So I’ve got one of these big dogs porting intakes here…

15691 Views 208 Replies 38 Participants Last post by 96pushrod, 2 mo ago

96pushrod

Discussion Starter · 5 mo ago

A kind gentlemen - who is not big dogs, or affiliated with them sent me a big dogs cobra intake that has been ported. I’ll be replacing the box r intake on the car temporarily to see the difference.

I won’t get into the pissing contest, really here as a third party to make a comparison. Here are some pics of it compared to a factory explorer intake. All measurements are in mm.

This will be a strict a to b comparison deal. I’ll look at fuel flow and dragy times to see which one works the best. Engine is a woody built 347 with a f1r blower. Any ideas on which will come out on top?

If anyone wants any other pics or measurements, please Let me know and I’ll oblige if I can.

Saw Tool Machine tool Milling Power tool

Gas Auto part Wood Engineering Metal

Automotive tire Wheel Rim Rolling Automotive wheel system

Bicycle part Crankset Bicycle handlebar Automotive tire Auto part

Automotive tire Motor vehicle Bumper Metalworking hand tool Tool

Hand Tire Automotive tire Bicycle part Wheel

Hood Automotive tire Bumper Automotive exterior Tire

Automotive tire Automotive lighting Vehicle Bumper Automotive exterior

See less See more

10

1 - 18 of 209 Posts

tmoss

· #21 · 5 mo ago

Definitely reverse taper there........but let's see. We DISCOURAGE porting any GT40/Cobra/Explorer lower beyond a 1250 size head port but we get a lot of requests for 1262 - we try to discourage that and suggest better alternatives. I'm thinking Tony cuts length out of the upper to make up for larger cubes when a more appropriate intake suggestion is more in order. Kudos for the test 96pushrod!

Reactions: 1

tmoss

· #44 · 4 mo ago

CDW6212R said:
That's what I worry about with a ported lower, how does it flow versus the upper. I'd like an intake ported for my 347, not an Explorer(I have one from you already), but hopefully with thoughtful care about tapering the ports sizes from the inlet and down, somewhat evenly.

I have an untouched Explorer upper plus that lower, and a used raw Edelbrock RPM II, and the one I want ported to use.

The stock length upper is the larger restriction once the lower is ported. What I'd like to see is a test of a reverse taper 1262 size ported lower vs a 1250 port ported lower just to get an idea of the true impact. Never seen that test before and we've never done it either.

Reactions: 2

tmoss

· #92 · 4 mo ago

rob said:
I offered up a tmoss lower in this post but there was no interest. In previous posts I asked Tom if he wanted to include one of his intakes in a comparison since he had so much to say about the big dog intake in previous posts and he said no.

You never proposed anything real to me in a PM or otherwise about how to move forward and who was paying for waht did you? Maybe think about why we would pass on that. Who's paying for what? If you want to bash me, then have a leg to stand on. How about that.........

Reactions: 2

tmoss

· #93 · 4 mo ago

Ed Curtis said:

Vena Contracta - that is a little too much imo......

Reactions: 1

tmoss

· #96 · 4 mo ago

rob said:
I never once bashed you, you said no And that is what i said.
if you are talking about my response to 945.0’s post, I never mentioned you, I said his intake was strewed. I know you didn’t screw it up, it was your son.
to be clear, I have not bashed you.

screwed not strewed

If you mean you offered up one of our intakes you already had, then that is my mis-read and that's on me. I don't know the name of 945.0 but if it's the intake that was done during my oldest son's (and Matt's brother's) death and burial, then yes Matt screwed up and should have waited longer to finish. We offered to return that one to us at our cost and re-do another. He sent it to a welder before that and so he declined which we understand, and he kept the intake. Then he asked for a replacement lower which we bought and sent to him. Then he wanted a refund on top (not made public). At some point you decide to cut your losses as he had already posted in the forum and the damage to our reputation was already done before a mutual agreement could be settled. We try to stand up and we've had very few true screw ups in about 3500 intakes and even less that were not settled amicably. Help you understand better?

See less See more

Reactions: 1

tmoss

· #107 · 4 mo ago

Enjoy_the_Ride said:
is that the top or bottom of the port? might of been able to get a thicker or thinner gasket to get better alignment. I hear the top of the port is most critical.

Normally, the short side is the highest velocity, so look at the flow path at every turn to know which side that is.......on a head, it is the floor at the SS turn at the bowl but at the port entrance...... then back that up into the intake.......

Reactions: 2

tmoss

· #121 · 4 mo ago

Putyoutorest said:
How come no one bother testing their ported parts to a aftermarket manifold? Lol

Quite a few over the years, maybe you just weren't here? Just a few I've filed over the years...

