Re: [Amc-list] WHat year 258's get water intake? Real world advantage?

[tom jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Wrambler <wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I've always been baffled by the use of a heated intake and it being run through the heater core.

So they ARE in series with the heater?! That makes no sense! Well some
I suppose, 'if its cold enough to have the heater on let the carb have
a little' .


> I'm not sure it would do squat for mpg, but it would be worthy of the experiment if you could scrounge up the 4 port valve.

You could to it with a simpler 'single pole double through' (a vs. b)
valve. In position A water flows through the heater. In position B, it
flows through a bypass hose. Then the intake heater is after that.


>  I doubt the 196.5 will see any improvement at all since the head/intake/exhaust is all combined anyway.

It's got me wondering, jsut how much heat energy is absorbed by the
incomign fuel/air mixture? Especially on  cold day -- droplets of wet
fuel hit the hot metal, boil to a gas (we hope) and take a lot of heat
with it.

> I'm thinking that heated intake plate was a Guv'ment thing forced on them as I sure don't see another reason for it!

I dunno... this was the road draft tube era, radiator overflow was the
asphalt, and no seat belts!

> Now, I wonder, have I prodded Tom enough? Will he be able to withstand the temptation to try this?

It's cold enough to need heat, so no :-) But I may find a way do drive
around with my thermocouple stuck down a spare hole in the manifold to
see what mixture temperature is on the highway.


-- 
All your arguments are invalid.
Enjoy your unstable system.
_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list