If Edelbrock produced the Proflo with a 4150 top I think it would be the go to intake for most of the AMC crowd

I think Edelbrock should already have a good idea. I know we already went over the extra water spicket for the the drivers side. Plenum size was adequate after lowering the plenum height so the hood of an AMX could close using a lower drop air cleaner. Last but not least we ran a non ported EFI intake with a 4150 flange at the Engine Masters Challenge this year with no problems handling 7000 RPM and no problem supporting an extra 200HP over stock. Also tested the H.S. pedestal rockers and the exhaust to 7500 RPM. The intake widens the power range nicely and has a more efficient design.

I don't know enough about programming MPI systems to offer much help here,

Would it be better to use/allow an existing/upgradable/open source system like Mega-Squirt?

Or maybe combine forces with a company that has the expertise and support structure already in place for a stand alone MPI system that could be adapted to any engine.

^assuming this would be for the next generation of Edelbrock MPI systems for more than just us.

Being able to run larger throttle bodies and injectors later to support more horsepower in the future is probably beyond what Edelbrock is marketing for,

but if the system is upgradable later it would appeal to people who think they'll want 750-1000hp later (even though most never will).

- 4150-style for universal-type throttle bodies or carburetor 

- injector ports to suit common injectors available in various flow ratings to suit wider range of power levels

- stock-type accessory mounts

- complete EFI kit, tunable like other aftermarket options, optional injector size 

- individual parts at reasonable, competitive prices (including bare, machined manifold) 

- common OEM sensors where suitable 

- kit to plug injector ports and unused sensor ports when fitting a carburetor (plugs can be removed later if fitting EFI) ... or offer less EFI machining (different part number) for carburetor use. 

Thanks, RD

I really doubt there will be a new manifold but a revised manifold based on an approved change.

Edelbrock wanted 25k just to make the changes on their existing EFI manifold for a 4150 flange.

I also would assume the changes have already been determined at this point.

You have to remember the common sense approach just does not apply only the corporate channel does. So keeping the changes subtle and beneficial is key to Edelbrock.

1) 4150 flange (Benefit: increased sales)

2) Water at the rear of the manifold also on the drivers side (Benefit: eliminates potential problems with the Edelbrock head)

3) Allowing manifold to be ordered with out the bungs machined (Benefit: increased sales)

4) Increased runner size (Benefit: none)

5) Leaving additional stock on the out side of the runner in order for the customer to increase runner size. (Benefit: none)

- better PCV baffling than RPM AirGap

- try for similar low-end and mid-range but better top-end than AirGap.

- fit under a flat hood without carb spacer and with drop-base air cleaner ... but spacer helps for those with cowl hoods or similar needing more plenum volume.    

The AMC RPM AirGap has good bottom end and mid-range, but drops off quickly on the top end compared to equivalent intakes for other makes.   Would sacrifice some bottom end to gain on top.  

Thanks, RD

Here is the same manifold but we made a thinner flange and coated the intake for heat sink. After testing with the lower plenum height we found the plenum size was more then adequate to feed the engine. This was the non ported intake we ran at the EMC. The second picture shows the extra water on the drivers side but we had to block all external water per the rules for the EMC.

Here is the air/oil separator we ran at the EMC because the E vac system and the Vacuum pump was not permitted. The second pic is the final height  ported 4150 EFI based on equalizing the runners. 

Me thinks Caroll Shelby, Lee Iaccoca and PT Barnam combined would have a tough time making that sales pitch. (and I'm a gen1 fan)

I say forget Hood clearance....... make a run of UR18s!!!!!!  :)

Edelbrock seemed to have no interest in the tunnel ram. I showed them the Edelbrock / Offy combo using the EFI base and the Offy Tunnel Ram since the runners were a better size and there is 3 options for a top. The Offy intake lined up real nice for the raised port heads after I cut  it to fit. The Offy Tunnel Ram will slip right through the EFI base to be welded on the head side of the base flange not on top of the EFI base.

Steve

Steve

Being that "mold making" is part of my business

I am pretty sure that Edelbrock will not put the $$$

into making a complete casting mold set for a new

manifold for this old motor. The volume is not there.

More likely is minor mods and machining changes.

