knife edgine intake runner?

Ron E · Post by **Ron E** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:06 pm

I believe Ford's short run of 4V 302 heads had individual runners. I never heard any talk about how they ran.
Weren't McGee's that way too?

Post by **SchmidtMotorWorks** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 4:42 pm

Weren't McGee's that way too?

I think so and so is Schubecks (I think).

And I think I have seen some partial cut-aways of engines for new cars that have seperate ports but the reason is they are throttled seperatly.

I'm just curious what the perfomance impact is.

Ron E · Post by **Ron E** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:07 pm

SchmidtMotorWorks wrote:
Weren't McGee's that way too?
I think so and so is Schubecks (I think).

And I think I have seen some partial cut-aways of engines for new cars that have seperate ports but the reason is they are throttled seperatly.

I'm just curious what the perfomance impact is.

It is interesting. I remember seeing an older Eclipse 2.0 (non turbo) engine with the intake removed. I had to go for a tape-measure. The intake port (feeding 2 valves) measured about 4 sq inches?! I had driven a few, and the felt pretty much normal in torque and response for their displacement. It left me wondering how the gas-speed past the divider played into multi-valve engines.

Grocerius Maximus · Post by **Grocerius Maximus** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 6:35 pm

Yeah the port entry on those is 2.37" W X 1.45" H, will make you scratch your head. You don't want to know the total port volume from valve to plenum, you'd say "That won't fly, Orville!". The total port length is in the 15" range. They make fairly normal torque and power for that size engine compared to everyone else, a little low on bottom end but nothing outrageous. On later models they reduced the CSA substantially and shortened the runners.

bobqzzi · Post by **bobqzzi** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 8:31 pm

Grocerius Maximus wrote:Yeah the port entry on those is 2.37" W X 1.45" H, will make you scratch your head. You don't want to know the total port volume from valve to plenum, you'd say "That won't fly, Orville!". The total port length is in the 15" range. They make fairly normal torque and power for that size engine compared to everyone else, a little low on bottom end but nothing outrageous. On later models they reduced the CSA substantially and shortened the runners.

I remember looking at one of those the first time- not good. I'd have to disagree about them not being down on power down low- they are pretty gutless.