[DeTomaso] WTB: Ford C9OX-D 302 Intake for Goose or F4BEdelbrock

Will Kooiman wkooiman at earthlink.net
Wed Dec 31 23:26:27 EST 2008 

I agree.  Good info.

What really surprises me are the comments about the Torker 289.  I had a 302
in a 68 Mustang with a Torker, Holley, headers, and a medium sized solid
cam.  The rest was 100% stock.  It had a toploader, but only 2.80 gears.  It
was very fast - at least low 13's.  It was dead under 2500 rpms, but after
that it pulled like crazy.  It wasn't a big town, but I beat a 340 Dart (my
brother), 351C Mach 1, 440 Charger, 340 Cuda, 350 Chevelle, plus several
Camaros and Corvettes.  My only loss was to a motorcycle.

The only other intake listed that I saw in the 80's was the F4B.  We
considered it a dog.  At the time, I could have bought it for $15.  I guess
I should have tried it.

-----Original Message-----
From: detomaso-bounces at realbig.com [mailto:detomaso-bounces at realbig.com] On
Behalf Of Charles Engles
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 9:27 PM
To: Daniel C Jones
Cc: detomaso at realbig.com
Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] WTB: Ford C9OX-D 302 Intake for Goose or
F4BEdelbrock

Dear Dan,


             You are an astounding source of Ford engine 
information.......!!



                            Wow,  Chuck Engles


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Daniel C Jones" <daniel.c.jones2 at gmail.com>
To: "detomaso, mailing list" <detomaso at realbig.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 9:15 PM
Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] WTB: Ford C9OX-D 302 Intake for Goose or 
F4BEdelbrock


