moon weber intakes

[grumpyvette]

moon equipment sold some of the more popular original intakes like this for the Weber side draft carbs, they produce decent low and mid rpm torque because the ports are a bit restrictive where the other ports cross and pinch in the port walls but they give high port velocity's and tend to look good and be responsive when properly tuned.
they look good and for a street car with a nostalgic look they are a great choice if cost is not a big factor, but todays better EFI and dual quad tunnel ram intakes will usually produce noticeably more peak horsepower
http://www.jenvey.co.uk/
http://www.mooneyesusa.com/moon-cross-r ... -1457.html

http://www.kinsler.com/072707/Cat56Pg_Whole_LR.pdf

VERTICAL STACK SYSTEMS TEND TO BE MORE EFFICIENT AND LESS RESTRICTIVE

several companies have made several very similar intakes,in both WEBBER and EFI or constant flow injection designs most were improved versions with longer,larger ports and runners that were not as restrictive

btw I had a long detailed discussion with a kinsler injection engineer , the horizontal cross flow injection is significantly flow restricted compared to the vertical stake version below

http://www.webercarbsdirect.com/Weber_C ... rs_s/2.htm

http://atracingworld.com/NEW-CHEV-SB-MO ... 67F1F.html

http://www.kinsler.com/page--Manifolds--6.html

http://www.kinsler.com/072707/Cat56Pg_Whole_LR.pdf

http://inglese.com/Products/Weber_Intake_Manifolds.asp

 

[LEJ ZO6]

Great pictures !

I liked the Weber carb setups ever since saw them on Can-Am cars in the 60's.

I had a set of 45DCOE's on my 1974 Corvette for a long time. They were on the Moon side draft manifold. They were a little difficult to set up and synchronize initially but once I got them dialed in they were GREAT ! Very responsive and good torque.

Lloyd

 

[phantomjock]

The more I see Moon-style crossram and 4 pairs of webers - the more I am attracted to them! But I keep reading there can be problems wih getting enough flow.
here is the desktop dyno (again)

So my questions -- now are:
Would 4 (pairs) of Weber 45mm DCOEs do the job?
Isolated runners are supposed to have improved torque - and the 4 Weber sidedrafts looks are show stopper for sure, but is it heading down the wrong path?
I haven't even turned the engine over yet - so I suppose I could pull the cam and replace it (new) if that would help.
Will my current cam generate enough vacuum - is that the problem people have with these setups - or just raw size?
The DIS ignition eliminates the dizzy from the equation for interference.
Thoughts?

Thanks Grumpy.
Cheers - JIm

 

[grumpyvette]

maths your friend, if you limit the intake port cross sectional area you limit flow rates,but thats not necessarily bad if your content with a power range that basically stall out at less than 6000 rpm
45mm diam. = equals approximately a 2.5" cross sectional area, but naturally the throttle blade reduces flow which is still not all that restrictive, as it probably takes up about .4 square inches at most,so a decent cylinder that flows in the 270cfm range with a 1206 gasket size should work reasonably well. (Fel-Pro 1206 Chevrolet small block intake manifold gaskets for ported cylinder heads. Port dimensions are 1.31" by 2.21") thats 2.9 square inches but the narrow part or restrictive section of the ports near the push rod and theres a chart that may help below
keep in mind as long as its similar or larger than the cylinder heads intake port your not restricting a great deal with the smaller carb size,

heres a chart FROM THE BOOK,HOW TO BUILD BIG-INCH CHEVY SMALL BLOCKS with some common cross sectional port sizes
(measured at the smallest part of the ports)
...........................sq inches........port cc
edelbrock performer rpm ....1.43.............170
vortec......................1.66.............170
tfs195......................1.93.............195
afr 180.....................1.93.............180
afr 195.....................1.98.............195
afr 210.....................2.05.............210
dart pro 200................2.06.............200
dart pro 215................2.14.............215
brodix track 1 .............2.30.............221
dart pro 1 230..............2.40.............230
edelbrock 23 high port .....2.53.............238
edelbrock 18 deg............2.71.............266
tfs 18 deg..................2.80.............250



play with the calculators, and read this thread

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=322

http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/runnertorquecalc.html

http://www.wallaceracing.com/header_length.php

http://www.pontiacracing.net/js_header_length1.htm


torque will peak around 4900rpm-5000rpm

so youll want to cam the car accordingly, with a cam duration in the range that gives you both a dynamic compression ratio of about 8:1 so you can run pump octane fuel and a cam with about a 230-245 duration and a lsa thats fairly tight like a 106-108 to maximize the overlap and breathing potential

and a header designed to maximize the torque at about the same 5000rpm range

related info

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=727

viewtopic.php?f=56&t=961

viewtopic.php?f=56&t=1730

viewtopic.php?f=52&t=1070

 

[grumpyvette]

http://www.hilborninjection.com/product ... &CatId=187

http://www.hilborninjection.com/product ... &CatId=187

compare that 1.7" diam. moon intake with its approximate 2.5 sq inch cross sectional area, to the 2.9" hilborn constant flow intake runner, with its larger sq inch area and youll see it has much more power potential