dual quads anyone have this set up - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
Go Back   Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum > Windsor Tech Forums > 5.0/5.8 Engine Tech

Corral.net is the premier Ford Mustang Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-20-2006, 11:25 AM   #1
Registered User

Trader Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: N.J.
Posts: 568

dual quads anyone have this set up

Any one running a dual quad set up on a 289 302, thats pretty much stock,,everyone thinks I’m nuts, but there’s something about two fours sitting under the hood, I would really like to go that route if possible, and I’m not really sure way I can’t when ford offered this set up for the 289 mustang back in the 60’s as a increase in horse power, and I believe they only had around 250 HP, I believe with my e cam ,gt 40 heads, long tubes and cat back, I should be around 350 + HP
__________________
92LX 4 cyl conversion
86 302,svo gt40 heads with 1.6 rockers,e cam,mac long tubes and cat back, B&M blower,670 holley, elec pump, mallory BTM dizzy and msd coil, 3.73 gears, up&lower arms with drag springs & bag, drive loop, pro 5.0 shifter, elec fan, 195 stat, bfg radials
surfsup is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-20-2006, 11:35 AM   #2
Registered User
 
351Freak's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The ATL
Posts: 1,185

The Weind dual quad tunnel ram setup is very nice and has enuff runner length to still be usable on the street with the right camshaft.

I would say the runners are tuned to the 6000-7000 rpm range...but are small enuf to support decent torque down around 2500 for cruising...

use 2 small carbs and it should work okay...

AND LOOK MEAN AS HELL...
__________________
2 Fox Bodies (GT hatches)/ 408 Twin Turbo and a 347 N/A screamer under construction (12:1 with ebay heads and TFS3 cam making 411 RWHP)...both AOD's of course
351Freak is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-20-2006, 11:38 AM   #3
Registered User
 
Doktor's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (0)
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Austin, TX USA
Posts: 2,551

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfsup
Any one running a dual quad set up on a 289 302, thats pretty much stock,,everyone thinks I’m nuts, but there’s something about two fours sitting under the hood, I would really like to go that route if possible, and I’m not really sure way I can’t when ford offered this set up for the 289 mustang back in the 60’s as a increase in horse power, and I believe they only had around 250 HP, I believe with my e cam ,gt 40 heads, long tubes and cat back, I should be around 350 + HP

Bad idea, there is a reason these setups have faded from popularity on street cars. Modern intakes and carbs have corrected the fuel distribution problems that the 60's intakes had and modern, high CFM carbs run cleanly thru the RPM range.

There is no reason to go with the added expense, twice the PITA tuning a dual carb setup, poor street manners and crappy gas mileage over a single carb setup that will make at least the same power.
__________________
Experience is the hardest teacher. It gives the test first, and the lesson afterwards

To upset a Conservative, lie to them. To upset a Liberal, tell them the truth.
Doktor is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-20-2006, 12:03 PM   #4
Registered User
 
WICKED87COUPE's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (0)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ooltewah,Tn
Posts: 538

I would use nothing no bigger the 2 390cfm holleys .
__________________
1974 Maverick5.0/AOD driver swap
1990 F150bone stock
1992 cavalierRice Killa....
WICKED87COUPE is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-21-2006, 07:07 AM   #5
Registered User

Trader Feedback: (0)
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Devore Hts, Calif...FIRE COUNTRY
Posts: 17,646

on the smaller engines you may actually have MUCH better performance and tuning luck when you use the THREE-TWO Barrel carburetor setups..........

but the carburetors are very hard to find, because of the special tops to fit into the air filter base.


the TWO -four barell units are not a tunnel ram style.....

they are plentiful.....
but limited to the "Carter AFB" which is a 525 cfm carb.

there may be a "edelbrock-produced -copy" of those carbs available now...
Kato Engineering is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-21-2006, 09:49 PM   #6
Registered User
 
capri331's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (14)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Erie, PA
Posts: 2,554

