|
Author
|
Topic: Port stuffers for the intake needed or not?
|
Built351c
Gearhead Posts: 140
From: Big Lake, MN
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-27-2002 12:47 AM
  
Been thinking about buying a new intake. Either a TFC or a Parker Funnelweb. Both use port stuffers. My heads have been worked over and flow 301 cfm. I am thinking that the port stuffers would hurt my motor more then help it. Opinions on both intakes and port stuffers are needed. Currently my motor is putting out around 480hp at 6500rpm with a Weiand Xcellerator that has been slighty worked on to match the heads. I am also using a predator carb with a one inch spacer.
The motor is a 351C 4v with 11.3 compression.[This message has been edited by Built351c (edited 01-27-2002).]
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 01-27-2002 08:22 AM
I dont have any past experiance with either intakes or the port stuffers, but from what I have seen, I think if the port stuffers work they way they are designed, they will help performance quite a bit. (and this is coming from a guy who hates port plates). For a test, I took a cylinder head that was flowing 305 cfm on the intake and filled the bottom 7/8" of the runner with epoxy, after I was done, it flowed 330 cfm (and I really had no idea as how to or where to put the epoxy). And it gained a bunch thru the mid lift range which would defintaly help torque.If I were to spend the money on one of those intakes,(and I know the intake I bought from Australia wasn't cheap), I would use the port stuffers. My intake ports with just some bowl work and a little short turn work flowed 310 cfm so I dont think you would mess it up by using the stuffers. 
IP: Logged |
Mpcoluv
Gearhead Posts: 1341
From: Charlotte NC usa
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-27-2002 09:18 AM
Have you seen the latest Terry PArker intake?
It looks like he is using a version of the Roush stuffers now, and the intake looks a lot like a strip dominator with the floor filled in.
It looks pretty good to me, but the proof is on the dyno I guess.
IP: Logged |
Built351c
Gearhead Posts: 140
From: Big Lake, MN
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-27-2002 01:35 PM
Thanks for the input. Once I get the car running right and down the track with the old intake then I will switch and see if there is any differences. Thanks again for the input.
IP: Logged |
NitroStanggirl
Journeyman Posts: 8
From: Idaho Falls, ID
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 03-21-2002 11:01 AM
I know this is a very old post, but I found it in a search engine, I think.I have Dyno Sheets for the Parker Funnelweb. http://www.madhatterracing.com/funnel4V.htm
IP: Logged |
NitroStanggirl
Journeyman Posts: 8
From: Idaho Falls, ID
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 03-21-2002 11:03 AM
Also the port stuffers on the intake side are a VERY good idea, they reduce the intake turbulence and also increase flow velocity. VERY nice for Torque gains!
IP: Logged |
Ron
Gearhead Posts: 137
From: Newcastle, Wa.
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 03-21-2002 01:44 PM
nitrostangirl what year and specs of it you own?
IP: Logged |
Daniel Jones
Gearhead Posts: 898
From: St. Louis, MO
Registered: Aug 99
|
posted 03-21-2002 02:37 PM
The Roush port stuffers approximate what Ford Motorsport did to make the A3 high port intake ports. A good thing in my book.Dan Jones
IP: Logged |
Fordwiser
Gearhead Posts: 442
From: Metamora, Illinois
Registered: Dec 2000
|
posted 03-21-2002 08:27 PM
I have a Yates style Motorsport intake I'm modifing to work on my 351C. The ports are smaller and flow into the upper part of the heads intake port. I'm going to try it without anything filling the heads. This is a drag motor that revs pretty high, the converter stalls at 4800 against the brake, this will be the lowest rpm it sees going down the track. My hope is the velocity will be high enough there will not be much turbulance, on a street driven motor I think the turbulance would kill torque so the stuffers would be a good idea.
Roger
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 03-21-2002 09:56 PM
I'm going to try my 2v port size Active intake on my 4v heads at the start of this year. My convertor really stalls high (6200-6400) and I'm hoping the smaler ports will keep the velocity up while the raised runner design with the bigger plenum will help keep it form killing the top end off.
