Using the fibre or composition gaskets under the exhaust manifolds does speed up the tendency for the exhaust manifolds to crack or break. Unequal expansion rates of the manifold by lieu of poor heat dissipation when using the fibre gaskets would be the explanation for this. By the original design, the exhaust manifolds were to be a metal to metal fit to the heads. The larger trucks used a metal gasket that incorporated a shield to keep the heat off of the valve covers but it is a metal gasket without any fibre backing and helps to promote better equal heat transfer from the exhaust manifold back to the head versus using the fibre backed gaskets. A very thin film of ‘red’ RTV on the exhaust manifolds in lieu of using any gaskets does seem to give the best exhaust manifold life while still being leak free.

.

Here are some links to past threads giving more info on the metal truck exhaust gaskets. I have had these on my own ’55 Customline for about twenty five years now and they do slow down that exhaust manifold breakage issue when compared to using the fibre style of gaskets.

http://forums.y-blocksforever.com/FindPost5884.aspx

http://forums.y-blocksforever.com/FindPost59691.aspx

http://forums.y-blocksforever.com/FindPost22380.aspx

• TED, i will look forward to next issue of mag to view the results of your hard work and test results, but am curious how did the offy cross ram adaptors fair against normal setups, i know ! i cant wait for mag, ha,ha. Thank you. regards bill.

Bill. The crossram setup actually helped the performance of the ‘hogged out Edelbrock #257 to the tune of 67 additional horsepower. On the flip side of this and using a properly ported Edelbrock FM255 intake, the crossram setup cut the peak numbers back by 26 horsepower. The looks of the crossram adapters on the dual quad intake sure looks impressive though. For a Saturday night cruiser, the looks would outweigh any performance differences as the setup idled and throttled up just fine.

Hutz 292 (6/18/2013)

---

Well we are trying engine number two for the overhaul. The machine shop called and block is not usable. So he went to a farm and found a 312 from a 56 Mercury. He had to pull then engine and he brought if over today. THIS IS WHAT WE FOUND!!!!!



AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

That’s a serious “OUCH” and a real mess to boot. I pulled apart a 272 that looked similar to that. While I managed to salvage the ‘G’ heads, just about everything within the block itself was pretty much junk.

That’s the wide spaced (‘56 Mercury?) intake which lends itself nicely to a variety of carb pairs. Adapters which will allow Carter AFB, Edelbrock, Holley 4160’s, or Demon carbs can be purchased from a variety of sources. Here’s the link to the adapter offered by Speedway Motors.

http://www.speedwaymotors.com/Universal-Carb-Adapter-Tapered-Port,69.html

Here’s a picture of a Edelbrock FM255 intake which is very similar to the intake you have with a pair of carb adapters installed.

John. As you’ve observed, the ECZ-C and FM255 dual quad intakes do work with the larger diameter distributors regardless of the rearward placement of the carb. The extended height of the cap on the MSD 8383 distributor does make it a bit touchy in regards to clearing the vacuum secondary diaphragms on both the Teapot and ’56 Carter WCFB carbs though. I had to install up to 1” of spacer under those particular carbs to clear the spark plug wires at the cap when using the Merc ECZ-C or Edelbrock FM255 intakes during the dual quad test. To date, the only documented instances I have for the ECZ-C dual quad intakes is it being used on the ’56 Mercs. It strikes me unusual that the ECZ-C casting number is actually used on the 1956 dual quad intakes while the ECZ-B casting number is introduced as the 1957 iron 4V intake. Just some ramblings here.

.

Thanks to Dennis, we now know that Schmeller Aluminum Foundry in Cleveland cast ~5500 ECG-D dual quad intakes for the 1957 Ford model run. This number appears to also include over the counter sales. Many of the ECG 2X4 intakes are identified either with a plain S or a S cast within a diamond on their bottoms which is indicative of castings produced by Schmeller.

Looking good guys. What kind of final compression ratio are you aiming for?

It’s only the 1956 and 1957 Ford dual quad intakes that need a ‘lowered’ valley pan. The Fenton, Edmunds, and Edelbrock dual quad intakes do work with the stock valley covers. Even the 1956 Mercury ECZ dual quad intakes work with the standard valley covers. In lieu of finding a factory‘recessed’ valley cover, the stock cover can be modified so it’s lower where the interference problem occurs. Here’s one example of a cover that was modified for use with the Ford dual quad intakes.

Doug is right in that the picture I posted of the modified valley pan has a much deeper recess than is necessary. Whoever built that cover originally took no chances when it came to clearance.

.

Here are a couple more pictures. The top picture is the factory dual quad valley cover while the second picture is the cover for the marine application which could also be potentially used with a factory dual quad intake if removing and blocking the carb air inlets.