Do it!
__________________
Tired of MSD's repeat 6 series box failures consider an affordable alternative, Pro Comp Electronics
capri331 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-21-2006, 11:02 PM   #7
Registered User
 
Retro 5.0's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (0)
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 645

I run a dual quad set-up on my car now. Have been for the last 9 years. I have a very old school set-up. I did it to be different from everyone else. The set-up works good. I run an old Offenhauser lowriser intake for a 289. has 1/2" thick 4-hole adapter plates for the Edelbrock carbs. Also has 1" thick open plates on top of them and then the carbs. I run a 1:1 linkage so I cruise on the primaryies of both carbs. I have no load up problems or stumbles. I tried a progressive linkage but the car was very soggy taking off from a light so I went to the 1:1 linkage. Worked out much better. I've had it to a dyno and the air fuel mixture was right on throughout the whole run.
I'd post pics of the graph but I don't know how to scan and post them. The car runs in the mid 12's at 110 m.p.h. And made 311 h.p. and 288 tq. Made peak h.p. at 6200 r.p.m. The engine is a 306 cubic inches with a 289 block and 69-351w cyl heads. The car is a 85 G.T. that weighs 3300 lbs with me in it. I know it would go faster with an airgap or Victor jr. and a 650 carb but it would look like everyone elses when I pop the hood. It also has a T-5 and 4.33 rear gears.
__________________
84 G.T.-350, 306, T-5, and soon 3.73's
85 G.T. 337 c.i.d. 11.44-120 mph in the 1/4
88 L.X. 302 c.i.d. 13.41-102 mph in the 1/4 daily beater
Retro 5.0 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-22-2006, 12:12 AM   #8
kim
Moderator & USAF (Retired)
 
kim's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (0)
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Tucson AZ
Posts: 13,283



I disagree with several of the previous posts.

Twins on a tunnel are not passe, nor is the combination easily beat by a single 4bbl intake. The twins on a tunnel will have better fuel distrobution, have fewer issues with accelerator pump bog, and will have far fewer issues with WOT restriction.

Twins on a tunnel, are so much better the performer that many classes outlaw the use of two carbs on a tunnel ram, and for those that think its easier any other way, I point to the pinaltimate in carbed performance, Prostock, NRHA and IHRA, twins on a tunnel.....

As for a 302 engine designed primarly around a "street-rod" I agree with the one poster that said he would build using the two 390's. Easier to tune for the lay-person. But the beauty of the twins on the tunnel is they respond better to lower vacuum signal. The added accelerator pump shot(s) and the increased jet area (second whole carb) mean you can get away with two carbs that would normally size as sufficent in a single carb application.

Why, I can't wholly explain, but I have 2 1100 CFM carbs on a 525cu in engine, and the carbs are still a little too small. Above 7600 RPM I start building manifold vacuum. By 9200 RPM Its climbed from a targeted .5" of vacuum to 1.5+".

For something in a 302 displacement engine on up to a 347 stroker combo with a Wieand 289 tunnel ram on it, I would not be afraid to tune two 600 cfm hollies to run best if its intended at all as a track engine. Using good heads, a matched cam and exhaust, you could easily tune the thing to run at the peak performance of the head port job, have a "cool" factor, and still drive the thing on the street. Only down side to the tunnel is tucking most of it under a streetable hood.
kim is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-22-2006, 03:51 PM   #9
Registered User

Trader Feedback: (7)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: York, PA
Posts: 2,290

A friend of mine is running a 2x4 Shelby intake with two 660 center-squirter Holleys. Runs great on the street and fits under the hood of his 66 Mustang using the Cobra air cleaner. I was always partial to the 3x2s myself.
__________________
70 Maverick Grabber, 5.0 (Performer RPM 2.02/1.6 heads, RPM intake, Comp XE266HR roller cam, 625 cfm Street Demon, EDIS/MegaJolt ignition, long headers), T5Z w/Steeda TriAx shifter, 9" "N" case Trac Loc w/3.89:1, 31 spline axles.
bmcdaniel is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-22-2006, 05:02 PM   #10
Registered User

