in the $170 - $300 range. I just whant to know which one will work best. Also, all of these intakes are compatable with my Carter carb, right?.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-21-2007, 06:48 AM
dwc43's Avatar
dwc43 dwc43 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Shelbyville,Tn.
Age: 54
Posts: 23,987
Biggrin

The Weiand 8007 will work the best for your 360 and with your Carter carb too. It's a very well designed intake for the small block and we have had great results from them on the street. Make sure what every intake you buy is a dual plane for street use and it's rpm range starts at idle with your mostly stock engine.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-21-2007, 06:41 PM
jordan360 jordan360 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cereal,Alberta,Canada
Posts: 73
Default

Ok, but what about the mouth shape? If i want to change carbs, it says i might need a special plate to seal it properly. Will this plate affect air/fuel flow? Also, how much of a power increase will i get? Thanks for the input.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-21-2007, 08:42 PM
dodger1 dodger1 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Princeton BC
Age: 85
Posts: 2,648
Default

Are you using a Carter Thermoquad (spreadbore pattern) or the earlier Carter AVS or AFB (squarebore) pattern? If you're thinking of changing to a Holley or Edelbrock down the road, get a manifold with a square-bore pattern. If you have a TQ and intend to stay with it, get a spreadbore pattern. Weiand and Edelbrock make streetable units with either pattern available. The Edelbrock Performer will take the stock TQ choke, and EGR if you need to meet smog inspections, but it's basically the same performance as a stock manifold except it's aluminum. There are adapter plates available to bolt one type to another but in my opinion they compromise the set-up.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-22-2007, 12:55 AM
dwc43's Avatar
dwc43 dwc43 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Shelbyville,Tn.
Age: 54
Posts: 23,987
Biggrin

Quote:
Originally Posted by jordan360 View Post
Ok, but what about the mouth shape? If i want to change carbs, it says i might need a special plate to seal it properly. Will this plate affect air/fuel flow? Also, how much of a power increase will i get? Thanks for the input.
You wont need an adapter for your stock T.Q. carb. If you wish to use one a 4 hole spacer will get you better throttle response for more low end performance and an open spacer will work to promote mid range and top end. The Weaind 8007 will out perform your stock intake and it's much lighter too. HP increases depends on the whole package that you have so it's hard to guess at that.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-22-2007, 01:33 AM
TK TK is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: not here anymore
Posts: 8,876
Default

In my opinion, starting at #1 in my book. (for you, assuming you have limited carb tuning experience)

1-Mopar Performance M-1 Dual plane
2-Edelbrock Performer
3-Stock cast iron.
4-Offenhauser 360* (Non dual port)
5-Weiand that dw mentioned
6-Offenhauser dual port

If you know your carbs, and your engines, the dual port makes the neatest street torque you ever felt, hands down, but without the knowledge to tune the carb, you will over-lean the piss outta it!

I have ran a couple Weiand action plusses, and they were OK, nothign impressive, and I had a turkey of a time getting the carb tune right on. They worked great on 429-460 fords, C/M fords, and Big Chevy's for buuut, on the small dodges, things just werent easy to read from front to back. Then, Turbododge, and a couple others, informed me it is because it ain't all that great as far as fuel distribution. I think the M-1 is the easiest to get even, in the dual plane category, followed by the performer, even though I cant tell the difference in performance, the M1 is of better quality, I think.
The Offey 360*, feels just like a dual plane, well, the three or four I have done a quick swap, except the MPG suffers some. Good news is, fuel distribution was always right on from front to back, and side to side, not to mention the power band seemed to be extended, from the dual planes.
And my personal favorite, the dual port. Why it never caught on, I'll never know, I think it is because it was a offey product, and offey has never been into the advertising, or the hype, from what I have seen. The dual port, when running on the mains, makes the most awesome acceleration and around town/towing power I have ever seen, great vacuum, and a smooth, powerful idle. Down side, was the carb tuning, required special attention. last one, was three jets bigger, and a 8hg spring on the mains from where it would have liked if it was a dual plane. (Because it wasn't mine, I didn't get to drive it enough to tune the step in the metering rods)
Even though they need a richer carb, MPG is the best, and, I like it because it doesn't take any throttle to move it down the road, or take off, like the other manifolds.



