HOW MUCH POWER IS A SBC TUNNEL RAM WORTH? 355 SBC INTAKE TEST-TUNNEL RAM VS RPM AIR GAP VS VICTOR JR

[@edwardwood3622]

Had a friend with a 71 327/350 Vega, it went well and drove great ran low 13s. He then switched to a 30/30 cam, tunnel ram with 465s and a Vega converter, the car was insane ran high 11s. Total cost for the parts ~ $600 in 1988. He put it together in one weekend.

[@vinceyoung5912]

I used a Vega converter in my th400 it was so loose from a stop on hills.

[@gordocarbo]

@@vinceyoung5912 What was the vegas stall speed? Never knew about those Know some late model S10s were 24-2500 C4 guys liked to use those on 700rs

[@vinceyoung5912]

@@gordocarbo it was a small converter. 3000 at least

[@gordocarbo]

@@vinceyoung5912 thx!

[@drd1924]

What is a 30/30 cam?

[@JRCMechanical]

So this one time not long ago, the night before one of our local car shows I decided to install a tunnel ram that I expected to be for more show than go, it had been sitting on the shelf for a decade, it was an original offenhauser with a massive upper plenum from the 70s that I had bought at a swap meet for a completely different project and I was sick of looking at it, so I got to work re-sealing the 500cfm Carter competition series carbs that it came with and installed it all with a completely new MSD ignition system and all of this going on a 100% bone stock 350 that had been recently rebuilt and .030 over, stock 70s truck heads and cam, it had small primary long tube headers and mated to a 700r4, it was replacing the original intake and Q-jet that ran well in my open wheel roadster, after some quick tuning and a couple HUGE burnouts to say I was shocked with the seat of the pants difference it made would be an understatement!!! I never imagined it would work as well as it did on a stock 350, I’m a believer!!

[@generalsixty2133]

This shows why years ago boat guys always reached for the tunnel rams on the parts store top shelves. Plus it looks AWESOME!

[@Harrybowles1969]

Thanks Richard for testing ❤️👍

[@michaelcoger4626]

If you had added another 1000 rpms you would have seen the improvement that the tunnel ram was designed for. My 361 inch small block picked up 64 hp when I went from a Victor Jr and an 850 Holley. To a tunnel ram and 2 750 carbs at 7800 rpms. My motor was 12.5 to 1 and had 220 afr heads and had a .630 Crane roller cam. It brought my nostalgic gasser from 6.70 in the 1/8th to 6.30. Then I swapped to twin toilets and alky and dropped to 6.10.

[@richardholdener1727]

this cam would not go another 1000 rpm

[@PeggyParrow]

Will a bigger cam help the ram ?

[@kylemilligan752]

Runner length, runner length, runner length!!! Mr Holdener, you ROCK! ThankYou for all the hard work and data you share. There is a company called dashman making tunnel ram spacers for weiand tunnel rams. Like 1-4inch lengths. Might be cool to see it swing the torque curve. Stack them up for a carbed TPI torque curve?

[@lollipop84858]

Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length ! Runner length !

[@TT64NOVASS]

Joe Sherman (rip) consistently made 30 to 40 more HP than a single carb single plane , but his testing was mostly on 400/410 ci engines.

[@richardholdener1727]

Joe was awesome

[@SweatyFatGuy]

I am curious how much my Pontiac is making with a tunnel ram on it. The cubes are a bit more than 400, but now that I have it all set up and working, I can put it on another engine when this one gets something... more forceful.

[@Baron-Von-1973]

I'm going to look at a 73 Ford Mach-1 with 400 and a tunnel ram dual quad 351c adapter kit this weekend

[@roberthandy9420]

Never saw one that made more power on butt dino we ran tunnel ram back in late 70s early 80s , tunnel ram was the way to go back in the day lol

[@colinjohnson7663]

SBC vids are THE best. I'm only 29 but I'll still likely never build an LS. Love the old school stuff too much.

[@lollipop84858]

No one cares

[@gordocarbo]

They are very vailable and built from scratch with aftermarket parts cheaper to do than an ls. BOlts right in no hassles with wiring

[@toomanymodz]

I love these experiments. Thank you Richard.

