351c EFI intake manifold

Doug,

Raised port heads? Has somebody other than Thomas Tornblom done the conversion? I am aware of only two conversions, Thomas' and an american's, a gentleman named Jim Murch.

the basis for the conversion is the Trick Flow 351W FI manifold base. The runners of the manifold are pretty much in the same location as the 351C 2V, they are a tad smaller and more rectangular, whereas the 351c 2V runners are a bit more oval (corners more rounded). There is plenty of meat in the Trick Flow intake casting to grind them to the same size as the 351C 2V. Thomas Tornblom mated his manifold to a Aussie 351C motor, with small port 2V heads. Jim Murch, has done the same conversion mating his manifold to the 4V heads. He found plenty of meat around the runners to grind them open to "almost" the same opening as the 4V head ports. (see pic below). A 2V port lines up in the lower right hand corner of the 4V port. The Windsor/2V runners also line up with the ports in the Ford/SVO heads, only needing a height adjustment. For instance, David Berman's engine builder modified an Edelbrock Performer 2V manifold to mate up with the high port Yates heads on David's motor. Since the Windsor block is taller, making the "vee" wider, the wider Windsor manifold sits higher in the "vee" when it is installed on the 351C block, since the Cleveland "vee" is narrower. I can't say if it aligns properly with the ports in the Ford/SVO heads (A3, B351, C302), but it can be adjusted one way or the other.

Ignoring the un-needed water neck in the front of the manifold, there are 3 operations that must be performed to the Windsor manifold base to mate it with the Cleveland heads & block.

(1) The rear "valley rail" of the Windsor block curves outward, the rear valley rail of the Cleveland block curves inward, so the manifold's rear valley rail mating surface must be welded up to create a new inward curving mating surface, machined flat and then cut to the Cleveland shape. You can see the outcome of this operation in the picture below, looks like it was cast that way from the factory.

(2) The Windsor manifold bolts are all oriented vertically, whereas the Clevelands manifold bolts are a mixture, the two in the middle on each side are vertical, but the outer bolts are perpendicular to the head. The manifold base must be redrilled for the perpendicular orientation of the outer bolts.

(3) The Windsor block has a 9.5" deck height, the Cleveland deck height is 9.2", so some material must be machined from the manifold base to allow it to sit at the proper height in the narrower "vee", unless of course the intake is being mated with a high port SVO head.

So Doug, are you ready to put the A3 heads & Webers on the shelf and bolt on a set of C302s and an FI intake?

cowboy from hell

Here's a couple of pictures comparing the port layout of 4V vs 2V vs C302 svo. In the lower picture, the roof of the C302 port is 3/4" higher than the roof of the 2V port.

I'm still working on making the wheel round and I'm close to fixing a rainy day.
I need to get those completed first.
Yikes.

I know this has been covered but why do you need to do this? Are you gonna use the Ford EFI from the Windsor?

I don't need to do anything, but thanks for the inquirey.
I'm always looking for better alternatives.
I am presently still in the IR FI mode.

The IR FI components are all there. I am told that the technology is manageable. Hell F1 teams use it all the time. I can do that, right? DeTom has faith in me.

The Weber IDA "look" seems appropriate to me for the Pantera.

For me this is the way the Pantera should go. I love the sound of the FI Lamboghinis. (Yes I know v12's don't sound like 5.7 v-8s), but part of that whine/scream is the IR FI at work. No question about that.

Because of the costs of the IR FI I am reluctant to jump in head first. Also I don't have the bucks. The buy in is around $6,000.

A Ford EFI would be interesting IF THERE WAS A MANIFOLD FOR IT, i.e., a "bolt on manifold".

I can tell by some of the responses that I am getting from the "FI experts" ( I don't mean you guys here on the forum) that supply complete running systems that there are some "implied pitfalls" that haven't been worked out yet.

The IR FI system had a starting problem. Whether or not the still do is unclear.

I suppose it depends on the definition of the word "running" or like what Bill Clinton said about how it depends on what "is, is".

The buyer has to work this all out.

That whiney SoCal, "I'm too cool for YOU to understand me" and "you're wasting my time" additude is unmistakeably present in those sellers.
That characteristic is part of the traditional snakeoil salesmanship that I have run into so many times before, seemingly passed on from generation to generation, that goes with buying a a bill of goods.
It sets off the flashing caution light immediately in me.

I don't know. I shouldn't doubt "them". Maybe they can walk on water...new technology ya' know.

quote:

DeTom has faith in me

Absolutely Doug. In fact, if I ever win the lottery I am gonna have you tune my IR fuel injection system for me. I still think Hillborns are sexy despite them not working for crap.

Thanks DeTom. You know that you are in a very select group of only one?

Doug,

the marque with the prancing donkey and the marque that's full of bull don't install IR FI on their street cars, they install one throttle body per bank of cylinders, 2 in total, not 8 or 12. A runner for each cylinder connects to a plenum serving one bank of cylinders, and there is one throttle body feeding that plenum.

