M1 SP vs Air Gap
- Thread starter Moparmal
- Start date
-
You can redrill the intakes to fit, not a problem. Port matching could be though. Also, years back Batten offered square portr W-2's I beileve.
Indy has square port W-2's right now.
Black 69 Dart
Well-Known Member
Sorry got mixed up on the intakes, they were single plane manifolds for the w-2 heads. On the same hand I just thought I would share what I have learned and seen over the last 10 years of engine building and the differences in hp an intake can have.
Black 69 Dart
Well-Known Member
No they were for the w-2 heads. It was the eddie victor w-2, m1 w-2 and the indy w-2 intake. For some reason I had a brain fart and got mixed up with intakes. I was working at a shop called ams engines in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
needsaresto
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2004
- Messages
- 7,603
- Reaction score
- 265
THe M1 is really one of the best single plane manifolds out there,second only to the eddie victor and not by much. I would not hesitate to use the M1 in place of an air gap in a stroker application. You wont lose much on the bottom end due to the extra stroke and the M1 will leave the air gap behind on the top.
sumbitmopar
Well-Known Member
For the minimal performance difference you might want to spend the $$ elsewhere on your car that may need/provide more benefit. Just a thought. ( how 'bout that cam you've been pondering or maybe put it towards a converter or different gears or.....?)
I had heard this - this is why I was wondering if the M1 might be better value on a stroker?
Guess Ill stick with the LD 340 until I can spare the time to experiment...sounds like it'll only be a couple of tenths anyway....
AdamR
Big Member
Dont forget with the RPM you are going to need an adapter to run the Thermoquad, The M1 doesnt need it.
AdamR
Big Member
I would use either an action plus (which is the same as the stealth just a spead bore version) or an LD340 opened up for the TQ.
jimmyray
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2007
- Messages
- 948
- Reaction score
- 30
Guess I'll chip in a question along the same line. I have a 408 stroker, 9.6:1 236/242@.050 .544 cam, hooker comps 1 5/8" into 3" exhaust, edel heads, 4000 dynamic 9.5" into 3.73 dana. Currently running a M1 single plane, Best time of 12.26 @ 109, 1.67 60' with slicks. Best time comes when shiftin at 5300!
I had been runnung a Edel (Carter) 600 on the street, and a Holley 750 on the strip. Carter gave better fuel economy, holley gave better time. The Carter had better low end torque. I recently switched to a DemonSizzler TQ, and where was a very noticeable improvement on bottom end torque, and it breathes much better than the Carter 600 on the top end. Idles better, off idles better, etc. Best carb yet, but not sure how it will do at the strip as compared to the holley.
I have a Weiand Stealth that still sits on my numbers matching 340 (in a crate) that has been port matched like my M1, but is otherwise stock. It will accept square or spread bore.
So the question is, since I am shifting below the upper end advantage of the M1, would it actually run better with the stealth?
I had been runnung a Edel (Carter) 600 on the street, and a Holley 750 on the strip. Carter gave better fuel economy, holley gave better time. The Carter had better low end torque. I recently switched to a DemonSizzler TQ, and where was a very noticeable improvement on bottom end torque, and it breathes much better than the Carter 600 on the top end. Idles better, off idles better, etc. Best carb yet, but not sure how it will do at the strip as compared to the holley.
I have a Weiand Stealth that still sits on my numbers matching 340 (in a crate) that has been port matched like my M1, but is otherwise stock. It will accept square or spread bore.
So the question is, since I am shifting below the upper end advantage of the M1, would it actually run better with the stealth?
moper
Well-Known Member
I think because the cam and headers are small for the package, the smaller plenum and longer ports of the dual plane will make more torque where you are using it. Might be dowm on overall horsepower but torque will be up. Also, the 4000 stall is too high for your power curve.... I think if you could hook it you will go quicker and faster with a lower stall tighter unit. That package shuold have peak torque around 3K with an almost flat curve, and peak HP around the 5K range. If you told dynamic you drag raced... did they give you the "we got a 9.5 that will be perfect.." line? I have to usually be firm and tell them I want it at 2500 and as tight as you can make it in a 9.5"...lol
stroked 340
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,117
- Reaction score
- 23
Put an air gap on it.. my 416 in my "street" duster ran 11.0's with a cam similar to yours,single planes like the m1 like rpms,why are you shifting so low?? i use to take the 416 to 6500 launching at about 2800 60's in the low 1.40's...
Black 69 Dart
Well-Known Member
To me that engine should run to 6500 rpm and make peak hp around 6300rpm. I am running a 340 with less cam stock heads but more compression, headman 1 5/8 headers and a 750 aed holly and it pulled to 6700 on the dyno. made just under 500 hp and 440 ft/lbs. Did you play with the timing were is it at? and you may need a bigger carb and bigger headers and a better intake. I am also runnig an m1 on my 2001 dakota r/t. the engine is stock except for the intake and exhaust and a superchips programmer. It pulls to 5400 rpm and hits the factory rev limiter, The m1 isn't that great of an intake for a single plane. Just my .02 cents on the intake some may not agree with me, but it has a small plenum, the runners have little taper (the cross sectional area as it gets closer to the head should taper down to help speed up the air as it enters the head)
Trevor
cecil4speed
Well-Known Member
Don't want to steal the thread,but since everyone is talking, just a quick question. I have an LD4B and would like to use it on a 340 with x heads. I'm going to run a thermoquad. Would I be better off to run an adapter or open up the intake so the TQ can bolt direct. I'm after low to mid range torque. Also, if I port match the intake to the heads, will it be the same as an LD340?
