[goatless]

The only thing bugging me with this whole silly thread is the implication that it was a straight up comparison of two different intakes. The title of the thread states it as such. It's pretty clear to most here that that is not the case.
Because of the other variables at work it is impossible to state that one intake is better than another- even though one may be.

[GOAT WHORE]

Originally Posted by goatless

The only thing bugging me with this whole silly thread is the implication that it was a straight up comparison of two different intakes. The title of the thread states it as such. It's pretty clear to most here that that is not the case.
Because of the other variables at work it is impossible to state that one intake is better than another- even though one may be.

This and the fact that Mary K starts the whole thing off with his panties in a bunch

[grandville455]

It all comes down to what skip said, a lot of people run these cars cause they like them not cause their looking for every last bit of performance like some of us, that's not their agenda. A mismatch is just that, Harry's customer was happy with the outcome isn't that what matter's? As far as the above video, well there's no doubt that car runs well, looks like jay's car, nothing against jay and what he has done, but I would bet my last dollar its far from "stock"! Looks stock yes that's what that class is, but internally not even close, let alone cubes etc.Jim hands car took years of tweaking to get where he is, and I applaud his contribution two fold! I agree debating is good, but u can clearly see who has issues with who on these boards. The good thing about life is there is more than one way to get stuff done, and don't always have to follow a "golden rule " approach!

[harry k]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

I don't enjoy the same freedom as others when it comes to this type of thread. As soon as I point out serious flaws with the parts tested, the OP gets his panties all wadded up and starts attacking me with all the personal crap, condescending attitude toward me in a personal nature, and whines and cries like a little child, threating to quit taking my replies "lightly", blah, blah, blah. Harry, why don't we just air all this stuff in Public Forum. You hate my guts because I REFUSED to send back your carburetor without payment, which we never did get and it's been over two years now, and all I was charging you half our normal labor rate, plus materials and return shipping.
Cliff

I don't know where this guy starts off with his BS about what he's stating about the carb,hey its been over 7+ friking years about a junk Q-jet core i have sent you,so you think i give damn about you keeping my junk core and hate your guts.(look whos the childish here)

In order to make readers here that don't know what the real story is, he has to start more smoke.
As i said, you are the one attacking me when it comes anything other than Q-jet being posted in this forum with some results,YOU AND YOU ONLY IS THE FIRST PERSON TO ATTACK MY CREDENCE,,,,,,READ IT WELL ,IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU NOt ADMITING THAT IS NOT IN YOUR BEST INTEREST HUH,GO FIGURE THIS OUT....
this guy keeps saying i am done with this thread and keeps returning back to stir more sh_t, stop your whinig.
and as i said previously, i am not the only person that he has been in arguements with this individual
hes done it with so many others.

[harry k]

Originally Posted by GOAT WHORE

So are we not to debate it? Ask not why? Just bow down in awe at the hp gain? Come on, why not discuss why the hp gains? Some people just need thicker skin.

someone proudly wears their name"WHORE"
do you want to rationalise with that? go figure that out .....

[MCronkGTO]

Really guys!? Is this what is has come too? Everyone is entitled to their opinions. As with anything on the internet you have to make your own decisions about the information posted.

We have far too many "haters" and their attitudes detract from this forum.

Mark C

[Bill Eveland]

Harry, any speculation of testing if you would have used a qjet on the oe manifold than used an adapter to mount it to the square bore intake? Thanks

[nachomax]

I tried messaging my intake, but it didn't reply back

Back on topic -- I suppose that the customer didn't have a Q-Jet, nor a year to wait for one to be prepared. The easiest and quickest way to gain horsepower was to change intakes, isn't that what happened? Maybe could have picked up a Q-Jet from Jegs, Summit, or your favorite speed parts store, and if the results would have less than the crosswind/carter, then someone would have still be unhappy (but not the customer) about the results.