But my vote, for you, would be the EB, or the M1.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-22-2007, 03:02 PM
dodger1 dodger1 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Princeton BC
Age: 85
Posts: 2,648
Default

TK, what carbs were you running on which manifolds?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-23-2007, 08:18 PM
TK TK is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: not here anymore
Posts: 8,876
Default

Edelbrock's, and AFB's.

I like them.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-24-2007, 12:08 AM
dodger1 dodger1 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Princeton BC
Age: 85
Posts: 2,648
Default

Jordan, what carb do you have? You said it's a Carter, but which one? (A TQ has a black phenolic main body, and the secondaries are larger than the primaries, the others are square-bores) A TQ was stock on a 76 360 but we don't know that that's what you have.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-24-2007, 12:46 AM
jordan360 jordan360 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cereal,Alberta,Canada
Posts: 73
Default

On the face of the carb(looking down on it), on the top left corner, it say Carter Thermo-Quad, so its a thermo quad.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-24-2007, 01:10 AM
dodger1 dodger1 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Princeton BC
Age: 85
Posts: 2,648
Default

OK, now you have to listen to the TQ lovers here (me included, 'cause I'm too cheap to buy a new carb) but bear in mind that a carb is a carb is a carb. I don't care whose name is on it, if you learn to tune it for your engine it'll do the job you want it to do. But why not work with what you have? Demonsizzler will re-do your carb for you at a reasonable price, Edelbrock and Weiand have spread-bore manifolds that will work for you, as will your iron one. If you prefer to go with Edelbrock or Holley (both square-bore carbs) you should get an appropriate manifold. What are your plans for the engine/car combo? Race or street? If it's race, a square-bore manifold+ Holley-type carb will give you the most tuning options, if it's gonna be a driver, the Edelbrocks on a square-bore manifold or the TQ on your spreadbore makes a great package. And they ALL must be tuned to the total car/engine package Remember, this is only my OPINION here
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-24-2007, 01:31 AM
TK TK is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: not here anymore
Posts: 8,876
Default

If you are keeping the TQ, keep the manifold it is sitting on as well.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-24-2007, 10:37 AM
turbododge turbododge is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Minnesota,USA
Posts: 1,198
Default

I think it matters what your intentions are, and what the build of the rest of the engine is. For a normal street performance type application, you might want to go with a regular Performer RPM (you are in Alberta and may want to put some heat on it). The M1 dual plane is a very good street manifold with good response and mileage. I also like the Offy that TK mentions, it is very repsonsive. If you are going low rpm, or towing, a regular Performer would be best.

My biggest statement would be to stay away from the Weiand 8007. They only balance flow and mixture at very high output (6000 rpm) and are terrible for distribution at other speeds. Just look at the runner length and crossection variation, cylinder to cylinder, and compare that to an M1 dual plane (almost identical runners) or a Performer to see the difference. I found the Wieand to cost 2 mpg and foul plugs because of the problems, as well as poorer performance.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-24-2007, 12:18 PM
345Dart 345Dart is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calgary/Alberta
Age: 75
Posts: 466
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jordan360 View Post
I am wondering, what is the best intake for a 360? I was looking at summit racing's web site, and they seem to have a whole bunch of Intakes in the $170 - $300 range. I just whant to know which one will work best. Also, all of these intakes are compatable with my Carter carb, right?.
Where in Alberta? If you want a CI intake off a 340 I have one you can have very cheap - come pick it up. I'm in Calgary.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-24-2007, 11:42 PM
jordan360 jordan360 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cereal,Alberta,Canada
Posts: 73
Default

I think i will stick with my thermo-quad. I Just wanted to keep my options open. TK, why should i stick with the manifold thats on it?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-25-2007, 12:54 AM
pishta's Avatar
pishta pishta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Tustin, CA
Age: 55
Posts: 3,987
Default

