Long rams vs modern dual planes

I'm still daydreaming about dropping a long ram intake setup on the Imperial. The 440 is being built with an eye on low to mid range torque and largely ignoring anything above 4500 rpm.

Have there been any direct comparison tests between the old long ram (30" divider) intakes and the modern intakes like the Performer or even the old Torker?
I know the long tubes would fall flat well before 5,000 rpm but it would be interesting to see the area under the curve at lower rpm.

Hacking one for port EFI would cure the old fuel puddling issue and likely send parts collectors into low earth orbit.

Yeah, for me it's all vapor but I do enjoy a good think about stuff like this.

Could you widdle up a spacer for injector bungs and not hack up the original intake?

widdle?

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/widdle

I think you mean whittle

k thanks.

You guys are hopeless. You keep buzzing around those long rams like they're going to do something for you. Don't you suppose that if they were so all-fired good that there'd be more of them in use? I think there was a direct comparison in Hot Rod's 383 intake test which I can't download because my operating system is so old.

Good Luck!
R.

The old 383 intake test didn't include the long ram. Part 2 included a cross ram that didn't do well.

But, yeah, long runner intakes.

Thinking about doing inline low rise dual fours on my 59'Imperial

The little Offy inline dual quad seems to be okay on mild to moderate engines, at least by what I've read.

You'll be sorry, I've used both the early inline dual four for wedge motors and the early first gen Hemi motor intake, no good except at WOT above 3500 RPM
one of my first halfway fast street cars was a 1934 Ford pick up that had been chop and channeled, it weigh under 2800 Lbs. without me in it with the near stock 1955 Chrysler 331 C.I. hemi, I put headers on it and a inline dual four intake off of a Jensen sport car with some early small CFM Carter AFB carbs, the stock dual plane single intake with one of those AFB drove a lot nicer below 3500 RPM than the dual quad set up did but being a guy under 22 yrs old back then I left them on
One of the first drag cars, (1960 Dodge Phoenix that weighed over 4000 Lbs with out me in it ) I put together had a stroker 383 motor that was 454 C.I. that had been run up in Fremont CA as a Super Stock car in a 1959 Plymouth Savoy
He got caught and banned so I ended up with it
That car ran 12.80 on a set of J.C Penney 800x14x7 inch wide slicks on it with me in it at the old Thermal airport Drags back in 1969, that car had a 3.73 gear open rear end it with a stock cast iron early torkflyte and stock converter
I never drove that car with the stock AFB single carb and intake but I was told the Plymouth ran a lot faster than my Dodge did with the same motor and tranny
If you have both intakes try them both and go from their , we all don't like the same thing so test, test and test some more

the edelbrock ch28 is the ticket for inline carbs. the long rams don't flow any air according to hugh's flow test. I use a ch28 with a pair of 600's and it has been absolutely the most trouble free reliable intake I've ever ran on a 440.

I hear people say that the long rams dumped at 5K.My 60 D500 never did.It would pull beyond that.Maybe I had a odd ball.Only problem I ever had was fouling plugs in daily driving which it did every day.Was my high school ride.Rocky

Christmas day back in the late 60's, with my younger sister in the car, we were first car in line that got stuck waiting for a passing train, when gates went up, I kicked it to to clean it out, all the the black smoke got me pulled over by a nearby LEO, said I did a burn out, I asked him where the tire tracks were? I got off, again.


On my long ram project, I can't see getting an optimum injector angle that just doesn't eventually aim at the floor of the manifold/head, so trying to go route for a bottom long ram port injector location, aiming at the roof, thinking with that small of inlet tract on a big inch motor, puddling will not be an issue, and keep a more period correct look.

here is a thought. what about using spacers between the head and intakes, housing the injectors, and throttle bodies where the carbs go, creating a dry intake ?
the spacers would be relatively easy to fab up.

