DeTomaso Mailing List: August 2000, Message #137

DAVE,
PLEEEEEASE GROW UP!
MD
P.S.  SEE IF LAURIE AND ROBERT K WILL CONSIDER THE SAME DECISION! :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: David Doddek <pantera@pobox.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <detomaso@realbig.com>
Date: Thursday, August 03, 2000 9:46 PM
Subject: RE: Cylinder heads & Big HP "Clevelands"...


>I see all that ever happens here is that my comments get slammed.  Thefore
>I will NEVER reply to a technical question on this forum again.
>
>Dave "goodby" D
>
>At 05:26 PM 8/3/00 -0400, you wrote:
>>>In light of most peoples driving, use the Performer dual plane.  It will
>>>pull to over 6000 rpm and provide more low end torque.  If you plan on
more
>>>racing than street driving then use the blue thunder.  Or if you chose to
>>>do the crower stage 4 cam then go with the blue thunder.  DO NOT use a
>>>single plane for a street car unless you want to turn the engine over
7000
>>>rpm and use a big cam.  Also the edelbrock will allow you to use the
engine
>>>screen.
>>
>>A guy on another list recently posted the results of intake manifold tests
>>he
>>performed on a 350 Chevy in a Camaro that nominally ran the 1/4 mile in
>>13.5 seconds or so.  He used a Rochester Qjet carb and several single and
>>dual plane intakes.  He was meticulous about carb tuning and his best
>>results
>>in real world driving were with a small port single plane intake manifold.
>>He said
>>the dual planes were only better right off idle.  Everywhere else,
including
>>MPG,
>>the single planes were better.
>>
>>I think this has as much to do with the specific intakes in question.
With
>>a 4V
>>Cleveland, all the single plane intakes are large port.  I like the Weiand
>>Xcelerator
>>2V I'm running on my Aussie headed 351C and wonder how it would work on a
>>4V engine.  It might work better than a Performer (or an Xcelerator 4V,
for
>>that
>>matter).
>>
>>Also, I wouldn't be surprised if the crossover point where even a big port
>>single
>>plane intake, like a Holley Strip Dominator, make more power than a dual
>>plane
>>like the Performer is much less than 7000 rpm.  Personally, below 3000
rpms,
>>
>>I'm interested in how smoothly the intake works.  When you're looking for
>>performance, you'll have the revs up anyway.
>>
>>>You can use any carb you like, but My best performance was from a
>>>Carter AVS from an old dodge big block.  The Performer carb runs well but
>>>does not corner well.
>>
>>The Performer is a slightly modified Carter AFB.  The Carter AFB and AVS
>>are very similar carbs, differing mainly in that the AVS uses an
adjustable
>>spring-loaded air valve and the AFB uses a counter-weighted one.  The
float
>>and bowl arrangements are the same, so cornering potential should be
>>identical.
>>
>>>Use around 750 cfm.  I think for what you want the 600 or 650 will be too
>>>small.  By the way, that carter I used was an 850 and it had plenty of
>>torque.
>>
>>Hmmm, I believe the largest AVS was a 750.  Perhaps you were using a
>>ThermoQuad which is an exaggerated spreadbore like a Quadrajet?
>>ThermoQuads are very sophisticated carbs and were available in 800 and
>>1000 CFM versions.
>>
>>Dan Jones
>>
>>
>>
>>
>