Pretty sure your Pontiac Power Ram would flow better than a 409 version. Not 100% sure but it would seem like just about every M/T Power Ram (cross ram) intake made after the 348-409 Power Rams were made had rounded corners on the main plenum for each carb instead of the squared off corners. Would be the first thing I would do is run down the street to the flow bench and find out.The 409 Edelbrock dual quad outflowed the 881, and the HP single 4 factory intake flat sucked on the ported heads I was using on my flow bench!
So has anyone ever flow bench tested a M/T crossram? I did my Pontiac M/T crossram that was converted to 65 and up heads(all were 64 and earlier heads). Kind of disappointed on how low it was even with decent sized Ram Air IV ports. Almost every intake I have outflowed it! The guy that modified it for late heads also added the balance tube between the sides that is supposed to help buffer pulses. But I probably will throw a motor together to put in the 65 GTO to put it on as I always liked a cross ram look. That or the Doug Nash/Warrior Pontiac tunnel ram I have.
Looks like my neighbor at the race at Eddyville, IA!!!!!!!!!!View attachment 82642
What, we can run hoods? LOL!
Earville and yes we heard roomers that he may have won. I have to watch the video another 1000 times before I'll believe it. LOL!Looks like my neighbor at the race at Eddyville, IA!!!!!!!!!!
Did Paul happen to tell you all that he won the race!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is true. Years ago I had the flow bench guy ask me about which carburetor I was going to run and I told him at that time whatever I found cheap. It is a valid point. Everything is related to everything else.It’s kinda difficult to make a direct comparison whether one would make more power without having it bolted to the head you intend to run. The intake port goes from the valve to the carburetor. Bolting the same intake to different heads will yield different results and vice versa.
Thank you! It is a long read.Post 202 in that thread talks about motor mount mods.
There is one pic of a small block, rest are 409.
Don't matter what it flows. What a combo runs on the 1/4 is all that matters IMO. I think one of the biggest problems is people that have no idea how to tune or make an engine run express their own opinion as gospel. The other major issue is lack of suspension knowledge, not always will the car with most HP win.No one doubts they produce more power over the 881 but everything made since does. The dual quad Edelbrock is way cheaper and produces more power than an 881. Then above the Eddy is probably McQuillen's 690hp or CRW single plane dual quad (for large port heads only) as I believe they are still to be had. Both of the later cost $400-600 less than current asking price for this ebay sale. So not sure about the worth every cent because power numbers aren't the best and tuning is a pain. I don't think anyone should spend more money to look different but go slower than what is currently available based upon the performance opinion given. These are historical race parts, meaning that back in the day they were impressive but now the only people that should be running them is anyone who is interested in them as historically/different but not fast. When I pull that dual quad small port off my 348, I'll run it and my 881 over to have them flow tested as factory castings. My money is the modern small port flows much better than the 881.
Paul here are some pics of the M/T cross ram with carbs in the engine bay of the '62 Biscayne:
View attachment 82647
You might be able to see the heighth in relation to the cowl, it seems unlikely that a stock hood would fit .
View attachment 82648
I like the "who needs a hood" comment, but just in case:
View attachment 82649
Cheers! TomK