Ford Forums banner

manifolds

4K views 18 replies 11 participants last post by  soverign 
#1 ·
has any body used a f-246 with the torque power manifold or any similiar cam like the previous thead were they used a smaller cam and any known results or any dyno results
 
#3 ·
#6 ·
If you want a dyno queen with bragging rights of peak power, dont use the Torque Power.
But in realitiy the 200 or 300rpm you loose at the top, will well and truley be made up and more, with the ultra high torque you made at low and mid range.

What would be a great test is a 12 second car with a TFC or FW and do a 1/4 mile run, then swap to the Torque Power the same day and do some more runs. I think people would be surprised of the results. :priest:
 
#7 ·
I know someone that has tested one. 11.4 no torque power 11.8/11.9 with. Remove the torque power and back to 11.4's.

[edit]What happened due to it falling over with the gearing it had. He simply ran out of rpm. doh!
 
#8 ·
brenx said:
I know someone that has tested one. 11.4 no torque power 11.8/11.9 with. Remove the torque power and back to 11.4's.

[edit]What happened due to it falling over with the gearing it had. He simply ran out of rpm. doh!
Yeah, you are probably right. The set up still favours the hirise. Maybe adjusting gears, stally and tune to be optimum for the TP too would make it fairer. We'll just have to wait for some keen guys to try.
(brenx, what manifold did they use against the TP?)
 
#11 ·
I initially was going to run the 246 + funnell web but have opted for the 238 + torque power as i figured the initial torque figures would compensate for the lack of top end, and my gut feeling was that the torque power would run out of puff with the 246 and as mine will not see a lot of track time i dont think it was worth it - i would rather have it down low off the line rather than at 6500 rpm.

If you are gonna run consistently 6000rpm+ your prolly better off with 4V as well IMO
 
#12 ·
if you are going to compare manifolds...try comparing a dual plane with a dual plne,not with a single plane...even with a single plane weiand xcellerator,and a torquer,and these over the years,these have been the most popular,the dual plane out performs these manifolds from 1500 rpm to around 6200 rpm,and this is exactly what they were designed to do...
not only that,but they help deliver a more consistent atomized mixture to the heads,you will see a slightly better emission test as well...
you have to compare apples with apples,but this doesnt get done in this case,because there is'nt any other dual-planes out there worth testing against...in this case they are in field of their own!
you can't compare a dual plane with a single plane,the engine is not seeing the same thing,it's neary like comparing a single plane with a tunnel ram!
when you can take a standard dual plane off of a mild 351 cleveland and replace it with another dual-plane that is designed to give around another 40 hp,and it does it,i think this excellent...
just my opinion...
 
#14 ·
hi Russ,yea it's good to be here...there's some good info on this forum...
one of the most important fundamentals to remember with making your car go faster is TRANSIENT RESPONSE...this is a direct correlation to torque,and this is the stuff that accelerates your car faster...this can be gained by doing many things to the engine/chassis...
eg..higher rpm converter,not only can this allow you to leave the line faster,by locking the driveline up at a rpm where your engine is making more torque...but also in keeping your engine in that range between gearchanges...
unlike a manual gearbox car...you can leave the line at a rpm in your higher torque range,but when you change gears the driveline locks solid as soon as you release the clutch,and does not flare up quickly to the higher torque range and accelerate..it has to pick some rpm up first before it gets to it..
thats why with a manual,you have to build an engine in a higher rpm band and/or use lower gearing in the box and/or diff..
this is ONE if the reasons why INTENDED APPLICATION of the car is important...
these soughts of things will help determine the way that the cylinder heads ,camshaft and carburetor need to be modified...
once you get a handle on how the engines "support sysyems" work,and how they effect the engine as a whole,then you will start to realise how much power some of the under rated engine parts can help produce...
 
#15 ·
whether a manifold is a dual plane or single is really irrelevant. What's relevant is what suits engine parts, car and running gear and as you've already stated intended application. My whole point above was you can kill an engine with a bad part choice just as quick as you can make it better.

No point putting a tunnelram on a stock engine.
 