IP: Logged |
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 45869
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 03-22-2002 07:43 AM
Welcome to M&M, NitroStanggirl. ------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 M code 351C 4V/FMX/3.25 open
'72 Mustang Sprint Coupe 351C 4V/FMX/4.30 Trac Lok
'94 F-150 XL 5.8L/E4OD/3.55 Limited Slip
MCA Member # 47773
IP: Logged |
bluestreek
Gearhead Posts: 1724
From: Athens,GA
Registered: Jul 2001
|
posted 03-22-2002 08:43 AM
Anytime that a smaller port is dumped into a larger port, there is a decrease in velocity and an increase in turbulance. Flow tests have proven that even a 1-2 degree taper (to smaller) will flow as well or better than a perfectly straight port and a D shaped port has better and smoother airflow than a round or oval port. Hope this helps. BS
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 03-22-2002 04:15 PM
quote:
Originally posted by bluestreek:
Anytime that a smaller port is dumped into a larger port, there is a decrease in velocity and an increase in turbulance. Flow tests have proven that even a 1-2 degree taper (to smaller) will flow as well or better than a perfectly straight port and a D shaped port has better and smoother airflow than a round or oval port. Hope this helps. BS
Hmm....maybe I wont try that intake after all. Even though there is more than enough material around the port to open it up to the 4v size, I would really rather not do that. Guess I will stick with the strip dominator then.
IP: Logged |
n2oMike
Gearhead Posts: 2831
From: Spencer, WV
Registered: Jan 2001
|
posted 03-22-2002 05:23 PM
Hey, intakes on 351C's are too easy to change to not give it a try!There was a guy at our local track who brought an old ragged, tubbed Maverick with a Boss 302 equipped with a B&A Track Boss intake and HUGE doses of nitrous... He spun the thing close to 9k rpm on the stock bottom end for several passes into the 6.20's. He felt guilty ABUSING the mostly stock Boss 302 like that, so he was going to retire the engine after his last pass.... but it didn't make it all the way down the track before scattering itself.  I bought the intake off him for $200, then sold it to a buddy shortly after for around the same price. This was just 3-4 years ago. The port mismatch didn't seem to bother him too much. The intake had 2bbl ports, and was completely stock. The unused part of the port was pretty much "dead air space" that didn't see much velocity anyway. Port stuffers couldn't hurt, though. Good Luck! ------------------
Mike Burch
66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads
10.63 @ 129.3
http://www.geocities.com/carbedstangs/cmml_mburch.html
http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/healey/367
http://www.mustangworks.com/cgi-bin/moi-display.cgi?220
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 03-22-2002 07:23 PM
quote:
Originally posted by n2oMike:
Hey, intakes on 351C's are too easy to change to not give it a try!
~~~~changes mind again~~~
You're right, it's too danged easy to change 'em not to try it.
IP: Logged |
Rustang
Gearhead Posts: 821
From: Clarion PA
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 03-22-2002 09:03 PM
My Boss 302 heads with the Roush spacers flowed 320cfm. I don't know how they'd had flowed without, though. ------------------
'68 mustang 351 clevor- 10.92@124
'67 Stang, 351W -11.18@118
'69 351C Torino-14.90@100
'78 Pickup 351W-15.56@88
'79 Pickup 460 ET=??
IP: Logged |
Twister
Journeyman Posts: 17
From: NE Ohio
Registered: Nov 2001
|
posted 03-22-2002 11:48 PM
quote:
Originally posted by bluestreek:
Anytime that a smaller port is dumped into a larger port, there is a decrease in velocity and an increase in turbulance....... BS
And an increase in pressure.
Pascal? Bernoli (sp)? An increase in velocity creates a decrease of pressure, and a decrease in velocity results in an increase of pressure. The amount of turbulance created depends on the shape of the passage where it get's larger. This subject of a port stuffer has gotten my interest, I have a '70 351C 4bbl I bought in boxes. Everything I've read says the 4bbl C makes no torque because of the port size so I was trying to think of a way to make some form of AR plate. Or do something/ play with it when I get it together. Nice to know someone has already done it. Time to go looking for a set of stuffers. I was thinking about some type of filling in the port but I'de be too afraid of it comign loose and getting ingested.
