could the intake be holding my low end down?

-
Not that I want one(I don’t), but say...... in the past ten years or so(or whenever the OP’s engine was built)..... where would one have sourced the “correct” stock spec replacement 340 “std trans” cam?
This was a one year only thing, right?
‘68?

Which would lead me to wonder....... I wonder what it really has for a cam in it?
 
PRH said:
Not that I want one(I don’t), but say...... in the past ten years or so(or whenever the OP’s engine was built)..... where would one have sourced the “correct” stock spec replacement 340 “std trans” cam?
This was a one year only thing, right?
‘68?

Which would lead me to wonder....... I wonder what it really has for a cam in it?
Click to expand...
The seller and his dad were pretty heavy into Drag racing- they had a large shop and a small junk yard that was full of A bodies! Lots of parts, so there is no telling. They 'built' this duster for the son when he was in high school but pulled the engine that was in it when it was sold to me (as we agreed on). It was a high compression radical mill that I really didnt need or want- and he ran some 12s with but not on a regular schedule.
In any event, the engine starts and runs fine and has a great sound- its been just what I needed.................
 
AJ/FormS said:
Addendum for street use;
170psi, now we are into aluminum heads, and things are heating up
180 is 87E10 friendly to save you several thousand dollars over the life of the engine, and incredible throttle-response, great fuel mileage is also possible.
190 is AJ approved,for best pumpgas, and makes a tire-eating monster. It may run on 89
200 is the Mitch-approved, probable limit for 91pumpgas. I haven't been there, cuz honestly with a manual trans,IMO; there is no way to tame it with street gears; 185 is tough enough, and cannot, IMO, be done properly with just a dizzy. If I were to try it, I would want a stand-alone timing computer.
There are only a handful of FABO fellows who responded to a question I posed a year or two ago, that dare to run this high, and reported success.
Click to expand...

How do you know unless you really try it?

My last combo ran at 185 psi with closed chamber heads 302's and it was a monster. It was still making torque at 6k where it hit the limiter.
 
Hysteric said:
My last combo ran at 185 psi with closed chamber heads 302's and it was a monster. It was still making torque at 6k where it hit the limiter.
Click to expand...
Wait; you ran 185psi with iron heads?
As far as I can recall you are only the third person here on FABO to run over 170 with iron,
Tell us more.
 
AJ/FormS said:
Wait; you ran 185psi with iron heads?
As far as I can recall you are only the third person here on FABO to run over 170 with iron,
Tell us more.
Click to expand...
Current combo is with open chamber cast iron 360 heads.

Car went 12.8 @ 105.5 mph 1.84 60ft last time out with an issue at the top end which i think is electrical and carb related. Going back to a 1.5 rocker to see if it picks up the low end and ultimately the 60ft

Early valiant sedan 3400 lbs with me in the car and a full tank of gas.
904 with a TA 3400-3800 stall
8 3.4 with 3.73 gears and 255 ET Street MT's

70 over 360
Ported 587's with a 1.96 valve. 240's cfm @ 550 lift 60 cc chamber.
Fellpro 8553pt
Speed pro H405CP pistons
Weiand stealth intake with 800 AVS carb
Crower 31242- 271/284 222/234 @ .050 on 112 idles nice and smooth.
Mallory Dizzy with 2 pink springs initial 18 and total 38 all in by 2000 rpm but retards 2-3 degrees as the revs pick up past 3K
1 5/8 try y's with 2.5 inch exhaust.

The top end was thrown together to get me out of a spot. Will be going back to the 302's (58cc's) an Air Gap and a Mr gasket 1121 thin head gasket which should pick me up another 0.5 to 1 point of comp.

In my view the cars too slow.....:)
 
10FA0857-7D80-4FE2-91A0-045B64515536.png
rumblefish360 said:
??????????
Click to expand...
 
nm9stheham said:
First off, run the compression test as suggested to see what you have in there for pistons. With 10.3 SCR (160 psi cranking compression), and a small torque cam, original Torker, and 1-7/8 headers, my 351C had no lack of bottom end torque.

What cam DO you have, OP, and was it timed properly?
Click to expand...
Way different animal.
 
burrpenick said:
Thought I had a dual plane, but turns out its an Edlebrock Torker II 340 single. This 360 w/3.55 SG seems a little sluggish off the line, could this single plane intake be the cause? The cam is not wild and its running on a built 904 w/cop car converter. The engine is fresh, and I dont know IF the stock 360 pistons were replaced.
Click to expand...