My guess is that Tunnel Rams are out of the picture.  

When  are we getting one? 

Does that mean new sizing or the current EFI with a 4150 top? 

Good news either way

Because of Jim's efforts at Homecoming I think you already have a market waiting for the PRO FLOW 3 that will sell today. 

So my question is realistically, how soon will they be available? 

Thank you sir for keeping the AMC hobby alive in the hearts and minds of everyone else at Edelbrock.

I have no doubt your influence there paved the way for stuff that's on my car right now. 

for what it's worth,

I would buy an EFI ready AMC Victor as soon as they hit the shelves. 

Steve

I absolutely agree with you Frank,

but only to a point.

The point being once you add a reliable knock sensor into the equation you can start tuning closer to the ragged edge with less chance of failure.

MPG (different type of "preformance") can go up dramatically if the program algorithim is designed to lean out under very light load, but adjust fuel & timing when a knock is detected.

So I would agree that Dyno horsepower could favor the carb, or the MPI,

but when you add real world conditions, I'd have to give the day to day advantage to a well thought out and executed MPI, be it 10 degrees or 100 degrees outside.

Bad tunes in the carb or the MPI would ruin the outcome either way,

but computer control is the reason we have 400-500-600+ streetable horsepower vehicles on the showroom floor right now.

Even my little (factory) 1.6L 197hp 4 cylinder would be a hand grenade without it's well executed MPI system to support it.

Besides,

I would want an MPI capable AMC Victor on day one,

but it would be to run a Holley carb on it (at least at first)

The knock sensors are pretty sensitive, though I won't pretend to be an expert on how the program algorithim actually works.

I do know many new high performance engines will run on junk regular gas, by dialing the tune back,

then run at full tune/full power when higher octane gas is used. 

My thought is they rely on the knock sensor to determine the cylinder pressure threshold and dial up or down boost and timing accordingly.

The little 1.6L 197hp engine I mentioned earlier has 10:1cr, with a turbo and is spec'd to run on regular unleaded with cast pistons.

To put that in brand new cars with a factory warrentee for use in all temperature ranges and conditions they must have faith in the sensor.

^All that said,

the factory tune is very forgiving,

aftermarket tunes on these same engines can and will = catastrophy sometimes

After thrashing the AMX on the dyno earlier that week I made the 1 ½ hour trip to the Kenosha Homecoming to display the car for Hopped up Cylinder Heads.

 I always say seeing is believing, there was allot of people who took a firsthand look at the EFI 4150 intake, Grace Dugan Exhaust and the Grace PCV with the Air Oil Separator for themselves at the Kenosha Homecoming. 

Everyone had the opportunity to see things for themselves and make their own opinion instead of someone embellishing their opinion for them with no facts to back them on the Forum.

I told allot of people at the meet that from my testing I do not see a problem for the 360 to make 500 + HP using an un ported EFI 4150, mild ported iron heads, Grace Dugan exhaust and the Grace PCV Baffle with an Air Oil separator.

We ended up pretty close with 489.7 HP and did all right with iron heads only flowing 256 CFM @ .480 lift. If we ran the 271 CFM heads and my ported EFI intake we would have been in the 530 HP range.

I.M.O. it is an early Christmas present for the AMC community to actually have a modern intake for AMC produced by Edelbrock. I am also glad they changed their mind and are going to address the PCV issue, I think it is very important also saving around 5 to 10 HP. Hopefully Edelbrock will not forget about the water on the intakes rear driver’s side.

I know my modified intake works just fine and I look forward to hear and read about everyone’s results when they compare the new intake to the current ones they were using before.

The Key Questions I would like to ask  before investing in a new intake is 1) Runner cross sectional area size? The current area is at 2.250-2.3 sq. in. which we found this size to be good to 6800 RPM without a problem. The ported EFI 4150 intake added more power across the board and widened the power range even more. This brings me to question 2) The deg. of the taper for the runner?  I found on both the 401 and 360 the straighter runner made the power range broader and the power came in quicker. 3) The runners approach angle to the head, will it be at a higher angle like the current EFI Intake or more flat like the Torker? 4) Plenum size and shape? I found the plenum size of the EFI 4150 plenty big to feed the size of both engines.