Thanks guys.
Thanks guys.
1968FormulaS340
Well-Known Member
I think the LD4B is for the smaller port 318 heads. You can still use it but the LD340 would be better. Just my opinion.
cecil4speed
Well-Known Member
Yes I realize this, but I was wondering if I open the ports up if they are basically the same intake? Are the runners smaller inside?
BigEdsGarage
Well-Known Member
If it were me I would keep the LD340 that is on there, clean up the ports and gasket match it and call it done. Maybe spend $40 on an open and 4 hole 1 inch spacers to see if it likes it.
Bigger isn't always better.
Bigger isn't always better.
jimmyray
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2007
- Messages
- 948
- Reaction score
- 30
Hope I am not highjacking the thread, not my intention, Moparmal!
I would have though mine would rev higher as well, but I'm lacking cam from what I've been told. I played aroung with shift point, launch rpm and timing, and found the best combo (with old TCI 3000 stall and Holley 750) was 5300, 1500 and stab, and 30 degrees total timing @ 2800. My car weighs 3400 w/o driver. The guy that sold me the heads ran 11.20 with slicks and 10.7:1 comp, 248/249 and .577 cam, and an empty weight of 3150 and 32 degrees timing.
I would have though mine would rev higher as well, but I'm lacking cam from what I've been told. I played aroung with shift point, launch rpm and timing, and found the best combo (with old TCI 3000 stall and Holley 750) was 5300, 1500 and stab, and 30 degrees total timing @ 2800. My car weighs 3400 w/o driver. The guy that sold me the heads ran 11.20 with slicks and 10.7:1 comp, 248/249 and .577 cam, and an empty weight of 3150 and 32 degrees timing.
AdamR
Big Member
The intake will work fine on your 340, especially if you port match it. I dont think they can be opened up for the thermoquad like the LD340 though.
You can not open the LD4B for a T-Q. No way, no how.
moper
Well-Known Member
What did the torque power curve look like? More precisely, at what rpm did it start at before peaking at 4400? High stalls create issues on chassis dynos. In most engines the difference in torque peak rpm and horsepower peak rpm is around 1500rpm+/- a few hundred. Because horsepower is a mathematical derivitive of torque. If the HP peak is accurrate on the chassis dyno (much more possible than the torque peak due to the convertor being pretty much constantly locked at that rpm) the torque peak should be closer to 3800. If your convertor stalls at 4, the dyno load will confuse it and the indicated torque is usually kind of weird.. Like it may start at the highest level and drop, or it may be a basic flat line until it rises a hair and drops off on the graph. If the torque number was right, the HP peak should be closer to 6K. I can't see a cam with 236@.050 peaking that high with a set of RPMs on it. Treat these engines like deisels in terms of gearing and stall speed and they love it...lol.
jimmyray
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2007
- Messages
- 948
- Reaction score
- 30
Well, got the swap from the M1 Single to the Weiand Stealth 8007. Also, last time at the strip I ran the Holley DP with Proform center on the M1. This time, it was the 850 TQ on the Stealth. I was having Carb issues last time out with the Holley, it was spitting full out of the front vent tube, and the needle was sticking open - grrr. With the TQ, I was in the process of tuning it, but ran out of daylight and low on fuel. All said, the TQ and Stealth is as good, if not better, than the M1 & Holley. I need a cool, 75 degree day to compare apples/apples, but think I can can get back to the 12.2's on a hot day, if everything works together...
Best part is, the TQ gets much better MPG than the Holley, has much better lower end response (TQ was better on the M1, and even more better on the Stealth), and I don't have to swap carbs at the track! FWIW, I drove to the track, made 10 runs and 10 burnouts, and drove home, accumulating 116.9 miles, and got a total of 10.7 mpg (including the 1/4 mile runs). Not bad, considering the Holley gave 8.5 mpg on the highway when I babied it, and no runs.
Best part is, the TQ gets much better MPG than the Holley, has much better lower end response (TQ was better on the M1, and even more better on the Stealth), and I don't have to swap carbs at the track! FWIW, I drove to the track, made 10 runs and 10 burnouts, and drove home, accumulating 116.9 miles, and got a total of 10.7 mpg (including the 1/4 mile runs). Not bad, considering the Holley gave 8.5 mpg on the highway when I babied it, and no runs.
Locomotion
Well-Known Member
Each combo needs to be tuned for best comparisons, and it's not easy because of all the possible variables involved, particularly weather. For my particular combo, I found the Holley Strip Dominator to be faster than the Weiand Stealth - both with the same Holley 750 double pumper and 1" tapered 4-hole spacer. The dual plane ran best when the deeper side plenum jets were 2 #'s bigger than the shallower side. I accidently stumbled across the idea when I happen to notice that the cylinders/plugs fed by the deeper side plenum 1/2 were colored lighter than the shallower 1/2!
The jetting for either intake was a bit leaner after I installed a TTI 3" X-pipe & Dynomax Ultraflo mufflers.
The jetting for either intake was a bit leaner after I installed a TTI 3" X-pipe & Dynomax Ultraflo mufflers.
-