#16 ·
yea ,thats exactly right...and the torque-power manifold really shines in a heavy car with high gearing,it will really pick the cars acceleration up,this type of combo a dual plane is really suited well... with a dual plane you will really help the strength of the vacuum signal that the carburetor sees...to help pull the fuel out faster,and into a faster moving airstream,at lower rpm,where a single plane does not show it's true colours as well...the torque-power dual-plane has some of both...better vacuum singal at the carburetor,and enough pleneum volume to keep making torque in the upper rpm...horses for courses...
 
#17 ·
soverign said:
hi Russ,yea it's good to be here...there's some good info on this forum...
one of the most important fundamentals to remember with making your car go faster is TRANSIENT RESPONSE...this is a direct correlation to torque,and this is the stuff that accelerates your car faster...this can be gained by doing many things to the engine/chassis...
eg..higher rpm converter,not only can this allow you to leave the line faster,by locking the driveline up at a rpm where your engine is making more torque...but also in keeping your engine in that range between gearchanges...
unlike a manual gearbox car...you can leave the line at a rpm in your higher torque range,but when you change gears the driveline locks solid as soon as you release the clutch,and does not flare up quickly to the higher torque range and accelerate..it has to pick some rpm up first before it gets to it..
thats why with a manual,you have to build an engine in a higher rpm band and/or use lower gearing in the box and/or diff..
this is ONE if the reasons why INTENDED APPLICATION of the car is important...
these soughts of things will help determine the way that the cylinder heads ,camshaft and carburetor need to be modified...
once you get a handle on how the engines "support sysyems" work,and how they effect the engine as a whole,then you will start to realise how much power some of the under rated engine parts can help produce...
Hey soverign, welcome to the forum :hy:
You make some excellent points. If I was to simplify and abbreviate what you have said would, "bigger is not always better" and "use the correct combination of parts",to acheive your goal, be too far off?
I'm not exactly answering silver foxes original question but, I have swapped an Edelbrock Performer for a Weiand X-celerator on my very mild 351 and gone backward.
Both manifolds run the same MPH over the 1/4, so would appear to make about the same peak power. But the performer 60ft's .3sec better and is a full half second quicker by the end of the quater.
Some tuning with the Weiand would probably improve the times a little, but the Performer uses less fuel and is smoother for my daily driver.

I actually bought the x-celerator for my next motor. But could probably sell both manifolds and buy a Torque-power. I think it would suit a 95% street driven car better.
 
#19 ·
hi Workhorse,that doesnt suprise me,...
if you'll bear with me...
a dualplane works slightly different to a single plane,in that the engine sees a stronger signal (greater pressure difference or vacuum),at the venturi booster...
this being, that one bank of cylinders pulls from two venturis of the carby,and the other bank from the other two venturis...hence the "two planes",sought of like half blocking off a vacuum cleaners nozzel...now the pull is much greater,and this greater pull on the fuel out of the booster has a much better atomization(smaller fuel molecules),over a given surface area of an oxygen laden airstream...
this set up will make more torque down low in the rpm band,where air velocity through the inlet tract is at a lower speed.now,as the rpm's rise the air velocity is faster and this effect will start to trail off,as the demand for a higher quantity of air flow is needed to sustain hp...
this is where the single plane comes into it's own...
the beauty about the xcellerator,is that it is a "smaller" single plane in its runner volume than most single planes,and is why it will tend to start to work down lower in the rpm than most... the smaller runners in cross-section will tend to keep the air speed faster aiding in delivering the port in the head,with a mixture that the fuel will not dribble out of the airstream as it goes around the short turn...you'd find that if you put a 2500-2800 rpm convertor in it,it would probably go faster over the 1/4 mile...
if you where to increase the speed of the vacuum cleaner,you would now have to take your hand of the nozzel to gain the extra airflow...

you could use a torque-power with a roller cam,but now you need to start looking at the efficiency of the intake port,to get the added benefit of the roller...a small roller,say.620" lift,270-280 duration,on a 110 lsa would be good with 9.8:1 static comp,small venturi carby (650 throttle body,flowing 750,with downleg boosters),it would hammer...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top