Cross Rams and Tunnel Rams, Buddy Bar

-
Hyper_pak

Hyper_pak

Old School Chrysler Fan
Joined
Feb 14, 2010
Messages
4,697
Reaction score
5,883
Location
Desoto Texas
We have had this discussion on a couple of different threads. The first picture is the bottom of an STR-12 small block cross ram.
The second is a 289-302 Ford Intake.
The third is the bottom of a Weiand 2x4 small block intake.
I assume the BB on the Weiand is Buddy Bar.
If that is true, this company produced a lot of intakes for quite a few companies.

Is there a BB mark on the bottom of an STR-14?
Or any other intakes?

From Hot Rod Magazine.
"That's another thing about John (Fell). His grandfather started Buddy Bar Castings in South Gate, California. Buddy Bar does aluminum sand casting, and for decades did all the Ford Cobra aluminum castings as well as Edelbrock's before they went in-house in the late-1980's.

340_STR12_BuddyBar.jpg
Buddy Bar 289-302 Ford.jpg
Weiand Tunnel Ram Bottom.jpg
 
That's interesting Stan. I thought each company had their own foundry to control quality. For what time period did this go on or is it still the way it's done? Bob
 
I guess they do now, but I don't know. The Shelby intakes were from the middle 60's, the STR's were 68ish?
 
So do you guys think the BB on the Weiand is Buddy Bar?

How about the mopar max, hemi cross rams, who made them? Mother Mopar?
 
abdywgn said:
Welcome to Buddy Bar Casting
Hot Rod Nov.2015 had an article on their products.
Click to expand...
Based on that, I wonder what improvements should be made on the STR-12 340 cross ram if they were to be recast. Since the one that I have has never been used I would be willing to let them base the improved one off of it, and now we know why Edelbrock has pushed back on bringing them back. They didn't cast them in the first place.
 
Last edited:
A56 said:
Based on that, I wonder what improvements should be made on the STR-12 340 cross ram if they were to be recast. Since the one that I have has never been used I would be willing to let them base the improved one off of it, and now we know why Edelbrock has pushed back on bringing them back. They didn't cast them in the first place.
Click to expand...

The best thing to do to fix that intake is to make a 1 inch spacer to raise the top plate away from the floor. The carbs are way too close to the floor of the manifold.

I suggest 1 inch because much more than that and you won’t be able to close the hood, which defeats the purpose of that intake. 2 inches would be better...but the hood thing crops up.
 
yellow rose said:
The best thing to do to fix that intake is to make a 1 inch spacer to raise the top plate away from the floor. The carbs are way too close to the floor of the manifold.

I suggest 1 inch because much more than that and you won’t be able to close the hood, which defeats the purpose of that intake. 2 inches would be better...but the hood thing crops up.
Click to expand...
Unless you have a six pack or super stock scoop, of course. But I'm curious how raising the plenum that would affect overall rpm tuning with that. Would it add so much volume that volume would have to be decreased elsewhere in the plenum to make up for any loss of low rpm torque or would it relegate it to a 4500 rpm and over power band?
 
Buddy Bar is one of the best foundries out there. They cast for a LOT of different companies through the years. Their work is very good. That's why if it has their mark, it's usually worth more than one that does not. They are still in business today.
 
Garrett Ellison said:
Unless you have a six pack or super stock scoop, of course. But I'm curious how raising the plenum that would affect overall rpm tuning with that. Would it add so much volume that volume would have to be decreased elsewhere in the plenum to make up for any loss of low rpm torque or would it relegate it to a 4500 rpm and over power band?
Click to expand...


Actually, the one I did was grossly under carbureted. I protested about running two 650’s but it was ignored because it was a “street” car.

I forget what it made for power but I do remember that the torque number was higher than it should have been, and the HP was lower than it should have been. It was under carb’d. It drove well and the customer was happy, but more car would have not lost much (if any) torque and picked the HP numbers up. I think it went 480ish HP and 515 on torque, so I was disappointed but like I said...it drove very well.
 
