Author Topic: Very High FE Dual Quad - What is it?  (Read 3224 times)

6s2055

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: Very High FE Dual Quad - What is it?
« Reply #15 on: March 17, 2021, 04:11:40 PM »
Not sure if it’s FOMOCO, but had that manifold on my 427 side oiler. That was on my Sanger Flat Botton boat in 1971.Interesting, that was at Tahoe and actually raced Shelby’s flat bottom “El Cobra”. Did win, however Carroll wasn’t driving!

shelbydoug

  • SAAC Member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5329
    • View Profile
Re: Very High FE Dual Quad - What is it?
« Reply #16 on: March 22, 2021, 10:47:58 AM »
Not sure if it’s FOMOCO, but had that manifold on my 427 side oiler. That was on my Sanger Flat Botton boat in 1971.Interesting, that was at Tahoe and actually raced Shelby’s flat bottom “El Cobra”. Did win, however Carroll wasn’t driving!

Maybe it's taller for use in a boat and has a marine part number?
68 GT350 Lives Matter!

98SVT - was 06GT

  • SAAC Member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2689
    • View Profile
Re: Very High FE Dual Quad - What is it?
« Reply #17 on: March 22, 2021, 11:50:10 AM »
I've seen that with '80s Boss 302 and 351c casings intended to look stock on the exterior but were for undetectable racing interior porting. This could be one that escaped the laboratory.
Ahh..... you have struck upon one of Ernie Elliot's biggest speed secrets. They had new manifolds cast using the Ford exterior and and an entirely different interior. They like Bob Gliden would never share their engine development with the Ford engineers as they didn't want other teams getting the information.

Could this manifold be the cause of the bubble hoods on the Thunderbolt cars?
Previous owner 6S843 - GT350H & 68 GT500 Convert #135.
Mine: GT1 Mustang Track Toy, 1998 SVT Cobra, Wife's: 2004 Tbird
Member since 1975 - priceless

2112

  • SAAC Member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3052
  • Fox Island, WA
    • View Profile
Re: Very High FE Dual Quad - What is it?
« Reply #18 on: March 22, 2021, 03:56:11 PM »
Why is Randy conspicuously absent on this thread.     ???

I thought he would know immediately.