[Cliff R]

"Are you going to notch the divider on the P4B? The way the stock and the P4B look after the mods you did, I'm really curious to see the difference as the floor is smooth on one and ridged on the other. Let the test begin!!! Good luck to you."

Thanks. I'm going to do the first testing without notching the divider, using a .230" thick fully open gasket, so both sides can "see" each other effectively enough, at least for initial testing.

Testing parts is not easy, and usually takes 2 if not 3 outings to see the full potential of the parts being tested.

We will load up and drive about an hour 20 minutes to the track, unload the car, and drive it around till fully warmed up.

The first run, is almost always off slightly from the next as it just gets the "cobwebs" cleaned out, and the transmisson and differential completely warmed up. I will see .01-.02 seconds improvement from the second run about 95 percent of the time and change nothing.

So I will make at least 2 more runs, and look at all three slips. They will in most cases be withing apprx .02-.03 seconds of each other. IF this is the case, we will install the part to be tested, then make another run. Time permitting, 2-3 more runs, then average all the numbers. More times than not, 2 things will happen. We woln't get in 2-3 more runs, and the temperatures will drop off enough to improve the runs anyhow.

This mandates another outing, starting out with the car in the last configuration we raced it in (we also have to duplicate fuel level used in the last round of testing), or the new part in place, then repeating the procedure above. We will finish up with the original part in place, and have about 5-6 runs from each part to average. Keep in mind, you have to pull all of this off, and not "toss" any runs because someone left a bunch of oil or water on the starting line causing the tires to slip and mess up the entire run. We also have to factor in the DA between the two (or three) outings, and always try to run in similiar weather conditions.

The other test method used is just to run a part for a considerable period of time and "average" all the numbers. Although not a same day "back to back" test, you will see over several dozens runs with each part in place in various weather conditions which part is going to provide the best ET/MPH.

My goal for the P4B intake is two fold. I do NOT like the RPM intake we are currently running, as it requires a 1" shorter Shaker assembly which doesn't allow the use of the factory style air filter and lid. It also doesn't "fit" well, putting uneeded force up against the hood as it's just too tall for the stock type components.

I want to go back to all of the original Shaker parts, and run a stock air filter to keep dust/dirt out of our engine. I also have never seen or heard of any testing with the P4B intake, at least in the q-jet version, so it's new ground. I would just bolt on the iron intake in place of the RPM, however, the runners in the new heads are WAY taller than the stock gaskets, so I'd have to open up the port entrances. I want to keep the iron intake in it's "stock" gasket size, just in case I ever decide to make an aluminum version of it. Concerning the current state of the economy, it's becoming even less likely this will ever happen.

I will say that I have been approached once already about making an intake, but after seeing Ace getting "rolled under the bus" on a similiar deal, a "joint" venture is highly unlikely, I've had enough telephone poles shoved up my rear with business dealings in the past few years, and I'm MUCH wiser about this sort of thing these days!......Cliff