Maddog
Active Member
Terry---as I read the above StanJ is donating a 1475 for you to cut up and Matt83 agrees with you completely. LOL.
Maddog
Maddog
Do we Need another choice in Intakes for the 472/500
- Thread starter PROSTOCKTOM
- Start date
So the question still remains. Do we need something that is going to be a subtle blend on the Cadillac engine???
My opinion is "Yes Definitely." I would love to see about two more purpose built intakes. Specific built intakes such as the performer, the performer rpm, and the performer rpm air gap, all have their places in the world of engine building and design, just like tunnel rams and high rise intakes. I feel that there are enough combinations out there that could reasonably justify use of an intake that isn't currently available. Unfortunately, however, the cost cannot be justified and that is why they don't exist.
My opinion is "Yes Definitely." I would love to see about two more purpose built intakes. Specific built intakes such as the performer, the performer rpm, and the performer rpm air gap, all have their places in the world of engine building and design, just like tunnel rams and high rise intakes. I feel that there are enough combinations out there that could reasonably justify use of an intake that isn't currently available. Unfortunately, however, the cost cannot be justified and that is why they don't exist.
Nick Campagna
Active Member
Very true Matt. An application which could use a better manifold is the 69 - 78 Eldorado. Their hood line is too low for even an Eldelbrock, and the modded stock can be marginal with a really strong motor. The uphill design of the runners is a problem.
JW
Active Member
Just an RPM airgap would do it IF it worked enough better than the current intake does.
Thing is you could not really make a DP to work for everything ,reason being if you size the manifold internally to fit an iron head and the mts head with a little adjustability in making the outlets of the runners larger for a ported head ,anything beyond that would weeze kinda like it does now.
Make the manifold large enough to cover the range of heads available now and it would be the last thing you would want on a mild engine.
Kinda like the difference between a cobrajet intake and a generic 429/460....one application will not work for both.
The low hoodline car owners just need to convert to efi and even a MTS intake could be used.
Wack about 3/4 of an inch off the intake and a low profile throttlebody and you are there.
Thing is you could not really make a DP to work for everything ,reason being if you size the manifold internally to fit an iron head and the mts head with a little adjustability in making the outlets of the runners larger for a ported head ,anything beyond that would weeze kinda like it does now.
Make the manifold large enough to cover the range of heads available now and it would be the last thing you would want on a mild engine.
Kinda like the difference between a cobrajet intake and a generic 429/460....one application will not work for both.
The low hoodline car owners just need to convert to efi and even a MTS intake could be used.
Wack about 3/4 of an inch off the intake and a low profile throttlebody and you are there.
hertzdaddy
Active Member
Maybe development costs of a better DP could be shared by the Caddy vendors? Build it better, price it right and market accordingly and they could possibly get a good share of current 2115 sales plus a little more. :scratchchin:
dave brode
Well-Known Member
Money spent vs sales. The question would guys spend $500 for a rpm [I prefer stealth] type intake.
I believe that a good number would. Heck, if the Potter 1475 intake was changed for the iron heads, some guys would buy it. Not because it would outrun the MTS [we don't know if it would], but simply because it's different, or they like the way it looks. Heck, I had a number of offers to buy my "airgap" performer, and it might not make 1 horse more than an out of the box intake. It might make less, due to plenum work that might or might not do well.
If one engine works best with intake #2, guys will buy intake #2. How many Stealth 460 intakes do you think were bought simply because the guy posted his intake test? A bunch, I bet, even though it might not fair so well on a different engine combo.
Dave
I believe that a good number would. Heck, if the Potter 1475 intake was changed for the iron heads, some guys would buy it. Not because it would outrun the MTS [we don't know if it would], but simply because it's different, or they like the way it looks. Heck, I had a number of offers to buy my "airgap" performer, and it might not make 1 horse more than an out of the box intake. It might make less, due to plenum work that might or might not do well.
If one engine works best with intake #2, guys will buy intake #2. How many Stealth 460 intakes do you think were bought simply because the guy posted his intake test? A bunch, I bet, even though it might not fair so well on a different engine combo.
Dave
Attachments
StanJ
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2008
- Messages
- 203
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
Maddog said:
Actually Charles, you are the one I was thinking of here:
StanJ said:
You've probably got that much lying around in loose change, Charles...you'd never even miss it. Why don't you do Dave and Tom a favor and front the development and first-run production costs?
