Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical Just Scored an Edelbrock X-F8 now what?

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by diegochero, May 9, 2015.

  1. Howdy to all out there in H.A.M.B. land! here's the low down, I have a falcon based Ranchero that I am planning on getting back on the road. The engine is not very traditional, and I would like to mix things up a little to give it an early to mid sixties vibe. Like a bug to a light I am drawn to weird induction setups, so in my mind the X-F8 is a much better looking set up than the Mass air that is on it now. I have done some research and have learned a couple of things about this intake, and I know these can be a bitch to deal with, but here is the question. Has anyone here ran one with any success, and if so what ignition was used, and carb selection ect? The ranchero's make over will lean towards a sixties flair, with touches such as diamond pleat in the interior. The engine will be dressed to look the part, but the internals are late model (5.0, GT 40 aluminum heads, B303 cam). That's it in a nut shell, goal is to make a nontraditional engine look traditional so it jives with the rest of the truck.
    DSCN2497.jpg

    DSCN2493.jpg
     
    volvobrynk and LOU WELLS like this.
  2. The intake showed up, and I have to say it is one ungodly chunk of aluminum. Doing some research I found a couple of interesting points....

    - Edelbrock jr. came up with this type of intake as a result of taking his fathers X-1 design, and putting dual quads on it instead of 6/2's

    -According to page 138 of Edelbrock's book, Edelbrock made in the USA, the intake was designed to be used with a pair of carter carbs.

    -There is a lot of volume in each half of this intake, (each bank is isolated), so when there is a back fire it is a real good one. Could this be why Holleys with their power valves were not considered over carters?

    -Twin 390cfm Holley's could be good if you can get around the power valve issue, Carter AFB's were available in 400cfm and could work also. One source spoke of a 300cfm AFB, but I have never seen one, and wonder if this is just BS?

    -Would it seem plausible to install some sort of blow off valve on each half of the intake, with the idea being that pops open before carb damage occurs?

    -everything has to be identical with the carbs. This is kind of a given but one guy was saying even the return springs are an area to consider in proper setup.

    Well that's all I have so far. I noticed there are a lot of views with no input. And realizing my question was very direct I would like to encourage response based on the few factoids I uncovered researching this pig. I will post some pictures this evening.
    -Thanks
     
    volvobrynk likes this.
  3. treb11
    Joined: Jan 21, 2006
    Posts: 3,223

    treb11
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Will you need a teardrop (a la Thunderbolts) hood bubble to clear the setup? I consider that a bonus for '60s vibe.
     
  4. From what I understood ... it's an intake needing a bit of top end help ... as in a motor that likes to rev. Being in a light vehicle, and hopefully a stickshift ... with the right cam, you should have some fun here.

    My experience with this application was sbc. I always knew it as a cross ram intake, number unknown/lost to time. I had a 12.5:1 compression 2.05" angle plug 366" small block with a Weber aluminum flywheel, and an off road 2nd generation Z28 solid lifter cam. It was in an SCCA raced '68 Camaro, that was parked in 1974. The eyeball on the intake was great, insofar as opening the hood. I too had the smaller cfm carburetors. As raced, and stored it was good and dandy ... but luckily for me, and my father it also came with an old twisted plate aluminum Edelbrock intake as well ... the one where the carb' sits a little sideways.

    For us, the car ran better with the single intake on the street. For the previous owner, Pat Smith of Omaha Nebraska .... the multitude of dash plaques all over the interior when found, that intake did him well at the hammer. Being a 4 speed car, and lots of open road courses, I can understand why. Your application being lighter then a Camaro, and fun factor figured in ... I think you will be fine. You'll figure out what it will like. Have fun with it.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2015
    volvobrynk and loudbang like this.
    Register now to get rid of these ads!

  5. porknbeaner
    Joined: Sep 12, 2003
    Posts: 41,007

    porknbeaner
    Member

    Like any cross ram intake the banks are isolated one from the other. you need an equalizer of some sort to make it easier to tune.

    I have not used that particular intake but on the other Edelbrocks I have run equalizer tubes to the carb bases either by way of carb spacers that were drilled and tapped or with newer carbs by using the PCV ports. You have to T off of your equalizer line for your PCV valve or use a vacuum pump to evacuate your crank case.

    We have bolted lots of carbs to cross rams and I have had my best luck with carter AFBs. Use the smaller ones if you can find them and I don't care for the Edelbrock copy.

    On your intake you could possibly drill and tap into the banks of the manifold itself.

    Cross rams have a tendency to be finicky in my experience, they don't like altitude or barometric changes. They also much like tunnel rams like to be all the way on or all the way off, but I have known guys who like to tune that have had good success with them on the street. Good success being a nominal term here.
     
  6. -TREBLL this thing is pretty tall, I think a teardrop will come into play just out of necessity

    -KIDCAMBELL1171. set up is a T5 trans, engine is roller and loves to rev, don't remember the cam spec but it is fairly gnarly. You can hear there is something always open with this one.

