Why oh Why

[Splangj]

….has no one made a big block manifold with integral valley plate. The Max wedge Mopar crate motor had such a manifold, just like the 426 Hemi. I would hope TF would step up, since I’ve given up on Ed.

 

[Lefty71]

I thought some of the M-1 RB manifolds had them "built-in" so no bathtub needed. Of course, does you no good now unless you like hunting used or nos.

 

[440 PHIXX]

Because it’s a better design not having the hot oil splashing up on the intake runners. The Chrysler B/RB engines are also a dry intake. No coolant running thru them.

 

[WileERobby]

Because it’s a better design not having the hot oil splashing up on the intake runners. The Chrysler B/RB engines are also a dry intake. No coolant running thru them.

 

[Splangj]

I’m aware of the oil splash issue, but stockers had heat crossovers, which have to be hotter than oil splash. And no pan on small blocks, or Hemis, or the max wedge Mopar crate motors. I know it would have been easier to make the manifold than a larger port valley pan, but if someone began making one, I’d be first in line.

 

[WileERobby]

I’m aware of the oil splash issue, but stockers had heat crossovers, which have to be hotter than oil splash. And no pan on small blocks, or Hemis, or the max wedge Mopar crate motors. I know it would have been easier to make the manifold than a larger port valley pan, but if someone began making one, I’d be first in line.

What does the heat crossover do, what does it affect, where is it located ? As opposed to the entire manifold exposed to the entire crankcase.

 

[Splangj]

It heats the bottom of the carb plenum on the intake for various reasons, usually emissions related, with fire breath exhaust directly from the head. It’s gotta be way hotter than the oil. I think an Olds or Pontiac engine from the 60s also used valley pans. Trying to align the ports with the pan can be a little tricky, but sandwiching a thin gasket on either side seems nuts. I know there’s aftermarket solid aluminum valley covers, but they only fit under a raised port aluminum head, which still allows a nice compliant composition gasket.
Hence the air gap manifold for many other engine.

 

[65CopCar]

The Mopar 337 intake has one. Of course you can't buy it anymore............

 

[Splangj]

Yes siree Bob! This is the rb max wedge manifold I was speaking off

 

[beanhead]

Most likely they're just going with the factory design. Cheaper and easier (for them!) for the end user to worry about it.
Considering the effects of block machining on what we have now an integral pan intake would probably be even more of a hassle to get fit just right.
That said, I tried Andy Finkbeiner's plate and 'batwing' setup with the TF intake and it's still sealing nicely.

 

[moparedtn]

….has no one made a big block manifold with integral valley plate. The Max wedge Mopar crate motor had such a manifold, just like the 426 Hemi. I would hope TF would step up, since I’ve given up on Ed.

Why are you giving up on me?
- Ed

 

[Lefty71]

This is the rb max wedge manifold I was speaking off

Me too... I have one of those. Whats the big deal with buying a valley plate from another vendor?? Sometimes they need a little modification... Also, if all fits up good, you really don't need a gasket on either side of the bathtub if thats the set-up you are running. They did'nt have gaskets from the factory.

Along those lines, isn't a true to life nightmare for the machinist to fit the M1 pictured above once you start cutting heads/blocks because of all the cutting that will be needed on that manifold??? And then of course, it will never fit another engine again, nor that one once you buy another set of heads???

 

[Splangj]

The machining part of the entire manifold does make a good argument, albeit everyone else does it with their manifolds. I just haven’t seen a decent valley cover that works on NON extended intake heads. I will look at the AF system. BTW, I’ve never run the thin gaskets with the factory tub, but some apparently do.

 

[33 IMP]

I tried to buy the 337 when they were still available, to use with original iron max heads.... but I apparently got the one for stage six heads, and it clearly wouldn't work, so I returned it. I didn't realize I had the wrong one, and the correct one was available.... til it wasnt.
I now use a cut up valley pan to seal the valley, and homemade gaskets on both sides of the pan to seal the ports.
Probably gonna use the superformance max gaskets next time.

 

[oldkimmer]

What’s wrong with the Indy valley plates. I’ve used a few. My 470 B block stroker has a plate cut from a flat aluminum sheet. Probably 1/4 inch thick. I also have a 440 valley plate the was fabricated to use a 440-6 intake manifold. Kim.

 

[33 IMP]

What’s wrong with the Indy valley plates. I’ve used a few. My 470 B block stroker has a plate cut from a flat aluminum sheet. Probably 1/4 inch thick. I also have a 440 valley plate the was fabricated to use a 440-6 intake manifold. Kim.

Nothing, if you have an aftermarket head with a full length flange at the deck. If you are trying to use a Mopar head with open areas between the ports, it won't fly. And why not use a stock valley pan with a 440-6 intake. That's what the factory did. Should work with aftermarket heads too.

 

[oldkimmer]

Mine was on anIndy Maxx wedge block with Indy b4 SR heads. Along with the 6 pack intake. Kim

 

[65CopCar]

Here is a picture of my 337 on my street car motor. Got real lucky and got it off a Moparts member a couple years ago. Very happy with the intake. Motor made 713 hp/709 torque on the dyno.