In the '70s a lot of people smoked a lot of pot, too. That said, the comment on the 392 with twin blowers - that's for real, although I don't know how common, it was enough that AMT tooled it up in their '53 Studebaker coupe kit for the salt flats or drag versions - complete with a clear hood with big bulge to show it off. Seems to me they also did a big block Chevy version in the '62 Corvette kit. The intake was triangle shaped. I don't know how well the performance would be on a real live example of same, but I would imagine if it didn't run well you'd have to say it blows. As for carbs, you can put as many on there as you want, but when you start getting to like 10 or 12 of them, you might think about using jets intended for the 5hp Briggs on your lawnmower or go-kart. Or else make like that Pontiac above only don't cut the intake and use the others just for show.
It's funny that you name these two factors in the same post. "Input" and "intake" need to correlate if there is to be any positive result. Pot smoking could be "supercharged" by use of a bong and the result was beneficial because the lungs can take a whole lot of volume. But lungs expand, cylinders don't. Porting and polishing the head and intake manifold was all the craze (back then) so that greater fuel/air mixture could be taken in. However, there are limits to everything and the amount of fuel that 50 dueces and quads can deliver ain't goin' nowhere no matter how well the head and manifold is ported - or how shiny it is!
That 5 carb poncho is just toooooo friggin cool for words. Keep this thread going. What other bizarre intake combos have you come across?
I just re-read my post...I meant to indicate that 3 sets of 4bbls (12 bores) would not work in any type of low-rise OEM intake due to the room required. If the topic is changing to aftermarket, well OK. As far as the pontiac goes I can see how a tunnelram intake could be cast to make it work for those masochistic types(thanks for the pic), but no way for an OEM. Happily the Dominator carb entered the picture and proved the best way to achieve ultra high CFM needs. Some of the stuff above is pretty silly looking. The factory SD stuff is attractive givien it's unique and dedicated use.
its interesting that the induction is the only thing that has changed. Look at the stock exhaust manifold and all the accessorys that the belt is spinning
1957 Pontiac at Daytona Beach speed trials had a three four barrel engine. This was factory. Also, the year of the blower 312, injected Chryslers, everything that the factories could think of, to be the fastest Art
Who ever built this thing did not do it for better performance. I have no doubt that the horse power and torque are lower wit ten strombergs than with the factory EFI. No one today interested in high performance would use 97s. It's purely eye candy. Like using two little blowers instead of one bigger blower.
.....that and it's also in mockup stage. I'm sure headers and all sorts of billet bling is in the works
Sounds something like the Munster Coach's intake. If I remember right, it only ran on the center two, or even just one of them. This is the only setup like that i've ever seen, although as popular as the car was, i'm sure someone tried to copy it.
I´m sure you´re right. But the one I saw in the parking lot was road worthy. Without a hood I was able to tinker with it (OK, so I was young and an idiot) and all the linkage was hooked up and functional. <O</OMy guess is that the intake manifld on the Munster Coach was genuine, even if all the carbs might not have been hooked up. I had a friend who had a 1962 Ford 406 with 3-deuces. When he lost his job he disconnected the outer two carbs and ran it on the centre carburator alone. He could (and did!) quickly connect all three whenever he was challengd to a steet race. <O></O>
I think the Munster Coach intake was all fake. Here's a closer picture of the engine.... it looks like there's a carb and air cleaner (note the "Cobra" lid) between the two rows of dummy carbs. Remember, this was a BArris built car for a TV show, two factors that would have kept the actual mechanicals from being too complex!
<O</OYeah, you´re right! It looks like a Ford dual quad/3 deuce air cleaner that´s only covering up the hole where the standard carburators should be. I can´t even see where those intake tubes lead to - probably nowhere!<O</O
------------------------------ Back when I was a kid, a neighbor, circa 1965-'66-'67, ran a similar homebrew 'triple-quad' set-up on a 6-71 blown 394 Olds powered 39 Chev gasser. But instead of AFBs, he used three OEM 394 Olds Rochester 4GCs. Like the AFBs, the space taken up by the combination 'carb body and float bowl assemblies' on a 4GC is not much greater than the space required for the base plate - and three of them, butted together, just fit on top of a 6-71. Unlike the T-bucket pictured above, (which is pretty cool by the way!), this wasn't a show car or street rod rod either, but a legitimate competition car.of the day. Mart3406 ===============================
Oh No, not again! I thought we debunked all of this in the "3 4 BBL J2" thread. Look at the bosses cast into the middle of the top of that manifold. They are obviously for something other than a "third carb". And a Holley 94? from GM? Come on now.
The Jalopy Journal