IP: Logged |
bluestreek
Gearhead Posts: 1724
From: Athens,GA
Registered: Jul 2001
|
posted 03-22-2002 11:49 PM
quote:
Originally posted by kid vishus:
~~~~changes mind again~~~You're right, it's too danged easy to change 'em not to try it.
Sorry Kid,I didn't mean to scare you away from trying a different intake. Trying it out is a good choice. It may not be a perfect match, but it'll give you an idea of what design works best with your combo. Remember that the known flow problem with stock 4 brl Cleveland is not just the port size, but also the flat intake manifolds and the low port openings on the heads. You want to try to get the flow higher and more vertical without reducing the size of the ports too much. There's a balance there somewhere, depending on how much port work is done to the transition, pockets, and valves. From reading your previous posts I think you're doing a great job! Good luck BS
[This message has been edited by bluestreek (edited 03-23-2002).]
IP: Logged |
kid vishus
Gearhead Posts: 6590
From: middle of NC
Registered: Oct 2000
|
posted 03-23-2002 09:21 AM
With as much taller as that Active intake is, with as high as the ports are raised, it might be worth trying just to see if it slows it down or not. I know it is much taller than my Strip Dominator. The Active measures 6 3/8" from the base of the intake to the carb flange. The Holley intake is prolly around 4". As for filling the ports, I have been told if epoxy is used, to put a set screw thru the floor of the port into the epoxy to hold it in place. I have played around with epoxy in a junk head to see how much flow difference it does make. It's a big difference even with someone that doesnt know where to put the epoxy (like me). The head I was using flowed 305 cfm ithout the epoxy, after I "puttied" it up, it flowed just over 325 cfm, and picked up a bunch thru the mid lift range, and eliminated a bunch of the instability we encountered testing the unfilled port. I talked with Ron Anderson awhile back and he told me he could get 360 cfm out of the intake ports on a 4v head by epoxing the floor up and some port work.
IP: Logged |
n2oMike
Gearhead Posts: 2831
From: Spencer, WV
Registered: Jan 2001
|
posted 03-23-2002 09:39 AM
Here's a picture of the Parker port stuffers from the 351C Forum. They cost $100 from...http://www.madhatterracing.com http://www.madhatterracing.com/shop/store/commerce.cgi?product=MI&cart_id=6074141.10003 In case anyone wants the link to the 351C forum, here it is... http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/119419  Good Luck!
------------------
Mike Burch
66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads
10.63 @ 129.3
http://www.geocities.com/carbedstangs/cmml_mburch.html
http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/healey/367
http://www.mustangworks.com/cgi-bin/moi-display.cgi?220
[This message has been edited by n2oMike (edited 03-23-2002).]
IP: Logged |
MrXerox
Gearhead Posts: 348
From: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 03-23-2002 12:32 PM
Would these stuffers do any good with an intake that was not matched? I.E. a strip-dominator or an X-Cellerator? Do they require some sort of epoxy to stay in the floor area of the port?
IP: Logged |
Rustang
Gearhead Posts: 821
From: Clarion PA
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 03-23-2002 05:50 PM
I drilled the bottom of the ports and drilled and tapped the port plates. Before I screwed them in I used JB Weld along with the 8-32 screws.
IP: Logged |
NitroStanggirl
Journeyman Posts: 8
From: Idaho Falls, ID
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 03-23-2002 09:17 PM
Sorry guys, I haven't been around much. I had no Idea there was so much activity here. THANK YOU FOR THE WARM WELCOME. The Parker Port Stuffers shown in the picture above need a Parker intake to go with it or matching stuffers inside the intake or some sort of filler to smooth the transition into the intake ports so the air doesn't hit that stuffer like a brick wall.
IP: Logged |
Mustangsandmore Forums