Nick Campagna said:
With that in mind. The other debate concerning a new DP manifold is, and has been with any Cadilac intake, hood clearance. I can completely understand that 90%, or more, of the Cadillac people don't want to cut their hoods up. Maybe a production cowl hood would be a better compromise to make this possible? I would love to see an old caddy cruising down the road\strip with about a 4 inch cowl. I think it would be sexy :bitelip:.
JW said:
I trust that if that is the case, you can better understand where we went with the 1475 and the boogie-man heads. At a point where you are optimizing flow you have gone beyond the realm of stock port design. The pressing question would be as you stated. How to make an all around manifold? It can't be made to fit two different ports and require no machine or hand work. So the idea makes perfect sense, but once again we are out weighing the means with cost. I am not trying to step on toes just want to put some realization into this. If you make a better purpose built DP manifold that will work properly with stock runners it won't work properly on a ported head correct? and vice versa? That is the reason we designed the boogie-man parts the way we did and let the other issues with a Cadillac specific build go to the wayside. We needed a purpose built intake to fit our heads specifically and any other use for either heads or intake would simply be supplemental. I would like to see the DP rpm airgap design on a Cadillac. It would be a great piece.
Dave,
I still like that moded 2115. It looks like a lot of work though.
hertzdaddy
Active Member
mt83 said:
Oh it is. Just look at Andy's ride!
[album]429[/album]
dave brode
Well-Known Member
Matt,
Thanks for the kind words.
On hood clearance, if the 2115 is an issue, what's another inch or two? Andy's look cool.
Imo, it would be better if our only dual plane was a stealth/rpm. How badly would it kill a very mild deal? It has been said that a well modified stock intake will be damned near as good as a 2115 on a mild deal anyway. This is all moot, as the "better choice if we can have only one dual plane" doesn't exist. My point, however, is that an rpm/stealth is what the caddy world needed, NOT the tow truck performer intake.
Apples to oranges, perhaps, but look at the stealth on the 460 test. Pretty darned good showing for a torque vs horse trade off.
Dave
Thanks for the kind words.
On hood clearance, if the 2115 is an issue, what's another inch or two? Andy's look cool.
Imo, it would be better if our only dual plane was a stealth/rpm. How badly would it kill a very mild deal? It has been said that a well modified stock intake will be damned near as good as a 2115 on a mild deal anyway. This is all moot, as the "better choice if we can have only one dual plane" doesn't exist. My point, however, is that an rpm/stealth is what the caddy world needed, NOT the tow truck performer intake.
Apples to oranges, perhaps, but look at the stealth on the 460 test. Pretty darned good showing for a torque vs horse trade off.
Dave
You're welcome dave.
I feel that the Cadillac engines and their various designs, be it stroker 500, std 500, stroker 472 or std 472, don't lack in the torque area. I have seen various combinations of parts go through our shop and get tested on our dyno. If you look at the torque out put of any combination it surpasses almost every stock production block and stroke combinations. That's not to say a poor intake wouldn't hurt the bottom end. It just means that we could give up a little there and not know it. We are going through looking at what we know and wondering what would be the best option for a new, iron head? if I'm correct in that assumption, intake. I would lean toward something like a stealth along with dave. The stealth will allow for higher hp numbers, over a 2115, and doesn't seem to lack that much on the torque side. In my expiriences with sbf's they perform better with a stealth intake than with a victor, until you get about 6000 rpm. Further more at that rpm you are not looking at a mild street engine either. If you look at this shoot out results you can see the comparisson of many intakes on a BBF. Since it is very similar to the Cadillac engine the results are comparable.
http://www.walt-n-anne.com/Ranchero/shootout.html
The stealth is in the top five in both categories and a similar manifold or reproduction modified for a Cadillac would perform just as well :twocents:. On the other had if the 2115 has hood clearance problems then what will it matter if you build one to any height? The few engines I have built and returned to original Cadillacs, while equiped with a 2115, haven't had any hood problems. We used a drop down air filter and everything fit. There was atleast an 1.5" between the breather and the hood.
