|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 154
Contributor
|
OP
Contributor
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 154 |
Came across this on ebay. It looks like somebody it trying to manufacture new parts with old designs... http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Thickstun...A1%7C240%3A1318My thing about it is the runner shape. Would this really be effective? It seems like a lot of twisting and turning... not to mention the odd holes in the ends of the runners. You would think that they would disturb the flow rather than improve it. The more I look at it the more it seems to contradict everything I've been told or read about intake performance. BUt it is really cool looking and if asthetics are the point, then I guess it serves it's purpose. Am I wrong?
'40 Studebaker project Chevy 292 powered. '51 Chevy business coupe 216ci inliner Inliner's #5360
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 154
Contributor
|
OP
Contributor
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 154 |
Kind of what I thought. The charge to the outside carbs has to take a straight shot then a hard 90degree turn with an obstruction to boot..... not like the larger radiused runners of the tattersfield. Plus the whole high-rise thing.... how effective is this really with all the other shapes? Further, how effective is it on an inliner? It's not like you are dumping straight into a head runner like on a V8.
I guess the whole thing didn't make much sense to me when I saw it. I was just wondering if I was the only one.
If I didn't care about any performance and was just looking to get gawkers... I'd probably consider it. But I think I'd stick with something that makes more sense to my simple mind.
Last edited by trump; 03/02/09 02:54 PM.
'40 Studebaker project Chevy 292 powered. '51 Chevy business coupe 216ci inliner Inliner's #5360
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,669 Likes: 42
1000 Post Club
|
1000 Post Club
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,669 Likes: 42 |
In terms of flow and fluid dynamics, sharp bends are bad for it. Large radii are much better, and produce less side effects if turns have to be a part of the design. As panic mentioned, those types of things were unknown 50 years ago by many of the pioneers who made things in their basements and backyard garages, and many advances have been made since an understanding of these things is more a part of design concepts!
Class III CNC Machinist/Programmer
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 503
Major Contributor
|
Major Contributor
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 503 |
Read up on Tommy Thiskstun and how this intake was developed. You have to remember that when he designed these it was 1937. he made them for racing applications. as a group hot rodders dragged them to the streets for daily use, but thats not what they were intended for.
The fins were used to hold ice cubes to keep the fuel condensed for drag racing. So the fins arent amusing they were practical for the use they were intended.
Funny a tattersfield was picked as a "nicer" design. thickstun designed that one too. The 2 companies merged in the 40's.
IMHO the thickstun is the most bitchin intake developed. It served a purpose for the time. yeah, we can knock it now, but I wont. The aluminum 2 pot intake I designed and built doesn't work as well as Thickstun's.
Last edited by 6inarow I.I. #1475; 03/06/09 12:41 AM.
Tom I.I. #1475
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 151
Contributor
|
Contributor
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 151 |
I've got a Thickstun that is very nice, but that one is just about the only one I have ever seen with virtually no knicks or chips in the fins. Very nice.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,123 Likes: 3
1000 Post Club
|
1000 Post Club
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,123 Likes: 3 |
I've found it counterproductive to make remarks that will invariably precipitate a attack, so I'll spare everyone any more thoughts, yes? Let's just assume that anything I say will be wrong, saves time. But thanks for not using the rude language!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,905
1000 Post Club
|
1000 Post Club
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,905 |
That's interesting about the ice. And it sold for 500 smackers! Whew!
Drew Mid-Atlantic Chapter
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 503
Major Contributor
|
Major Contributor
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 503 |
That's interesting about the ice. And it sold for 500 smackers! Whew! The first one of these intakes I saw was in Denver years ago. I asked the guy about it because I had never seen a Thickstun intake, and that's what he told me. As he explained it, it sure made sense. and he was old at the time, so i assumed he had some sort of first hand experience. Anyhow, it was a cool bench racing session that afternoon about that intake.
Tom I.I. #1475
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 92
Active BB Member
|
Active BB Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 92 |
Read up on Tommy Thiskstun and how this intake was developed. You have to remember that when he designed these it was 1937. he made them for racing applications. as a group hot rodders dragged them to the streets for daily use, but thats not what they were intended for.
The fins were used to hold ice cubes to keep the fuel condensed for drag racing. So the fins arent amusing they were practical for the use they were intended.
Funny a tattersfield was picked as a "nicer" design. thickstun designed that one too. The 2 companies merged in the 40's.
IMHO the thickstun is the most bitchin intake developed. It served a purpose for the time. yeah, we can knock it now, but I wont. The aluminum 2 pot intake I designed and built doesn't work as well as Thickstun's.
Great info Tom and thanks for sharing. At first I thought it was a reproduction and after reading that Joe looked at it I thought it must be an original never used one. Now the same guy has posted another for sale. What are the chances of somebody having two in that condition? Is it possible it's a repop?
1952 Chev 1300 Cdn. ½ ton
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 364
Contributor
|
Contributor
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 364 |
This one on ebay is a reproduction, if I am reading the seller's description correctly.
Hoyt, Inliner #922
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 92
Active BB Member
|
Active BB Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 92 |
Wow you don't read something like this everyday on ebay:
Question & Answer Answered On Q: Do you have the NOS magnets that go in the little holes at the end of the intake? These magnets align the molecules in the fuel/air mixture so they all point in the same direction, giving you astounding performance and economy. Just curious it you got 'em. Mar-09-09 A: No, we only have the intakes. Q: Thanks for the quick response on the carb mounting distance. That distance, 2 15/16", is for the 235 carbs. Do you have one with bolt centers at 2 11/16", which is for the 216 carbs. Mar-09-09 A: No, this is the only one that we have. Q: What is the distance, center to center, for the carburetor mounting holes/studs. Thanks Mar-09-09 A: The distance between the carb bolt centers is 3". If you need to mount Stromberg 97s, 48s or 81s (twin throats), we also have adapters that bolt to the intake. Q: Is this a reproduction or original? Does it come with the linkage? Mar-07-09 A: Yes, this a new casting as we have changed the original so that the intake fits the early and later engine plus clear any headers without grinding. The linkage is included plus adapter rings if you are using the early (2 bolt rocker cover) head. Q: i hadn't heard anyone was recasting these manifolds. who's doing it ? god it's beautiful!!! robert, inliners international # 3850 Mar-07-09 A: We have been working on this for some time and will also have a new rocker cover for the early engines as well. We will be doing an article soon in the 12 port news now that it has been tested on an Inliners car.
Any comments on the magnet thing? Pretty interesting stuff.
1952 Chev 1300 Cdn. ½ ton
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 503
Major Contributor
|
Major Contributor
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 503 |
do you suppose the magnets are next to the sky hook and dehydrated water on the store shelf?
Tom I.I. #1475
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 138
Contributor
|
Contributor
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 138 |
Yup, right between bottled prop wash and ash-3's!
|
|
|
|
|