Trader Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: N.J.
Posts: 568

I was looking more at the low rise manifold edelbrock, I think f 28 , I want the car street worthy and think a tunnel would be too much.
__________________
92LX 4 cyl conversion
86 302,svo gt40 heads with 1.6 rockers,e cam,mac long tubes and cat back, B&M blower,670 holley, elec pump, mallory BTM dizzy and msd coil, 3.73 gears, up&lower arms with drag springs & bag, drive loop, pro 5.0 shifter, elec fan, 195 stat, bfg radials
surfsup is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-22-2006, 05:04 PM   #11
Registered User

Trader Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: N.J.
Posts: 568

Retro 50, have any pic’s of the motor you can post
__________________
92LX 4 cyl conversion
86 302,svo gt40 heads with 1.6 rockers,e cam,mac long tubes and cat back, B&M blower,670 holley, elec pump, mallory BTM dizzy and msd coil, 3.73 gears, up&lower arms with drag springs & bag, drive loop, pro 5.0 shifter, elec fan, 195 stat, bfg radials
surfsup is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-22-2006, 05:08 PM   #12
Registered User

Trader Feedback: (0)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 69

Heres mine...


This is a 306 built on a 65 289 block with 2 Edelbrock 500CFM performers. My goal is to get 300 to the rear wheels. The car should weigh around 2300#'s when done. It's built on a Factory Five frame, and using a custom built FIA body being made in PA now...My current Cobra weighs the same, but uses a bone stock 92 5.0 with a smog delete.

I'm building the 289 FIA Cobra late this summer. More pics and info can be found

here...

Last edited by Rickster666; 03-22-2006 at 05:11 PM.
Rickster666 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-22-2006, 10:10 PM   #13
Registered User
 
Hissing Cobra's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (0)
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 228

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfsup
Any one running a dual quad set up on a 289 302, thats pretty much stock,,everyone thinks I’m nuts, but there’s something about two fours sitting under the hood, I would really like to go that route if possible, and I’m not really sure way I can’t when ford offered this set up for the 289 mustang back in the 60’s as a increase in horse power, and I believe they only had around 250 HP, I believe with my e cam ,gt 40 heads, long tubes and cat back, I should be around 350 + HP
Great question. For you to do it, you definitely need a cam that makes power between 2,500-6,500 rpms. Otherwise, you won't take full advantage of Edelbrock's intake manifold which makes it's power in that RPM Range. The GT-40 heads will be fine if they're ported well and have larger valves installed. We used solid lifter cams and Edelbrock 500 cfm carburetors (with two tuning kits!) This setup will not pass emissions so if you want it in a later model car, you may not be legal. Also, these combinations usually lack in the torque department, requiring steep rear gears (we use 4.30's.) That being said, let's get down to the nitty gritty.

My twin brother Retro 5.0 posted earlier about his dual quad setup. It is extremely streetable and is right at home on both the street or the strip. As he stated, it made 311 rear wheel horsepower and 287 rear wheel torque and runs 12.40's-12.60's @ 108-110 mph (on ported/polished/larger valve '69 351W heads.) Here's a pic of his engine.



How do I know about it's street manners, power and driveability? I copied his combo for my own 'Stang. I was so impressed with it's manners and more impressed with people's reactions at the local cruise nights, I decided that I had to have that too. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, right?

Anyway, my engine differs slightly due the the fact that I have an Edelbrock dual quad intake manifold vs. his '60's era Offenhauser unit. I also bought AFR 185 (58 cc's) aluminum heads and I have a slightly larger camshaft. We decided that it was easier and less labor intensive to buy the heads already done and to add a bigger cam to take advantage of the additional flow characteristics. We learned a new lesson along the way. His engine made the 311/287 numbers (smaller cam/less flowing heads) while mine made 307/278 (larger cam/higher flowing heads.) It's all good though! Mine runs 12.40's-12.80's @ 107-110 to his 12.40's-12.60's @ 108-110.

