For a long time now, we've been aware that some of the prime speed pieces of the '60s performance scene are largely missing from the current landscape. We're speaking of multiple carburetors, specifically, the dual four-barrels that were popular on everything from factory muscle cars to modified street brawlers for at least a couple of decades. As well, we'll note that when sanctioning bodies allowed, two-fours were the induction of choice for the racing set--think such disparate venues as NASCAR, Trans-Am, and NHRA drag racing. If multiple carbs were the hot ticket back in the day, why no longer?
While we still see fully restored machines with original eight-barrel induction, the modern enthusiast crowd seems to have largely moved on. Those who have done so in belief that a good single-four makes better power, may have been helped in their opinions by magazine articles in the last decade that purport the same. We can recall several tech stories in various titles that involved hot street V-8s of 350 or fewer cubic inches which, in dual-quad dress, were all blessed with at least 1,000 cfm of airflow. The results for the two-fours were 10-15 horsepower shy of a modern four-barrel setup, with the numbers always couched in a "well, it's still respectable power, and the good looks justify the penalty" attitude. Frankly, we here at MM&F find that a pretty lame perspective, yet are less than convinced the results need to be this way.
Surely the single four-barrel is a straightforward and cost effective choice, so if bang for the buck or simplicity are your priorities, it's hard to argue against it. Yet in today's market, many buyers are looking for performance and something more. It may be visual appeal, historic connection, improved driveability, improved horsepower, or a combination of all. So, do dual quads fit into this equation? They certainly do for the first two elements, but is it really true that the fabled induction will slow down a healthy street motor? If so, there's justified reason for their relative disappearance. However, with the magazine tests referred to above in mind, we're struck by the ton of cfm that 1,000 or more represents on a traditional sized small-block. Can you say over-carbureted? What about using smaller carbs on these smaller cube motors? Yes indeed!
We recently had the opportunity to test two sets of small Holley four-barrels on a healthy small-block Ford, and believe the results are enlightening. One of our parts sources is Carl's Ford Parts in Beloit, Ohio, which specializes in factory-style, multiple carb setups for a variety of vintage Ford engines. Owner Carl Binius was on board with our desire to dig into the subject, and was one of many with whom we discussed the pros and cons of multiples with. We involved racers, product reps, and speed merchants of differing backgrounds, and found advocates and pessimists alike.
But before we dig into the nitty gritty of testing dual quads, we first need to set the table by baselining a couple of popular four-barrel intakes for comparison. With this in mind, we identified two predominant schools of thought in the current '60s car hobby, one being those who are playing with real factory hot rods, or building something to accurately emulate them. Think G.T. 350. Such enthusiasts likely want to stick with the original high performance Cobra intake, or one of several others which are strikingly similar or period correct. The second group of enthusiasts is building cars without concern for originality or historical perspective, rather they're looking more toward ultimate performance, a modern appearance, and/or the best bang for the buck. In the world of current street/strip oriented single-four intakes, Edelbrock's Performer RPM has a rep for being one of the best. With this in mind, we set out to test both sides of the single-four coin by testing with a genuine S2MS Cobra aluminum high-rise from a '66 G.T. 350, followed by a Performer RPM. Holley supplied one of its new aluminum 670-cfm Street Avengers (PN 83670) as a constant for both intakes, and we were impressed by its attributes--light weight (5 pound savings over conventional Holleys), four-corner-idle circuitry/secondary metering block, quick change secondary diaphragm lid, and sparkling finish.

The results of our single-4...

The results of our single-4 and dual-quad dyno tests on a hot 331-inch, small-block will prove surprising to some. Here are two of the six combinations we evaluated--the Cobra intake with Holley 670 Street Avenger, and the Blue Thunder two-4 with Holley 465s.

1 There was nothing wrong...

1 There was nothing wrong with the engine in Randy Dunphy's '65 Falcon at the start of our efforts, but it did lack visual pop, and proved a great candidate for evaluating the potential of dual quads on a small-block Ford. We found the 331-incher running an Edelbrock Performer and older 650-cfm carb, a combo we didn't bother to test for two reasons--1. The focus of the project wasn't to test a bunch of single-four intakes, and 2. The Performer is one of those 20-year-old manifolds that isn't old enough to be cool, or new enough to be state of the art.

2 Our two-4s analysis needed...

2 Our two-4s analysis needed to start with something to compare to, so we decided to baseline with two favorite single-4 intakes-a Cobra-lettered, high-rise original to early GT350s, and a modern Edelbrock Performer RPM. Holley's 670cfm Street Avenger was used on both.

3 We found the Holley 670...

3 We found the Holley 670 (PN 83670) to work great right out of the box, particularly on the Cobra intake. It's clearly an easy route to making good power, and the aluminum construction is an appreciated weight savings. Compared to the pair of traditional Holleys we'll be running as a pair in later tests, this single aluminum carb saves roughly 15 pounds.

4 Impetus for this project...

4 Impetus for this project stemmed from some less-than-stellar dual-quad magazine tests in the last 10 years, along with the memory of a long ago tech story in Hot Rod. The magazine's July and October '68 issues tested a variety of intakes and carbs on Ford's then-new 302. The results indicated dual-quads could be made to run better than a single-four on a pretty modest small-block. Would we find the same?

5 After making several runs...

5 After making several runs with the Cobra/Holley 670 combination, our best rear-wheel numbers were 243.9 hp at 6,000 rpm, and 252.5 lb-ft at 3,750. Factoring items mentioned in the main text, we figure this 331-inch engine was making 330-340 horses at the flywheel.