[@tenorhowlermonkey3454]

Thanks Rich for the SBC videos! I had very good success with the Weiand TR but never tried the new Sheet metal TR Sniper from Holley.

[@Oldcomputer]

Would be interesting to see the current production Ebrock 7110 TR tested. The 7110 plus dual AVS 500 cfm carbs is a popular combo because it is sold as a kit from speedway.

[@truthtalker7535]

I had great success tunnel ram in the 80s

[@PeggyParrow]

The cam is taking a vacation early on, it may help the ram if the cam was able to rev to 7500. ?

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

The TR1Y is pretty ancient, that design is about 50-55 or so years old. It would have been interesting to see the tunnel ram with two 450 cfm carburetors, I'm thinking 900 cfm was plenty, and the 650 carburetors might have been big enough to hurt torque, and maybe they didn't work great with the plenum. It would also be interesting to see what the air fuel ratio was. I know you played with jetting, not saying you missed. Just saying we see a ton of power by working on making the fuel curve the engine wants. Just jetting doesn't necessarily get you there.

[@needadate]

Quite the opposite, the 650s are too small on the TR.

[@richardholdener1727]

650s are actually oversized for 500 hp

[@jeroldlafferty54]

You right in the 70's that intake was used for 7500rpm+launches

[@jasonjordan4672]

I agree with needadate and ronnie , needs more cfm for the tunnel ram , a set a valve springs would also help , my guess is the springs are going off in a hurry and the ram was tested last so suffered the most up top

[@mitchellferre1652]

​@@R2WMotorsportsYup

[@needadate]

Unless you happen to have a common plenum tunnelram, you need two carburetors individually as high-flowing as the carb used on a single carb intake for a given motor. Yes, that's individual flow - not combined. Regardless of layout or number of cylinders (as long we're talking fourstroke and the number is less than 16), there is only one (1) cylinder at a time being fed air and/or fuel from the plenum/carb. Thus, on a dual carb/dual plenum intake you need _each carb_ to be able to provide as much flow as on a single carb/plenum ditto - otherwise, it becomes a restriction and this of course hurts power output.

[@michaelblacktree]

I don't think I've ever seen a tunnel ram with a divided plenum. IIRC they all use a common plenum. That said, if you have a divided plenum with 2 throttle bodies, the plenums have more time to refill after each intake stroke. So you can use throttle bodies smaller than the single unit. But half the size of single unit might be too small.

[@richardholdener1727]

I have never seen a tunnel ram that feeds two distinct (separate) plenums from each carb and your theory that you need double the flow rate for two plenums is also inaccurate

[@PeggyParrow]

Me and my buddy just finished a 331 sbc gasser type and had the 600 carbs totally trickef out and the throttle response was wicked fast, been told it would it would not work ! I believe its the combination of the correct parts that work together. Been building sbc engines since 1970, but this one was the most exciting and satisfying build !

[@jackperry9369]

Appreciate all your content Richard

[@steveshafer4023]

I'd be interested to know what the jetting was on the tunnel ram carbs.... If you're too fat you're going to lose power.... a/f ratio is something that needs to be considered.... Frieberger did something similar on engine masters and the tunnel ram made more power everywhere except the very bottom end....so many factors need be to considered. BTW I've been running the same exact intake rebranded as the Eldebrock street ram for years starting with a 355 ci and now with a 383 ci the combination has worked great for me and looks amazing.... I've had no problems with drivability especially in stop and go traffic... works for me....

[@PeggyParrow]

Could it be the cam ?

[@edwardwood3622]

Those straight through mufflers need a certain amount of exhaust flow to become efficient where there is almost zero restriction.

[@richardholdener1727]

why do they need more flow to become efficient?

[@edwardwood3622]

@@richardholdener1727 from what I understand once you get enough flow the exhaust will pass right over the perforations instead of penetrating eliminating turbulence producing effectively a straight pipe.

