Howard1784
Well-Known Member
Had the original small heads 1.92s etc. Upgraded to 2.02/1.60 cam was 501 /513 as original
Some M1 porting pictures and flow numbers
- Thread starter pittsburghracer
- Start date
-
Howard1784
Well-Known Member
9 mi per gallon! 56 miles each way to track. Car weighs 3700 lbs with me in. Added the recommended 750 carb, headers etc., for that engine. No difference between changing between double pumper or vacuum secondary either. I've ranted on this engine/car set up before.
Rat Bastid
Dunamis Metron
No offense but when the engine is numb to tuning the entire combination is off.
Customer here!
I will try an early 440 TQ first and a 1,000 race unit later.
The Thermoquad will forever be my favorite carb. Had a '71 Duster 4 speed with one. Man, when those secondaries opened up/kicked in, watch out! I will never forget that feeling.
Sorry guys no updates. I woke up yesterday with a pounding headache and sinus or allergies or something. Felt like crap all day and honestly at 6am not much better today. Not sure if it was from being outside shooting the other day in some crazy wind or not. Back to bed
Yes yes yes… LMAO! “That Sound!”
Like anything new to you, there’s a learning curve to using a TQ. They’re odd by compare to a Holley. They’re not difficult IMO, well, most of the time for me. Sometimes I get a carb that just throws me for a loop. LOL It’s normally pretty much way out of adjustment which can be a PIA to restore sometimes. It’s not a difficult carb but learning it can be like all things new. A PIA.
The key is when you get one, is to go through the carb carefully and set all those little adjustments carefully. Bending the rods and making sure everything is where it should be is annoying until it’s right.
The hardest thing about a TQ is finding rods and nets to tune it. eBay has kits from time to time but they’re ridiculously expensive. Also realize the carb is a stock carb, not a race carb. It will never be as flexible or tunable as a Holley. The parts aren’t out there so home modifications are done for the more extreme cases. It depends on the end user how far they want to modify there TQ.
Once you get the hand of one, they’re not bad at all.
There warping of there phenolic resin middle is due to the mid ‘70’s emissions control system which also ran the engine hotter. The heat cycles were punishing for the carb back in the day. This caused the leaks and eventually the cracks. A lot of times people would use the paper thin gasket which is a no no for any carb IMO. From the factory the very thick gasket should be used. This helps prevent the heat soak and boiling fuel.
Once I have this up and going, it will be my first attempt to use a TQ on more of a race level than street or street strip kind of ride.
Thanks for the nfo... started thinking bout what carb i want to get for my pos.. looked at the AVS2 but will prolly end up with a normal holley type setup (I could swear i still have a 750 somewhere i can't find) i'm sure the newer ones like QFT and FST are better than the old standard holleys though..
Try a Brawler carb. Nice units.
No I didn’t retire from porting yet. My very enjoyable day at the pistol range on Wednesday for four hours and woke up Thursday sick. I figured probably just sinus or allergies with all the wind we had Wednesday. Well I’m not sure what it is but I slept 80% of Thursday and Friday with a booming headache, chest congestion, and soaking wet chills last night woke me up. No temperature so I cranked up the heat to 70 and put my sweatpants and hoodie on and went back to bed. Took a short nap at noon and felt good enough to hit the shop. With a crazy runny nose I can’t work at 100% but I’m getting lots of plenum shaping done. I’ll give it one more hour and go eat some soup and crackers.
Pictures with the spacer. Next time I work on this I will be flipping it every different direction possible many many times till I’m satisfied. Then on the bench it goes.
Woooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!
Yea man. Looks cool as heck. Lots of work there. I’ve carved a few things, but nothing compares. I’d be more inclined to work on a what I’d guess we could consider a normal square bore intake than take a stab at this. The spreadbore shape and such things as how air flows is not really a personally well know item for me. I really am not sure how to attack that intake. Since you have done such work before, porting, your personal experience and understanding goes a lot further than a rookie’s best guess.
Sometimes, things are obvious, counterintuitive, or when pointed out because you have no idea, you then say, “Of Course!”
It’s not until you find out “Of Course!” Does it make itself apparent.
In the cylinder heads I worked on I’d have to say after viewing your work and talking with you here via PM’s on how to proceed, I made the jump. I fixed the heads and did what you showed and what you told me to do. They work, don’t leak oil, runs great, better than before. Home run all around. You really helped me out and in that helping, take away the nervousness of screwing it up badly.
The last thing that wanted to do was to screw them up.
There a bit pricey to purchase one just to experiment with.
One day I’ll try a full porting on a set of heads.
Sometimes, things are obvious, counterintuitive, or when pointed out because you have no idea, you then say, “Of Course!”
It’s not until you find out “Of Course!” Does it make itself apparent.
In the cylinder heads I worked on I’d have to say after viewing your work and talking with you here via PM’s on how to proceed, I made the jump. I fixed the heads and did what you showed and what you told me to do. They work, don’t leak oil, runs great, better than before. Home run all around. You really helped me out and in that helping, take away the nervousness of screwing it up badly.