I'm a big proponent for fuel injection conversion, but not of the IR type. I can't argue IR doesn't look good, it does, but it is unneccessarily complicated and expensive, definitely not for everyone. I have my personal doubts that it makes any additional horsepower for a motor with a redline of 6500 rpm.

Here in the Pantera hobby there is a mystique about FI installations that they are only for the knowledgable insiders. But over in the Mustang hobby, or among the various GM groups like the Camaro guys, retro-fitting FI is no big deal, its done everyday, even folks with limited technical ability install them. The folks outside of the Pantera hobby have 4 advantages, there is plenty of information available to assist them, they are retro-fitting injection onto motors that have been fitted with FI by the manufacturer, there is nobody telling them it is too complicated, and they are not installing independent runner systems. One throttle body is enough, keep it simple.

I agree that it would be nice to have a FI manifold available so that an owner doesn't have to roll his own, Trick Flow actually announced the development of one two years ago (for 2V heads) but that project is on the back burner at the company right now.

At this point in time, a Pantera owner wanting to convert to single throttle body FI, but not wanting to modify a 351W intake, is left with installing one of the throttle body injection systems, or the systems employing a modified single plane intake.

George

A single plane intake? I've got one of those!

Not to be cotradictory, who me? Dennis Quella's system is as torky as a production unit and just as dependable.
I had heard, but can't confirm, that it can inexplicably experience hot starting problems.

Not to be argumentative either, who me? I think if I dig a little I could find some dyno on IR vs. single plenum.
I seem to remember that there was a measureable difference around 4,500 rpm. (+15hp)
The difference at 7,000 was a bunch.
Who's got a 6,500rpm engine? Not I sir.

A 2v intake isn't going to help me with my A3's. I luv my heads.
I still don't see how those things give you 400hp. The ports go the wrong way.

Also, I should point out that there is a tremendous difference in the runner size of the A3 Weber manifold vs the 4v.
That has to be a plus in making the system respond.

On the subject of 2V heads, the very best ported "iron" 2V heads can support 500 bhp, 450 is a more reasonable expectation for the average porting job. Even with porting & 4V size valves the iron 2V heads hit a brick wall in the intake flow curve at 0.550" intake valve lift.

But its a new world now Doug. The alloy 2V heads made by CHI & AFD will support right around 600 bhp. The intake ports flow well past 0.600" lift, they are a good match for the lift characteristics of hydraulic roller cams. They are plenty for any reasonable street application.

cowboy from hell

quote:

the marque with the prancing donkey and the marque that's full of bull don't install IR FI on their street cars, they install one throttle body per bank of cylinders, 2 in total, not 8 or 12. A runner for each cylinder connects to a plenum serving one bank of cylinders, and there is one throttle body feeding that plenum.

Heh-heh. Prancing Donkey and Full of Bull? -Funny stuff. But, their engines are configured for this type of induction.

quote:

I'm a big proponent for fuel injection conversion, but not of the IR type. I can't argue IR doesn't look good, it does, but it is unnecessarily complicated and expensive, definitely not for everyone.

It’s true that there’s a lot of hardware in multi-cylinder IR induction systems. More throttle bodies and linkage means more cost. It also means the linkage must be well thought through in order to be reliable and maintain tune. Unnecessarily complicated? Compared to what? The old Hillborn mechanical injection systems were IR, simple, and effective, though not optimal. As far as the ECU, the sensors/instrumentation are really no more or less complicated for IR or anything else.

If you are not an engine tuner, and want a bolt-on-and-go system, go buy a mass flow EFI system. But don’t expect to be able to obtain states of tune that are achievable with other approaches. As far as that goes, a good engine tuner with a 4 barrel has shamed many a deep pocketed, would be, EFI "expert". But give a real engine tuner a free hand with engine configuration and EFI….....and he will produce better all around results. And IMO, a better balance can be struck between street behavior and race performance with the combination of EFI & IR. Like everything else, it requires a purpose built engine for IR, and unfortunately >$. For all of the aforementioned reasons, you are absolutely correct, IR is not for everyone.

quote:

I have my personal doubts that it makes any additional horsepower for a motor with a redline of 6500 rpm.

With all due respect, I don’t think 6500 rpm is the driver. The objective of IR is rarely to achieve better peak HP figures, but generally, more avearge torque over a broader the rpm range. If you make higher average torque over a given rpm range, you will accelerate harder even though you may have lower peak HP. This tends to make better drivers out of lesser ones on challenging tracks and shall we say "spirited street driving". Cammed properly, IR has the potential to do so. Just ask the sprint car guys and the likes of Kinsler, Hillborn etc. They’re not delusional. They’re just allowed to run IR. Historically, in carbureted engines, IR produced much stronger signal to the booster, thus throttle response and torque. -Not a factor with EFI. Isolating the runner also allows different LSA and cam profiles. Run similar profiles in an open plenum four barrel and get impressive peak HP but often in fairly narrow rpm ranges, thus peaky engines. So you cam and design the induction system accordingly. If you can’t keep the engine in the sweet spot boys, that peak HP figure will not get you down the road faster.

quote:

Here in the Pantera hobby there is a mystique about FI installations that they are only for the knowledgable insiders. But over in the Mustang hobby, or among the various GM groups like the Camaro guys, retro-fitting FI is no big deal, its done everyday, even folks with limited technical ability install them. The folks outside of the Pantera hobby have 4 advantages, there is plenty of information available to assist them, they are retro-fitting injection onto motors that have been fitted with FI by the manufacturer, there is nobody telling them it is too complicated, and they are not installing independent runner systems. One throttle body is enough, keep it simple.