QuickD100/Dave is getting ready to do a dyno test on one of these pretty soon. Not sure if he's doing multiple manifolds or just the ram, but you might want to get ahold of him and see what's up.

http://www.hughesengines.com/TechArticles/4portedintakemanifoldsupdated08272007.php

I haven't seen any dyno tests, but hughes cfm numbers tell an interesting story. For a stock big block head flowing say 230-ish CFM, the long rams look like they would provide ample flow. So as long as you're running stock or near stock heads, you should be fine and I think they would run well with a port efi conversion or a propane conversion would be fun to try. You want the intake to flow more than your heads, how much more is up for debate.

I don't see how to get a decent injector angle with that solution, unless the spacer is 3-4" deep. Additionally, since the long ram has such a poor reputation on puddling, seems to me to be counter intuitive to change over to an efi system, and just have puddling move to a different location. Your idea would be the simplest. Years back I asked here about a 90Deg injector, didn't get any leads.

very true about the puddling problem. i have thought about this over the years, but haven't taken the time to really investigate, or plan out this suggestion. always other projects come before, and at this time, i'm preparing an engine/transmission combo to install in my charger so i can have some fun before i croak, instead of working on/building cars for others like i have done over the last 15-20 years.
i hope to return to this thought in the future though.

They didn't do a long ram test in that series, unfortunately. But, I was surprised by how broad the torque and HP range was with the tall tunnel ram. For all the stories of them only being good over 4500, as I recall, it pretty much spanked everything everywhere in the curve in those tests.

I beleive they were originally done by Hot Rod, so they are probably floating around on the interwebs.

I had a couple ram engines rebuilt, one was a 1960 300F 413 engine with 63 300J short ram intakes and 3505s carbs. Stock stroke, stock compression, stock small valve heads with a very light pocket cleanup and a mild cam (similar to stock, went with a hyd roller) basically a stock rebuild but with lighter pistons and a warmer cam. I had it dyno'd and it performed well. TQ peak was at 3,600 rpm/351hp. Peak HP was 410 at 5,000, 421tq. It started falling off steadily past 5,000 rpm but the torque curve was very long and flat.

ScottSmith_Harms that's a lot what I was thinking about with my 59" Crown

That's exactly what I'm looking for.

Consider the application.
5300 lbs
3.23 gears
tight converter
29" tires


Tons of torque everywhere is what I need.

I still like to put my '60 NewYorker on the dyno once to see what it makes with the longram stroker under the hood.
Unfortunatly I still need to fix a driveline balance issue which starts at higher 90-100mph speeds because of the custom made driveshaft and sliding yoke.

It also has 3.23 and the stock stall convertor in the transmission.

Being frank, I would be disappointed with those numbers, unless those are at the wheel. This is not directed at your motor, it just might be what it is combo.

It was about what I expected with restrictive heads and a very mild cam. Not a monster but it had gobs of torque all over the place. Better heads and a more aggressive cam would have certainly upped the ante, my goal was a fairly simple stock style rebuild with a few miner modern upgrades (lighter pistons, roller cam, etc.) they were added more for reliability than an attempt to add HP.

If I were building a ram engine for ultimate performance I'd build a 440 stroker with good flowing heads and would use a much more aggressive cam. The intakes would likely be more for show than anything at that point because with a build like that the intakes would become the choking point, a single plane with a big 4 barrel or EFI would be the choice for max HP. If I were wanting the max from the intakes on a big inch engine I'd likely have them extrude honed, or cut them open from the underside for some good material removal to increase the plenum size to the max then weld them back together.

Cam card was the first cam I used before going to the roller. Specs were similar.

.02

as the intended intake[s] on my 33 humpback panel, the intakes are really, as scott said, just for show.
however, there will be good heads, bigger cam, higher stall converter, bigger gears, and cut and welded intakes.
i know the shortcomings of this intake, but the truck shouldn't weigh much over 2500 lbs, so this combination should be a fun deal. [i hope !]

I say go for it. I don't know if I would get into EFI but a set of long rams, a 509 cam, 2500+ stall converter and 3:91s would be a fun combo. Sure you could probably go faster with a good single plane but I guarantee you'll have a bigger smile on your face with those long tubes under the hood.

Stating the obvious?

there was a set of long rams on the Portland and or Seattle crags list that wear already cut up for for fuel injection I dint see then now they wear up fore a long time and he wanted a lot foe the setup