[@keithsmith9889]

Been waiting for dual vs single... 😮❤

[@corvettejohn4507]

It would be nice to add to this test a good cross ram intake like the Edelbrock STR or the '68-'69 Chevy Z28 cross ram.

[@yarrdayarrdayarrda]

My personal 406 with AFR 245 heads makes 665 HP using a plenum modified Super Victor 4500, I did try a tunnel ram and twin 950's and although both combinations made similar power, the Super Victor had a much broader power curve, and therefor much more average HP and torque than the tunnel ram. The tunnel ram did look much cooler though.

[@transformationclass5054]

Interesting. I have a 406 with a dual tunnel ram set up. Seems like low end power is a bit weak.

[@lollipop84858]

​@@transformationclass5054 dual tunnel rams?? 2 tunnel rams?? Wicked!

[@rjlakosky7612]

Put some valve springs in the engine! Totally inconclusive test if you didn’t rev that engine to the rpm it should operate at

[@richardholdener1727]

agreed-missed it by 200 rpm

[@gordocarbo]

@@richardholdener1727 so you bamboozled them huh? J/K

[@OldDirtGuy]

While doing cool looking intake systems. I think it would be fun to test a Crower or Hilborn injection system updated to digital injection just to see how well it works and sounds.

[@richardholdener1727]

they r cool

[@EricErnst]

I just got an Edelbrock 7110 street tunnel ram that I'm planning to run on my mild roller 355. I can get a 4" spacer to go between the plenum and runners. It should really help the lower end torque. I have a baby cam in it. 202⁰/212⁰@.050"

[@richardholdener1727]

why would plenum volume help low end?

[@EricErnst]

@@richardholdener1727 it adds runner length, and to a lesser extent, overall plenum volume. The dual quad plenum bolts to the top of the runners on the 7110 street tunnel ram. The mounting flange between the plenum and base looks almost like a pair of 4 leaf clovers. So you can add runner length much like your experimental adjustable runner length intakes.

[@EricErnst]

@@BuzzLOLOL the runner length of the intake is 14.5". I know the TPI setup is something like 20". That would be ideal for low end torque, but the tpi stuff runs out of steam pretty early in the rev range. And I wanted to try out a tunnel ram sticking through the hood.

[@richardholdener1727]

My bad-I though you were talking about carb spacers-runner extensions could change things

[@gordocarbo]

Not sure Id do that. Extending runner length sure. Much larger plenum I wouldnt do. Thats like a stock cam you are running ...210/2teens is great for st torque on a 350 will still idle like a kitten

[@christophersnyder9232]

I'm curious about single carb tunnel ram setups in comparison.

[@peggyparrow2059]

Try headers that are 4 into 2 into 1, that combo may be best .

[@rogerstill719]

More carburetor on the tunnel ram. Two 750"s I think would fix the lack of upper RPM horsepower.

[@richardholdener1727]

so 1300 cfm wasn't enough for 500 hp?

[@needadate]

@@richardholdener1727 since it's not a common plenum, you had 650 cfm available - not 1300. See my post below.

[@needadate]

Yes, and since we're around the 500 hp mark even bigger carbs would most likely improve the output over those. There is zero (0) difference in individual carb flow requirement between a single and a dual plenum intake on the same engine. This is pure physics.

[@richardholdener1727]

I believe these had a connection in plenum, but if not, then you are saying that a 650 isn't enough to support aa 4 cylinder that makes 250 hp. Having tested this on the dyno on another sbc, you are incorrect.

[@gordocarbo]

@@richardholdener1727 Amazed how many try to correct you and the usual response is they heard...or the internet said.. Wow

[@keithsmith9889]

I expected to see general torque ad lower end power increases but I'm kinda surprised it didn't have a higher peak than a single card. But about exhaust I always wanted to try to make a variable type exhaust so it would scavage low but then at 4k or so open up for all that top end. I just think it would be fun to get the max everything

[@lollipop84858]

Your exhaust fantasy is referring to correctly designed (Elston) tri-y headers

[@xxAKlowriderZ71xx]

Hey Richard, have you ever done any dyno testing of scoops vs stacks, with and without filters, on tunnel rams? Thanks!