    -PORKNBEANER. My gut feeling is that the isolation of the two banks is an issue which is why Edelbrock got away from these. If you look at Edelbrocks second generation of the crossram setup it is really just a plate that is on an open lower plenum, and the set up looks like the unit GM had for their trans am program. A tube is a very good idea. I was also leaning towards the small Carter.
     
  7. porknbeaner
    Joined: Sep 12, 2003
    Posts: 41,007

    porknbeaner
    Member

    The separate plenums or logs was always a problem on the u-weld intakes too. Some of them came with provisions for balance tubes and some did not and if the guy who built it didn't know any better they didn't get balance tubes. I have drilled and tapped a bunch of them for nipples over the years or brazed nipples into them for just that purpose.

    The AFBs work well in twin carb setups. I am a Holley guy by nature but I still like the carters for a 2x4. If you are not already familiar with it do your research and learn how to tune the secondaries. Getting them to open properly will make all the difference in the world for you.
     
  8. So here it is in all its' glory. The Edelbrocks are just for show, small carters will be the order of the day. I know with tunnel rams a lot of guys would run, one choke on one carb, and nothing on the other. Since it all has to be matched with this thing I am left wondering twin manual choke, no choke? I guess we will see what works when it comes time. 20150515_112607.jpg 20150515_112631.jpg
     
    volvobrynk likes this.
  9. squirrel
    Joined: Sep 23, 2004
    Posts: 43,249

    squirrel
    Member

    see if you can find some Carter 9502s carbs? They seem to be a bit scarce..
     
  10. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 16,144

    gimpyshotrods
    Member

    I spent two years, back in the late 80's, trying to tune the SBC version of this.

    Gave up.

    Reversion central. You could always actually see a halo of fuel mist over each carburetor. I am surprised it did not explode. Had four different cams, with different overlap, to try to get it to go away.

    My conclusion is that this is a high-RPM-only setup.
     
    loudbang likes this.
  11. 6-bangertim
    Joined: Oct 3, 2011
    Posts: 322

    6-bangertim
    Member
    from California

    I'd e-mail Vic Jr. to see not just what he remembers about that manifold, but WHO used it that is still around for tunning. NICE RANCHERO!!! Take Care, Tim
     
    volvobrynk likes this.
  12. Thanks for the replies and comments everyone. I am going to try and find some 400cfm carters to keep cfm down. Definitely going to run equalizer tubes of some sort, and school up on the secondary tuning /synchronization.
     
  13. 73RR
    Joined: Jan 29, 2007
    Posts: 6,222

    73RR
    Member

    Late 50's and early 60's Mopar and GM used some pretty small AFB type carbs. Based on throttle bore dia and venturi dia they could be in the 400 range.

    .
     
    volvobrynk likes this.
  14. porknbeaner
    Joined: Sep 12, 2003
    Posts: 41,007

    porknbeaner
    Member


    Gimp
    just to screw with you and because I like you real well that halo of fuel mist is what a velocity stack is actually designed for. You know they are the right length by the crackle, if it sounds like little lightning bolts going off you have them the right length. ;)

    They were an all the way on or all the way off intake, that was what Mr Edelbrock was all about, going fast!!! It was Vic Jr that moved the company toward the street rodder. Nothing against street cars I build 'em and drive 'em, Just stating a truth.

    There ar two ways to over come the halo aside from my previous mention of running stacks, one is a carb spacer (maybe a long carb spacer) and the other is an edelbrock stub stack.

    I built an intake for an OT hot rod back in the '90s. Runners too short and plenum too small+cam and head combo = reversion, or maybe equaled in this case. I was determined to get all the engine and induction under a flat hood (sleeper). It was mentioned to me that a stub stack would cure it (they fit inside your air cleaner) it was just shorter than the *halo, but at the insistence of a friend I tried it. Beyond my own logic the damned thing worked.

    *@gimpyshotrods thanks for the word, very descriptive and one I never would have thought of.


    Actually a pair of WCFBs may work well with the m small motor. They are pricey/hard to find and a bear to tune but they may work well.

    I wonder if I would go back on my no Holley deal and say that a pair of Holley 2 bbls wouldn't work well too. they make a 2bbl for the short track crowd that is in the 350-390 CFM range even new out of the box ( and not yet beat on) they are not to pricey.

    @diegochero
    The choke deal is a good idea. When I was younger I ran divorced choke a lot. I still do if that is what I have to play with. But it is a pain in the ass and sometimes you really load one up pumping it to get enough fuel to start. A choke is a way better idea, at least for me now that I am older and less patient. ;)
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2015
    volvobrynk likes this.
  15. Kinky6
    Joined: May 11, 2003
    Posts: 1,765

    Kinky6
    Member

    Admittedly, I don't know much about small block Fords or dual quad set-ups, but I was reading a post by Roothawg last week where he had been beating his head against a proverbial brick wall over trying to get the best performance out of a dual quad cross ram. Long story short, he shelved that intake, and went to a single four of about 750cfm and got better performance from his small block. I understand about wanting to run an intake that looks bit different than the ordinary.

