Don Terrill’s Speed-Talk

Hi,
I have a question regarding what would we the best intake manifold for my combination in order to maximize it but still be good for footbrake drag racing. I'm looking to go faster and I think that the intake manifold that I have on now may be a little small. My comination is:
399.9 cubic inch SBC (4.190x3.625)
BMF 18 degree heads 268cc intake runner 2.180 titanium intake valve 1.600 titanium exhaust valve
GM 10185053 Intake manifold with 4150 top port matched to the heads
Pro Systems 1100 Dominator
HVH 4500 to 4150 Super Sucker adapter
3100 pound car with a powerglide and 5.83 rear gear
Shift at 9000 RPM go through traps at 9000-9200 RPM
7000 flash stall 8" torque converter

Any help is greatly appreciated. Thank you

Use the Edelbrock 2859, it will make very good power.

Footbraking and going thru the traps at 9000? Gotta sound sweet, but not on the wallet......... Call Gaby at Wilson Manifolds and see what he has to say. My buddy has a big SBC with 18 degree heads and Gaby did the manifold for him. Not sure what they used, but took a lot of work.

cmracing wrote:Footbraking and going thru the traps at 9000? Gotta sound sweet...

Yes, he should be in Super! lol!. Sorry bud, had to do it!

Abbottracingheads wrote:Use the Edelbrock 2859, it will make very good power.

That is one of the intakes I was looking at but didn't know if the Edelbrock 2859 or Edelbrock 2858 would be better for my application? I haven't seen either one in person yet. What makes the Edelbrock 2859 the better manifold?

cmracing wrote:Footbraking and going thru the traps at 9000? Gotta sound sweet, but not on the wallet......... Call Gaby at Wilson Manifolds and see what he has to say. My buddy has a big SBC with 18 degree heads and Gaby did the manifold for him. Not sure what they used, but took a lot of work.

Lol! Yes it does sound sweet at 9000 RPM. The initial costs of getting the right valve train and bottom end are more but I love building something different. Did the intake that your buddy got from Wilsons give him significant gains in E.T. over what he had? What intake did he have on the engine before that?

FastBuick wrote:

Abbottracingheads wrote:Use the Edelbrock 2859, it will make very good power.

That is one of the intakes I was looking at but didn't know if the Edelbrock 2859 or Edelbrock 2858 would be better for my application? I haven't seen either one in person yet. What makes the Edelbrock 2859 the better manifold?

The 2859 and 2858 are two very different manifolds, .. hands down I would use the 2858 spider, .. dominator flange, .
the 2859 will need extensive porting, ..

curtis

cboggs wrote:

FastBuick wrote:

Abbottracingheads wrote:Use the Edelbrock 2859, it will make very good power.

That is one of the intakes I was looking at but didn't know if the Edelbrock 2859 or Edelbrock 2858 would be better for my application? I haven't seen either one in person yet. What makes the Edelbrock 2859 the better manifold?

The 2859 and 2858 are two very different manifolds, .. hands down I would use the 2858 spider, .. dominator flange, .
the 2859 will need extensive porting, ..

curtis

Thank you for the info Curtis. Judging by the pictures I've seen of both manifolds I definitely agree that they are totally different manifolds. The 2859 looks like they stuck a 4500 flange on a 4150 style manifold and would need blending and porting before it could be used. The 2858 on the other hand looks to have a very open plenum and shorter runners. I was leaning towards the 2858 too but wasn't sure if the big plenum and shorter runners would hurt the bottom end coming off the footbrake.

The 5053 manifold you have ( if my memory is correct ) is a manifold they built so that it can be modified to the heads and purpose the engine was built for and aimed at Cup. If you are running it as out of the box it WILL be far to small in volume, however if you were to port it as intended you will find that you have an entirely different performance picture. They are not by any means a bad manifold, and ported correctly will be different night and day on a head similar to your 18 degree. I am not making a choice for you between the GM head or another choice but whatever you buy if you do not work it to your heads you will still be down. Stuart.

Runner length, runner CS, and runner taper. If the intake you are using now is just gasket matched, you have a lot to gain!
All out of the box intakes need work for Max performance. Very few work just good outta the box.....
You should gain a bunch! Good luck


T-flow

FastBuick wrote: Thank you for the info Curtis. Judging by the pictures I've seen of both manifolds I definitely agree that they are totally different manifolds. The 2859 looks like they stuck a 4500 flange on a 4150 style manifold and would need blending and porting before it could be used. The 2858 on the other hand looks to have a very open plenum and shorter runners. I was leaning towards the 2858 too but wasn't sure if the big plenum and shorter runners would hurt the bottom end coming off the footbrake.

Filling the cylinders makes power and torque, .. not too small of ports,

Sorry Fastbuick, didn't notice your question to me. What started-off as being a better set of heads on top of his old block snowballed into a new set of heads from Brodix on top of a Iron Eagle block which turned into a 455 SBC. When the engine builder talked to Gaby (spelling?) at Wilson about the heads and intake he said send them to me, they won't work as-is from Brodix on that size engine. Gaby did his thing and the engine made a lot of power and my buddy is having fun. Similar to you, he is turning that baby. I'd have to check with him, but I think he is shifting around 8000 and traps around 8400 or so in good air. Not 100% sure but sounds sweet! Footbraking just like you, no TB or 2-step allowed in our class.

I also have an 18° 403" SBC (4.135 x 3.750) that is torn down for a freshen up after a Jesel belt drive slipped. I was thinking of trying to find a little more HP. It currently made 780HP @ 7500 RPM on motor with a Wilson ported Edelbrock 2955 spider intake and a 1050 HP carb. I was told when I built the motor that the intake was definately our limiting factor, but wasn't sure what to go with either. I like the Edelbrock 2858 as well, but will it also require a lot of work to perform out of the box, or is pretty decent? My heads are a little small for this size engine, but they flow decent (352 cfm @ .700") and I really didn't want to get into cleaning them up since they were so nice to begin with.

Am I in the same boat as the OP? More intake, bigger runner, etc.?


Cole

cboggs wrote:

FastBuick wrote:
Filling the cylinders makes power and torque, .. not too small of ports,

That's definitely the truth. Thanks for your help. I appreciate it.

Lockwire wrote:The 5053 manifold you have ( if my memory is correct ) is a manifold they built so that it can be modified to the heads and purpose the engine was built for and aimed at Cup. If you are running it as out of the box it WILL be far to small in volume, however if you were to port it as intended you will find that you have an entirely different performance picture. They are not by any means a bad manifold, and ported correctly will be different night and day on a head similar to your 18 degree. I am not making a choice for you between the GM head or another choice but whatever you buy if you do not work it to your heads you will still be down. Stuart.

I believe the manifold you are thinking of is the one that may have replaced the one I have now. I think the part# is 24502481? Basically though it is the same design but has more material inside to allow for a lot of porting. Mine doesn't have that extra material so it is probably slightly bigger in volume but i'm sure not by much. From what i'm hearing, like you said, there is a lot to gain in using a properly ported manifold for my application.