Wanna stick with the TQ? Get an LD340, made to accomodate a TQ, may have to clearance the secondaries-cant remember. Or a max effort single plane, my choice would be a Strip Dominator. Had both on a warm 340 with 3.91 gears and the LD would just smoke the tires, the Strip Dominator was faster because it had less low end torque so it would plant the tires and the top end was better. Anything is better than the old Torkers, dime a dozen on Ebay and about worth it.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-25-2007, 11:05 AM
dwc43's Avatar
dwc43 dwc43 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Shelbyville,Tn.
Age: 54
Posts: 23,987
Biggrin

The TQ wont fit on the LD340 unless you take it to a machine shop and cut the top up on it. BEst bet is the 8007 Weaind. With the TQ it has no distribution problems at all. We've run them on the street since the '80's and they are real easy to tune your carb in. Much lighter than your stock cast iron intake and it out flows it from idle to top end. Great intake and carb set up and it's made to bolt your stock TQ without any mods.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-25-2007, 09:30 PM
TK TK is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: not here anymore
Posts: 8,876
Default

Flow isn't everything.
In the past you have said the cast iron manifold performs like the aluminum ones dw.
You have to know what you are looking for to find a distribution problem.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-25-2007, 10:21 PM
turbododge turbododge is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Minnesota,USA
Posts: 1,198
Default

Here's the Weiand:



Here is an M1 dual plane:



Take a look at the runner match for length and crossection and tell DW which one is going to have matched flow at a wide range of flow rates (rpm).
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-25-2007, 11:57 PM
TK TK is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: not here anymore
Posts: 8,876
Default

And, like I mentioned before, on 29/60, 51M/C and 400 Fords, and big chevs, the action plus is a great manifold, but it leaves something to be desired on the small mopar. (small chevs, and AMC's share the same problems with them, possibly because of the sorta the same port configuration)

If only they had built decent low RPM single planes! (street dominator?)

Oh, an SP2P, is a great manifold too, for the street! (Edelbrock)
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-26-2007, 12:33 AM
pishta's Avatar
pishta pishta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Tustin, CA
Age: 55
Posts: 3,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK View Post
If only they had built decent low RPM single planes! (street dominator?)
Remember the cast iron '65 273 4bbl intake? Motor guru Vizard made a stock GM Q-jet intake manifold work better than any off the shelf intake in his book, lots of mods, but it was better, cast iron and stock looking. Ultimate sleeper intake.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-26-2007, 10:54 AM
dwc43's Avatar
dwc43 dwc43 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Shelbyville,Tn.
Age: 54
Posts: 23,987
Biggrin

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK View Post
Flow isn't everything.
In the past you have said the cast iron manifold performs like the aluminum ones dw.
You have to know what you are looking for to find a distribution problem.
Never made that first statment. And that second statement is true. That's why you wont find that problem with the 8007 when set up properly with the right carb and tunning.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-26-2007, 11:36 AM
turbododge turbododge is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Minnesota,USA
Posts: 1,198
Default

You just can "tune out" the problems that come from having one runner shorter than most single planes (#5) and another runner that is 5 times or more linger and triple the crossection.

Think of it this way. Even DW will admit that single planes, with their short runners, work up top. Dual planes, with their long runners, work better on the bottom and mid range. Why in world would anyone think they could make them work in the same ranges as each other, just because they are on the same manifold?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-26-2007, 11:41 AM
rumblefish360's Avatar
rumblefish360 rumblefish360 is offline
Moparchat Bronze member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: C
Age: 57
Posts: 11,120
Default

Jordan;

The Weiand will do fine. You can have the inatke flowed and balanced if theres any concern with air/fuel flow and it can be corrected. Any intake can bennifit from this.
The Performer from Edelbrock is not much better than the stock T-Q intake.

Next up in performance levels would be a RPM/stealth. But they a squarebore carb and a adapter for a T-Q while possible, makes the overall height a bit tall for most hoods.

Holley Strip Dom and the better MoPar M-1 single plane are spreadbore intakes. You can use your T-Q on there if your racing.

The adapter of a square bore carb on a spreadbore intake is nothing more than a thin plate while the reverse is a thick adapter.