Yes, get a dual plane intake.
It reads as if that would be the appropriate intake. Usually expect 'with the best of tune' that between the 2...it was the feeling of 25 or so ft.lbs torque increase everywhere under 5000 rpm with the dual plane...then neck and neck with the single plane rpm'ing/hp over the dual plane.
 
Hysteric said:
Current combo is with open chamber cast iron 360 heads.

Car went 12.8 @ 105.5 mph 1.84 60ft last time out with an issue at the top end which i think is electrical and carb related. Going back to a 1.5 rocker to see if it picks up the low end and ultimately the 60ft

Early valiant sedan 3400 lbs with me in the car and a full tank of gas.
904 with a TA 3400-3800 stall
8 3.4 with 3.73 gears and 255 ET Street MT's

70 over 360
Ported 587's with a 1.96 valve. 240's cfm @ 550 lift 60 cc chamber.
Fellpro 8553pt
Speed pro H405CP pistons
Weiand stealth intake with 800 AVS carb
Crower 31242- 271/284 222/234 @ .050 on 112 idles nice and smooth.
Mallory Dizzy with 2 pink springs initial 18 and total 38 all in by 2000 rpm but retards 2-3 degrees as the revs pick up past 3K
1 5/8 try y's with 2.5 inch exhaust.

The top end was thrown together to get me out of a spot. Will be going back to the 302's (58cc's) an Air Gap and a Mr gasket 1121 thin head gasket which should pick me up another 0.5 to 1 point of comp.

In my view the cars too slow.....:)
Click to expand...
I had a very similar combo that went 106@3650 with a manual trans. But my 60ft was in the 2.4x zone. At 185psi, the bottom-end was killer strong. This with a 367 @ 10.95Scr with OOTB Eddies, a 270/276/110 advertised/223/230@.050 cam, 3.55s, and a 7000 redline. Why 7000? Well I thought it prudent to quit somewhere, not that the engine wanted to. My timing was 14 initial, 28*@2800and all-in 34*@3400. Full TTI 3" exhaust. Rpm-AG and 750DP. I only completed one run and hit 12.9x. I was and still am running 1.6 arms. I doubt my combo had more in it, except for the lazy 60ft,lol. I was running 245/60-14 street tires,lol.
So Ima guessing our combos are pretty similar.
Well, were. That 223 cam died in 2004, and I swapped in a 230* in it's place . Now I shift at 7200. and the combo went 93 in the Eighth, still with a 2.4x 60ft lol, 325/50-15 BFG DRs this time but same street suspension,lol.
 
The dual plane will pull harder on each side of the carb, higher vacuum and velocity, keeps the fuel mixed from the carb..torque picks up.
 
You couldn't pay me to run a dual plane...



Pic a side. You want fuel mileage or power. Getting both is a myth.

Decide what you what the car to do and build from there.

Dual plane= ehhh but i get milage like an Escalade....

Single plane with the correct set up= :steering:
 
Cope said:
You couldn't pay me to run a dual plane...



Pic a side. You want fuel mileage or power. Getting both is a myth.

Decide what you what the car to do and build from there.

Dual plane= ehhh but i get milage like an Escalade....

Single plane with the correct set up= :steering:
Click to expand...



Exactly.the number 1 reason why guys lose bottom end power with a single plane is the carb is too big. You can usually tune around it, but most guys don't. A dual plane intake will take a bigger carb.

Done correctly, and DP intake loses every time. In both power, driveablity and fuel mileage.
 
yellow rose said:
Exactly.the number 1 reason why guys lose bottom end power with a single plane is the carb is too big. You can usually tune around it, but most guys don't. A dual plane intake will take a bigger carb.

Done correctly, and DP intake loses every time. In both power, driveablity and fuel mileage.
Click to expand...
Thank you for saying this. I've always thought that a single plane is just adding to the low RPM issues of a big cam and big carb. You can make one of the 3 smaller and all of a sudden, the low RPM performance starts coming back. That was the point of my 351C story: I had several supposedly 'wrong' parts for low RPM torque: big header tubes, single plane, and big intake ports. But the behavior of the small cam and modest carb and high CR dominated those 'too big' parts at low RPM's. (Which always makes me wonder about the arguments that the intake tract size is too big... but that is another discussion.) Put in all parts that peak out at high RPM's and of course it will be like a peaky 2 stroke engine; nothing, nada, zip down low.
 
yellow rose said:
Exactly.the number 1 reason why guys lose bottom end power with a single plane is the carb is too big. You can usually tune around it, but most guys don't. A dual plane intake will take a bigger carb.

Done correctly, and DP intake loses every time. In both power, driveablity and fuel mileage.
Click to expand...

