I have both cast and aluminum super six intakes in my garage. The aluminum of course is much lighter. Other than that, is there any reason why someone would prefer, or not prefer a aluminum intake over a cast?

Thanks
-Mike

_________________
Daily Driver 72 'Cuda
74 Duster /6
http:www.goodysgotacuda.com

Go read this thread, then be smart and pick the iron one.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Well, the Mopar performance M-1 aluminum intake is an excellent piece. It has good casting quality and has larger runners than a stock intake.

The factory super six intakes however, suffered from very poor casting quality. They had a tendency to split apart and burn out/crack in the floor area (right above heat riser location). They also suffered from porous castings and pinhole leaks. In fact, there was numerous TSBs and recalls on the original aluminum intakes.

Some of the intakes where fine, while others were crap. If you got a good one then you were in good shape, if you got one in bad shape, you were SOL, it was pretty much unfixable. The later intakes where of a lot better quality though, and buy the 80s they had most of the bugs worked out of them althoguh there still was the occasional bad apple.

_________________
82 D150-225/727
02 Dakota-3.9/5 speed
87 GMC C7000-8.2 Detroit Diesel/5+2

Sorry Dan, didn't see your above post I said pretty much the same thing it does.

_________________
82 D150-225/727
02 Dakota-3.9/5 speed
87 GMC C7000-8.2 Detroit Diesel/5+2

Just to clear anything up i sent that manifold to Reed free no cost i did not know it was cracked. Sometimes when you get parts i just look at them and try to help a Slanted friend. I have got several cast two manifolds but i thought the aluninum would be better. Thanks Ron Parker

Hey I am going to pickup an supersix intake tomorrow. How hard are these cracks on the manifold floor to see.

_________________
82 D150-225/727
02 Dakota-3.9/5 speed
87 GMC C7000-8.2 Detroit Diesel/5+2

Fairly easy. Both of my cracked aluminium ones are crack in the exact same spot- directly "inboard" of the EGR valve port on the floor of the intake.

Ron- don't worry, I never even suspected you would knowingly send me a cracked intake.

Thanks Reed we just try to help . As everybody knows i try to grab all Slant parts i can buy I doint have the time to look close to some of the parts. Hell we got to go racing before long and i got to work on the car but we will keep on trying. Thanks Ron Parker










Using A Tennessee Moonshiner To Burn A Bagel

I like the Lumenum ones. They are really really light....and work fine....or dont. If they dont you just toss them....far...cuz they are so light. If they do work...well.... they are great.

To be honest I haven t seen one that was no good...they are a dime a dozen here.

_________________
Yeah....Im the one who destroyed this rare, vintage automobile.....

I agree. Very nicely-made intake, even if it does have inexplicable extra holes and obstructions in runners 1 and 6.
That's an open question.
Yep, that applies to the 1bbl version of the welded aluminum intake, too.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

I didn't check the M-1 on my Duster for anything weird. It is a nice piece!



So the 80's alooominniemums is better? A finer piece of crap? I think I have one off a '83 truck.

I am am getting ready to put it on the Fart Dart.

_________________
'72 Duster 198 stock cam, 3:23's Hookers on jack stands for 8 years in the driveway
'79 Maxivan 360 Offy Qjet Comp RV cam/rusting in the driveway.
93 D350 160HP Cummins Auto Dually Clubcab needs a injector pump
2005 Golden Couch Buick

My 80s version finally rotted through after a decade of free use.(found it)

Im left with an Offy...it has smaller runners and needs an adapter no matter what carb I chose.

I have an iron 2 bbl intake but it weighs way heavy.....

_________________
Yeah....Im the one who destroyed this rare, vintage automobile.....

GoodysGotaCuda,

I like the solid, (not welded) cast aluminum manifolds like what they used on the 78 and newer trucks. They are well built and seem to warm up much faster first thing in the mornings, especially in the below freezing conditions. No bogs like the cast iron manifolds. In the morning after starting I tend to put it in gear and go and am usually at 50 mph after about 3 blocks. I could never get away with that using the cast iron manifold. It would bog like crazy.

Like Dan and others say, the welded factory manifolds may not be so good.

_________________
Aggressive Ted

http://cid-32f1e50ddb40a03c.photos.live ... %20Swinger


74 Swinger, 9.5 comp 254/.435 lift cam, 904, ram air, electric fans, 2.5" HP2 & FM70 ex, 1920 Holley#56jet, 2.76 8 3/4 Sure-Grip, 26" tires, 25+MPG

I'd like such a manifold, too, but I have yet to see one, or even a picture of one — and I've been looking for quite some time. That doesn't mean they definitely don't exist, but there is not yet any firm confirmation of a 1-piece cast aluminum intake being released by the factory for models other than the '60 Valiant and the '76 Feather Duster/Dart Lite; if such an intake was released, there's not yet any solid info on what they were used on and when. There are different part numbers for 2bbl intakes on trucks vs. cars in some years, but not for 1bbls, and the welded 2-piece intakes were in fact released (and installed on slant-6s used in cars, trucks and vans) for the 1978 model year. Here is what Chrysler's History of the Slant-Six Engine has to say on the subject — it was written by Bill Weertman, who was Managing Engineer of Engine Design from 1955 -1962, Assistant Chief Engineer of Engine Design and Development from 1962 - 1976, and Chief Engineer of Engine Engineering from 1976 -1987:
Unfortunately, I don't have '78-'79-'80 FPCs nearby, but 1982-83 truck, 1984-85 truck, 1986-87 truck FPCs (all final editions) all show the following:
4104 579 1bbl
4273 132 2 bbl (not listed in '86-'87 FPC because no 2bbl offered)

'82 and '83 passenger car FPCs show:
4104 579 1bbl
4104 594 2bbl

So the late-production 1-piece aluminum intake is still a bit of a mystery. Ted, can you show us some pics of yours, and tell us what casting number it bears?

Then, Ted, how is it that I "get away with" exactly that with my stock cast iron intake on my '71, which was parked outside all last winter and gave me "start up and drive off with no hesitation" driveability even after sitting all night at well below zero? It even still has breaker points. Aluminum intakes do warm up somewhat faster than iron ones, but they are still not magical, and the driveability problems you keep saying were solved by installation of an aluminum intake were still not due to your previous intake being made out of cast iron.

Like Dan and others say, the welded factory manifolds may not be so good.[/quote]

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Dan,

I went out to the car to write down the part number of the aluminum manifold and noticed the aluminum heat deflector is covering the part number. It's pouring down rain, snow yesterday. I would have to pull the carb off and the heat deflector......
I am planning to do that soon but, on a nicer day.

When I made the comparison between manifolds it was with a Holley 1920 carb with a #56 jet with a lightly set choke with no exhaust heat flapper in the exhaust manifold.

What carb is on your 71? running what jet and what choke setting? If your running a richer setup, that could be true with the cast iron. I have found that running on the lean side it makes a big difference in performance with the aluminum manifold.

I uploaded a couple of shots of the aluminum manifold on the link below. It is a pretty thick smooth casting.

_________________
Aggressive Ted

http://cid-32f1e50ddb40a03c.photos.live ... %20Swinger


74 Swinger, 9.5 comp 254/.435 lift cam, 904, ram air, electric fans, 2.5" HP2 & FM70 ex, 1920 Holley#56jet, 2.76 8 3/4 Sure-Grip, 26" tires, 25+MPG