gjc5500 Posted January 21, 2007 Author Share Posted January 21, 2007 Wow. this got alot of responses. i think im gonna try to find a sc at PnP and make a manifold for it. then on top of it... put 2 2bbl carbs or 1 4bbl carb on there sticking thru the hood. the old style rod looking scoop maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators RTz Posted January 21, 2007 Administrators Share Posted January 21, 2007 3 words for you... E, F, I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PapaCreech Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 hehehhe as i previously stated, this would be wonderful if someone could figure out a system for building it pretty sure i could do this but idotn even knwo where to start. Way otu of my depth here i think. LOL carb , EFI, it dosnt matter im still impressed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avrfan Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Eaton m90's are abundent and I think fairly straight forward to install. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted January 23, 2007 Administrators Share Posted January 23, 2007 I purchased an Eaton M-112 from a Jaguar for my SBC V-8 Z conversion http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=115326 and it doesn’t have the integral bypass that came on some of the other M-112 applications, (Ford Lightning, Cobra Mustangs etc). I am planning to install a remote bypass from Magna-charger http://www.magnusonproducts.com/bypass.htm and my plan is to use it as a boost controller of sorts. The Super charger will be geared, (pulley combos), to run at its max capable RPM at my engines max capable RPM which “should” be able to produce MORE boost/HP than I ant from this project if I wasn’t running a bypass. The plan is to have by-pass controlled via a boost controller through my WOLF V500 EMS. In theory this will allow more low end BOOST and flatter boost curve at mild to moderate boost levels with little loss. That’s the theory any how… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003z Posted January 24, 2007 Share Posted January 24, 2007 Interesting. How certain are you? 100% now, after reviewing some documents. They used that size for packaging more than performance. Even with the huge hood bulge, they couldn't go with a 90. It was a great 340whp upgrade, but it was pretty much not upgradeable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.