[@richardholdener1727]

stacks?

[@xxAKlowriderZ71xx]

the velocity stacks that mount atop the carbs, some use no filter, some use a screen with foam, and some use a filter with a lid. Shaped similar to a funnel. I know you’ve seen them before.

[@Thumper68]

The tunnel ram would of done better on more cubes.

[@george1la]

If not turbo'd why are long collectors not common. After all it is free total power under the curve. From what you showed and previous tests there seems to be no questioning of this fact. There is certainly room under the cars and some pipe is really cheap to buy and install.

[@richardholdener1727]

proper runner length is always a benefit

[@gordocarbo]

Was that cam a solid, hyd ft or roller? Remember that article. 500 was a big deal for a 350....remember in the 80s the 390-400hp recipe was 11-1 350 292 type hft cam ported 2.02 irons and of course The Berg had a Vic Jr on there lol. Isky 292 mega seemed to hit harder than the comp 292 magnum Id think you were losing valve control up top the TR should carry a bit more unless it was outta cam. Whaddya think Jedi Richard?

[@richardholdener1727]

roller

[@123pap]

Was the a roller cam? I think the tunnel ram wants more carb? 750's

[@richardholdener1727]

hyd roller

[@fullnoyz]

Hey Richard have you done a test on tunnel ram v dominator style manifold?

[@richardholdener1727]

on a small block?

[@fullnoyz]

@@richardholdener1727 yeah 355

[@davidncw4613]

Good stuff TY!!

[@23Roadster1]

That compression, cam, and springs are well suited for the single carb-dual plane combo. It's border-line stretched for the single plane. And it is totally wrong for the tunnel ram. A tunnel ram shines with high comp., much more cam ( high overlap decreases dynamic compression so it can live on premium pump gas ) and strong enough springs to let the TR eat at 7 to 8K where it's designed to run. THAT'S the purpose of a tunnel ram. As with everything automotive; it's all in everything working together! This video proves just that.

[@rtkl13]

Would you happen to know the lobe separation on the cam ?

[@dougpeirce726]

Which model of AFR heads, I didn't hear or see in the video.

[@richardholdener1727]

190

[@gordocarbo]

Vid said they were th e old afr 190s with a cnc job

[@gordocarbo]

He shows the results of all to eliminate redundant questions people are still asking My god watch the thing before posting. lol

[@mikie9077]

with these flows a pwr curve what would the1/4 mile drag results be?

[@richardholdener1727]

depends on vehicle

[@broz1969]

What kind of mufflers are those? Looks kind of like a flowmaster style, but i can't tell for sure. Just curious.

[@eliasmelendez1271]

So I'm trying to convince my friend to go with a tunnel ram with a dual efi throttle body injection using the super sniper. His engine is a 400ci sbc destroked to a 377 I think but his compression is 11.5:1 and runs on 93. I think the tunnel ram will wake that engine up by alot. What do you think he should go with?

[@richardholdener1727]

tunnel rams work well

[@gordocarbo]

WHy not 2 carbs way simpler cheaper no need for all the electronics, screen in the car etc

[@eliasmelendez1271]

@@gordocarbo the car is a daily/weekend warrior car. Last thing he wants is a car only doing 6 miles per gallon. Carbs are nice if the engine was a all out drag car but this is a car used quite abit more then a trailer queen. Plus he did do a tunnel ram with 2 efi holley super sniper systems. He is also running on coil packs vs a distributor. The car made 730whp 620wtq on e85. The compression was raised to 12.5:1 compression. I told him if he's not going to drive it as much but at least 3 times a week to run on e85. It also has a flex fuel kit installed. The camero hauls ass running low 10s so far. From being a mid 11s car.

[@bcbloc02]

Does collector length in front of a turbo have the same effects or is it less noticeable?