[jonmachota78]

Originally Posted by nachomax

Maybe could have picked up a Q-Jet from Jegs, Summit, or your favorite speed parts store, and if the results would have less than the crosswind/carter, then someone would have still be unhappy (but not the customer) about the results.

True true, but then we could be unhappy about the components themselves rather than a mismatch of components. :

[Half-Inch Stud]

Originally Posted by MCronkGTO

Really guys!? Is this what is has come too? Everyone is entitled to their opinions. As with anything on the internet you have to make your own decisions about the information posted. Mark C

okay then. Re-read Post #6 FWIW, for my opinion is;

the customer ought to try a Q-JET on his Freshly painted iron intake, re-Dyno eval, THEN sell the Squarebore;

to be ahead of this game financially, and with higher & more responsive performance.

objective as it gets. HIS

[Dragncar]

It simply was not a apples to apples test in any way shape or form. Do not care what some customer thought. Just because he was "happy" does not mean anything to tell you the truth. What does he know really.
This is hot rodding 101 stuff. I learned this in 1980 when I was 15 and we were building a 307 for my brothers first rig (69 CK10 1/2 ton) Dad rebuilt the engine with a factory "Corvette" cam and a factory iron Q jet intake. Since my uncle worked at Carter he got us a 625 AFB. Never ran right until we figured out Q jets were not "Quadrajunk" as people called them. Put the Q jet on and it ran WAY better vs the Carter and adapter plate.
And since this test is EXACTLY in Cliffs wheelhouse I will take his word as gospel on the subject.He has spent far more time doing tests and "proving" them than anyone on here.
And I am not some "newbie" as I build my own Holley carbs from scratch and have done more than one back to back manifold/carb test at the track in my 69GTO drag car with the track as my dyno.
Unless that iron intake was modified to take a 4150( not easy but can be done,cast iron work sucks) or a different 2 plane intake with both bolt patterns the test just meant a 4150 primary JAMMED through a stock Q jet opening will not run as well as a intake with a original 4150 bolt pattern. REALLY, who would have thought that ?

[harry k]

Originally Posted by Bill Eveland

Harry, any speculation of testing if you would have used a qjet on the oe manifold than used an adapter to mount it to the square bore intake? Thanks

cfm is cfm, whatever cfm you elect to use @ WOT not matter what carb it is or has been used, the power outcome@peak rpm will be the same.

[GOAT WHORE]

Originally Posted by harry k

cfm is cfm, whatever cfm you elect to use @ WOT not matter what carb it is or has been used, the power outcome@peak rpm will be the same.

Harry this makes no sense at all. You used the same carb in your dyno pulls with different results. Same carb, same cfm, different power levels. Cfm is cfm but it changes acording to the parts you use.

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by harry k

cfm is cfm, whatever cfm you elect to use @ WOT not matter what carb it is or has been used, the power outcome@peak rpm will be the same.

Not if the manifold vacuum measured at WOT at peak power is different.

Stan

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by Dragncar

It simply was not a apples to apples test in any way shape or form. Do not care what some customer thought. Just because he was "happy" does not mean anything to tell you the truth. What does he know really.
This is hot rodding 101 stuff. I learned this in 1980 when I was 15 and we were building a 307 for my brothers first rig (69 CK10 1/2 ton) Dad rebuilt the engine with a factory "Corvette" cam and a factory iron Q jet intake. Since my uncle worked at Carter he got us a 625 AFB. Never ran right until we figured out Q jets were not "Quadrajunk" as people called them. Put the Q jet on and it ran WAY better vs the Carter and adapter plate.
And since this test is EXACTLY in Cliffs wheelhouse I will take his word as gospel on the subject.He has spent far more time doing tests and "proving" them than anyone on here.
And I am not some "newbie" as I build my own Holley carbs from scratch and have done more than one back to back manifold/carb test at the track in my 69GTO drag car with the track as my dyno.
Unless that iron intake was modified to take a 4150( not easy but can be done,cast iron work sucks) or a different 2 plane intake with both bolt patterns the test just meant a 4150 primary JAMMED through a stock Q jet opening will not run as well as a intake with a original 4150 bolt pattern. REALLY, who would have thought that ?