 Since Edelbrock is starting from scratch how about Edelbrock gives AMC the unfair advantage by pushing the runners outward in order to equalize the 4 outer runner’s length. The runners are currently around 5” on the short and 6.5” to 7.0 on the long. There has been substantial gains and it would not affect the street ability of the intake and bring the AMC up to par with the rest of the pack.

I guess you can see what I would do to the intake next after knowing what I know now… I look forward to see what Edelbrock creates….

 

I.M.O. the Mopar Victor would be way to big for 95% of the AMC street cruising community just like I believe the same with header size. Edelbrock would have made more HP if they ran a 1 5/8 header when testing for their dyno results. Seems small intake runner goes hand n hand with small primary exhaust. It takes someone running at Jeff Lees level to benefit form the Mopar Victor intake size. The Mopar Victor does not start walking away from the non ported EFI 4150 until .400 lift. The non ported EFI is superior below .400 lift with a smaller runner and the Mopar victor is superior as the lift goes up to .900 lift with a bigger runner. Then there is Spiro's comment where he is mostly concerned about the flow at mid lift where the smaller runner intake dominates. Spiro was a contributing factor for the School who took 3rd at the 2017 EMC gaining them an additional 30 HP just from advising them the install degree of his cam. The professor was a little shocked when Spiro told him he really did not care about the big flow number he achieved at Max. lift. The professor asked Spiro if he would spend a couple weeks helping them next year and the professor was quite shocked when Spiro told them if you want to win either select an AMC or a Mopar... Spiro is the go to guy for cams, another good recommendation from Jeff Lee. The down side he is very busy so it takes a while and the up side he has the AMC's running really fast like Adkins.... I ended up using Erson because they were able to grind a cam and get it to me in less then 3 days. I would like to go back and try all 3 cams, Spiro's, Bullet's and compare it to the Generic Erson Cam I ran. Maybe some day.... I think the Bullet cam I had custom ground would be killer in the 401 but just not practical to drive everyday. So right now the Super Scavengers I ran at the EMC are on the car and when the good  weather breaks in spring I can go back on the dyno and get my final numbers then off to the track for some T&T at Byron.....Here is a pic for an example of pushing the runners outwards and reducing the curve in order to equalize the runners... One of the competitors at the EMC was pushing 340CFM with his Mopar heads using a victor but when you compare CFM to HP it was low.

A lot of what I do falls in the 5% that would benefit from the CSA

In my opinion the best intake Edelbrock could make is an EFI sized like the current one only thick enough for increasing CSA to meet the needs of those who need a larger CSA; leaving it up to the end user to make it larger. 

 I think you have a perfect example of what engine combination the Torker manifold size is good for. Just like Jeff Lee proved out when he went from the Indy Manifold to the Torker, the Torker was a better match in size and made more power. I.M.O. I do not think you would see any gain with the smaller intake most likely less power with your combination but I could see you increasing power with the Mopar Victor size intake to support around 700 HP. The Mopar Victor would be a good replacement for the Torker. When I talked to Adkins and told him I think the Torker was too big for my combination he said the Torker is more for racing not the street but we are limited in selection to what the aftermarket supplier provides. In my case the smaller intake is the right size to make the most power for my combination because it made more power across the board then the R4B and the Torker. 

As far as the heat soak even if you air gap the Torker you will see no gain because Hot air rises. I found the only way to stop the heat soak  was to coat the intake which allowed us to make our back to back pulls because we had no time to wait for the manifold to cool back down. I even mentioned to Edelbrock the manifold was hot to the touch in the Plenum area when I was changing carbs on the dyno to hear their reaction. So the Term Air gap has nothing to do with the manifold running cooler but might be useful for advertisement to sell intakes.

I look forward to see what Edelbrock comes out with. Same size as the EFI, same Size as the Torker, same size as the Mopar Victor, straight runners, tapered runners, equal runners etc.

Agreed....

but I'd still be at the front of the line for a modern single plane that uses some of what's been learned in the 50 years since the Torker/Tarantula came out.

It doen't take away from how versatile the Torker has been for us to want to see something new developed.

....besides,

imagine how many more $100 Torkers you'll be able to buy if they release a Victor AMC