|
Anyone ever try the BBC trick flow intake manifold? 540-565 ci
|
|
Think you may want to talk to articfriends see if he will help you. |
Thanks, just never really hear anything on this one. Seems like I recall him back to back testing different intakes or may have been another member dynoing intake carbs etc 4150/4500 platform and intakes. I really like the brodix hv 2001 for runner length however seems like it was pretty much close to the merlinx with both being ported by Wilson I believe. I drop shipped to the Vic jr to Valako last year and he didn't care for the short runners although that intake always seems to do well. Close to the Merlinx. I am undecided at this point after I saw this trick flow a while back just thought I'd check. Whatever one I end up with the it will be ported and floors raised. Just want the most velocity I can get. I think SB mentioned years ago in the a and b class guys were running a lot of the brodix. I'm probably over complicating the issue but just want the best intake for my NA build. Merlinx always seems to be a winner for many when doing back to back comparisons but it's the Internet. |
Buy them both run them on dyno and have all the work done and run them again but also get 3 cams to try t will donate some of the dyno time. Lol |
I'm running the Brodix HV-2000 on my 524, motor seems to run really well from 3000-6000. My engine builder has tested a number of intakes and the Brodix seem to run better in the rpm range we see. Not many big boats running much more than 6000 rpm. Lots of material in the Brodix for port matching.
|
Originally Posted by getrdunn
(Post 4682312)
I think SB mentioned years ago in the a and b class guys were running a lot of the brodix. In the mean time here :) Originally Posted by sb Here's an example on data I ran for someone with a 540, AFR heads, 5600-5800 peak rpm: Quote: Pipemax: To measure port length, measure top of port(Roof) and measure bottom(Floor) of port. Add together. Then divide by 2. {use Scotch 3M 218 Fine Line Tape to measure Roof and Floor Lengths} - Induction System Tuned Lengths - ( Cylinder Head Port + Manifold Runner ) 1st Harmonic= 36.977" (usually this Length is never used) 2nd Harmonic= 20.987" (some Sprint Engines and Factory OEM's w/Injectors) 3rd Harmonic= 14.652" (ProStock or Comp SheetMetal Intake) 4th Harmonic= 11.532" (Single-plane Intakes , less Torque) 5th Harmonic= 9.357" (Torque is reduced, even though Tuned Length) 6th Harmonic= 7.872" (Torque is reduced, even though Tuned Length) 7th Harmonic= 6.794" (Torque is greatly reduced, even though Tuned Length) 8th Harmonic= 5.975" (Torque is greatly reduced, even though Tuned Length) Note> 2nd and 3rd Harmonics typically create the most Peak Torque 4th Harmonic is used to package Induction System underneath Hood Plenum Runner Minimum Recommended Entry Area = 3.194 to 3.593 Sq.Inch Plenum Runner Average Recommended Entry Area = 3.672 Sq.Inch Plenum Runner Maximum Recommended Entry Area = 3.751 to 4.439 Sq.Inch Minimum Plenum Volume CC = 1157.9 [typically for Single-Plane Intakes] Minimum Plenum Volume CID= 70.7 [typically for Single-Plane Intakes] Maximum Plenum Volume CC = 8861.2 [typically for Tunnel Ram Intakes] Maximum Plenum Volume CID= 540.7 [typically for Tunnel Ram Intakes] ================================================== ==== -- Cross-Sectional Areas at various Intake Port Velocities (@ 28 in.) --- 159 FPS at Intake Valve Curtain Area= 4.524 sq.in. at .640 Lift 181 FPS at Intake Valve OD Area and at Convergence Lift = .563 223 FPS 90% PerCent Rule Seat-Throat Velocity CSA= 3.221 sq.in. at 5600 RPM 350 FPS Velocity CSA= 2.051 sq.in. at 5600 RPM Port Sonic-Choke with HP Loss 330 FPS Velocity CSA= 2.178 sq.in. at 5600 RPM Port Sonic-Choke with HP Loss 311 FPS Velocity CSA= 2.311 sq.in. at 5600 RPM Smallest Useable Port CSA 300 FPS Velocity CSA= 2.395 sq.in. at 5600 RPM Recommended Smallest Port CSA 285 FPS Velocity CSA= 2.521 sq.in. at 5600 RPM Recommended Smallest Port CSA 260 FPS Velocity CSA= 2.764 sq.in. at 5600 RPM Recommended Port CSA 250 FPS Velocity CSA= 2.874 sq.in. at 5600 RPM Recommended Port CSA 240 FPS Velocity CSA= 2.994 sq.in. at 5600 RPM Largest Intake Port Entry CSA 220 FPS Velocity CSA= 3.266 sq.in. at 5600 RPM Largest Intake Port Entry CSA 210 FPS Velocity CSA= 3.422 sq.in. at 5600 RPM Torque Loss + Reversion 200 FPS Velocity CSA= 3.593 sq.in. at 5600 RPM Torque Loss + Reversion |
Okay getrdunn, this was the post and page:
https://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/...ml#post4131692 |
Originally Posted by 14 apache
(Post 4682323)
Buy them both run them on dyno and have all the work done and run them again but also get 3 cams to try t will donate some of the dyno time. Lol |
Sorry I never got back to your PM. I actually believe when all said and done, the difference in the boat vs dyno will be negligible on which intake is better. All out race application, maybe...