[@richardholdener1727]

I think it does

[@CarlosTrujillo-vh5dv]

Regret selling my 87 back in 07 now i have a 90 k1500 4x4 5.7 single cab im building runs perfect at the moment ac,heater works engine purrs nice and quiet unwanted noise..looking for a mild cam gona run 199cc afr heads convert my tbi back to carb and run a dual plane air gap,with a 750 cfm holley..just not shure what cam to run..i want a H roller for maintenance and reliable just dont know which option to go with..people say the 270hr is a good option befor having to upgrade to a 26-28 stall converter

[@bfromthed]

Looks like it needs a little more valve spring if dual plane and single plane nosed over at the same spot? Or is that just where you stopped the test?

[@dannytravis7118]

I have an important question for you about the 4.8 LS. I watched many of your videos and have seen you go to 7000 and 7500 rpm with the 4.8 because they like to Rev. That being said, how long can it maintain those kind of rpms or how much rpm can it handle for extended periods of time. I have a 21 ft Grady White boat with a 4.3 v6 mercruser engine. I have been told it's exactly the same block and heads as the 4.3 vortex in my Chevy truck. I took the boat out and normally cruise 3500 to 4000 rpm which at 4000 rpm is about 30 to 33 mph so mph is about 7 to 10 lower than rpm in thousands. I once ran up to 45 mph and had that 4.3 screaming at about 5500 rpm. I went for 5 minutes or less and got worried about blowing up the engine. Now I'm into remodeling the boat and was thinking about a 4.8 LS with a BTR truck Norris cam and springs and a 4 barrel intake and carb. If I did that how reliable, how many rpms could that engine take before I run the risk of slinging a rod or is there something else I need to do to help it last for longer periods of time at high rpm.

[@richardholdener1727]

The 4.8L will make a LOT more power (200 hp more) than your 4.3L, so you need to think about prop pitch and cavitation AND engine rpm. A properly tuned and cooled 4.8L will run 7000 rpm for a long time, but I doubt your combo will want to run there

[@dannytravis7118]

@richardholdener1727 if I can get it to 50 mph on the water would be great. Reason being she has a 100 gallon fuel tank which with the 4.3 is pretty efficient. I'm not sure the mpg yet. Speedometer is broken so I don't know how far for the fuel used. But when I get that figured out I want to take her to Florida and if I'm able to fuel wise cruise to the Bahamas. So that's the need for extra speed. 350 miles at 35mph is 10 hours of hard running. 6 hours at 50. Still a work out but more doable. That's the premise anyway if everything remains the same 6000 rpm should get me to the 50 mph I'm looking for. As for the prop pitch I will be looking at that first and discussing with boat repair experts. That and actually how to figure out fuel and distance equation so I don't run myself out of gas. I learned that steady running she just sips fuel. All day cruising at 2500 to 3000 rpm about 8 hours it only uses 9 to 10 gallon of gas. A lot of hard starts pulling tubes and skiers it used 50 gallons of gas in about 8 hours.

[@nessie42786]

I’d be worried that the stock outdrive might Not be up for the task.

[@dannytravis7118]

@BuzzLOLOL as for keeping it cool enough I need to ask a boat expert or mechanic. Reason being the way it is set up right now it pulls fresh water through the outdrive and pumps it into the engine constantly I want to make it a closed system with a radiator and electric fans. That way I wouldn't need to winterize it and I could take it out in cold weather and I wouldn't have to flush the engine when it goes out on salt water. For fresh water I would only need to lower the out drive to let it drain and salt water I'd still need to hose it out but I wouldn't have to worry about corrosion in the engine itself. I'm not worried about high speed just would like to get fast enough for longer cruises and not beat the boat to death trying to run 12 hours at 30 mph instead of 7 hours at 50

[@ldnwholesale8552]

LS and 7500. Crank may hold it but the rods will not. And I doubt they have usefull power at 7500 anyway

[@mikegregory3157]

what side holley

[@raypingley5733]

I have had a tunnel ram on about everything I owned The Holley pro dominator is the best tunnel ram I have ran. When weiand bought Holley that discontinued that in take. I still have it It’s the best

[@Chemically_Induced]

I have a fairly long sedan by modern standards (118.5" wheelbase Caprice PPV, L76/L77) I've heard that assuming sufficiently large headers/collector running into equivalent pipes, that I can step it down into the stock mufflers, because large pipes stop mattering so much towards the end of the run at the back of the car. has any of your testing shown anything relevant to that? they're heavy, but I'm wondering if keeping the stock axle back/mufflers is a big deal beyond sound.