I feel that the Cadillac engines and their various designs, be it stroker 500, std 500, stroker 472 or std 472, don't lack in the torque area. I have seen various combinations of parts go through our shop and get tested on our dyno. If you look at the torque out put of any combination it surpasses almost every stock production block and stroke combinations. That's not to say a poor intake wouldn't hurt the bottom end. It just means that we could give up a little there and not know it. We are going through looking at what we know and wondering what would be the best option for a new, iron head? if I'm correct in that assumption, intake. I would lean toward something like a stealth along with dave. The stealth will allow for higher hp numbers, over a 2115, and doesn't seem to lack that much on the torque side. In my expiriences with sbf's they perform better with a stealth intake than with a victor, until you get about 6000 rpm. Further more at that rpm you are not looking at a mild street engine either. If you look at this shoot out results you can see the comparisson of many intakes on a BBF. Since it is very similar to the Cadillac engine the results are comparable.
http://www.walt-n-anne.com/Ranchero/shootout.html
The stealth is in the top five in both categories and a similar manifold or reproduction modified for a Cadillac would perform just as well :twocents:. On the other had if the 2115 has hood clearance problems then what will it matter if you build one to any height? The few engines I have built and returned to original Cadillacs, while equiped with a 2115, haven't had any hood problems. We used a drop down air filter and everything fit. There was atleast an 1.5" between the breather and the hood.
STDog
Active Member
mt83 said:
That's fine for the RWD cars, but the Eldo has a much lower hood.
hertzdaddy
Active Member
mt83 said:
Its a one-off graft he made from some hoodscoop he found or had laying around I believe.
nitrojoe
New Member
Just to throw a design idea out there . How about a modular hi-perf dual plane intake that has a common plenum center section and the lower bolt-on section will feature various intake port heights / widths to accomodate different cylinder head packages .
If I win the lottery .... there's going to be some "front" money !
I agree with Terry that a tunnel ram on the " T " would be badass :metal: He would pick up torque and the " T " would pull the wheels higher and charge harder towards the stripe , at least 2-3 tenths faster . Optimize a solid roller for cylinder filling and I think we would have to re-name the hi-port to ....... suggestions ? :scratchchin:
( Terrythumper !)
If I win the lottery .... there's going to be some "front" money !
I agree with Terry that a tunnel ram on the " T " would be badass :metal: He would pick up torque and the " T " would pull the wheels higher and charge harder towards the stripe , at least 2-3 tenths faster . Optimize a solid roller for cylinder filling and I think we would have to re-name the hi-port to ....... suggestions ? :scratchchin:
( Terrythumper !)74 Novallac
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2010
- Messages
- 946
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Nick Campagna said:
I ran into hood clearance problems on my 69 corvette. I found that if you use the air cleaner base for the L88 vette (which should still be available through Eklers or just about any vette restoration outfit) it will give you a lot more drop over the carb and better hood clearance. You'll need at least a 2" filter if I remember correctly. :screwy:
EZ
New Member
So Miles............did you run it on the dyno??? Any idea if all that work paid dividends?? :reading:MOCRUZN said:
EZ
New Member
dave brode said:
Looks to me like the Stealth was the hands down winner of the 460 Ford contest for HP and TQ combined.
dave brode
Well-Known Member
[quote="EZ
Looks to me like the Stealth was the hands down winner of the 460 Ford contest for HP and TQ combined.[/quote]
Yessir. If we could only assume that one modified [hacked and welded] for a caddy [w/o adapters] would do as well for us. Then again, a different engine might like one of the others. I wish that the test 460 had been a bit a wilder combo. Something like a 10-1, maybe 10.5-1 CR with 240 ish at .050" cam [or more] and such.
Dave
Looks to me like the Stealth was the hands down winner of the 460 Ford contest for HP and TQ combined.[/quote]
Yessir. If we could only assume that one modified [hacked and welded] for a caddy [w/o adapters] would do as well for us. Then again, a different engine might like one of the others. I wish that the test 460 had been a bit a wilder combo. Something like a 10-1, maybe 10.5-1 CR with 240 ish at .050" cam [or more] and such.
Dave
JW
Active Member
And still no dyno numbers
If a manifold is only a few horse better on a VERY mild combo bumping up the compression and even a little bigger cam might make a huge difference.
If a manifold is only a few horse better on a VERY mild combo bumping up the compression and even a little bigger cam might make a huge difference.