Register now to get rid of these ads!

Hot Rods Thickstun

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by CA 31 Victoria, Jun 11, 2021.

  1. CA 31 Victoria
    Joined: May 2, 2011
    Posts: 57

    CA 31 Victoria
    Member
    from California

    Does anyone have any historical info on this intake? Seems to have mixed performance reviews but is unique and satisfies the LCES factor. None the less i will be running it on a mild 59 motor.
    Some have PM-7 embossed on them, this one does not. What is the difference?
    Any tuning considerations with the “ high rise” configuration?
     

    Attached Files:

    KiWinUS likes this.
  2. That intake appears to be an earlier Thickstun. The PM-7 was a later design and had more rounder intake runners.
     
    stillrunners likes this.
  3. Here is a picture of a PM-7. They were produced after WWII. The earlier ones had been produced prior to the war. PM7.jpg
     
  4. Petejoe
    Joined: Nov 27, 2002
    Posts: 11,073

    Petejoe
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Zoar, Ohio

    Am running a repop on my 8ba.
    Getting good torque and mileage averages around 15.
    Expensive but I like the look of them.
    Have seen any special tuning characteristics. just use a unisys to even them up.

    90D21D46-8A48-4D12-8171-C554C844DC7C.jpeg
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2021
    fauj and Desoto291Hemi like this.

  5. The thickstun is a cool looking intake but a very POOR performer. I have extensive dyno tests of a strong “mule” flathead running 10-12 diff intakes in Hot Rod mag. The diff from a thickstun and Edelbrock slingshot was 18 hp . That is about 20% on a motor(stock around 100 hp). If you want a thickstun just for “profiling” but if you want a better performing flat,the Edelbrock slingshot is a better choice. The best performing intake tested(no 4 carb intakes were used) was the 3-2 Navarro that made about 20 hp over the slingshot. Flatheads Forever!! A328A7B2-49D9-48AF-A264-B6003A083A77.jpeg D3423512-AE2F-4371-8A3A-57AF6FC1EE9E.jpeg 934F4F61-6DA8-4DF0-A9F5-25C7484B4EEA.jpeg
     
    5window, olscrounger and Petejoe like this.
  6. CA 31 Victoria
    Joined: May 2, 2011
    Posts: 57

    CA 31 Victoria
    Member
    from California

    While dyno test on a “built” motor shows impressive results, I am skeptical that there would be the same improvement on a mild motor.
    I was interested in the historical aspect........
     
  7. alchemy
    Joined: Sep 27, 2002
    Posts: 17,255

    alchemy
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    The PM-7 has a very cool historical factor. So by relation the early version intake should also be historical. And maybe even more cool.

    But the guys are right about it not proving to be a great performer. If you can stick your finger into a port and feel a square corner, it's not going to perform well. Air and fuel mixture doesn't want to turn hard corners.

    I have one of the Thickstun earlies, like yours, as well as a PM-7. I haven't installed either on a running engine yet. I am currently using an early Weiand hirise that has a couple hard corners in its ports. I wouldn't call it a top performer either. But it sure is cool, and by some accounts one of the first hirise intakes made (1939), so it is historical.
     
    fauj and KiWinUS like this.
  8. patterg2003
    Joined: Sep 21, 2014
    Posts: 715

    patterg2003

    Attached Files:

    Petejoe likes this.
  9. WTF really
    Joined: Jul 9, 2017
    Posts: 1,261

    WTF really
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    Am I wrong or was the thickston developed by a guy that worked for Vic Elderbrock? Didn't he think he could do a better job? Just seams like I read this somewhere.
     
  10. Fortunateson
    Joined: Apr 30, 2012
    Posts: 4,278

    Fortunateson
    Member

    Anyone have any performance facts for the Eddie Meyer 3x2?
     
  11. alanp561
    Joined: Oct 1, 2017
    Posts: 1,853

    alanp561
    ALLIANCE MEMBER

    My suggestion would be to go to myflatheadford.com for a wealth of information on practically every piece of flathead speed equipment with lots of pictures DSCN2933 (1).JPG . DSCN2948.JPG That's where I found out that my short Thickstun, which a number of folks on here kept saying was a cut down PM-7, was indeed a pre-war PM-6 and was more desirable than the PM-7. Look at the differences in the runners from yours to the PM-7. You may have something really rare.
     
    fauj likes this.
  12. CA 31 Victoria
    Joined: May 2, 2011
    Posts: 57

    CA 31 Victoria
    Member
    from California

    Thanks Alan, I learned a bit more, as you suggested the prewar Thickstuns are few and far between. These are unique pieces far before the many that followed and surely before anyone had access to computer programs and dyno testing.
    It is obvious as pointed out by above post the design was evolving and this is not a race winner, seems like many are trying to build a fast Flathead, I’m satisfied with a good sounding solid driver, the nostalgic look using original parts is appealing...
     
    alanp561 likes this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 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.