I’m contemplating running an old Weaind aluminum cross tunnel ram intake manifold, P3690982, on my 63 Sport Fury (see specs below). I have been trying to find some info on pros and cons about this intake. I have the option of running the 6 pack top or the single 4 barrel top. I was also thinking about having a dual quad top made. I have read the info in the Mopar engine book and it lists the mods for the 6 pack but I would like to hear form some people that have run it before. I know this intake will probably not work as well as some of the new ones, probably not as good as my TM7 that I just took off, but I think it looks cool. I have always liked to be different and I don’t think I have ever seen one of these intakes on a car before. I was going to go the traditional Max Wedge look but it is costly and it seams like lately every other 62 to 65 car I see has a cross ram. Don’t get me wrong I love the look, I just can’t afford it now and like I said before I like to be a little different.

I found this site that has more mods for the 6 pac also. http://victorylibrary.com/mopar/weiand-c.htm

The site says the major problem with this intake is that the very low mixture velocity in the plenum will cause fuel to “drop out” of suspension, form large droplets, and collect on the plenum floor. This leads to poor idle quality, plug fouling and irregular mixture distribution between cylinders. Although this cannot be completely cured, the factory suggested some modifications (in the Engine book)

Looking at the manifold I can see why the fuel would puddle on the plenum floor, as it is perfectly flat. On the 6 pack setup the center carb (primary) is directly over the flat spot in the plenum and I can see this being an even bigger problem with the single 4 as the carb is in the center directly over the flat plane of the plenum.

This lead me to think about other tunnel ram designs with a single 4 and dual 4’s. I have used both and I always had better street manors from the dual quads. In theory I would say that a dual quad top made for this intake would work better and be less apt to having the problems noted above. What I was actually thinking was to have a 2x4 top made and place a large divider in the center of the plenum so that one 4 barrel would run the front cylinders and one would run the rear. This would reduce plenum volume, and increase velocity. I would leave an opening in the divider as a balance tube.

Any thoughts?

Thanks
John

Engine
440 = 0.040, forged flat tops (0.060 below deck) ported and polished 906 heads shaved to 80cc’s, final comp ratio is 9.5:1, MP mechanical .528 cam, roller rockers, Balanced rotating assembly, forged crank, LY rods w/new apr bolts, ½ inch oil pickup with high volume pump and 7 qt pan, just a good basic 440 build for street strip use.

Car
63 Plymouth, 518 OD transmission w/ transgo shift kit, 2600 stall, 3.91 gears, SS springs.

It will be fine for you! In high output motors it actually lacks enough flow

I've just installed one of these with a six pack set up. I've modified the intake as per the DC engine book, but I've had considerable difficulty getting the thing to run right, it's almost there but any tips from someone with experience of this intake would be much appreciated.

http://www3.sympatico.ca/big-d/2X4.htm

Don Dulmage built a two 4bbl top as seen in the webpage above. I'd contact him and see what he has. I have one of these intakes and I can see where the fuel from the center carb (sixpack) hits the plenum floor and fuel runs all over the place. I think the two 4bbl would put the throttle blades much closer to the inlets in the manifold.

I have been running mine now for 4 years runs good.

dual quad lid would probably have less issues than a single 4 or six pack top because the carbs would be over top of the runners. HP wise, this intake will probably pick up 20hp or more over a tm7 depending on your engine

a victor jr with a 1000hp holley lost 4 mph in the 1/8th to this intake with a six pack in my testing on a standard port 493

Bump, I watching this close. I have this intake and want to use it on my eddy head 493 in the Challenger. Leaning towards Promax carbs work, they ran this intake on one of the 440 magazine builds.

it's the Mopar Muscle Engine Challenge 2008, here's a link.
http://moparmuscle.automotive.com/114429...arts/index.html

I've ran a couple. Modified for two fours, they work great. Had them on daily drivers and work trucks...

How about my buddy's Charger? ON PROPANE!!!

Wow..take a challenging intake and add the variables of using propane through it!
I can only imagine.

I love my aluminum dual plane 6 bbl Edelbrock intake, the "factory stock" one, part number CH-6B
Having said that, both the Weiand and the wide, Edelbrock STR 14-6 have always intrigued me. There is disappointment that so many "bulletin" and mods seem to have to be made for them to work, and even more mods to maximize their performance. So kudos to those of you who have either of these way cool looking manifolds.

Man are you ever missing the point !!!!

Just about every intake on the market needs mods to make them work and maximize performance. The difference is that Chrysler wanted racers in the winner's circle so they put the time and effort into figuring out what was needed and then passing the information along. Chevy and Ford guys had to fend for themselves and rarely shared their findings. I'd bet a lot of those guys were reading Chrysler bulletins !!

Wow, talk about digging up bones

I want the two four top for mine just for looks, thought of making one out of plate aluminum and a 1" spacer (to make the same thickness as original) but maybe just bolt the plate to the bottom for less plenum size (the article) and use the 1" thick 4 hole plastic carb spacers.
I have the Carter competition carbs 9636SA.
That way I won't mess with the my six pack carbs and leave the whole assembly carbs,intake and air cleaner stock.

A few guys have tried them in N/SS with dual 4's. The power output wasn't aNY thing to brag about. Nobody currently using one.
Doug