Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

STUDEBAKER TUNNEL RAM INTAKES LOOK.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • PackardV8
    replied
    quote:How cool would it be to see that out of the hood of my Lark?
    As always, your car, your money, your decision. There are some of us who are never going to buy anything requiring a hole in the hood.

    FWIW, a 259" @ 5,500 RPMs consumes only 330 CFM total and we're going to put 780 CFM of carburetors or more on it? Yes, Mike, I did note you said vacuum secondaries, so they would be for looks only and the secondaries would never open.

    thnx, jack vines

    PackardV8

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Van Veghten
    replied
    I'd like to get one also but Ken won't answer my e-mails, P-mails...!

    Alan, et.al. - One could also use two vacuum secondary Holley 390cfm carburetors...!

    Dave, it really isn't for the street...BUT, depending on many things, it COULD be made to somewhat work on the street.
    For decent low speed power the runners are too short, the plenum is too large.
    The plenum cavity can easilly be made smaller, the runners...not so much!
    As I noted above, with twin 390's (vacuum), it might work ok.

    Don't expect 20 mpg though...!!

    Mike
    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • Alan
    replied
    Dave, If you get one would you tell us how well it fits under your hood. I am sure it wouldn't fit in an Avanti or even the early C's & K's but would love to see some pics. of it in your Lark. Don't use anything larger than a 600 CFM single 4 BBL.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dave.Barnett
    replied
    I have a stock 259ci motor in my Lark, how would it react with one of these on top of it? Some say its not for the street, is that true?
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/55374615@N00/3167919079/
    How cool would it be to see that out of the hood of my Lark?
    -Dave

    Leave a comment:


  • Bunzard
    replied
    I'd like to have one and it could just decorate my coffee table...truly a work of art.

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    Hi, MVM, Alan, et al,

    Although this thread continues to wander away from Ken's beautiful tunnel ram workmanship, it does give some insights. MVM said of the dual Webers,
    quote:Funny thing...a few times at the drag races, he never got it to run better than a well tuned, single carburetor.
    Most here know this, but it bears repeating - When building a performance Studebaker V8, the first money should be spent on head porting, larger intake valves, more compression, more camshaft. Only after these areas are addressed does the OEM iron intake or Lionel Stone's repro aluminum intake become the limiting factor. Without a big investment in the inside stuff, a high-zoot intake manifold is just eye candy.

    As always, your car, your money, your decision.

    thnx, jack vines

    PackardV8

    Leave a comment:


  • Alan
    replied
    59, I built one for my MG and had more money in brass tuning parts than the Weber cost, just think what it would be like with 4 of em.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Van Veghten
    replied
    I helped Alex a bit with the design of his Webber "cross ram" manifold.
    Other than making the carb. mounting "boxs" (otherwise known as a plenum) a tad on the restrictive side...he did a nice job.

    Funny thing...a few times at the drag races, he never got it to run too much better than a well tuned, single carburetor.

    But it does look different...catches a lot of stares.

    Personally..as has been said...the carb. and ignition tuneup just is still a bit off...and...he was racing at 3500 feet...add to that, they were all warm (not hot, but) days.

    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • 59r2
    replied
    I didn't mean to make fun of anything only trying to think out of the box. I coudn't get specs on the webers only trying to help with a under the hood mod. I didn't know weber are so hard to tune.
    Jeff that is a great way to mount two them.
    My reasoning for the suggestion is ,to supercharge a 289,259 the cost is the engine cost plus about $3200.00,This tunnel ram is 780 plus the cost of one or two edelbrockes @ 325-400 each,the webers are 380-410. So if you use two you are looking at 1600.00 plus leakage . which is what lionel wants for a two quad setup .(this months turning wheels advertizement). so the cost of this tunnel ram is very reasonably priced and I think state of the art in 2008.
    JOE

    1959 HARDTOP R2 4speed 1960 conv
    SDC member since 1972
    IMG]http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff21/59r2/DSC01514-3.jpg[/IMG]

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    http://www.webercarbsdirect.com/Phot...uctCode=V8-350 this is closer to what four downdraft Webers would look like on a Stude V8. The barrels are too far apart to line up with the ports.

    Four sidedraft Webers on a cross ram begins to look like a nest of snakes. I built one back in the bad old days and never again. The throttle linkage was a nightmare and tuning Webers is an art form that takes years to learn, about five thousand dollars in parts and a chassis dyno.

    thnx, jack vines.

    PackardV8

    Leave a comment:


  • JBody
    replied
    Hi, everyone! I just got back from the convenience store, where I bought 10 powerball tickets. When I win 345 mil, more or less, I will go ahead and buy the nicest 58 Golden Hawk I can find, and commission 5-3 Stude to build Me a special tunnel ramm for it, and a special pressure box to accomodate the three-four barrels. Prolly, they will be new old stock ca. 1968 Holley "Three Barrel" carburetors. Don't worry---I've done the physics on this one. I went to one of those "psychics"(get it?) down there by the pawn shops and tattoo parlors, and had a seance, and contacted Albert Einstein, and had him crunch the numbers on this one. He does say that I need to use an experimental "R-9" grind Camshaft, and that the only one in existence is in one of the abandoned cars out at the former Stude test track, near SB. So, I'll need to send my crew out to procure it. Will keep you informed. Later.

    Leave a comment:


  • buddymander
    replied
    Hey deepn, does that weber linkage also play 45rpm records??

    Leave a comment:


  • N8N
    replied
    heck, if you're gonna have four webers, don't bother with a "manifold" at all, just make tubes to connect the ports on the heads to the carb bases. probably would be a cast-iron female dog to synch up but it'd look cool

    nate

    --
    55 Commander Starlight
    http://members.cox.net/njnagel

    Leave a comment:


  • DEEPNHOCK
    replied
    A few years ago I machined some intake flanges for Alex Magdelino out on the west coast (as well as a billet valley cover).
    He used the flanges to build up an intake to mount two Webers.
    I think four would be a bit too much, but one could try[]
    Jeff[8D]




    quote:Originally posted by 59r2

    Here is an idea for you.The carb base shouldn't be parrell to the floor of the box ,so let's think old school.
    How about four of these mounted on the sides to stay under the hood.
    http://www.webercarbsdirect.com/45_DCOE_p/19600.075.htm
    Get job ,nice work, I admire your skill.
    JOE

    1959 HARDTOP R2 4speed 1960 conv
    SDC member since 1972
    IMG]http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff21/59r2/DSC01514-3.jpg[/IMG]


    http://community.webshots.com/user/deepnhock

    Leave a comment:


  • 59r2
    replied
    Here is an idea for you.The carb base shouldn't be parrell to the floor of the box ,so let's think old school.
    How about four of these mounted on the sides to stay under the hood.
    http://www.webercarbsdirect.com/45_DCOE_p/19600.075.htm
    Get job ,nice work, I admire your skill.
    JOE

    1959 HARDTOP R2 4speed 1960 conv
    SDC member since 1972
    IMG]http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff21/59r2/DSC01514-3.jpg[/IMG]

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X