For comparison. The inside of an Indy 440-25 crossram. Even though mine has the carbs in the center.
Doug
Doug
LemonWedge 470 build thread
- Thread starter LemonWedge
- Start date
- Local time
- 6:42 PM
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2014
- Messages
- 33,728
- Reaction score
- 53,508
- Location
- South Louisiana
Doug, you are pushing all of my intake obsession buttons.
I finally got an outstanding Weiand cross-flow intake w/6bbl top after over a year of insane-level research. I literally had dreams about it and it was inevitable. I don't want to have it modded, even if that was possible, for MW ports, and there's no way it fits under my N96. It's going up for sale once I take possession of my 572.
Same situation regarding no hood clearance for the 440-25 but DAMN that intake absolutely mesmerizes me as I wonder what that would be like with a custom 6bbl top, or a F&B throttle body trio and injectors at the ports.
I'm going to be optimistic and say a "Doug's Mods ModMan" (would that be a "DougMan"?) winds up being a CHAMPION performance layout, with a 6bbl and it fits under the Air Grabber (or at least an aftermarket 6bbl A-12 scoop)
Gunner1
Well-Known Member
Quick question. How do you think this type of manifold would compare to a normal upright tunnel ram? The roof of the runners has a sharp 180 to do, if it is to share plenum volume with both sides. While this one seems to have a generous plenum I wonder how the intake pulse is affected by the sharp turns. That modified one is some legit work on manifold air management.
I know a few guys who swapped the 440-25 using 750 Eddy carbs for the indy -3 single plane and a dominator. The results were very similar. The pictured below mods have been tried. But all the combos using them were slower than mine. The bottom view of the plate shown is very similar to the Indy carb plate. My friend Casey runs a Bischoff 588, B-1 originals, Indy tunnel ram adapted to B-1 heads in a 65 Coronet, Mine is DVW garage built 580", -1's with the crossram. We both run N/SS.
He's about .10 quicker and slightly heavier.
Doug
—-
Wow look at that workmanship inside that intake. A guy can see why it works so well. Mine had the stuffers inside like the ones in another picture you posted. When I switched from the 440-25 to the Super Victor with the 1050 Dominator my ET went from 10.45 to 10.38. My 440-25 sure didn’t compare to yours though. Amazing work!
You misunderstood. Mine is stock. The modified ones pictured are fair amount slower.
Doug
- Local time
- 6:42 PM
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2014
- Messages
- 33,728
- Reaction score
- 53,508
- Location
- South Louisiana
Unless the "eye candy" effect is a factor. For me, that's part of it, but I want to "honor" the "V-code" aspect of my Roadrunner, thus my decision to try 3x2 of "something" as long as possible.
Gunner1
Well-Known Member
If I was still a working man and had my shop then I think a 3x2 or a Xram would be that kind of shiny bauble I would love to try. But alas I sold my tools and house. I’m now a gentleman of leisure on a fixed income. So I’m reliving my youth through you guys. I’m just happy be able to talk to motorheads and look at projects. Keeps me excited about the 63.
I live on Social Security. If I need race parts, I do side jobs. Doing two transmissions right now. A 68 Belvedere 318 to 440 swap coming in two weeks. That'll buy new slicks, brake pads, and a 55 gallon drum of 114. And have cash left over. I'm ready to hit the track at 68 years young. Enjoy life.
Doug
LemonWedge
Well-Known Member
It was a busy weekend away from the shop, but I managed to get a few things done. Chased all the threads. Stuffed the cam in. And took main bearing clearance readings. What I found was good consistency, but a little tighter than I had hoped for. What do you guys think about .023 at the mains in a motor that will see 6800?
Last edited:
Thats a little tighter than I would like to run, but not by much. On that size journal I'd really like to see a min of .0025". Measure the crank bearing bores. Clevite lists 383/400 bearing bore dimension as 2.8175"-2.8180". If its tight the line hone could be opened up. Unless the crank was just cut or the line hone was just done it's been running at this dimension in the past. Your crank was cut to -.010". But its on the high side of tolerance. Clevite spec for -.010" would be 2.5145"-2.5155". It's tough because -.001" undersize mains don't exist. From what I hear polishing a crank acurately .0005" is tough. But thats not my field of expetise. If the line hone specs are on the only real solution if the crank bores aren't tight would be to cut the mains to .020". Or run it as is.
Doug
Doug
Last edited:
LemonWedge
Well-Known Member
The main journals at the crank were left alone Doug. But the mainline was honed. I’ll measure the bores without bearings in them tonight and see what I come up with. I want this thing to be right. Both my machinist and his lead tech are racers that I race with. So I’m sure they’ll work with me if I have to ask them to re-look at it.
66Satellite47
Well-Known Member
I am not a builder, but .0023 does seem tight. On my bracket motors I always wanted .0025 - .003. But it does depend on what bearings you are running.
LemonWedge
Well-Known Member
Cleavite P bearings.
MS part # bearings will probably have more clearance. Remember the main diameter on thos motor is smaller. So clearance should be a little tighter than a 440 main.
Doug
Doug
Last edited:
LemonWedge
Well-Known Member
“MS” is a series similar to “P”? I’ll go looking for those.
King makes a set of “-.001” bearings. in Theory that would get me to .0024, but I realize I’d have to install and measure to verify that. Another $100-…….
CHRYSLER King Engine Bearings MB555HP001 King HP-Series Main Bearings | Summit Racing
Didn’t get around to measuring the bores tonight. I’ll get out there tomorrow.
King makes a set of “-.001” bearings. in Theory that would get me to .0024, but I realize I’d have to install and measure to verify that. Another $100-…….
CHRYSLER King Engine Bearings MB555HP001 King HP-Series Main Bearings | Summit Racing
Didn’t get around to measuring the bores tonight. I’ll get out there tomorrow.
Gunner1
Well-Known Member
I wish I could do that. But I am 100% disabled. Lungs heart and back but I get done what I can. Just takes longer. I’m just glad I have my dodge and at 75 I’m still having fun and watching Lemon Wedge build his beast. I was 60 when the agent Orange hit me. Now the Camp Le Jeune water is acting up with Parkinsons. But I’m happy. This is a great forum and awesome People.
You need -.010" bearings since the crank is .010" undersize already. It's ground on the high side of tolerance (spec is 2.6145"-2.6155" at .010" undersize). No one makes a .011" under bearing for this motor. The P bearing is a passenger car bearing. The Clevite MS876P is an H series bearing which is a performance bearing. My Bore size dimensions are correct. Passenger car bearing clearance is generally tighter. I've had no clearance issues useing th H series with proper line bore and crank dimension. If your crank was in the middle of tolerance you would have .0028", or at the minimum of the tollerance you would have .0033" My bet is the line hone isn't tight.
Doug
LemonWedge
Well-Known Member
Looks like that is exactly what I’ve got, Doug. Measuring the bores to see where Im at, then I’ll just have to talk to the machinist to see what my options are. In your experience, if we can open the bore up by .0002, will that translate to .0002 added clearance with the bearings installed? Or would I be better off working with the crank?
Last edited:
Similar threads
