Help me with this old Edelbrock SBC intake

I picked up an old Edelbrock CB3X intake at the swap yesterday for my little 327 I'm putting together. I have a Performer that I was going to run, but this older intake really fits the theme better.

Can anyone give me an idea of how much power I'd be leaving on the table by running this thing over the later Performer intake I have ?

I'm assuming this is just the forerunner to the Performer model. Is that right ?

 

Probably wont loose any HP. The earlier intakes have smaller ports that match the earlier heads better. Period correctness is worth something too in my book. I;s use it. If you dont use it, I want it Be great on the 301 I'm building for the Mid Injun Vair.

 

C3BX is a great intake. I'd run one over a performer any day. Not sure about giving power away over the later model intake but I'd pass on the late model intake any day. Even if it did mean giving up a couple of horsepower, don't really think you would feel that on the street anyways

 

got a pic? whats this intake look like?

 

I will get out to the shop and get it bead blasted after the sun goes down a bit. It's 103 here right now. I will post pics of it after that.

 

Very much like this Edelbrock 3CB


Photo from Terry Rosebush Motorsports

 

I've got one on our '57 Chevy on a 327, runs very good. Never had a Performer on it, so can't tell you how it compares, but I'm very pleased with it.

 

What's the difference between that C3B and my C3Bx ?

 

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=192317

 

There's actually more to the answer than that link...

I've delved into this a whole lot. I have in my shop a C3B, C4B and C3BX. The intake runner layout is different on my C4B than the other two. It has a pair of real short runners, and a pair of real long runners. The carb base is a 4-hole base.
The C3B and C3Bx have a divided 2-opening plenum, with the notch for the Holley 3BBL carb in the plenum divider. The high and low side of the plenum floors is opposite the C4B, and the runners are more equal in length. It's clear this is the version the Performer was patterned after.
HOWEVER, I've also seen pics of a C3B WITHOUT the notch for the plenum, and I've seen pics of a C4B with a divided plenum and evenly spaced runners.
In short, I've seen every combination of plenum/carb pad with each designation.

AND, I've seen all of them with the fill tube going out the right, or going out the left, with the T-stat housing going the opposite way.

On the C3B I've got, and the C3BX, the only difference I see is a couple of different ports up front for the heater hoses (drilled/tapped versus the boss is there but not drilled), but more importantly, my C3BX has the boss for a choke mechanism cast into it. My C3B and C4B do not have those, and I haven't seen any of the others since to compare.

I'm currently working on a story to dyno test all of them against a Performer--the 283 is at the engine builder's right now.

-Brad

 

have you tested them yet?

 

Brad, did you ever do the dyno test?

 

There was a dyno comparison between a whole bunch of early Edelbrocks and I think a performer in Hot Rod Deluxe VERY recently, 1 or 2 issues back at most.

 

----------------------------------------
The CB3X had slightly larger ports than 3B3

Mart3406
============================

 

Being an old geezer, I bought one new, a C3B. Is was for a 3 barrel Holley. I've had it on a 327 350HP motor and now a 350 ci mild stocker in a coupe. The thing works great on both, with an Edlebrock carb. I think the x was for a bypass of some type.
cooger

 

I haven't gotten around to listing it yet, but I do have a CB3 for sale. $120 includes the ride in continental U.S.

 

Fwiw, HPBooks old book, "How to HR SBC's" say's that a C3BX and a 780 cfm, 3310-1 Holley was the hot set-up way back then.

I have an early '80's Performer 2101 on my Strong-Arm 406 and like it.

As well as a brand new, still in the box, probably darn near last a the old Holley 300-36's in my bedroom closet for my next old junk301 engine that I'm going to shift at 8,000 rpm just for the fun of it.

pdq67

 

I have both version. I've run the C3B on a number of engines since the early 70's, the first being a 12.5 336c.i. with a 950 3bbl, 2.02 heads and a Z-28 service package cam. That thing had some real ponies from about 2500 to 7500, but really crappy bottom end. Also used it on several more mild 327's, 350's and 400's. Single carb pattern.

The C3BX has a choke stove, 2 more water ports up from and two carb patterns. Otherwise appears the same except the casting is not as smooth.

Charlie

 

soooo, how about a SP2P edelbrock on a 283 with a good cam and stock compression?. i got one cheap and my 2101 is cracked.

anyone know what issue it is.

 

I'm running a C3B and an Edelbrock 1406 on my 327. It seems to work pretty good although I wonder if plugging the slot in the plenum would help or would it not make a difference. I also though about adding a carb spacer to see if that would change anything. Any thoughts?

 

I once ran an SP2P on an otherwise stock '64 327/250 hp engine and couldn't notice any advantage over the stock 4GC intake.

 

-----------------
No....no "bypass of some type". As
stated in my previous post - the ONLY
difference between the C3B and C3BX
is *slightly* bigger passages and port
openings in the C3BX.

Mart3406
=========================

 

Anyone?

 

I don't think that the 3bbl clearance slot in the intake is large enough to disturb much in the way of proper airflow.

 

Well...what would you like it to do, exactly?

The slot is designed to "gain" a little more carburetion at upper rpm without losing the low-rpm advantages of the dual-plane design. As with all compromises, the effect is limited, either way. So far as the 3bbl clearance, I dunno- possibly so- but a lot of the newer intakes made long after the 3bbl's demise are slotted in a similar fashion/location, and some intakes made before the 3bbl were slotted too.

Without knowing much about your particular engine, I can say that you have a pretty effective mild street combination in what you are running. Filling the slot is unlikely to make much of a noticeable difference (assuming the small original slot dimensions). Since you are considering doing so, I'm guessing that you are looking for more low-end torque. You might consider using a 1/2" or 1" four-hole spacer, either wood or phenolic. I wouldn't expect spectacular results but you might see a bit more torque under 3500. You might also need to tweak the jetting a bit with the spacer.

I would take a look at your distributor as well...I don't know what you have but there may be more gains to be had there.

Assuming that the curve is already optimal as is, the spacer ** might ** like a couple of degrees more of initial timing, and/or a slightly quicker centrifugal rate.

 

i got one just like it that my dad bought new .