Have to disagree on that one
You can tune around a lot of things but it doesn't mean you've used it up yet, you're just a good tuner. If the cam isnt big, wtf put a single plane on it? What's he doing again? Time and time again, be it *** or real dyno, track, the dual plane in the right application performs well. How does he drive it? Idkoc.
Put nitrous on it, flatten it, pull 5-9 and cross your fingers . Best of luck
 
Last edited:
AJ/FormS said:
I had a very similar combo that went 106@3650 with a manual trans. But my 60ft was in the 2.4x zone. At 185psi, the bottom-end was killer strong. This with a 367 @ 10.95Scr with OOTB Eddies, a 270/276/110 advertised/223/230@.050 cam, 3.55s, and a 7000 redline. Why 7000? Well I thought it prudent to quit somewhere, not that the engine wanted to. My timing was 14 initial, 28*@2800and all-in 34*@3400. Full TTI 3" exhaust. Rpm-AG and 750DP. I only completed one run and hit 12.9x. I was and still am running 1.6 arms. I doubt my combo had more in it, except for the lazy 60ft,lol. I was running 245/60-14 street tires,lol.
So Ima guessing our combos are pretty similar.
Well, were. That 223 cam died in 2004, and I swapped in a 230* in it's place . Now I shift at 7200. and the combo went 93 in the Eighth, still with a 2.4x 60ft lol, 325/50-15 BFG DRs this time but same street suspension,lol.
Click to expand...

What was the ET?
 
AJ/FormS said:
I had a very similar combo that went 106@3650 with a manual trans. But my 60ft was in the 2.4x zone. At 185psi, the bottom-end was killer strong. This with a 367 @ 10.95Scr with OOTB Eddies, a 270/276/110 advertised/223/230@.050 cam, 3.55s, and a 7000 redline. Why 7000? Well I thought it prudent to quit somewhere, not that the engine wanted to. My timing was 14 initial, 28*@2800and all-in 34*@3400. Full TTI 3" exhaust. Rpm-AG and 750DP. I only completed one run and hit 12.9x. I was and still am running 1.6 arms. I doubt my combo had more in it, except for the lazy 60ft,lol. I was running 245/60-14 street tires,lol.
So Ima guessing our combos are pretty similar.
Well, were. That 223 cam died in 2004, and I swapped in a 230* in it's place . Now I shift at 7200. and the combo went 93 in the Eighth, still with a 2.4x 60ft lol, 325/50-15 BFG DRs this time but same street suspension,lol.
Click to expand...
I can pull well into 7000 with a LD340 dual plane.
 
lots of variations in the various single planes
as YT says it's the combination
never got the single planes to work in motorhomes
musta been the wrong combination
 
Wyrmrider said:
lots of variations in the various single planes
as YT says it's the combination
never got the single planes to work in motorhomes
musta been the wrong combination
Click to expand...
I said it's the combo.
Single planes have their place, they do make the most power in the end aside from a tunnel ram... but everywhere under that..the dual plane packs a punch.
I took my wieand accelerator off and put a ld340 on nothing else changed and the car pulled much harder, ripped the tires loose way quicker...pulled 2.5 "more vacuum at idle. 284* .528 solid cam. 340
 
MOPAROFFICIAL said:
I said it's the combo.
Single planes have their place, they do make the most power in the end aside from a tunnel ram... but everywhere under that..the dual plane packs a punch.
I took my accelerator off and put an ld340 on nothing else changed and the car pulled much harder, ripped the tires loose way quicker.
Click to expand...


The reason the factory used that junk was because they had to give somewhere. They wanted more runner length so that's how they got it.

You don't need to spend more than 15 minutes on a flow bench to see how stupid it is to put a corner in any flow path. If you do, you'd better know why, because it's a loser. Never is putting a corner in the flow path a good thing. Never.

If you lose power with e SP intake over a DP that's on you and your combination.
 
yellow rose said:
The reason the factory used that junk was because they had to give somewhere. They wanted more runner length so that's how they got it.

You don't need to spend more than 15 minutes on a flow bench to see how stupid it is to put a corner in any flow path. If you do, you'd better know why, because it's a loser. Never is putting a corner in the flow path a good thing. Never.

If you lose power with e SP intake over a DP that's on you and your combination.
Click to expand...
What rpm do they operate in.
Street car, not in the rpm ran.
I gave up upper range power, aka tuned for lower end torque so I could get that snappy lane change, rocket ship on 3.73 gears
It wasnt earth shattering at 390 hp-stock x heads. Real world, not race track or even ideal.. a regular old school combo
It's going together, reconfigured , in another thread I need to update. Heads now do 270's and cam is a tweaked version of the engle kv3...single plane might like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top