From another thread to reference. I also believe these intakes are mated to Valako heads.
Originally Posted by BenPerfected
(Post 2435361)
I dyno'ed the Merlin back to back with the Brodix HV 2001. Both were port matched and balanced at Wilson Manifolds. Both were the same at the top and the mid-range was stronger on the Merlin. Pre-dyno testing, Wilson's comments was we were going to like the Merlin better in the boat...we do! Very strong on acceleration.
Originally Posted by BenPerfected
(Post 2435712)
I haven't done any recent work on a Dart single plane intake. Many of the old A & B Class racers used the Brodix HV2001. Most of my $ & time was spent with polishing on this manifold. I expect the Dart performance would be similar to both the Merlin and Brodix. Wilson's comments were the Brodix was too big. Like intake runners on cylinder heads, big generally means lazy, especially in the mid range in a marine application.
The Merlin has two basic advantages. It is smaller than the Brodix and provides more mid-range torque and the has the brass water jackets....hugh to me. Wilson's is a good place to go if you want to convert a $400 manifold into a $1500 one :D Both these manifolds are way big at the port for most heads with a 308-325 cc intake runners. The port match work can be significant if you want them welded-up to maximize performance. One other tip, best dyno results for my combination was a 1" carb spacer on the Brodix and 1.5" on the Merlin. HVH and Wilson both offer good spacers. If anybody is interested, I also have a reworked Brodix HV 2001 port matched to a pair of Dart IE's 308's ported to 320cc by Sonny Leonard. |
Good point on the carb spacers. I added a Phenolic 1" tapered spacer and it made a noticeable improvement, especially on the low to mid range acceleration . I then added a 1" open spacer under that and noticed even more improvement.
|
Originally Posted by ThisIsLivin
(Post 4682751)
Good point on the carb spacers. I added a Phenolic 1" tapered spacer and it made a noticeable improvement, especially on the low to mid range acceleration . I then added a 1" open spacer under that and noticed even more improvement.
Tks |
Originally Posted by ThisIsLivin
(Post 4682751)
Good point on the carb spacers. I added a Phenolic 1" tapered spacer and it made a noticeable improvement, especially on the low to mid range acceleration . I then added a 1" open spacer under that and noticed even more improvement.
|
Try the combination of a tapered and open. I noticed the improvement right from plane to top end. I didn’t dyno it, but to notice a marked improvement had to be more than 5 or 6hp. |
Haven't seen that intake in person. I just dynoed a 565 w profiler intake, it came within 15 hp of what dyno sim showed ( 865hp), I just dynoed a 555, had flotek 375 heads, claimed flow about identical to the profiler heads, calculated hp also in the 880 to 900 range, was off the mark by 100 hp, had a BMP 4500 intake box stock. Customer had no interest in trying spacers because he had no room in his car vs hood scoop anyways but compared to most other similar motors I have dynoed I can about guarantee there was 20 hp to be had from spacers and box stock bmp/merlix x ports vs cncd 375 heads at 1.625 vs 1.82 and 2.375 vs 2.54 , Im going to assume hp was lost there but customer had sent intake out for nitrous plumbing and wasnt taking it back off to try a different one or mod it
|
I would have liked to compared my chinesium intake that i outperformed a edelbrock super victor with to this merlin/ bmp. I dont think when you have heads that flow 300/320 cfm and motors turning 5800 that there is a ton of difference between most open.plenums as long as you give it as much spacer as it needs to straighten out air flow, add plenum.volume. now, bump ci up to 565, turn rpms up to 6500, buy heads that are supposed to flow 440 cfm, then any intake thats not perfectly matched to the killer heads is going to hurt combo/hp by knocking that flow waaaay down
|
Originally Posted by articfriends
(Post 4683335)
Haven't seen that intake in person. I just dynoed a 565 w profiler intake, it came within 15 hp of what dyno sim showed ( 865hp), I just dynoed a 555, had flotek 375 heads, claimed flow about identical to the profiler heads, calculated hp also in the 880 to 900 range, was off the mark by 100 hp, had a BMP 4500 intake box stock. Customer had no interest in trying spacers because he had no room in his car vs hood scoop anyways but compared to most other similar motors I have dynoed I can about guarantee there was 20 hp to be had from spacers and box stock bmp/merlix x ports vs cncd 375 heads at 1.625 vs 1.82 and 2.375 vs 2.54 , Im going to assume hp was lost there but customer had sent intake out for nitrous plumbing and wasnt taking it back off to try a different one or mod it
|
Originally Posted by hogie roll
(Post 4683346)
First combo was profiler head and intake? The profiler and some edelbrocks seem to be the yellowbullet favorites. 555 w flotek 375s, merlin x intake box stock except a bunch of nitrous lines plumbed on manifold and slight port obstruction from nitrous tips, box stock 1250 dom, also had only 12.5 complression becuase again was built to be sprayed, it actually calculated on dyno sim at about 900 hp, missed its mark by a mile at only 780. afrs were in the mid 11s, if you leaned it out intio the low 12s it made 760 hp, bsfcs were terrible for compression motor at .460 to .540 on top, the 565 had bsfscs in low to mid .400s, .380s even in some spots, it made all kinds of power leaning it into the high 12's while tuning. customer was unwilling to try a different intake or even carb spacers on 555 so in the end did the box stock merlin kill power, did the flotek heads not flow what they were claimed, just more questions. In our MARINE world, a 540/565 with pretty much any open plenum intake, especially one with a dominator where throttle bores are spread out versus tight in midddle wants a intake with some plenum volume and transition from flange to port openings if its not built into the intake already, hence carb spacers picking up both tq and hp without much negative effects IF you have hatch clearance, Smitty |
