Jay, this is a great project you've undertaken here! Like everyone else, I really thank you for your efforts, and for sharing the results. We're relatively certain that you're going to change forever the 'pecking order' of FE intakes...and probably cause an about-face in what brings the big bucks on eBay!
Like everyone else too, there's things I wish you could include (though we know how difficult/impractical some of them are):
a) I'd like to see you repeat some of the manifold tests, with a healthier cam installed in the same engine (+10°/15° @ .050"). Yes, it'd be great to combine that cam upgrade with a set of 'worked-over' Edelbrock heads (so we can really see any breathing bottlenecks), but a medium compression ratio, iron head motor with a cam swap, is still probably far and away the norm out there in FE land.
b) I'd love to see the results of a test of the PSE adaptor-base manifold with the 351C 'Torker' top (and again with a Tunnel Ram top?). I doubt it'd outflow the later Victor and Dove single-plane designs, but it'd be interesting to compare its out-of-the-box performance from 25 years ago with those. Wish I had one to lend you for the test...but maybe someone else does??
c) Anyone taking odds on what the spread will be, between the SP-2P and the dual-quad Tunnel Wedge?
The "riddle me this" question I have for you is this: I notice that in each of your dyno graphs, not only do each pair of horsepower and torque curves from a particular manifold cross at approximately 5,250 RPM, but, as in the example graph below, all of the horsepower and torque curves cross each other at the same point. Is there any signficance to this? Does this 'crossover point' tell a dyno operator anything important? Is this typical of most engines? Is it just a function of horsepower being determined by torque and RPM?
"In theory, theory and reality are the same. In reality, they are not!"
