dual vs single plane manifolds
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 14 of 79

Thread:
dual vs single plane manifolds

  1. #1
    Senior Member Factory502's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    100

    Default dual vs single plane manifolds

    after speaking with several motor guys about there thoughts on intake manifolds, many are favoring a dual plane manifold- granted I understand alot depends on the motor- however, seems that more jetboat guys run single plane manifolds over dual ( tunnel, team Gs, victors series, torker etc.) if dual planes are the way to go, why are there so many of the others???

  2. Remove Advertisements
    PerformanceBoats.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    El Cajon, CA.
    Posts
    3,605

    Default

    Hey how are you doing? Hopefully well. I think it would depend on application. A boat that does it's duty as a ski boat or cruiser probably would benefit from a dual plane because it's torque and HP curves are lower in the RPM range, whereas a boat that does it's duty as hauling asss would benefit more from a single plane intake.

  4. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Kingman/Golden Vly, Az
    Posts
    1,278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hotrod56cars View Post
    Hey how are you doing? Hopefully well. I think it would depend on application. A boat that does it's duty as a ski boat or cruiser probably would benefit from a dual plane because it's torque and HP curves are lower in the RPM range, whereas a boat that does it's duty as hauling asss would benefit more from a single plane intake.
    very well put, not too mention the driveability at slower speeds with no loading up ...i love mine ...just my .02 cents

    FastRat

  5. Remove Advertisements
    PerformanceBoats.com
    Advertisements
     

  6. #4
    Senior Member CK7684's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    550

    Default

    Mostly depends on what RPM your running most of the time, and your overall end goal...

  7. #5
    Senior Member hotbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    lake Ouachita AR
    Posts
    4,677

    Default

    there is alot of arguing on what is best for a jet.they are different than cars and v-drives.


    i ran a rpm air gap for a few years thought it was the shit,then 1 day talking with the seastrum clan jac seastrum and his son scott.they convinced me that the single was the way to go{they preffer a t-ram but i hate them}.so i bought a very nice dart single plane intake off of them and hello big difference.

    i dont understand what might make you think it will load up at slow speeds and be no good at pulling skiers and such doesnt really make sense with a jet.but then again just my 2 cents.

    if i was talked into a dual i wouldnt run a low profile dual,atleast get a higher rise dual plane like the rpm air gap.hope this helps travis

  8. #6
    mo balls than $cents$ IMPATIENT 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    hugo,okla
    Posts
    11,729

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hotrod56cars View Post
    Hey how are you doing? Hopefully well. I think it would depend on application. A boat that does it's duty as a ski boat or cruiser probably would benefit from a dual plane because it's torque and HP curves are lower in the RPM range, whereas a boat that does it's duty as hauling asss would benefit more from a single plane intake.
    x2 big heavy boats that won't ever see past 5400 do well with a dual plane, boats that are more performance built and will see the upper rpm range of the motor more than the bottom benefit from singles.


    i herd trav(hotbo) put a water bong intake on his bbc and now it chews asssss mornin bud

  9. #7
    Senior Member hotbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    lake Ouachita AR
    Posts
    4,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IMPATIENT 1 View Post
    x2 big heavy boats that won't ever see past 5400 do well with a dual plane, boats that are more performance built and will see the upper rpm range of the motor more than the bottom benefit from singles.


    i herd trav(hotbo) put a water bong intake on his bbc and now it chews asssss mornin bud
    yeah thats rightmorning to you bud.i still say try both if you can and make sure they are good quality intakes and see which one you prefer

  10. #8
    Senior Member CK7684's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    550

    Default

    I dont see what difference it would make being a jet, seeing as my engine doesnt turn much over 5000 rpm...
    Only thing is, jets dont generally cruise at lower rpms (below 3000)

  11. #9
    steelcomp was here
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    n/e TN
    Posts
    26,269