That's really impressive. I've always thought that one of the over 426 inch strokers would really be able to get the full potential out of one of these manifolds. Even more so if one were manufactured for a W2-W5 configuration.
 
I have said before, and I will say it again, it is nearly impossible to over carburete a small block mopar. I had a str12 on a 410" smallblock, and it had explosive low end torque with dual fitech throttle bodys, opening all 8 barrels at once....probably 1600 cfm
 
A56 said:
Based on that, I wonder what improvements should be made on the STR-12 340 cross ram if they were to be recast. Since the one that I have has never been used I would be willing to let them base the improved one off of it, and now we know why Edelbrock has pushed back on bringing them back. They didn't cast them in the first place.
Click to expand...

Chrysler already did that work for us. The modifications are diagrammed out in every Direct Connection Engine book (the result of hundreds of dyno pulls). At the suggestion of others, I had these mods made before I installed the STR-12 on my Dart 340 and have had nothing but good times out of it. That said, the cast tops are too weak. The original on mine was repaired three times. I found a billet one at the Mopar nats 10+ years ago - much stronger. The lid is reasonably simple so tracing it out with a CNC program and cranking out lids that solve that problem would be a breeze.

What I don't get is that Edelbrock reproduced a run of the STR manifolds for AMC 390 a few years ago. Why not an STR-12? I think that an AMC group got paid pre-orders for most of the run. I can't believe there isn't more demand for a sbm version than the AMC engines.
 
str12-340 said:
Chrysler already did that work for us. The modifications are diagrammed out in every Direct Connection Engine book (the result of hundreds of dyno pulls). At the suggestion of others, I had these mods made before I installed the STR-12 on my Dart 340 and have had nothing but good times out of it. That said, the cast tops are too weak. The original on mine was repaired three times. I found a billet one at the Mopar nats 10+ years ago - much stronger. The lid is reasonably simple so tracing it out with a CNC program and cranking out lids that solve that problem would be a breeze.

What I don't get is that Edelbrock reproduced a run of the STR manifolds for AMC 390 a few years ago. Why not an STR-12? I think that an AMC group got paid pre-orders for most of the run. I can't believe there isn't more demand for a sbm version than the AMC engines.
Click to expand...
Because the molds were lost years ago, and the tooling costs are prohibitive to remake that intake from scratch.
 
I had my top water jet cut, and made a few spares, it would be easy to space the top up, but I never experimented with that. My base has zero mods, no dams, no porting or anything, and truly it runs flawlessly in my opinion. DEFINITELY more low end torque than the M1 single plane it replaced
 
str12-340 said:
Chrysler already did that work for us. The modifications are diagrammed out in every Direct Connection Engine book (the result of hundreds of dyno pulls). At the suggestion of others, I had these mods made before I installed the STR-12 on my Dart 340 and have had nothing but good times out of it. That said, the cast tops are too weak. The original on mine was repaired three times. I found a billet one at the Mopar nats 10+ years ago - much stronger. The lid is reasonably simple so tracing it out with a CNC program and cranking out lids that solve that problem would be a breeze.

What I don't get is that Edelbrock reproduced a run of the STR manifolds for AMC 390 a few years ago. Why not an STR-12? I think that an AMC group got paid pre-orders for most of the run. I can't believe there isn't more demand for a sbm version than the AMC engines.
Click to expand...
Who made the AMC STR manifold Edelbrock or did they farm it out? And to respond to your first answer, my point exactly. Improvements to the STR 12 would include a thicker top plate. How did they do all of those dyno pulls without cracking any?
 
The lids crack because of a backfire normally. Plus the top is cast, so somewhat fragile to begin with.
 
I have seen where some were modified with something like a supercharger backfire relief valve.
 
A couple of strategically placed posts in the middle of the lower part to bolt the top down to would go a long way towards reliability of the top. With the long spacing between the perimeter oriented bolts, the top wants to balloon with any back pressure. It wouldn't take much to install two or three columns and drill the top for the bolts. I will run one of these if I can find one I can afford. Otherwise I'll make one from plate. Either way, at some point, I will be sporting an STR-12(ish) intake. I just think they are too cool for school.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top