See less See more

8

Reactions: 1

tmoss

· #123 · 4 mo ago

Ok Tony, others probably are due to your statement.

tmoss

· #128 · 4 mo ago

Str8ballar said:
@tmoss

I find this one very interesting I have had a few people tell me it's a waist of my time to even test the TFR long runner that I have. They say it sucks. Crazy thing is it has the same lower as the TFR box. This is a prime example of why I like the GT40 intake many many times with a little work they out perform the aftermarket intakes. All but the box that is.
View attachment 1094663

I was always pushed to test case by case. I understand the underlying physics of why it's not a good idea but I was always one to say "ok let's try it and prove it one case at a time. Remember, we're not talking about pushing the limits like many high-end racing teams do. I just enjoy trying stuff out, I'm a product of my roots when that's all you had.

Reactions: 1

tmoss

· #129 · 4 mo ago (Edited)

ndmp40 said:
Plus, the poster mentioned "track" testing, read carefully. No dyno mentioned. So how did he get max hp and tq numbers????

wrong reference by me, was not relevant

tmoss

· #132 · 4 mo ago

65fasback said:
Why did that guy even try to put that intake on an engine in a truck that makes peak horsepower under 5000 RPM? What was the logic behind that?

What do you know about the truck? Don't assume......I'll see if I can find it again......

tmoss

· #147 · 4 mo ago

Nitrous SSC said:
So what’s the overall goal here comparing? What’s superior to a certain RPM? Average power?

My point of view is, you want to maximize average torque in the rpm band you intend to use.

Reactions: 1

tmoss

· #180 · 4 mo ago

I'll just throw this out there, most ethical people in this sport would never knowingly lie about a competitor. Tony seems to have no such ethics. Here is a photo he posted about his ported intake compared to one of ours that he probably thought we'd never see. Anybody with any experience with what a stock GT40/Cobra/Explorer flows 100% stock knows the number Tony says was one of our "ported" intakes flows knows it a total lie and is what a 100% stock intake flows. Even if a customer sent it and said it was one of our lowers, he would KNOW by looking at it if that was true or not. In the end, time tells all and people who have some idea of what is real and what is not KNOW. Tony preys on those on many who do not. Use him or don't but know who you're dealing with........

See less See more

Reactions: 1

tmoss

· #184 · 4 mo ago

Lamont86TA said:
Sorry I have to reply. The customer that was for said this is a Tmoss upper and lower. So that number represents that manifold flowed "BOLTED TOGETHER " Like the tape says. We don't flow a single piece on a 2 piece manifold. We only flow uppers and lowers bolted together. Our intake is upper with tb tunnel and lower ported. This is a apples to apple comparison.

We have a few manifolds you ported in shop right now! So what is the purpose of this? You can't spin this. So cut the with trolling.

WOW, you obviously do not know that a stock upper on a stock lower flows then, do you??!! A stock lower flows right at 215-220 cfm. Consistently, a stock upper adder to a lower shows a 5-10 cfm less. I guess you don't run the flow bench. Any HACK can get that to 220-230 cfm. Maybe let Tony do the talking about something you need more experience at? It's an obvious lie!!

tmoss

· #185 · 4 mo ago

Lamont86TA said:
This was your manifold we fixed before pictures

Our welder at that time repaired every hole!

OMG, you can't even READ the post - this was NOT our intake work. The poster even said "I had a Tmoss (actually Matt) ported GT40 already but it was an Explorer model number and I was afraid it wouldn't line up with my future Kenne Bell install. So I tracked down an F4 that was also already ported but not very nice." Do you UNDESTAND this means it was NOT our work or do you have serious cognitive disabilities??? Lee Boss - care to set this guy straight? So much pure lies and BS ..........

Reactions: 1

tmoss

· #187 · 4 mo ago

Lamont86TA said:
Hey T. Hack, I was the one that flowed it. We give a average, let me tell you what average means, add all the individual runners up, divide by 8. Hope you learned something. Try the old school mind games with to 2 year old. Since you so smart, answer this, why do we keep getting your customers manifolds to port after you ported it already? It says something for a customer to pay twice for something to be right. That means it wasn't to their satisfaction the first time, but you don't care, you got paid! Love the tag team trolling! Like the Road Warriors! Are you Animal or Hawk? Enjoy your day!

OMG, the numbers I posted WERE average. You obviously don't have much time on the flow bench. Here is what we and others have verified for stock GT40 family intakes. Show us where we are wrong and you are right.........

See less See more

2

Reactions: 2

tmoss

· #189 · 4 mo ago

I tried to hang back, but you can't expect someone who is being lied about to stand aside, or maybe you can........

Reactions: 4

tmoss

· #191 · 4 mo ago

Str8ballar said:
Ed may have stirred the pot on this one but I 100% get your point.

Thank you!!

Reactions: 1

1 - 18 of 209 Posts