The last thing that wanted to do was to screw them up.
There a bit pricey to purchase one just to experiment with.
One day I’ll try a full porting on a set of heads.
Pitts.
I have a question for you regarding the intake in post #40. Eric Weingartner has done a comparison recently of several intakes, about 8-10 of them. What is very noticeable among the single plane intakes is how far the runner dividers on some of them protrude into the plenum. Seems to be more than one school of thought as to exactly how far, if at all, the dividers should protrude into the plenum. In post #40 above, hardly any protrusion.
Have you done any before/after flow testing on this?
I have a question for you regarding the intake in post #40. Eric Weingartner has done a comparison recently of several intakes, about 8-10 of them. What is very noticeable among the single plane intakes is how far the runner dividers on some of them protrude into the plenum. Seems to be more than one school of thought as to exactly how far, if at all, the dividers should protrude into the plenum. In post #40 above, hardly any protrusion.
Have you done any before/after flow testing on this?
No testing on vane work alone. When you get into work like that you better be prepared to flow up to four runners and it hard enough to get four ports to flow close to the same. There is so much info out there on intakes especially today that it’s up to my customers to send me their choice of intake for their intended purpose and I’ll take a half decent intake and I’ll try my hardest to make it better. It’s been so long since I worked on my Super Victor I think that’s the last intake I did major vane work to. Shaping goes a long way towards getting you where you want to go. I was never interested in just flowing the intake by itself but boy that sure would be easier than mounting it to a head. I know it really opened my eyes years ago when I took a friend Chevy dart Platinum heads (cast iron) from 260 and got them pushing 320 only to bolt his Victor jr on and lose 40 cfm of the gain. He was a young engineer and loved to watch and when he saw that he was pissed. He told me to go ahead and port the Victor jr and he spent 400.00 (a lot back then) for the newest greatest Dart intake. Well I got the Victor jr done and we were now down to a 6cfm max loss which I showed him while he was here. I bolted the new Dart intake on and the loss was back to 40 lol. He was pissed and said will you port that one too. So I did and we got it as good as the Victor jr. The new latest greatest isn’t always that great.
Pitts.
You mention shaping the vane. It seems the latest trend is to have a fairly sharp, pointy leading edge.
Many older intakes had a bull nose edge, like the leading edge of an airplane wing. Thoughts?
You mention shaping the vane. It seems the latest trend is to have a fairly sharp, pointy leading edge.
Many older intakes had a bull nose edge, like the leading edge of an airplane wing. Thoughts?
I’ve really covered my thoughts on this so many times that it’s been throughly discussed. I don’t like sharp edges anywhere. I also provide lots of what I think are good pictures to show the “shaping” that’s is being performed.
Ok I’m about over whatever made me sick. Had to get my business taxes all charted and calculated and saw my account last night and got my income taxes done. I hate that Job. Ok back to the M1 manifold. Finished it up today and gave it a good bath. Then on the same port for some numbers. Very interesting numbers and I now have respect for an old intake I’ve never touched before. I think I said it earlier but honestly I respected it out of the box which is rare. He’s some new numbers
——-Head————intake on
.100—64——————62—64
.200—125—————125—132
.300—187—————183—194
.350—214—————213—218
.400—238—————236—238
.450—257—————246—253
.500—284—————255—265
.550—294—————256—266
.600—296—————258—270
.650—302—————271—283
.700—308—————279—289
——-Head————intake on
.100—64——————62—64
.200—125—————125—132
.300—187—————183—194
.350—214—————213—218
.400—238—————236—238
.450—257—————246—253
.500—284—————255—265
.550—294—————256—266
.600—296—————258—270
.650—302—————271—283
.700—308—————279—289
Let’s just say I think I tested the poorest flowing port on the intake (one of two) so yes I think it would help to square it off. After I get paid I may if I have time flow one of the rear ports to see how it stacks up. We have to look at this whole test as one that is really pushing the boundaries of this intake and I think it handled the test well. How many guys do you know that would pick this intake for a set of heads flowing 308 cfm. I think it would really shine on a head flowing 280-290cfm. After I flow tested it I started looking at the sharp edge on the adapter face and as a carb would centralize the airflow more towards the center of the intake took some duck-sil and roll out a nice bead to put a radius on top the spacer. It kicked the mid lift numbers up approximately 2 cfm.
Ok as i sometimes do I’m going to change up my answer to this question after sleeping on it. My head is always leaning towards the drag strip because that’s my thing but here we have a factory engineered intake that was made especially for the Thermaquad carb. With the small primaries and large secondary plates it was designed to help fuel economy, part throttle performance, and still perform well which after playing with one I think they accomplished. Did it beat out a modified Victor340??? On the street with the carb it was designed for yes I think it did. What other intake that is out there shined like this one out of the box.
-