The use of a Edel./Carter AVS/AFB is good, but do not go to large on the carb. It will not react the same way as a T-Q of a larger size. Better off down 100 cfm (Rated) from the T-Q at a min. for the street.
(Build dependent of course)
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-26-2007, 03:18 PM
turbododge turbododge is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Minnesota,USA
Posts: 1,198
Default

Quote:
You can have the inatke flowed and balanced if theres any concern with air/fuel flow and it can be corrected
Yeah, Rumble, I agree that you can get a manifold flow balanced, I have done a lot of that, used a lot of epoxy and popsicle sticks. The problem is that when you have runners that are as mismatched as the Weiand, you can only get them to match for a relatively narrow rpm range, maybe 1500 or 1000 rpm. When you match a short and long runner at 180cfm by grinding, blocking, etc, you will run good at that flow, but a small crossection short runner and a big crossection long runner do not react to a change in flow the same. When you go to 85cfm your flow will be way different between the runners that matched perfectly at 180. Add to this the difference in runner length's effect on the pulses that cab sees, with the resulting variations in mixture, and it gets worse. Add to that the different volume in the runners and you get different cylinder fill characteristics.Like I said previously, if short and long runners could be made to perform the same, you would not have single and dual plane manifolds, they would all be the same.

Take a tape measure to the runners on the newest and best design manifolds, and you will find that even though the first glance looks like they vary a little, they are quite close, and a lot of work has gone into making them react to flow changes the same.

I know from my testing that when I had the 8007 balanced out for 5500rpm so that it would give me nice even plugs, when I drove it on the street at 1500-2500 rpm, it would foul (usuall two) plugs in 300 miles or less. The other plugs would be from very clean to nearly fouled, and it would always be the same good and bad plugs. I could put on the M1 dual plane, or a Performer, and never foul a plug again.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-26-2007, 06:01 PM
dodger1 dodger1 is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Princeton BC
Age: 85
Posts: 2,648
Default

Looking at the Weiand 8007 and the intake shown in Mopar Performance muscle section catalog P4876335 (or P4529116 in the 2002 print catalog), the only one illustrated for std. 67-91 heads, I see what appears to be the identical spread-bore manifold. I realize these are only illustrations, whereas you guys have obviously run both types but a lot of us can't really compare the two any other way. It would seem that there's something fishy somewhere.Any comments?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-26-2007, 09:54 PM
TK TK is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: not here anymore
Posts: 8,876
Default

The obsergvations I have had, were out of the box.

If your going to go throue all the trouble, port - Sonic all the way!
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-27-2007, 12:04 AM
pishta's Avatar
pishta pishta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Tustin, CA
Age: 55
Posts: 3,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK View Post
The obsergvations I have had, were out of the box.

If your going to go throue all the trouble, port - Sonic all the way!
Strip Dominator, high rise with an air gap!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-27-2007, 11:23 AM
TK TK is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: not here anymore
Posts: 8,876
Default

Yeah, I guess they end up the same in the end, HUH?
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-28-2007, 12:20 AM
Rug_Trucker Rug_Trucker is offline
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Nashville TN
Posts: 774
Default

Why would anyone want a SP2P on a performance engine? It would lose HP from a stock iron intake. I have one. Just never have run it. They are for bone stock cam, exhaust, rtc. It is a MPG intake. Small runners. It is for low down torque.

I run an Offy Dual Port on my truck, the Eddie wa bought to try for a comparison. My rig weighs in at 5800+lbs.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
340 intake vs 318 intake, what works best for this.... poomwah Performance Talk 17 09-30-2007 06:33 PM
M-1 Intake or Modify Stock Intake? adamjmc Ram Truck Chat 8 01-12-2003 01:06 PM
Mopar MPI Intake VS Hughes Engines Modified Intake bootleg Ram Truck Chat 17 12-07-2002 09:51 AM
Is there Regular Intake and Cold air intake? 01MagnumV6 Dakota Truck Forum 1 04-23-2002 12:18 AM
AirRaid intake vs. QuickD intake vs. KN Gen II TruckBoy95 Ram Truck Chat 23 09-10-2000 03:33 AM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
. . . . .