    Default

    Most single plane intakes have the edge over a dual plane at about 3000-3500+ rpm. Dual planes really shine over single planes below 2500 or so. Since there's really very little load on most jets below 3000 rpm, there isn't much benefit in using a dual plane. However, there is a significant advantage in using a single plane above 3500rpm, especially if you're cammed correctly. If your cam and intake aren't complimenting eachother, then it's apples and lemons. If you're just bolting a new intake on an otherwise stock engine, you'll probably get better performance from the dual plane. Do a proper cam upgrade and a single plane is the best bet on a jet.
    If God is your co-pilot, change seats!
    Acts 2:38, the perfect answer to the perfect question.

  12. #10
    Senior Member hotbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    lake Ouachita AR
    Posts
    4,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CK7684 View Post
    I dont see what difference it would make being a jet, seeing as my engine doesnt turn much over 5000 rpm...
    Only thing is, jets dont generally cruise at lower rpms (below 3000)

    exactly how many jets cruise at under 3 grand.

    a jet doesnt build rpm like a car

    i agree with steel 100 percent

  13. #11
    Resident Ford Nut Sleeper CP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    San Diego County
    Posts
    10,072

    Default

    I have a dumb question, (assuming it's a 502 he is putting the manifold on) wouldn't an RPM air-gap work great up to 4,000 -4,500 and a single plane out perform it above that ? If he's not building a racer or if he is not going to spin it above 5,200 or so I might chose the Air Gap... Is that wrong thinking ?

    A link or two:

    http://www.popularhotrodding.com/tec...evy/page2.html


    Here's a 496 test with a dual plane to 6,500.
    http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles...ads/index.html

    Somewhere there's a back to back test single vs dual : This might be it.

    http://books.google.com/books?id=Y98...sult#PPA100,M1

    Sleeper CP
    Last edited by Sleeper CP; 12-12-2008 at 02:03 PM.

    "Dark Sarcasm"
    Going fast is only half the fun ... what you make go
    fast is the other half.
    " A Government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have"

  14. #12
    mo balls than $cents$ IMPATIENT 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    hugo,okla
    Posts
    11,729

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sleeper CP View Post
    I have a dumb question, (assuming it's a 502 he is putting the manifold on) wouldn't an RPM air-gap work great up to 4,000 -4,500 and a single plane out perform it above that ? If he's not building a racer or if he is not going to spin it above 5,200 or so I might chose the Air Gap... Is that wrong thinking ?

    Sleeper CP
    you would think. i replaced the single plane intake on my bbf 460 taylor sc with a air gap intake, no other mods and it picked up 3mph and 250rpms over the victor that was on it. i'm sure the pick up was due to increase torque where i needed it.it never saw more than 5300rpms max

  15. #13
    Senior Member bp298's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    LHC
    Posts
    6,570

    Default

    for over 10 years, i ran an old edelbrock torker II single plane on what was basically a stock 396. that engine never saw anything over 4800 in that jet. it ran fine, idled fine, but the old holley 850 required frequent attention.
    then, 20 years ago, i was talked into replacing it with a performer. it ran fine too, but there was really no measurable difference between 'em that i could tell.

  16. #14
    Glendale Arizona Squirtcha?'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Glendale Arizona
    Posts
    2,368

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bp298 View Post
    for over 10 years, i ran an old edelbrock torker II single plane on what was basically a stock 396. that engine never saw anything over 4800 in that jet. it ran fine, idled fine, but the old holley 850 required frequent attention.
    then, 20 years ago, i was talked into replacing it with a performer. it ran fine too, but there was really no measurable difference between 'em that i could tell.
    My experience was the same as Bob's. Torker II single plane with a 750 cfm Holley on a basically stock BBF 460 running 4600 rpm (Aggressor AA impeller). Switched to a Weiand Stealth dual plane, everything the same with the exception of the manifold swap and ran the same rpm at the same speed. No difference.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in


Tags for this Thread

Digg This Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95