It was his car and his parts. So then that is all that matters. He came in with parts to see which was better. It would be a different story if he was asking about what should he do.

Stan

[harry k]

Originally Posted by GOAT WHORE

Harry this makes no sense at all. You used the same carb in your dyno pulls with different results. Same carb, same cfm, different power levels. Cfm is cfm but it changes acording to the parts you use.

usually i don't rationalise with someone uses the name "WHORE"
but i ll make it clear in this case
keyword here "acording to the parts you use" yes i used high rise aluminum intake manifold which benifited the engine.NOT A MODIFIED CAST IRON INTAKE MANIFOLD THAT REQUIRES TO RUN Q-JET AND ASSOCIATED FUEL DELIVERY SYSTEM TO SUPPLEMENT A SMALL BOWL CARB THAT NEEDS ALL THE HELP IN THE WORLD TO MAKE THEM WORK TO SIMPLY MEET A HOLLEY OR EDELBROCK CARB PERFORMANCE!!!!

[harry k]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Not if the manifold vacuum measured at WOT at peak power is different.

Stan

Stan
i have used the 5"dia. vacuum gauge where i have gave up on it anymore,
How many times on wot dyno pulls or track passes you been able to see or barely get to defrentiate the difference ? the increments are so small and it wiggles so much on the engines were measuring (specifically within 600cfm range carbs used) you barely get to measure anything if you want to become sceintific.Thanks for listening.

[GOAT WHORE]

Originally Posted by Bill Eveland

Harry, any speculation of testing if you would have used a qjet on the oe manifold than used an adapter to mount it to the square bore intake? Thanks

Originally Posted by harry k

cfm is cfm, whatever cfm you elect to use @ WOT not matter what carb it is or has been used, the power outcome@peak rpm will be the same.

Originally Posted by harry k

usually i don't rationalise with someone uses the name "WHORE"
but i ll make it clear in this case
keyword here "acording to the parts you use" yes i used high rise aluminum intake manifold which benifited the engine.NOT A MODIFIED CAST IRON INTAKE MANIFOLD THAT REQUIRES TO RUN Q-JET AND ASSOCIATED FUEL DELIVERY SYSTEM TO SUPPLEMENT A SMALL BOWL CARB THAT NEEDS ALL THE HELP IN THE WORLD TO MAKE THEM WORK TO SIMPLY MEET A HOLLEY OR EDELBROCK CARB PERFORMANCE!!!!

Bill asked a question pertaining to two different combos and your respomce was that it did not matter, that they would both have the same power outcome. Really
Let me ask you this, why did your high rise manifold make more power over the stock intake? Could it have anything to do with airflow? More cfm? A better match of parts? By your logic there should have not been any difference in power.
I realise that you can swap parts with no power gains but the whole point of this thread was to show that there was a gain.
And by the way, how often do you get the chance to rationalize with someone that has Whore in there name

[SergeF]

Harry, good numbers! That chevy is moving. I found a good use for heavy intake and QJET. Best wheel chock set up yet and no spacer on this one. You know, a perfect match!

[Mikes455Wagon]

So let me see if I get the short version of this....

Edelbrock carb on stock intake...sucks

Qjet on stock intake....good

Edelbrock carb on square flange intake...good

Qjet with some adapters may be acceptable on square flange intakes

While Cliff and I have differed on opinions on some things in the past, I firmly believe he has the Qjet stuff figured out to an exact science. When he saw the edelbrock carb going onto a spreadbore intake, he already new what was gonna happen with the parts involved.

So, I am confused as why anyone would get upset about any of this. It looks like this all is just showing what most of us already know. If your parts don't compliment each other, you have a giant Turd. 260@ .050 duration cams don't belong in street cars with 2.73 gears and stock converters either. To each their own I guess.