I had a stock 1956 4V intake on the +060 over 312 dyno mule so I could sort out some Holley Teapot, Carter WCFB, and Rochester 4V carbs in preparation for the upcoming dual quad intake test.  The peak power numbers were so dismal I had to take a second look at the carbs to insure that the secondaries were opening up; the carbs were working just fine.  Final conclusion: the 1956 ECZ-A intake is obviously very restricted compared to the stock 1957 ECZ-B intake.  It’s no wonder that so many of those ’55 and ’56 Fords that had dual quads installed back in their day had a significant increase in performance.

Here are the peak HP numbers for three different intakes used on the dyno mule with a set of mildly ported 113 heads.  All these values are with the same carb just to keep all the intake comparisons on a level playing field.

– 240HP at 5100 rpm - ECZ-A Teapot, stock unported

– 276HP at 5200 rpm - ECZ-B Large flange, stock unported

– 311HP at 6000 rpm - Out of the box Mummert aluminum, stock unported

While the Teapot intakes are obviously good daily driver manfolds, the step up in performance in just changing to the ECZ-B intake is more than impressive.  Ford engineers were on top of their game in ’57.

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)

Hollow Head (12/18/2012)

---

Ted, please, give us fair hp numbers with all tested at 5000 rpm. We all know 5100 rpm  and 6000 rpm are not the same. As at our dyno sessio we got about 10 to 13 hp more with every 100 rpm increase it sure makes difference.

What was stated above were the peak HP numbers and the different manifolds do peak at different rpm values.  But I see what’s being asked so here’s a chart with the HP values in 500 rpm increments that should make everything clearer.  All this is still with the 750 carb as that's the only data sitting in front of me right now.  I'll have to dig deeper for the other carb data.

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)