|
Author
|
Topic: 351c 2v heads intake change to CJ
|
joerigby5836
Journeyman Posts: 54
From: FL
Registered: Feb 2004
|
posted 10-21-2006 07:13 PM
 
Ok what am going to do many of you have already tried and mave have advice/ opions.
This is currently a rebuilt/ 3/4 cam 72 351c 2v with a performer and a holley 750cfm carb in place. I have purchased the 73 CJ intake & special egr spacer as well as the 4300d carb. I figure I will have to use the 4v intake valley pan since the ports are larger than a 2v port. I was told the engine was ported/matched when I purchased the car so I not sure what i will find when I remove the intake. I personely dont think the larger intake ports in the CJ intake will heart me that much.
I really dont want to change the heads yet. Thanks
Joe ------------------
Joe Rigby
1972 351c Mach 1 Fastback
|
Aussie XAXB
Gearhead Posts: 131
From: North Olmsted, Ohio
Registered: Jan 2006
|
posted 10-21-2006 10:45 PM
You are putting on an intake manifold with larger runners than the intake ports on the cylinder heads. This means there is going to be a "step" in front of the airflow path and will greatly interrupt the flow of air and detrimentally affect performance. Steve ------------------
My Mad Max Interceptor Project http://xaxbinterceptor.tripod.com Wife's 1966 Mustang Site http://purplestang66.tripod.com My Custom Part Site http://www.artisticmachine.com
|
mach1mike
Gearhead Posts: 135
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2004
|
posted 10-22-2006 06:45 AM
I had a similar set up on my 351 2v when I first bought it. As Steve says above, you will have a huge step down from the 4v inlet to the smaller 2v port. Saying that, mine ran "OK" but once I'd taken the inlet off & say the port size difference & fitted a aluminium Edlebrock 2v Performer that accepts a 4bbl Holley carb & it ran a whole lot better.[This message has been edited by mach1mike (edited 10-22-2006).]
|
Hemikiller
Gearhead Posts: 726
From: Killingworth, CT
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 10-22-2006 08:53 AM
I'd leave the Performer in place, since it's matched to the heads. If you really want the stock look, then the mismatch won't cause any driveability issues. I've used OE 4V intakes on 2V heads plenty of times.
|
joerigby5836
Journeyman Posts: 54
From: FL
Registered: Feb 2004
|
posted 10-22-2006 09:15 AM
Steve nice Mad Max I like it. I have considered the Aussie intake manifold but after finding how difficult it was to find the correct egr spacer to cover the egr groove in the intake of the 73 CJ Intake. I can only Imagine how difficult it will be to find one for the Aussie manifolds. MY second main objective is to finally attach the orginal Kickdown rod up. I maybe trying for somthing that will never happen due to the orginal setup/rod was for the 2v carb/intake. I tried the holley adapter and that also failed.Joe ------------------
Joe Rigby
1972 351c Mach 1 Fastback
|
Aussie XAXB
Gearhead Posts: 131
From: North Olmsted, Ohio
Registered: Jan 2006
|
posted 10-22-2006 11:05 PM
Thanks Joe. It's a dream come true. Today I started disconnecting everything and draining the cooling system to pull the engine out.You are much further ahead to either stay with the Performer or also the Weiand 2V intake is popular among Aussies for the 351C. They really know their stuff on cars and they build these engines to make serious power mostly. Also the Edlebrock Performer Air Gap is popular in the US as a favorite with 2V heads. It's the closest thing to the Aussie Parker Funnel Web that is probably the ultimate 351C intake, but the best results with that one seem to come with 4V heads that have the tongues epoxied into them. By the way, I live in Ohio.  Steve ------------------
My Mad Max Interceptor Project http://xaxbinterceptor.tripod.com Wife's 1966 Mustang Site http://purplestang66.tripod.com My Custom Part Site http://www.artisticmachine.com
|
spaceman
Journeyman Posts: 7
From: phoenix, az USA
Registered: Nov 2006
|
posted 11-09-2006 10:36 PM
I ran my 73 mach1 with a cleveland 4bbl intake on 2bbl heads for a few years. Yes there is a significant port mismatch and turbulance to go along with it, however I did notice a difference. The Ford performance book states that this is an easy cheap 35hp despite the mismatch.
|
Aussie XAXB
Gearhead Posts: 131
From: North Olmsted, Ohio
Registered: Jan 2006
|
posted 11-10-2006 11:19 PM
Now that is very interesting!! I'm going to have to take a look in that book somewhere.
Steve
------------------
My Mad Max Interceptor Project http://xaxbinterceptor.tripod.com Wife's 1966 Mustang Site http://purplestang66.tripod.com My Custom Part Site http://www.artisticmachine.com
|
spaceman
Journeyman Posts: 7
From: phoenix, az USA
Registered: Nov 2006
|
posted 11-11-2006 12:00 AM
FYI, the Book is ford performance by Pat Ganahl, I have the older 1979 version published by S-A design. I believe they have a new copy out. Lots of engine info.
|
joerigby5836
Journeyman Posts: 54
From: FL
Registered: Feb 2004
|
posted 11-11-2006 06:36 AM
Thanks guys theres good info here. But I still have the question of the Auto kick down rod. Since the engine was an orginal 2v setup and the switch over to a 4v intake and carb has been introduced i am having problems hooking up the kick down rod.
Will putting this orginal CJ intake & the 4300d carb correct this?
Thanks ------------------
Joe Rigby
1972 351c Mach 1 Fastback
|
spaceman
Journeyman Posts: 7
From: phoenix, az USA
Registered: Nov 2006
|
posted 11-11-2006 11:00 AM
I vaguely recall the manifold being higher so that the stock kickdown rod hit the manifold. If this is the case you have a few options. 1. Get a rod for the other engine, 2. don't use one at all ( I hated the kickdown myself and would rather shift manualy.) 3. bend the rod you have so it clears the engine.
|
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 48752
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 11-13-2006 06:16 PM
I don't use the kickdown rod on my '72. ------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 - '70 Mustang Convertible - '72 Mustang Sprint - '94 F-150 XL
|
