Re: Injector Stack vs. SM Intake
[Re: tubtar]
#847904
11/07/10 01:19 PM
11/07/10 01:19 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 252 St.Louis, Mo.
mokid
OP
enthusiast
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 252
St.Louis, Mo.
|
Set up sits on a W7 small block I believe its a 440 cu in car ran inthe low 8's in a 3200 lb conquest, The entire motor is for sale, Very sad story a true mopar racer died of cancer his wife and best friend now are selling everything including Hemi Alum block, a complete 572 hemi block that has 440 heads, several race small blocks, also cars a 67 Barracuda just out of the body shop, a 65 Barracuda full tube chassis running a 440 with a pro charger best of everthing, never got to race car before he died, also a 67 cornet show quality with a Alumn Hemi never run. If any interested parties please let me know.
|
|
|
Re: Injector Stack vs. SM Intake
[Re: mokid]
#847905
11/07/10 02:15 PM
11/07/10 02:15 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 684 St. Charles, MO.
Slingshot383
mopar
|
mopar
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 684
St. Charles, MO.
|
Stack injection on alcohol will make more power than a carb on alcohol, and if you are starting from scratch, the costs is comparable. If the system came of a sprint car motor with W-7 heads, it will not bolt straight on a set of 440 heads.
1994 Undercover Chassis 125" altered
stack injected big block, soon blown and injected
Member of The Torque and Recoil Club
|
|
|
Re: Injector Stack vs. SM Intake
[Re: mokid]
#847907
11/07/10 07:55 PM
11/07/10 07:55 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,206 New York
polyspheric
master
|
master
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,206
New York
|
The IR throttles have to be really huge to beat a carbureted plenum manifold.
Boffin Emeritus
|
|
|
Re: Injector Stack vs. SM Intake
[Re: polyspheric]
#847908
11/07/10 08:54 PM
11/07/10 08:54 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,082 St. Paul , Mn.
tubtar
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,082
St. Paul , Mn.
|
Quote:
The IR throttles have to be really huge to beat a carbureted plenum manifold.
This kind of formed my opinion........they seem to start at 2 1/8" dia and go up from there on small block set ups I have seen........telling me that they will allow huge amounts of air in. And if you don't have the arrangement that requires this , a carb would be a better choice. Again.....purely guess work from my corner. But it seems to work on paper.
|
|
|
Re: Injector Stack vs. SM Intake
[Re: tubtar]
#847909
11/08/10 12:08 AM
11/08/10 12:08 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,206 New York
polyspheric
master
|
master
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,206
New York
|
That's not very big. Crower used 2.90" stacks on 427" BBC 40 years ago.
Boffin Emeritus
|
|
|
Re: Injector Stack vs. SM Intake
[Re: 40ford]
#847912
11/08/10 02:10 PM
11/08/10 02:10 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 684 St. Charles, MO.
Slingshot383
mopar
|
mopar
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 684
St. Charles, MO.
|
The Indy 8-Stack is a 2.90" throttle bore, and Engler Machine and tool can make them much larger than that. A properly set up mechanical fuel injection unit will work at lower rpm's than 4000, and will also have a clean idle.
1994 Undercover Chassis 125" altered
stack injected big block, soon blown and injected
Member of The Torque and Recoil Club
|
|
|
Re: Injector Stack vs. SM Intake
[Re: Slingshot383]
#847913
11/08/10 06:25 PM
11/08/10 06:25 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 28,312 Cincinnati, Ohio
Challenger 1
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 28,312
Cincinnati, Ohio
|
Quote:
The Indy 8-Stack is a 2.90" throttle bore, and Engler Machine and tool can make them much larger than that. A properly set up mechanical fuel injection unit will work at lower rpm's than 4000, and will also have a clean idle.
I agree with the last 2 posters.
I have run 2 different stack injections and have out run all carbs.
I could see driving them on the street, no problem. I even used my N2O system to prime the motor to start,one man job.
|
|
|
Re: Injector Stack vs. SM Intake
[Re: 40ford]
#847914
11/08/10 08:46 PM
11/08/10 08:46 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,206 New York
polyspheric
master
|
master
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,206
New York
|
The IRs don't idle well and don't accelerate well off idle----they don't have an acceleration pump as carbs.
Backward.
Boffin Emeritus
|
|
|
Re: Injector Stack vs. SM Intake
[Re: mokid]
#847921
11/09/10 11:42 AM
11/09/10 11:42 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,093 Long Beach, CA
Mike Swann
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,093
Long Beach, CA
|
Ive seen guys do conversions where they have EFI injectors on the underside of the stacks , connect MAP to all of the stacks with small tubes on the outside to a miniature manifold and a TPS on one throttle shaft. Works really nice for the street.
8.30's @3400 lbs
|
|
|
Re: Injector Stack vs. SM Intake
[Re: Mike Swann]
#847922
11/09/10 02:11 PM
11/09/10 02:11 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 684 St. Charles, MO.
Slingshot383
mopar
|
mopar
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 684
St. Charles, MO.
|
Mechanical fuel injection is more race oriented than for the street. It is also easy to work on and tune, the problem is that most people start out learing how to tune carbs and then try to apply the same methods to fuel injection. I can make my little motor idle at 800 rpm in gear, and launch with a 1.20 short time. Of course it's much happier launching at 6200, but that's more the cam and heads than the injection.
1994 Undercover Chassis 125" altered
stack injected big block, soon blown and injected
Member of The Torque and Recoil Club
|
|
|
|
|