Offenhauser 4x2 Intake

John Milner

Member
Has anyone ever ran one of these on a 348 or 409? I am thinking about trying one on my 409. If you are running this type of intake, what carbs are you running? Thanks
 

Attachments

  • IMG951820.jpg
    IMG951820.jpg
    82.8 KB · Views: 24

boxerdog

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 5
I've got a 6x2 with Ford/Holley 94s on it. Got it from Tom K and "restored" everything. Haven't had the huevos to put it on anything yet, but it sure looks cool. I'd suggest Stromberg 97s as they are probably the easiest to set up and match right now.
 

boxerdog

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 5
Sorry about the Ford stuff, but their rear ends are better, too. As far as multi carbs go, there is a lot more stuff out there today for 97s than anything else. By the time you round up 4 identical 2gs, you might wish you had used 97s. Also, I read a dyno report back in early 348 days where they replaced the 2gs on a 3x2 with 97s and picked up some power, even though they were slightly smaller. OTOH I used the 94s because Tom sent me a bucket load of them, and they are simple to rebuild. At least do a comparison, and shop around before making a decision.
 

Don Jacks

Well Seasoned Member
Supporting Member 3
Read that again,Dave.The carbs that they used were 4 bolt Stromberg carbs from a 55-57 265 and 283 engine,not the 3 bolt 97's.That being said,the 97 is a very simple little carb.,and these 4 and 6 carb set ups were more about looks fast rather than being fast.
 

boxerdog

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 5
They were a 4-bolt carb, but the idea is the same. And the carb definitely isn't a 97, you are right. That being said, the Rochesters aren't that good or we'd all be running 4GCs and Q-jets. I did some research when I did that 6x2, and all of those guys prefer 94s or 97s or the new clones of them. And it is all about the looks, no doubt.

Unless you have a real man-a-fre, which I guess really worked?? I saw them, but never owned one.

Actually, I do have a very functional Q-jet on my 74 Nova, but only because it used to be on the CA smog check list. It works well with the 700r4 and I am too lazy to put anything else on it.
 

1964SuperStocker

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 3
They were a 4-bolt carb, but the idea is the same. And the carb definitely isn't a 97, you are right. That being said, the Rochesters aren't that good or we'd all be running 4GCs and Q-jets. I did some research when I did that 6x2, and all of those guys prefer 94s or 97s or the new clones of them. And it is all about the looks, no doubt.

Unless you have a real man-a-fre, which I guess really worked?? I saw them, but never owned one.

Actually, I do have a very functional Q-jet on my 74 Nova, but only because it used to be on the CA smog check list. It works well with the 700r4 and I am too lazy to put anything else on it.
For the record I hate Q-jets. Not a fan of Edelbrock either only because I always used Holley. Never had one on a Ford but loved my Holley's on my Chevy's.
 

La Hot Rods

Well Seasoned Member
Supporting Member 15
Sorry about the Ford stuff, but their rear ends are better, too. As far as multi carbs go, there is a lot more stuff out there today for 97s than anything else. By the time you round up 4 identical 2gs, you might wish you had used 97s. Also, I read a dyno report back in early 348 days where they replaced the 2gs on a 3x2 with 97s and picked up some power, even though they were slightly smaller. OTOH I used the 94s because Tom sent me a bucket load of them, and they are simple to rebuild. At least do a comparison, and shop around before making a decision.

When I was building my 4x2 with a crossfire lower intake, I collected over 20 large 2GC's to come up with 4 the same. :wacko
 

409gang

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 1
Read that again, Dave.The carbs that they used were 4 bolt Stromberg carbs from a 55-57 265 and 283 engine,not the 3 bolt 97's.That being said,the 97 is a very simple little carb.,and these 4 and 6 carb set ups were more about looks fast rather than being fast.
I was going to put a 340 hp 409 in a V drive drag boat and was trying to find a 6 x 2 intake for the Nostalgic WOW look, I was thinking of canceling out 4 of the carbs and running it on 2. The 6 x 2 is a very Nostalgic look and screams early 60's!!!
 

dakota tom

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 2
I've done a little reading on 6x2 log manifolds. I have one for a 430 MEL Lincoln engine. I thought they would really hurt power compared to current tech. I couldn't find it now but there was an early hemi build that compared a 6x2 to a hot heads intake. The 6x2 was only down about 15 H.P..
 

409gang

Well Known Member
Supporting Member 1
I've done a little reading on 6x2 log manifolds. I have one for a 430 MEL Lincoln engine. I thought they would really hurt power compared to current tech. I couldn't find it now but there was an early hemi build that compared a 6x2 to a hot heads intake. The 6x2 was only down about 15 H.P..
They may be down in HP but up in cool factor. When I was a kid almost every plastic model of a hot rod had a 6 x 2 set up, also you couldn't hardly pick up any car magazine that didn't have hot rod featured in it with a 6 x 2 setup.
 

63 dream'n

Well Seasoned Member
Supporting Member 4
They may be down in HP but up in cool factor. When I was a kid almost every plastic model of a hot rod had a 6 x 2 set up, also you couldn't hardly pick up any car magazine that didn't have hot rod featured in it with a 6 x 2 setup.

I never really thought much about them......until I saw this one...... which was a member’s here on the forum ..........absolutely love the way it looks
344224FD-F18B-4EDC-9A61-ACCA5DD76388.jpeg674A1E36-3586-4D2A-A923-DEBA157202C9.jpeg7E035B0A-3C7F-4256-9B61-B76C8D7ED0DA.jpeg
 
Top