Sounds like a good place for it Frank.  Maybe even a pressure activated solenoid that ran some through blower inlet under boost. May help regulate inlet temp a bit. Nothing like a high speed blender to get it all whipped up.


http://ford-y-block.com 

20 miles east of San Diego, 20 miles north of Mexico

John, 
         How would a cast iron, unported "B" intake work with e85?  Mixture variation issues?  Use a supercharger to create some heat  and probably help atomize the fuel? 

Frank/Rebop

Bristol, In ( by Elkhart) 

I've seen this manifold up close, I like it a lot, these guy's do a good jod.

Cliff 

AFR 11.5 sounds like a little bit richer side.
We are using 12 to 12.5 but E85 seems to be quite forgiving for different mixtures.


Hyvinkää, FI

Royce the AF meter was gas calibrated. The stoich we were looking for was about 11.5:1 on the E-85.  The motor did make some decent power and one of the carburetors had slightly better tq even with the distribution spread.
 The E-85 was a real eye opener as to how the extra volumes could effect the distribution. 
We ran the car with the manifold as dynoed for about 3 races. The manifold was pulled and floor was given the full cheese grater treatment and time was spent texturing the runners.  The car picked up .04 et and 1.2 mph on the gasoline.  The other thing we noticed was that it helped the pk rpm. Early on when we tried raising the shift point 200 rpm to 7400 it didn't pick up. After the manifold work it liked being revved. 
  It was interesting to see back to back I would have to say that anything could be done to improve the atomization or vaporization of the E-85 would help.
We discussed taking one of the water outlets and circulating it under the plenum before connecting back to the Y connection. But that is for a later date.
 
  Vaccum  Secondary carbs seem do a much better job of controlling AF ratio under initial loading on the dyno.   We were dynoing a motor one time with a double pumper carb and it was down 15 ft/lbs  initial loading.  After we had done this a few times we decided to hold it there and see how long it took for the accelerator pump shots to clear out.  It took 4 seconds best I can recall.  The motor jumped up 15 ft/lbs .


http://ford-y-block.com 

20 miles east of San Diego, 20 miles north of Mexico

Frank/Rebop

Bristol, In ( by Elkhart) 

If the carburetor is properly sized, then WOT performance will be the same with either a vacuum secondary or double pumper carburetor assuming tuning is optimal with each.  The problem with a double pumper carb or being perfectly sized for a particular engine combination is it’s only properly sized in a given set of circumstances.  If anything changes (put air density at the top of the list) then the double pumper carb is either too large or too small for a particular engine combination.  Because the secondaries on a vacuum secondary carburetor open only as much as is in demand based on the primary bore air flow, then by design it’s easy to use a vacuum secondary carb that is intentionally oversized for a combination and always have a carburetor that will not be undersized.  Likewise, it will not be oversized either by lieu of the secondary blades only opening the amount that’s needed.

The vacuum secondary carbs are capable of much stronger torque numbers in the lower rpm band where the secondaries are not open as much as would be seen on a double pumper carburetor that’s being run the same way.  Faster air flow as a result of reduced secondary throttle opening enhances the torque.  This is why I ran a vacuum secondary carb in the EMC competition.  I had five similarly sized carbs to work with; four were double pumpers and one was a vacuum secondary model.  After each carb was fine tuned, all were the same from 2800 rpms and above.  It was that single vacuum secondary carb that was much stronger in the 2500-2800 rpm band than the others and based on this, that was the carb that was selected to run on the Y at the Engine Masters Challenge.  That is also the same model carb that’s being used on my Y powered altered roadster.

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)

Ford 2 valve 4.6's. The Crown Vic motor.

Frank/Rebop

Bristol, In ( by Elkhart) 

John  Interesting Info..I have burned a fair amount of E-85 here are a couple observations.. I think your distribution issue would be similar if the manifold material is cast.  Did you put your hand on the manifold after a pull?  Ice cold.. Latent heat of vaporization sucks up all the heat, even if cast aluminum.  So if the manifold relies on vaporization to get good distribution, the E-85  or Alky would not give good results.. I have not found that E-85 makes any more power than gasoline,  either  carb or injected.. They are about equal.. The advantages of E-85 are cost, octane rating, and wider tuning window. Were the A/F readings you mentioned from Lambda sensor calibrated for gasoline?  Stoich for E-85 is around 9 to 1. Can't wait for the prototypes of that cast tunnel ram

Usually a good surface prep on the runners is enough to keep atomization up.  A little bit of temperature goes along ways as far as vaporization is concerned. 
 One part of the story on the single plane manifold that has not been shared until now is that when we dynoed the engine we also tried it on E85.
Using 8 O2 sensors we were surprised that it has slightly better fuel distribution than the dual plane. We did our initial testing with vp110 on both manifolds.
 After we felt like we had the motor pretty well tuned up we switched carburetors and fuel over to E85. That's when the party started.  The a/f ratio variation between cylinders opened up a bunch.  It went from having 1.5 points of AF from all 8 cylinders to about 5 points of variation.  Oh yeah 10.0:1 on the richest and 15.0:1 on the leanest.
   If you look at the Y block magazine article in one of the color pictures you can see if you look real close the readings of all 8 cylinders and you can see the kind of spread I'm talking about.
 We tried 3 different E85 carburetors that day. None of them matched the power or distribution of the gasoline.  My belief was that the tin manifold could not hold enough heat to get the E85 to vaporize.. I feel if the manifold had a cast piece and had a rougher surface texture the story would be different.
  


  On another topic having your fuel injectors or fuel delivery farther away from the valves is a better deal than getting them too close.   I know its not what you see on your wife's new car out in the drive way, but what OEM's  are trying to accomplish  and what performance oriented people are trying to accomplish are very different.  It does help solve fuel distribution issues and that is good, it also however makes them very camshaft and header sensitive, and that is bad, especially in a sequential firing mode. Many times the OEM's can get the injector firing to close to the exhaust valve closing and it really limits what you can do for camshaft.  Header scavenging, a thing that performance engines rely on can become a detriment.  
OEM's have also struggled with injector targeting hitting the cylinder wall, washing the cylinder down and killing the rings and piston skirts.

 


http://ford-y-block.com 

20 miles east of San Diego, 20 miles north of Mexico