I think I may have the incorrect part numbers for the 4bbl below. MP
Catalog lists them as 2/4bbl and the picture looks like a 2bbl. May need
some help here.
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Jamie Calder" <JCalder3@cfl.rr.com>
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 6:18 PM
To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
Subject: Re: DML: M1
> Thanks Bernd and Jon. Here's some Summit pricing to go by:
> 2bbl $582
> 4bbl $354
> 4 bbl $228 cheaper!
> There's cheaper prices elsewhere but all have over a $200 difference.
> Depending on how the engine is looked at, do I need the P5007790 right
> linkage or P5007791 left linkage?
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: <jon@dakota-truck.net>
> Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 5:53 PM
> To: <dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net>
> Subject: Re: DML: M1
>
>>
>> "Jamie Calder" <JCalder3@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Any suggestions on which M1 for a NA 408? 2bbl or 4bbl? The 4 bbl
>>> seems to
>>> be about $200 cheaper but I'd get which ever has better performance.
>>> I've
>>> heard that a 4bbl looses to much low end but that's not the case with a
>>> 408...
>>
>>
>> Ouch! $200 *cheaper*? Only a few years ago (ok, maybe several),
>> the entire manifold was $200! :-(
>>
>> I don't know if this will help you out or not, there is some
>> limited dyno information on the 4bbl here:
>>
>> http://www.steigerperformance.com/benefits/dyno
>>
>> The comparison graphs are from DMLer Bob Tom's '97 318. On that
>> particular truck, the 4bbl actually made more low end torque than the
>> stocker (though there was a hole in the 3500-4000rpm range; I'm not
>> sure if that is a 4bbl characteristic or just that particular truck).
>> When you were referencing low end losses, I'm not sure if you were
>> comparing the 4bbl to stock or the 4bbl to the 2bbl; the 2bbl may very
>> well make more low end than the 4bbl, unfortunately I don't know for
>> sure since I have not seen any dyno comparisons.
>>
>> Regarding the low end, if you are able to determine that one or
>> the other makes less power in that range, that may not necessarily be
>> the end of the discussion, depending on your intended use for the
>> vehicle. In a truck, where you have a terrible front/rear weight
>> bias, an engine with a soft bottom end may not be such a bad thing; it
>> may give you an opportunity to get hooked up before all the ponies come
>> on-line without having to put a lot of money into the suspension setup.
>>
>> Anyhoo, just thought I'd chime in in case any of that is useful to
>> you. Whichever manifold you end up with, they are both excellent, and
>> either would be a nice improvement over the stocker.
>>
>> --
>> -Jon-
>>
>> .- Jon Steiger -- jon@dakota-truck.net or jon@jonsteiger.com -.
>> | '96 Kolb Firefly, '96 Suzuki Intruder, Miscellaneous Mopars |
>> `-------------------------------- http://www.jonsteiger.com --'
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 21 2008 - 10:10:56 EDT