318 intakes - old style?

-
junkyardhero said:
if you're trying for a mileage miser build, have you considered hunting down an SP2P?
Click to expand...
I thought of that, but I'd just use one of my dual plane 4bbl intakes before purchasing another. Doubt this truck sees enough mileage per year to fret over a mile or 2 per gallon
 
Put any stock 2 barrel intake on it, and any stock BBD 2 barrel. Runs great drives nice. Don’t loose sleep over it any more.
 
318willrun said:
I thought of that, but I'd just use one of my dual plane 4bbl intakes before purchasing another. Doubt this truck sees enough mileage per year to fret over a mile or 2 per gallon
Click to expand...
facts. unless the mileage gain is appreciable, it's all a moot point besides driveability.

i'd almost suggest that the factory dual plane is better than the SP2P if set up right. we certainly know it's a better all around piece.
 
junkyardhero said:
facts. unless the mileage gain is appreciable, it's all a moot point besides driveability.

i'd almost suggest that the factory dual plane is better than the SP2P if set up right. we certainly know it's a better all around piece.
Click to expand...
100% it's about part throttle under 3000 rpm's drivability between the two intakes
 
318willrun said:
100% it's about part throttle under 3000 rpm's drivability between the two intakes
Click to expand...
it's an interesting exercise to be sure.

my gut check says the dual plane version out classes it, especially in that 2000~3000 range. but early single with small ports and small valves and small carb? i'd bet it'd be hard to quantify the difference with the butt dyno.
 

junkyardhero said:
it's an interesting exercise to be sure.

my gut check says the dual plane version out classes it, especially in that 2000~3000 range. but early single with small ports and small valves and small carb? i'd bet it'd be hard to quantify the difference with the butt dyno.
Click to expand...
Or any dyno.
 
junkyardhero said:
it's an interesting exercise to be sure.

my gut check says the dual plane version out classes it, especially in that 2000~3000 range. but early single with small ports and small valves and small carb? i'd bet it'd be hard to quantify the difference with the butt dyno.
Click to expand...
Driving the older style intake/cars, even in B-bodies, were tire friers. My sister had a '70 Coronet 4 door, and that 318 2bbl had punch that many would doubt it was even a 318 2bbl. Just curious on the comparison between the two, because I'd use either or.....
 
318willrun said:
Driving the older style intake/cars, even in B-bodies, were tire friers. My sister had a '70 Coronet 4 door, and that 318 2bbl had punch that many would doubt it was even a 318 2bbl. Just curious on the comparison between the two, because I'd use either or.....
Click to expand...
oh for sure. every early 2bbl car i had would one wheel peel whatever shitty 14" tire i had on there half way down the block easy money.

my best guess is that the later mo-trees got gutted with emissions and lower compression (and a bigger cam!) and the dual was an effort to claw back some respectability. and maybe some low speed torque. every 318 two pot i've ever driven would absolutely blow doors on any 360 2bbl pig.
 
junkyardhero said:
what you need is a dyno for ants!

(but in all seriousness, maybe you could glean some information from fuel consumption data)
Click to expand...
I doubt it. In fact I’d bet (within the useful range of the dyno) you could make two pulls and not even notice there were two graphs. Using the same engine and two different stock cast iron 2 barrel intakes. They’ll make the same power so they’ll use the same amount of fuel.
 
TT5.9mag said:
I doubt it. In fact I’d bet (within the useful range of the dyno) you could make two pulls and not even notice there were two graphs. Using the same engine and two different stock cast iron 2 barrel intakes. They’ll make the same power so they’ll use the same amount of fuel.
Click to expand...
define "useful"

;D
 
One would have to be grossly more efficient than the other to see any difference and I don’t honestly think that’s the case.
 
junkyardhero said:
what you need is a dyno for ants!

(but in all seriousness, maybe you could glean some information from fuel consumption data)
Click to expand...

TT5.9mag said:
I doubt it. In fact I’d bet (within the useful range of the dyno) you could make two pulls and not even notice there were two graphs. Using the same engine and two different stock cast iron 2 barrel intakes. They’ll make the same power so they’ll use the same amount of fuel.
Click to expand...
ET slips may show something measurable. Especially if done back to back, then back again
 
318willrun said:
Thinking on doing a 318 over the winter for the truck. Will be a LA roller block, and I don't care about WOT.
I have not tested anything with the early year (like the '69) single plane vs the later year intake. Thinking best torque/power up to about 3000 rpms.
At this point, I know pretty much the rest of the build, just wondering if anyone has compared these intakes. At this time, this direction, it will be the BBD 2bbl. As always, I may change my mind... LOL
As in older intake, the picture below references what I'm talking about
View attachment 1716453393
Click to expand...
If that is the single plane you've got, go with the dual plane.
Why, you ask?
Because of that stupid bathtub choke well that constantly eats gaskets leaving you with another frustrating exhaust leak right next to the carburetor.
You won't notice a lick's bit of difference performance-wise, but by the time you replace your third gasket you'll be wishing you had used the dual plane with a sealed choke well.
1757608890383.png
 
Professor Fate said:
If that is the single plane you've got, go with the dual plane.
Why, you ask?
Because of that stupid bathtub choke well that constantly eats gaskets leaving you with another frustrating exhaust leak right next to the carburetor.
You won't notice a lick's bit of difference performance-wise, but by the time you replace your third gasket you'll be wishing you had used the dual plane with a sealed choke well.
View attachment 1716453681
Click to expand...
Good thought!
 
a mate had a worn out bbd on the 318 in his 67 satellite. he swapped a 38dgas weber which he jetted to suit (it came from a ford 3.0 capri) and it ran much better. to physically make it fit he just had to slightly slot the 4 bolt holes in the carb's base plate. weber also did a 40dfi with (strangely) 40mm chokes compared to the 38's in the carb my mate used. readily available cheap chinese copies are on ebay and work just fine.
neil.
 
Professor Fate said:
Don't know if you've got one sittin' around, but for the sake of argument a stock 360 2bbl manifold and carb is an excellent bolt-on addition to a stockish 318. All your planned linkages will work. If you don't have one already, they can be had for a song.
View attachment 1716453658
Click to expand...
Adding this to a 318 does not work, 360 ports are to big. i know from experience, engine will not run right until full operating temp, i removed this and went to the original 318 intake then all good
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-
Back
Top Bottom