[@richardholdener1727]

you need to see if stock mufflers hurt flow-they might

[@Chemically_Induced]

@@richardholdener1727 yeah. I know the charge cools and doesn't need as much diameter pipe, but restriction is still restriction. thx

[@richardholdener1727]

I understand the change in temp, but stock mufflers were designed with specific flow and noise cancellation in mind-not sure how large collectors would change the flow rate of the exhaust

[@Chemically_Induced]

@@richardholdener1727 I wasn't implying a large collector would compensate for a poor flowing muffler stack. I'm agreeing with you that if the mufflers are a restriction, they are a restriction. I just hadn't thought about that aspect and was thanking you for bringing my mind around to that aspect.

[@Demoralized88]

I know the Ford 4.6 and other engines from the 90s-2000s received 10-20HP factory rating differences with different exhaust options, along with other bigger cars. The more volume of tubing before the mufflers, the less it should matter as a flow restriction. That said, factory mufflers (especially before peak efficiency of the late 2000s-onwards) with chambers are an inherent flow restriction as they're designed to break up kind of 'linear' flow (exhaust gas impulses, thus sound pressure), muting distinct impulses into a low pressure puff. They're inherently restrictive to some degree, but this is largely dependent on exhaust volume to muffler volume and internal baffling. They directly fight and oppose port tuning ('scavenging', etc) but again the expansion volume before the muffler should reduce the effect. Chambered mufflers are by far the most effective at SPL reduction, though at the cost of restriction as stated. The internal baffling design was severely restrictive around the 90s, compared to say some aftermarket chambered muffler like the Flowmaster whatevers. A pushrod V8 has some of the lowest pressure and deepest tone waves, so they don't need true mufflers like a 370z or VTEC i4. You can easily get away with a decent flow-through 'muffler' like Dynomax Ultra Flo which I highly recommend, or other glass-pack large resonator that don't really impede flow at all. They're also way lighter, which is nice. I ran a Dynomax catback in a 2012 Mustang w/ short-tube headers and stock cats and they're quiet with lower tones and low-throttle pressures but become way louder with high throttle/load.

[@peted5217]

Great torque curve! TR's mostly useless on street, cept 4 Bling, sticken thru hood. Lo rpm torque thru 4500 rpm , where streeters spend 95% of time.

[@lollipop84858]

You obviously didn't see the dyno test. Tunnel ram has most torque where you mentioned

[@raypingley5733]

I have tried about all them. That pro dominator with two asp carbs from John Kyle It made over 700 horse It was awesome

[@raypingley5733]

Ado…..

[@raypingley5733]

Adp…….

[@sikrandall83]

Richard did you run it with a single 4 barrel top to see the difference between that and dual quads?

[@richardholdener1727]

nope

[@sikrandall83]

@richardholdener1727 maybe sometime in the future lol, none the less this is a great video. I remember the old adage that, "oh yeah tunnel rams are not streetable, top end only." Sure they are

[@Carl_Jr]

Engine Masters did that test. Either their most recent episode or the one prior. I could tell you the outcome but what fun is that? 😁

[@gordocarbo]

@@sikrandall83 Those are from guys that never could tune right. Long runners are awesome on the st

[@Carl_Jr]

Do you think putting a cutout before that muffler would have the same effect?

[@richardholdener1727]

anything that shortens the collector length

[@Carl_Jr]

​@@richardholdener1727Cool. That's like a 2-in-1. Put an RPM trigger that'll open the cutouts @ 4k-ish RPM and you get both gains! 👍

[@richardholdener1727]

that might be cool

[@royhinton3046]

With the issue at about 6200, valve float, ignition whatever that whole test was a. Waste of time, the differences of the intake are really going to show up at the high end. That motor needs to be capable of twisting 7500 to truly test the high rpm intakes.