    I like your truck, BTW, that thing looks sharp. Good luck with it! K6



    Posted using the Full Custom H.A.M.B. App!
     
    kidcampbell71 likes this.
  16. volvobrynk
    Joined: Jan 30, 2011
    Posts: 3,588

    volvobrynk
    Member
    from Denmark

    I know this might be a stupid question, but here goes:
    Is it possible to take them carbs and balance them like a set of webers on there shared set of runners?
    Manually synchro the butterflies.
    Putting two vacuum gauges in the adapters, or under each carb. Depending if you run risers or adapters under them carbs.
    And put a vacuum gauge in every barrel of the carb, like the ones you use on a multiple carb set up with 2 or more carbs. Adjust them all to the same vacuum as the weakest one.
    This method would make the mill run like two 4 banger teamed up. And it should be possible them like that, if you got a circa baseline for jetting.

    Please bear in mind that my carb knowledge is based on Webers and Individual runners.
    But the math applies, you just need to get the choke size/CFM very close to optimal, and the bbl's to a slight undermatch for high velocity.

    I have a hard time grasping the need to make them joint plenum. But I usually works with four bangers.
     
  17. porknbeaner
    Joined: Sep 12, 2003
    Posts: 41,007

    porknbeaner
    Member

    More then possible, making the plenums balance just makes tuning easier. They are just less finicky when run on a common plenum.

    The thing to remember is that when dealing with the public in general it is easier to make things as easy as possible. In general most people have trouble running a single four with a 4 corner idle circuit so when you start playing with multiple carbs and those needed to balance between themselves it becomes a real nightmare to teach someone to do. The reason that many of these old manifolds were never popular is that they were not easy to tune.

    When I was little there was a man that came into the Ol' Man's shop on Saturdays. Saturday was a kind of an open house and problems got dealt with if need be but mostly it was just good ol boys day. Anyway this man was running an SBC with 8 ( maybe only 6) carbs on log manifolds. Two separate plenums basically. The ol' man used to trim the carbs for him and one time he handed me a some fittings and told me to go to the lathe and open them up and turn a shoulder on them. [yea yea before the safety Nazis get involved let me say to kiss my ass and deal with it] he then proceeded to braze the nipples into the logs and make hose balance tubes. After he showed the man how to trim his own carbs and all was good, the man never needed him to trim his carbs after that.

    Making is user friendly is the easy way to keep everyone happy.
     
    volvobrynk likes this.
  18. JOECOOL
    Joined: Jan 13, 2004
    Posts: 2,734

    JOECOOL
    Member

    I'd put Predator carbs on it then I would have an excuse to not drive it;)
     
  19. porknbeaner
    Joined: Sep 12, 2003
    Posts: 41,007

    porknbeaner
    Member

    Hey I saw a pair of those cheap the other day. Like paper weight cheap. :D
     
  20. volvobrynk
    Joined: Jan 30, 2011
    Posts: 3,588

    volvobrynk
    Member
    from Denmark

    Okay, if you say so, i trust you.

    I run my Dell'orto's on a Weber Manifold with IR, I set it all up with four vacuum gauges. Runs like a peach, except I need bigger venturies. Made them very easy to adjust. But that ain't that hard.

    I never delt with two carbs on an eight. That's why I ask. But I didn't see why it shouldent work.
    But after reading you post it makes a lot of sense why you would put in the tube.
    KISS method.
     
  21. JOECOOL
    Joined: Jan 13, 2004
    Posts: 2,734

    JOECOOL
    Member

    I know a guy with a fake gasser that still runs them.
     
  22. porknbeaner
    Joined: Sep 12, 2003
    Posts: 41,007

    porknbeaner
    Member

    Usually when I see them they are hammered all to hell. I always though that the idea was good just the execution was bad on them.

    They were not really a new idea they made tank carbs like them in the second war to end all wars. I don't remember what they were used on but you used to be able to find them surplus all the time cheap.
     
  23. JOECOOL
    Joined: Jan 13, 2004
    Posts: 2,734

    JOECOOL
    Member

    I've seen them with Holley float bowls screwed on the side . I assume thats easier than replacing the needle and seat.
     
  24. gimpyshotrods
    Joined: May 20, 2009
    Posts: 16,144

    gimpyshotrods
    Member

    I did run velocity stacks on it. The kind with the foam filter on top. They were about 6" tall.

    The foam filters were never not soaked with fuel for long.

    It was so bad that I did not want to drive it much, for fear that I would burn my car to the ground.
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2020 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.