Friends, I have looked all around and spoken to a good many people on the topic of dual carb manifolds and dual (split) exhaust manifolds for the 1934-1938 Dodge Straight 6. I am trying to explore a route that results in reasonably predictable outcomes and afford myself the advantage of listening to good minds and experienced hands. I've gone out to find parts, read every forum I could find, spent allot of time staring at all the pics kindly left for others. I would appreciate advice from those that actually themselves have worked on this topic and felt the results were worth it. I would appreciate help on the following: Dual Carbs Manifolds..... Is there any dual carb intake manifold worth buying today for the Dodge 6? Is there any particularly intake manifold that was once made that is generally felt to be the quintessential final word on actual performance and stability? On that point, is there anyone out there that can fabricate a proper manifold? Is there anybody out there that has a proper, useable, worthwhile intake manifold that wants to get it into hands that actually is going to use it? I know my Stromberg EX-22 well, and have two. Am I wrong to think that I can use this model? Appreciate whatever help can be offered. -
I had a 53 Chrysler years ago that I got an original dodge duel carb manifold with ball and ball carburetors . ( it came off a late 59’s dodge dump truck ) and a set of swap meet tube style no name split exhaust manifolds . I had the carbs rebuilt and bolted everything on, it really woke the engine up and drove great , kept up with traffic able to go on the high way etc ,
I have never been able to score an early Fenton or Edmunds catalogue, so no help on the intake. As far as the carburetors are concerned: The EX series, including the EX-22, was the latest series of Stromberg to use the mechanical power valve (a.k.a. economiser valve). In a multiple carburetor set-up, a mechanical power valve is a good thing, for most; as it provides much easier tuning. In a single carb installation, the newer designs with vacuum power valves are better, and even in a multiple carburetor set-up for absolute maximum driveability and economy. They are just more difficult to set up. The quality control on the EX-22 is excellent. Now, the possible downsides: Stromberg made 217 DIFFERENT type EX-22 carburetors. As always in a dual configuration, both carbs should be identical by part number; and be correct air-flow-wise for the size and modifications to the engine. Probably the biggest downside is going to be tuning parts availability. While I have every size jet, power valve, etc. available for the EX-22; that is probably (don't know this for certain), your only source for other than gaskets and possibly a fuel valve. (Not that I am complaining ). The calibration parts are NOT interchangeable with those for the 97 (EE-1). If the availability of parts is sobering, then consider the Carter W-1 carbs used on 1946~1948 Chevrolet. Again, I have every part on these carburetors; but guessing others might have access to jets, rods, etc. (I do not know this for certain, but it is a reasonable guess). Jon
If the manifold shown in the article has the same style port configuration as your engine; a better configuration would be THREE smaller carburetor rather than two due to there being three intake ports. Jon
This is the best info I found in my stash. From my 1952 Bell Auto Parts catalog. I have others as well.
Thank you all for your kind help on this thread, very much appreciated. I will continue to do the research and hopefully will find the parts that I will need.
I can get you a pattern for intake/exhaust from a ‘31/32 Dodge 6 as well as the later 39? Up 6 and see if they are the same as you have. Would that help you out? I don’t work fast, but can get it done
I have a 230 dodge powered car. The motor is stock other than being rebuilt and bored .30 over at some point. I found an Edmunds aluminum head and that really woke up the motor. Maybe try a head before doing the carbs.