[@richardholdener1727]

this cam and combo (or these intakes) will not going to make peak power anywhere near 7500

[@B4Ctom1]

Stealth Ram (efi) vs Tunnel Ram (carb)

[@jrsgarage3244]

Gotta run right cam/rpm👍

[@richardholdener1727]

#wrongcam

[@timleonard86]

Tunnel ram probably would have shinned alot more down low had you used annular boosters instead of straight leg

[@Anarchy-Is-Liberty]

Frankly, I believe your bad valve springs screwed the entire test!

[@richardholdener1727]

or at least the last 200 rpm

[@gordocarbo]

Hyd roller..can only spin them so high anyways.

[@Guns_N_Gears]

Tunnel ram 4 the win 👍

[@sstevocamaro]

Good test with the old school pre Eliminator AFR’s

[@gordocarbo]

Love those old 190...ported a set that did every bit as well as the eliminators with a 2.02 valve Heavy piece of alum, lots of room to port. Elims...forget about it!

[@johnsheetz6639]

I would get you guess you could get 600 with the tunnel ram.

[@needadate]

Not with a 650 carb.

[@gordocarbo]

could but not with that combo

[@twotwocold]

Same cam on all intakes. Tunnel ram likes high lift💯 tunnel ram wins when than cam gets big😉

[@richardholdener1727]

#wrongcam

[@shaneshane1379]

That old ram isn't very good. I always liked the Holly pro dominator ram. Tunnel rams should increase the over all averages.

[@beestoe993]

Clearly not all tunnel rams are created equal. Without big cubes and rpms the tunnel ram concept is just for show. It's a trick best left to pro stockers imo.

[@richardholdener1727]

That is correct that tunnel rams are not all the same, but the concept works well with the right tunnel ram on the right motor. Definitely Not just for Pro Stock.

[@beestoe993]

@@richardholdener1727 What does a tunnel ram designed for street use offer over any other street manifold?

[@gordocarbo]

@@beestoe993 More torque, longer runner

[@beestoe993]

@@gordocarbo Wrong. Tunnel rams are a single plane design. Dual plane manifolds will make way more torque on a street engine. Longer runners yes, that is is to promote velocity/rpms. But has to be proportionate to the specific engine.

[@stevewheat9030]

Tunnel rams work.... been running one of years.... on the street..

[@ldnwholesale8552]

Now try and fit the tunnel ram under a standard bonnet. And try driving it at 1500 rpm. Will not happen. The Victor fits under most bonnets, though generally a 2" spacer livens them up considerably. But then does not fit under the bonnet! For a 6000 rpm engine the 850 was way too big, you ned to run 7000 rpm at least to make use of it.

[@gordocarbo]

Who drives a cammed sb at 1500 rpm?

[@roykrossin8343]

And what’s it worth on a bbc ??

[@richardholdener1727]

those vids are up

[@tonykomer2997]

You jeed to stop the focus of top vs bottom power and tq and give the comparison of the total areas under the entire curve of each hp and tq. In a street rig and frankly even in many comp it's more critical unless you have universal access to tons of different transmissions with various gearing ratios as well as diff ratios. Who cares about just the top end gain if you must keep rpmsbbetween 5500 - 6500? Seriously you are going to have a trans and rear end gearing that will allow you to hold your rpm band to only 1k -2k total to stay in that narrow advantageous range!?! Looking at the ones with much broader improved perf you are showing nearly 2x the gains vs the top end bias units and across from off idle to 5k rpms. On the street it's not even close. Gaining 2x the high end gains and over 4000 rpm range vs the high end with half as much gain over also half the rpm band of at most 2k. So it's lije gaining 30 hp from 2-5k vs gaining 15 hp fromm5.5k-6.5k. So under the curve average your actually loosing 15 hp with the high end setup vs what you getdual balanced. The dual plane 4pm should never be called a low end bias. It's a balanced band performer as its power is balanced across the entire band. It just does not have its setup severely bias to a very narrow band up high. That is a strip only value.

[@richardholdener1727]

if only I showed the entire hp and torque curves and all the gains for ech test!