If you slap a factory ECU and instruments from a Camero, Vette, or 5.0 Mustang on a like sbc or sbf engine, expect like performance. It will definitely be much more economical due to the factory production volumes. In my opinion, deciphering all the factory sensor input, and altering source code for a factory ECU, is more challenging than tuning with an aftermarket ECU. But, there’s lots of people doing it, selling PROMs etc., and you definitely can get good bang for your buck in the early steps up from stock . Getting into the higher states of tune costs increasingly more……and boys, it’s never enough!!!!!

Always a healthy discussion George. –Best wishes to you and your family for a very happy New Year.

Kelly

Yeah I heard you can run more overlap on the cam with IR because since the cylinders can't communicate, you don't get that back pulse of exaust going into a cylinder on it's intake.

If you look at cam listing from anyone, I defy you to find one that is labeled for IR EFI.
Some might be thought to apply themselves better then others but, no no specific cams for this application.
Pay your money and take your chances! Your pick is as good as anyones.

quote:

Originally posted by Panterror:
...Always a healthy discussion George. –Best wishes to you and your family for a very happy New Year...

Kelly, without a doubt, carbureted IR systems are far superior to common plenum carbureted systems in terms of powerband width and throttle response, just the sort of thing a road course race car, or a sports car, can take advantage of.

My personal question, is a fuel injected IR system an advantage compared to a fuel injected long runner "factory" system that employs a single throttle body, at what we would call streetable rpm levels. Is the powerband achievable measurably wider, or the throttle response measurably crisper? Do the complexity & expense involved in the IR system provide a worthwhile return with fuel injection, like it did with carburetion?

I don't have the personal experience to answer that question, but apparently the prancing donkey engineers & the engineers full of bull don't think there's any advantage, or they'd be doing it, wouldn't they?

I agree with your sentiment, always a healthy a discussion. My heartfelt wishes for a healthy and prosperous new year for you and your family as well, my friend.

George

quote:

...but apparently the prancing donkey engineers & the engineers full of bull don't think there's any advantage, or they'd be doing it, wouldn't they?

Well, I wouldn't conclude such.

Everything's a compromise in engineering especially when it comes to engines. One certainly can not assume that Ferrari's or Lambos don't compromise performance for other things important to passenger cars or public perceptions of "refinement" and quality. Production cars have an even more complicated set of conditions and trade-offs. The original manufacturer and badging on the car doesn't exempt them from US government regs or the need to make trades. This certainly is not limited to the induction systems. Examples?

Are their exhaust systems designed for optimal performance? No, they have catalytic converters and meet noise and emissions standards. Doesn't mean I would select it for my car. More tractors than police on the roads I drive.
Tires? -A street/performance compromise.
Suspension? same.
Cammed for performance considerations only? Nope.
Weight? Yup, you guessed it...compromise; radios, air conditioners, sound supression, crash impact tolerance, etc.

And on and on. Having said all that, I see a lot of Ferrari and Lambo bashing. I don't agree. They are fine cars. The fit and finish are of a high standard, and even in street trim the over square 12 cylinder engines have great range, are very predictable, and that makes them easy to drive. "Refined" if you will. Wind'em up tight and they'll go. But I routinely see modestly modified Vettes exceed many Ferrari's in club racing.

Cheers,
Kelly

With the Electromotive TEC3r, it is relatively straight forward to set up a single plane manifold with the air fed from a throttle body for easy linkage and then have the FI nozzles at the end of the individual runners aimed right at the valves. It can even be set up with 8 coils sitting right at each spark plug.

quote:

Originally posted by PanteraDoug:
If you look at cam listing from anyone, I defy you to find one that is labeled for IR EFI.
Some might be thought to apply themselves better then others but, no no specific cams for this application.
Pay your money and take your chances! Your pick is as good as anyones.

Doug the only cam I ever bought was back in 1973. It was a solid roller for a chebby 454. It didn't exist yet and it took two years for the bastards to deliver. By that time I lost my money and had to sell my engine project just to pay off the builder. So I do know if you are buying a cam, buy something that exists or the wait becomes too long.
I guess now a days you just get on the phone to a reputible cam company and they asks you a million questions. What does the car weigh, how is it geared, how are your gonna drive it, what is your zodiac. After you answer all the questions they send you a cam. So yeah, you get a cam just for your car. I guess. That's what I heard anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by Panterror:
... I see a lot of Ferrari and Lambo bashing...

Large equipment and a bionic prostate. -Too funny. OK, I give. You have superior e-weapons!

Have a good one George.

Kelly