Interesting. Profiler seems to be one of the companies that makes the HP and runs the numbers on track. The single 4 and tunnel ram are everyone’s favorites. And that 370 head really starts flowing at 0.700 lift. I don’t recall seeing a test where plenum volume has ever hurt. I suspect the trade off may only be in throttle response. |
With all of these spacers it seems like we're just getting back to the venerable tunnel ram. ;)
|
Originally Posted by Baja Rooster
(Post 4683658)
With all of these spacers it seems like we're just getting back to the venerable tunnel ram. ;)
Just like adding spacers to a dual plane is not making a single plane. Making something share 1 characteristic does make something become another. |
https://rehermorrison.com/product/an...ersion-plates/
These made an extra 8-12 horsepower on my 540s. |
Originally Posted by Baja Rooster
(Post 4683658)
With all of these spacers it seems like we're just getting back to the venerable tunnel ram. ;)
|
Dart Tunnel Ram. Trust me. Famous last words !ha,ha,ha.
|
Almost did the dart tunnel rams but ended up going kinsler injection off class one race motors with new ecu's don't think it cost that much more with used intakes. |
How well would a tunnel ram work with a boat motor? I always assumed from my old car days the low end would suffer to much in a single speed boat.
|
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...4c6d5718b.jpeg
Originally Posted by Wildman_grafix
(Post 4683791)
How well would a tunnel ram work with a boat motor? I always assumed from my old car days the low end would suffer to much in a single speed boat.
|
Originally Posted by Wildman_grafix
(Post 4683791)
How well would a tunnel ram work with a boat motor? I always assumed from my old car days the low end would suffer to much in a single speed boat.
|
Originally Posted by payuppsucker
(Post 4683793)
Richie Zul did quite a few of them so I'm thinking they work pretty well.
Originally Posted by Wildman_grafix
(Post 4683791)
How well would a tunnel ram work with a boat motor? I always assumed from my old car days the low end would suffer to much in a single speed boat.
Lastly, a certain tunnel ram isn't the same as the net. Runner cross sectional area and length and plenum volume all determine what rpm vs cid vs power it ill make. Same with single pane intakes...thus why it drive's me nuts (single plane intake manifolds mostly) when talked about generically. Another thing is, people back then didn't really realize the different timing requirements of the tunnel rams. They typically love a ton of initial timing. |
Originally Posted by SB
(Post 4683664)
You can add 4" of spacers or more and it's still not a Tunnel Ram.
Just like adding spacers to a dual plane is not making a single plane. Making something share 1 characteristic does make something become another. I think given the advancements of engine building the tunnel ram may be a good option again. |
And that is the real advantage of modern day fuel injection. Unfortunately we do not have these available for BBC's.
Since we don;t have to worry about fuel getting into the runners and then into the combustion chambers with EFI, we can build longer straiter runners, attached to a pretty large plenum, and package it to fit under any hood. :) https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...ad4a1b0d6e.jpg |
Just imagine if someone made an intake like this for BBC's where you can bolt in a different set of runners :)
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...5a6df9542d.jpg |
It just seems that a tunnel ram machined for injectors with a couple throttle bodies on top would be pretty trick. |
You can get the Dart (and others) that way now if you want.
|
Originally Posted by SB
(Post 4683837)
Just imagine if someone made an intake like this for BBC's where you can bolt in a different set of runners :)
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...5a6df9542d.jpg |
Originally Posted by Baja Rooster
(Post 4683855)
It just seems that a tunnel ram machined for injectors with a couple throttle bodies on top would be pretty trick. Or https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...4fb1bdba7.jpeg I think spraying the injector right at the back of the intake valve would probably help you slow idle down a giant cam though. |
How does a tunnel ram compare to the Hilborn style stacks? I'm guessing they are roughly the same height, but with the tunnel ram having a plenum area that the stacks lack.
|
Originally Posted by bck
(Post 4683911)
How does a tunnel ram compare to the Hilborn style stacks? I'm guessing they are roughly the same height, but with the tunnel ram having a plenum area that the stacks lack.
|
Originally Posted by bck
(Post 4683911)
How does a tunnel ram compare to the Hilborn style stacks? I'm guessing they are roughly the same height, but with the tunnel ram having a plenum area that the stacks lack.
|
One thing pro stock was not allowed to do was place the injectors where they want. And they can't run ir intake. I did like fuel injection on pro stock and flat hood. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:28 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.