Here's a pic of my engine.



Here's a pic of the two together.



As everyone knows, street cars MUST be driven! Each of our cars runs on 93 octane with no detonation and the temp guages are at 180 degrees (rising slightly in traffic). We have driven them numerous times to Connecticut and New Hampshire (2 to 2-1/2 hour ride each way.) Even beating on them at the track in New Hampshire and then driving home.

Here's my dyno sheet. I don't have my brother's to post, sorry! As you check it out, look at the power curve. My cam makes the power from 2,400-6,400 rpms, right where the intake makes it's power. The air/fuel is very good as well.

__________________
1979 Mustang Cobra - 5.0/5-Speed/4.30's - 12.38 @ 111 mph
1989 Mustang LX - 5.0/5-Speed/3.73's - 14.63 @ 95 mph

Last edited by Hissing Cobra; 03-22-2006 at 10:13 PM.
Hissing Cobra is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-22-2006, 10:57 PM   #14
Registered User
 
capri331's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (14)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Erie, PA
Posts: 2,554

Hissing, what is up with the dual PCV's on your bro's car?

BTW I liked the write up on your car a few months back. I love seeing yellow 4 eyes making the pages of may favorite rags.
__________________
Tired of MSD's repeat 6 series box failures consider an affordable alternative, Pro Comp Electronics
capri331 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-23-2006, 12:16 AM   #15
Registered User
 
Retro 5.0's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (0)
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 645

Quote:
Originally Posted by capri331
Hissing, what is up with the dual PCV's on your bro's car?

BTW I liked the write up on your car a few months back. I love seeing yellow 4 eyes making the pages of may favorite rags.
Not Hissing but I can answer that. I only have one pcv valve on the pass side cover. The other hose on the drivers side cover goes to the rear air cleaner so it takes in filtered air. The reason for the tubes is because I don't have any baffles in the covers due to roller rockers. The tubes keep the oil out of the breathers.
__________________
84 G.T.-350, 306, T-5, and soon 3.73's
85 G.T. 337 c.i.d. 11.44-120 mph in the 1/4
88 L.X. 302 c.i.d. 13.41-102 mph in the 1/4 daily beater
Retro 5.0 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-23-2006, 07:17 AM   #16
Registered User
 
capri331's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (14)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Erie, PA
Posts: 2,554

Well that explains that, cool thanks!
__________________
Tired of MSD's repeat 6 series box failures consider an affordable alternative, Pro Comp Electronics
capri331 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-23-2006, 11:15 AM   #17
Registered User

Trader Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: N.J.
Posts: 568

Thanks for the pic’s they look awesome
__________________
92LX 4 cyl conversion
86 302,svo gt40 heads with 1.6 rockers,e cam,mac long tubes and cat back, B&M blower,670 holley, elec pump, mallory BTM dizzy and msd coil, 3.73 gears, up&lower arms with drag springs & bag, drive loop, pro 5.0 shifter, elec fan, 195 stat, bfg radials
surfsup is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-23-2006, 06:26 PM   #18
Registered User
 
Hissing Cobra's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (0)
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 228

Quote:
Originally Posted by capri331
Hissing, what is up with the dual PCV's on your bro's car?

BTW I liked the write up on your car a few months back. I love seeing yellow 4 eyes making the pages of may favorite rags.
Thank's!
__________________
1979 Mustang Cobra - 5.0/5-Speed/4.30's - 12.38 @ 111 mph
1989 Mustang LX - 5.0/5-Speed/3.73's - 14.63 @ 95 mph
Hissing Cobra is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-22-2006, 08:53 PM   #19
Registered User
 
capri331's Avatar

Trader Feedback: (14)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Erie, PA
Posts: 2,554

Nothing says I Love You like dual quads
__________________
Tired of MSD's repeat 6 series box failures consider an affordable alternative, Pro Comp Electronics
capri331 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:20 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
© 2010-2011 Corral.net

Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.