>> So, am looking for an old Ford C9OX-D (C9OE-D) factory aluminum piece, 
>> may
>> be lettered near the t-stat opening as FORD, SHELBY, COUGAR, TIGER, or 
>> blank,
>> as Ford had them made up a few different ways...but all the same intake!
>
> The C90X intake was developed for the Muscle Parts 351W head swap.
> Ford only made them two ways, with either a blank pad (as shown in
> the Ford Muscle Parts catalog or with FORD lettering.  All the other
> versions are copies and do not perform as well.  Also be aware that
> the Ford lettered and blank versions have been reproduced as well.
> The real versions have OECO stamped in very small letters on the
> bottom side (back corner on thermostat side).
>
>> Another option is an Edelbrock F4B of similar design and period.
>
> There were a bunch of similar dual planes but the C90X was the
> best of the bunch.  The F4B wasn't very good.  I know a guy (Alex
> Denysenko) who is a Windsor guru (holds IHRA records with 289 and
> 302 Windsors) and has tested pretty much all the intakes.  Here's
> how he rates the dual plane 289/302 intakes:
>
> Best: FoMoCo C90X
> Good: Edelbrock Air Gap, Edelbrock Performer RPM, FoMoCo Shelby
>       lettered, FoMoCo Cobra lettered
> Fair: Edelbrock F4B
> Poor: Weiand Stealth, Colt 65
>
> Super Ford magazine did a SBF intake manifold flow comparison test in
> the early '80's.  Jim Miller of JME did the test and the 5 intakes
> tested were all provided by Alex.  They included an Offy Port-o-Sonic,
> a C90X FoMoCo, a Shelby Ram Box, an Edelbrock Toker 289, and an Offy
> Dial-a-Flow.  The Torker 289 was the worst performer of the group.
> Second best was the FoMoCo C90X surprisingly.  Alex claims the C90X
> still bests the latest Edelbrock Air Gap Performer RPM in making power
> over a wide RPM range.  The C90X was also 3 tenths of a second faster
> in the 1/4 mile on a 289 Hipo Mustang.  One of the things Alex likes
> best about the C90X is it's flexibility.  Some intakes are sensitive
> to the engine combination and may work well one one engine but not so
> well on the next.  The C90X works well on any 289/302 from stock to
> street/strip.  When Jack Roush built a 302 for the 1979 Indy Pace Car
> Mustang, he chose the C90X.
>
> Here are my notes on the C90X intake:
>
> Blank pad of Ford lettering behind the thermostat housing
> 2 tapped bosses behind thermostat housing
> Firing order on the forward runner
> C90X 9424B on back runner
> 2 hole (oval) plenum
> 2 tapped throttle cable bracket bosses
> 2 tapped bosses on aft runner for vacuum
> tin heat shield (oil splash) on bottom (held by 2 blind rivets)
> ports measure 1" wide by 1 7/8" tall
> additional threaded boss (small diameter, down low in front)
>
> If you are under the impression that the C90X is a low rise intake,
> you are mistaken.  The C90X intake is at least as tall as an S2MS
> Shelby intake.  I have both here and can measure them if you'd like.
>
>> Old articles about modifying Goose used the Ford Intake,
>
> The ones I have appear to use the low rise cast iron intake.
> An example is the article reprinted in the Peterson "Complete Ford
> Book" (1972 vintage) with the details on the Mangusta engine build-up.
> The article tests some parts on a Mangusta strapped to a chassis dyno
> The stock engine made 110 RWHP.  They make some claims that 110 RWHP
> equates to 242 HP at the crankshaft and that 145 RWHP equates to 319 HP
> at the crank, neither of which compute but who knows what sort of dyno
> corrections they were applying.  According to the article, the Mangusta
> had a 9.5:1 compression ratio 302 that was equipped with a stock Ford
> cast iron intake and a 470 CFM Autolite 4 barrel carb that made 110 HP
> @ 5500 RPM on Ak Miller's chassis dyno.  The stock engine appears to be
> just a 302-2V with the 4 barrel carb from the 302-4V but not the higher
> compression ratio.  The article says the lower compression was due to
> the lower octane fuel available in Europe.  Jerry Potts installed 351W
> heads and 10.5:1 compression pistons along with a C90Z-6250-C cam
> (essentially a hydraulic lifter version of the 289 HiPo solid lifer cam
> with 290 deg adv duration and 0.470" lift) but retained the stock intake
> and carb (single point distributor, too).  These changes increased power
> to 145 RWHP with the 470 CFM carb which they equated to 319 HP at the
> crank.  Switching to a 600 CFM Autolite (still on the stock intake),
> they made 155 RWHP.
>
> The Mangusta build-up used some of the parts developed for the Ford Muscle
> Parts program.  In the old Muscle Parts catalog, Ford outlines 3 levels of
> changes for the 289/302 SBF: Impressor, Controller and Dominator with HP
> increments for each change relative to a stock 289-2V.  Adding the C90X 
> high
> rise dual plane intake, 600 CFM Holley carb and an open element air 
> cleaner
> was good for 31 HP.  Adding the C90Z-6250-C hydraulic cam with matching
> lifters and springs along with a 289 HiPo dual point distributor was worth
> 40 HP.  Adding tube headers was worth 15 HP for a total of 86 HP over the
> 200 HP 289-2V.  With these parts in place, the larger port and valve 
> '69-'70
> 351W heads and 10.5:1 compression pistons were worth 32 HP.  Larger GT40
> valves added 7 HP more for a total increase of 118-125 HP over the 289-2V.
> Switching to a Lemans solid lifter cam brought the total increase to 
> 144-155
> HP over the base 289-2V.  Going from a 289 to a 302 was worth 11 HP.
>
> Though the parts are mostly obsolete these days, the sequence of part
> changes is still sound.  Without the C90X intake and headers, the Mangusta
> modifications didn't deliver as much as they might otherwise.
>
> Dan Jones
> _______________________________________________
>
> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>
> Archive Search Engine Now Available at http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/
>
> DeTomaso mailing list
> DeTomaso at list.realbig.com
> http://list.realbig.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso 

_______________________________________________

Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA

Archive Search Engine Now Available at http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/

DeTomaso mailing list
DeTomaso at list.realbig.com
http://list.realbig.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso

More information about the DeTomaso mailing list