Edelbrock EP4B intake - what's the truth ?.

I've been wanting a 4brl intake for a while, but i lost the last original 59 intake on e-bay. Now i wonder if a Edelbrock EP4B can be used ?.
What is the story about this intake ?
I see different discriptions - some say it is pre 65 pontiacs, some say it is 59 to 64, and some says it is only 61 to 64.

They all seem to agree that EP is Early Pontiac - fair enough, but how early ???

These seem to come at a resonable price, and should fit the large selection og 4 brl carbs - i wonder if i can run a quadrajet ?. A friend of mine has a spare quadrajet from his trans-am. I also have 2 carter AFB's - both needs rebuild.

Anyone know this intake ?

If you have a picture of the bottom of the intake I can tell you which years it will fit. I don't think Edelbrock makes a pre 64 intake anymore but they used to.

If you watch ebay you'll see one pop up every once in a while. The tri power intakes are easier to find. I've only seen maybe a handlfull of 4 barrel intakes for our cars

Is this sufficient ?. I've been looking at some (rather poor quality) pictures of my own car - (still in storage), and it looks sike the thermostat housing is on top like on this one - i can see from the pictures of tripower manifolds that it is on front.

That will fit either 55-60 or 61-64. If you look towards the front of the intake on the bottom there are 2 round holes. You'll need to plug the front one with a freeze plug because thats the coolant passage for the 61-64 style heads.

OK, thanks !. I'll try to get one of those then. Maybe the alu will save me some $ on shipping .

It definitely will!

It is on its way to me !. I am thinking of having it powder coated - but first i have to se what it looks like.

Anyone who have tried a Q-jet on one of these engines ?. According to my shop manual the only difference betwen my engine and a tripower is the intake and carbs + .25 more compression. 4 brl should be exactly the same. I am thinking that a good qjet should make about the same flow = same power as a tripower, so i am guessing that i could expect just over 300 hp (a stock 4 brl afb is rated at 300 on this engine).

Depending on what pistons you have. They had 4 different compressions for 59. 7.8? 8.6? 10.25 and the 4 bolt main 10.75.

On the front of the block right under the head on the passenger side there should be 2 stamped numbers. One should be the VIN of your car, the other is the application or block code. You can look up the code on wallace racing and it'll tell you the specs.

I think the 2 barrel motors had a different cam than the 4 barrels. I would just use a Carter or an Edelbrock over a Qjet.

Various compression ratios was 7.8:1, 8.6:1, 10.0:1, and 10.5:1. Tri Power only came in 10.5:1 comp ratio. 4bbl came in 8.6:1, 10.0:1, and 10.5:1. 2bbl came in 7.8:1, 8.6:1 and one combination in 10.0:1.

Being a 4 door vista with 2bbl and hydramatic your engine would be one of these (from factory):

Engine Code - Compression Ratio

A - 10.0:1
J - 8.6:1
K - 7.8:1

None of these combinations would have the 4 bolt main either.

All camshafts were either the standard or hydramatic camshaft, no change if a 4bbl or tri power in '59. There was a different camshaft for the T420 engines though.

Good info, you're right, I was wrong. Thanks for that, I always thought the tri powers were 10.25:1, wow I'm running a 10.5:1 pump gas??? Great...

Thanks !

The camshaft info matches my original shop manual, but as i untherstood the manual the hydramatics were all 10,25 :1 - and the manual 8,6 to one. I will check the engine ode, but i think that i have the high compression since i have had detonation problems ..

I think the 4 bolt mains is only the 420Tempest racing engines. I guess this is extremely rare, right ?

4 bolt mains for 59s are extremely rare. I only know of one 59 Pontiac with a 425A 4 bolt main motor in it. I have found a few other guys over on performance years that have had one or knew of one back in the day.

You know, Looking at the wallace racing site again, I don't think they're correct for the compression ratios. I'm pretty sure the regular tri power, 4 barrel and 2 barrel cars were only 10.25:1 and I'm pretty sure all the 425A motors were 10.75:1 and the had the X stamped on the middle exhaust ports indicating that they were milled down for more compression. hhhmmmmm

That sounds like what the shopmanual says. I dont know of any mention of ratios lower than 8,6 in the shopmanual. 8,6 for manual, 10,25 for hydramatic and 10,5 for tripower. There is also a 420E (economy), but i dont remember the compression for that one.

