Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oval port Pro Flo XT?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Oval port Pro Flo XT?

    With all the oval port BBC out there I am surprised Edelbrock doesn't offer a pro flo xt in the oval port configuration. It would also be very complimentary to the E-CNC 325 heads. This is a setup I would like to use. Wondering what Edelbrock's thoughts are on this.

  • #2
    Oval vs rectangle debate was done a long time ago.

    Rectangle is the high performance version...... Period.

    Oval is the most common low performance that people would start out with..... Because it was the most mas produced.

    Edelbrock 100% supports both types. They make many intakes, and heads for both.


    The XT style of intake is a true high performance piece. That when purchased. Can be installed on "both" types.
    So later on if you decided to go with the performance orientated square port heads. You don't have to purchase another intake manifold.
    At 43,861 MPH Elon Musk now owns the fastest car in this Galaxy

    Comment


    • #3
      I realize that the oval port is the lower performance of the two, not like I do not have any experience with BBC. The concern is that a rectangle port intake, while it will fit, is not a good fit to the oval port head and if you are using the E-CNC 325 heads it is not for a non performance application. Therefore if producing both performance heads and intakes in everything else why not the XT. If the Xt is an oval port to match the 325 heads it may be theorized that the vacuum signal could be improved and the fuel injection optimized for a larger cam such as the 2263 Rolling Thunder. I am believing this would be an excellent performer for the street or strip on a not so large engine, because if you are going to go big, go big 632's are not that high $ these days comparably.

      Comment


      • #4
        #3557 and #3567 are no longer made.......your like 8 years to late.
        At 43,861 MPH Elon Musk now owns the fastest car in this Galaxy

        Comment


        • #5
          Old thread, sorry. I'm sitting on an oval port version of the XT manifold and am curious why they were discontinued. Are they complete dogs?
          Did they discover a casting problem? Flow issues? Building a 496 with a mild cam for low end grunt, low rpm double overdrive cruising. Will it be good for this application?

          Thanks,
          Pugsy

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by 123pugsy View Post
            Old thread, sorry. I'm sitting on an oval port version of the XT manifold and am curious why they were discontinued. Are they complete dogs?
            Did they discover a casting problem? Flow issues? Building a 496 with a mild cam for low end grunt, low rpm double overdrive cruising. Will it be good for this application?

            Thanks,
            Pugsy
            i just finished up a .030 over 9.8 502 that touched 698 hp w afr 300s and a modded oval port xt intake. ran out of tb at end w open headers, had to do some light mods to it to get rated flow

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by smittyseng View Post

              i just finished up a .030 over 9.8 502 that touched 698 hp w afr 300s and a modded oval port xt intake. ran out of tb at end w open headers, had to do some light mods to it to get rated flow
              Thanks. I'm looking at 600 LB/FT torque at 4000 RPM's. From what you mention, I should be fine then. HP, maybe 550. 290 GM heads.

              Comment

              Working...
              X