Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm looking for an aluminum intake manifold to replace the original cast iron one on my 69. Same street driven lower RPM range as factory.

Does anyone have experience with one that uses the original air cleaner assembly without having problems with hood clearance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Boss429Dreamer said:

I believe the Edelbrock Performer is equivalent to the cast iron beast on our 351W. From what I've read...

The carb pad height might be close to original.  But, the Performer intake moves the carb forward quite a bit.  That might cause interference with the distributor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

East York - I am considering a shaker set up, but I like my Performer RPM, did you use a stock shaker set-up for a 351W?   I know some friends who have modified the shaker ass'y to fit under the hood.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.  I am not anxious to change out my intake if I don't have to, lot of plumbing and wiring to move.   I am going to Carlisle in June and will go talk to the "Ram Air Man" to see if I can use a combination of parts to lower the Windsor setup.  You think if get an inch out of it, will it clear?  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2021 at 3:55 PM, Vicfreg said:

I have an Edelbrock Performer RPM manifold with no issues.  Have one of them on my '68 also.  Weiand Stealth is also a good manifold.

 

 

 

engine bay.jpg

IMG_0633.JPG

ugh, I envy your engine bay.. can you share what type MC you are using? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I tried 2 modern master cylinders out as the stock one was really close to my shock tower with my dual brake booster.   I got one for a mid-1990's Ford Explorer and one from a mid-1990's Ford Ranger.   I used the reservoir from one, and the body from another. I used the body that had the fittings connections on the drivers side, and the flat reservoir.   After I did that, I figured out the one in the link below would fit directly.   You need to get the metric standard brake line adaptors.  The bore and rod length are the same as the '70 Mustang.  The only modification I had to do was slightly enlarge the mounting holes.  

I think I did a post on this,  I will look for it.

Dorman M390269 New Brake Master Cylinder

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The engine bay was media blasted and primed with PPG primer, final coat PPG single stage satin black.  It's really easy to touch up with aftermarket black satin paint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2021 at 5:04 PM, Vicfreg said:

Yes, I tried 2 modern master cylinders out as the stock one was really close to my shock tower with my dual brake booster.   I got one for a mid-1990's Ford Explorer and one from a mid-1990's Ford Ranger.   I used the reservoir from one, and the body from another. I used the body that had the fittings connections on the drivers side, and the flat reservoir.   After I did that, I figured out the one in the link below would fit directly.   You need to get the metric standard brake line adaptors.  The bore and rod length are the same as the '70 Mustang.  The only modification I had to do was slightly enlarge the mounting holes.  

I think I did a post on this,  I will look for it.

Dorman M390269 New Brake Master Cylinder

 

Why would you use this Master ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because with the dual diaphragm booster, the stock master cylinder, and the new equalizing valve and bracket I had for my 4 wheel disc brakes, the setup hit my shock tower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really great video, thanks a lot. I also have a C9X intake, which I didn’t use.   The Edelbrock is maybe a little bit higher, but without the 5/16”spacer I should be right on with the hood scoop height.   Thanks so much for posting this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all of your feedback, guys.

I ended up with the Weiand 8023WND since the Edelbrock ship date was recently moved from 6/18 to 9/8. Forget it. According to Summit they've been on backorder since January.

The question I have is this: After researching the Weiand before ordering, I ordered the 8023 since it was listed as idle - 6800 rpm. The 8023WND is listed as 1500 - 6800 rpm. What Speedway shipped me was the 8023WND. Will I have idle or vacuum problems since I'll be using close to a stock cam and OEM power disc brakes?

Also, using a straight edge over the top of the OEM rocker covers as a datum, I measured a difference in carb pad height of +0.508" in the front and +1.395" in the rear versus the cast iron manifold. The motor's out and the car stripped down so I'm keeping my fingers crossed and hope I have hood clearance as some of the previous responses have stated. I'm not worthy of a Shaker so just the stock air cleaner. 

Thanks again for your help .............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On my 1969 Mach1, 351W I use the Weiand 8023 with a 1/2" tall phenolic carburetor spacer.  With stock motor mounts, an aluminum Moroso drop base air cleaner with 3" tall filter has almost 1/2" clearance to the stock hood (no shaker).  I did trim the air cleaner base slightly, about 1/8", to drop it a little more.  Without the carb spacer it would fit much better.  So far, the air cleaner hasn't yet touched the hood.  The shape of the air cleaner top makes a significant difference for hood clearance.  A stock air cleaner or the K&N style of air cleaner top type might not fit.

Another think to keep in mind, some drop base air cleaners do not clear electric choke assemblies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not much time to work on the Stang lately but finally got back on it this weekend. I noticed that the Weiand only has one bolt in the rear adjacent to the water passage in the head that is blocked off (only the front passage is used just like the cast iron OEM). They cast a boss into the intake but no bolt hole. The next bolt is all the way on the other side of the #4 and #8 intake runner. Is a bead of silicone around the water jacket enough to prevent leakage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...