Friends, A number of people kindly and generously responded to my questions in the thread, messaging and off-line via the phone. I thank those that did. I also sought out information on the same issue outside of H.AM. B. as well. In order to leave some useable and purposeful information for any other person who asks the following question, I offer up my final impressions. "What can/should I know about running twin carbs of the Dodge straight 6 and what can I expect?" Improvement is possible, though only for a tiny subset of people who fully commit themselves to attending to ALL of the typical requirements to improve flow. Those kind of people also have expectations that are for the most part realistic. That would, by way of example, include attending to the crank, cylinder capacity, piston head design, compression, ignition, manifold flow, valves and their grind as well as their springs, timing, and exhaust. Those results can make for a measurable improvement in performance. Having said that, and perhaps most importantly there are real limitations and consequences in regard to funds spent and actual measurable meaningful applicable performance improvements. No surprise, but it explains the ever growing black-hole that surrounds Straight 6 build outs. - A tiny percent of people actually attend to ALL the required work and, when they do, accomplish it well. When they do, it is mostly Ford not Dodge. This is because of a severely limited number of available parts for Dodge as well as discoverable, well prepared, thoughtfully articulated and technically accurate performance product infrastructure. That and the whole interest and willingness of the next generation to work on straight 6 when an 8 can be dropped in is collapsing and the industry has literally turned its back on all things straight 6 for a whole series of rational realistic and monetary reasons. It appears that it is all going to end with the current aging generation being replaced by a generation that shows very little interest in these blocks. This is not necessarily all negative, it is however, unquestionably the state of affairs for remnants of this hobby. - Dual carbs are best summed up like this.....the results, if perfectly attended to are measurable but negligible and most likely NOT noticeable. Not attending to all mentioned above is unquestionably an exercise in hydrocarbonation adornment. Many duals performance is actually a diminishing of a single well tuned properly prepared single carb, though the users are either not willing or capable technically of even knowing that. TRIPLES on a completely and thoroughly prepared engine potentially yield excellent results. Triples and their preparation are the recommended path and come with their own set of issues. - Heating the intake manifold is a much discussed topic. Folks, I've heard it all from "why do you think the vast majority of vintage intake manifold offerings did not include heating the manifold?" to "it must be attended to or your intake manifold will turn into an Amana Freezer!" So where are we on all of this? Well....let's get this done...IF you live in the desert.....IF you like to travel 3mph in a parade in Las Vegas during a heat wave......IF you live in the arctic.....IF you anticipate crossing the Selmo La Pass (look it up) then this might be an issue one way or another. Responses included, Ford had a problem, Dodge never did except perhaps at extreme temperature ranges. Many said run water through those intake manifolds that have an INTERNAL full length run...if its there use it. Others said running hot water through a close-off plate requires routine observation because running hot water anywhere near an intake is a poor idea. But most said this issue is an advanced form of mental masterbation, start off without it and see if you ever need it. - Exhaust improvement impact performance inasmuch as the known and measurable factory problem of pressure and flow problems in the forward first two cylinders cannot do anything other than be positive. Fixing the final flow is probably the best and, for most, the only thing that is truly worth doing from the perspective of actually seeing improvement per dollar spent. On that issue.....one needs to know the following: - Langdon and Fenton style exhausts have very real implications. The heat thrown off of the forward split-3 for BOTH examples is detrimental to the stock fuel pump/filter and will require, at a minimum, shielding. You might get away with clocking the fuel pump assemblies that can do that. It was strongly recommended by the designer of one of those two systems that stock fuel pump/filter be abandoned and be replaced by a direct electrical fuel pump. While this is not an issue, it begs the question as to the pathing of the front manifold and throws weight behind the more modern, better flow configured steel headers. - The early Dodge under chassis are known for their lack of natural pathing for exhaust systems. Cross-over, "X" piping is made more difficult if one wants to be left with anything like stock ground clearance. Placing systems within the frame “x outs” has to be done considering that the flooring is wood. Plan it out. - If one does go with split exhaust mufflers must be placed as close to the block as possible for flow in engines that actually are going to get maximum benefit. Back pressure is never required for a properly prepared engine, but watch heat buildup near any restrictions of the exhaust system. What will I do? Fix the exhaust flow. All the time and money that I would have spent trying to make up for a disinterested Speed Parts culture in regard to this brand which by and large is best summoned up by the dried and wasting bones of the last real attempt to support anything hopeful....The Dakota Boys website of Eternal Silence......will go into driving the car. If you have read this far you are either where I was on this topic or have nothing better to do with your day. Either way hope this was helpful in some way. I'll end with directly quote the last paragraph of the article posted on this thread above as nothing appears to have changed very much in the last 71 years..... " I feel I must apologize for the lack of detailed information in this article. As much as we tried, WE HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO FIND A TRIED AND PROVEN ENGINE OF THIS TYPE WORTHY OF BEING DESCRIBED AND RECOMMENDED FOR DUPLICATION BY OTHERS. If and when we do locate such an engine, we shall try to present a more helpful article." (Emphasis mine) The other end of the spectrum....the full buildout...done at home.
Lol- hopefully, you have a rear axle that will support more speed- my '28 Victory Six won't go above 45-50 without tearing the rear apart (don't remember what the gear ratio is, but it sucks). I was able to find a '27-28 Fast Four rear end with better gears, so hopefully I can mess with it a bit this summer (YES, noboD, it is finally coming home to be made road-worthy). Best of luck with the search- I had toyed with the idea of making a down draft (and possibly dual) intake for my engine, but until I can give it a reason to run over 55, there's no need
The famous Bob K put 200 thousand miles on his straight six in 10 years. But deep down he wanted a Mopar motor.
You folks were very kind to me in all the responses. I went to work and finished up the engine after a couple of years. It runs perfectly and, well its a brand new car in regard to performance. Now I could go on and on and on about what works and what doesn't on this build. Let me know what you want to know and I'll do my best to give you a full response. To all that took the time....thanks!
The Jalopy Journal
