Re: Need a new Toy?

[Gary Pavlovich <glpavlovich@xxxxxxx>]

Yes, I don't think any modern intake can beat a Tunnel Ram for Max HP & 
Torque, even the "old school" Weiands...of course a tunnel is not a 
user-friendly manifold for the average Hot-Rodder due to height (for one) 
which requires no hood or a cut-out for clearance.

I will be running a Tunnel Ram on my Poly but I designed the manifold to fit 
under the hood...of course I have more hood clearance than most people 
(approx. 16" from top of block face)  so I can get away with a "tall enough" 
tunnel ram to make it effective and still have the stealth factor.

Gary Pavlovich
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim Altemose" <jaltemoose@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 8:51 AM
Subject: Re: Need a new Toy?


Indy refers to it as an "In-Line Cross Ram".

Below is a comparison of the manifolds.  Looks like the Tunnel Ram won out.
http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/techarticles/engine/mopp_0911_intake_manifold_tests/index.html

- Jim
Jim Altemose, Long Island, NY
'63 Polara 500 (Max Wedge)
'63 Polara 500 (383)
'65 Belvedere I (Street Wedge)
'71 Bronco

On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Roger Pettigrew <dodger7998@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ok,,,,,will take your word for it,, would have to see the intake it self 
> to
> understand,,,,,,, sure looks like an inline set up to me
>
>
> In a message dated 5/3/2011 11:14:58 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
> mcreglow@xxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> actually that is a cross ram. that is the indy cylinder head x-ram,
> and is the hot ticket for nostalgia super stock racing.
> http://www.usaperform.com/indy-chrysler-cross-manifolds-p-231.html
>
> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Roger Pettigrew <dodger7998@xxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > Nice toy,,,,,,,makes me wonder what the real story is on cars that are
> > obviously misdescribed in their description,,,,,,, that is definitely
> not a
> > crossram on it, so makes me wonder what else is not being seen
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 5/1/2011 4:03:10 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> > shelby_nut@xxxxxxxxx writes:
> http://ontario.kijiji.ca/c-cars-vehicles-classic-cars-1963-plymouth-savoy-W0
> > QQAdIdZ279189587
> >
> >
> > --
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> > ----
> > Please address private mail -- mail of interest to only one person --
> directly to that person. I.e., send parts/car transactions and 
> negotiations
> as well as other personal messages only to the intended recipient, not to
> the Clubhouse public address. This practice will protect your privacy,
> reduce the total volume of mail and fine tune the content signal to Mopar 
> topic.
> Thanks!
> > 1962 to 1965 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion Guidelines:
> > http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html and
> http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html.
> >
>
> --
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ----
> Please address private mail -- mail of interest to only one person --  
> directly to that person. I.e., send parts/car transactions and 
> negotiations as well as other personal messages only to the intended 
> recipient, not to the Clubhouse public address. This practice will protect 
> your privacy, reduce the total volume of mail and fine tune the content 
> signal to Mopar topic. Thanks!
>
> 1962 to 1965 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion Guidelines:
> http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html and 
> http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html. 


----
Please address private mail -- mail of interest to only one person -- directly to that person.  I.e., send parts/car transactions and negotiations as well as other personal messages only to the intended recipient, not to the Clubhouse public address. This practice will protect your privacy, reduce the total volume of mail and fine tune the content signal to Mopar topic.  Thanks!

1962 to 1965 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion Guidelines:
http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html and http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/general_disclaimer.html.