Interresting that the manuals were considered low performance, and had lower HP ratings. Today the opposite is the case....

Chris was the one that pointed out the 7.8:1 ratio which I had never heard of either but it is on the Wallace Racing site. But if you notice all the 7.8:1 ratios were for "Export" which means all US pontiacs should be either 8.6 or what I thought was 10.25:1.

Christian, from the looks of it, all the manual and auto cars had the same HP ratings.

http://www.wallaceracing.com/cgi-bin/engine3.cgi
go to more until you get to the 59s

I got my information of of my master catalog. The 7.8:1 is not an export engine, in fact my car has the K code and I am 3rd owner. Car was originally from Iowa.

That wallace site is good for information but a lot of it has been copied wrong or something.

Robert, what's the engine letter code on your engine?

Yes, according to that page they are, but according to the original shop manual they are not the same rating. I don't know which one is most correct, but somehow i think it makes sense that the higher cr rating makes more hp's. My guess is that the AT cars needs the extra power to make up for extra losses in the drivetrain. As far as i can find out from the shop manual mine is 10,25:1, 280 hp, 2brl.

I have a plan that i would scan the original manuals some day, and make them available, if i can somehow find the time. However i will scan the specification pages as soon as i get the manuals - they are also in the car - and post them here for us all to enjoy.

The information you guys are finding is 1960 information. The 10.25:1 and 10.75 comp ratios, the export engine codes, etc. I looked at the 1960 engine identification in my master catalog. The shop manual and wallace is basing their information on that the '59 and '60s were the same when if fact they were slightly different.

The letter code on mine is C, which I was told years ago that it meant tri power automatic. I confirmed this later on the wallace racing site.

I know wallace racing was wrong on their hp ratings for 1962 motors. When I thought I had a 283 hp 4 barrel they told me it should be 283 hp 2 barrel and 303 hp 4 barrel. I started a thread on performance years to see if the compression ratios were correct.

Chris and Christian, is there any way yall can post what yall are getting this info from?

Thanks guys, I'll try to cantact Wallace and see what they say

http://www.pontiacsafari.com/MPC/Pages/page_0060.jpg

And that is the same stuff that Wallace Racing has.

Chris, are you sure your motor is original?

I see, so that may be where the difference comes in. i'll definetly check the numbers on mine as soon as i get to it - i would like to know what the cr and rating actually is. I know that my manual is for 59 pontiac, but that does not mean it's information is correct. My manual is the orange GM shop manual - i've got the bodymanual, shop manual and hydromatic manual. I also bought the big manual on the hydramatic on CD in case anyone needs it.

I just scanned this of a original 59 brochure that i got from e-bay. This is the same specs horsepowerwise as in the shopmanual, however it states a cr of 10:1 - i always assumed that this was just a rounding, but it may be that the shop manual is incorrect.

Note how there are two different ratings for hydramatic and manual in these specs.

Ok, so I guess maybe wallace is correct? Maybe the tri powers were 10.5:1 and all the other high compression motors were 10:1

Yep ! - i guess it's hard to measure that accuratly, however, i'm pretty sure that mine is the 280 hp 2brl version - be it 10 or 10.25:1. I'll scan the shop manual specs as soon as i get it home... Maybe my memory is off with regards to the cr...

Note how the tripowers are the same with auto or manual, and the rest is lower comp/lower hp with the manuals ?. I guess that the manuals were for economy, exept for the tripower hmm....

The reason for the lower (8.6) ratio of the Syncromesh cars was that the standard transmission used, couldn't handle the power that the Hydramatic could. The 420A, both 4barrel and Tri-Power, and the 315hp Tri-Power came with a Heavy Duty 3speed transmission if you ordered one of those engines with Syncromesh. The 420E only came with the Hydramatic even though it had the same 8.6 ratio, mainly because it came standard with a high rear axle gear, and needed the low first gear of the Hydramatic to have reasonable acceleration. It's amazing, that when you look at that chart, they got all those variations from one block and head casting, four intake castings, four camshaft grinds, and two piston designs. One other note, everyone seems to marvel at the idea of 4-bolt mains on some 327sbc, but Pontiac had them available as early as 1959......John

OK, so that is the reason !
Good info !