I know usually IR setups are without a plenum on them and with a normal carb you have issues with fuel dropout and the plenum as well as vacuum signal problems.
what would happen if we setup IR carbs right at the intake port then take the runners up from their to a common plenum then to the air filter. this way you have a dry runner intake.

I don't have the ability to try this or anything it's just more of curosity sake on how this would work out.

so wanna lay bets on how long it will take for vader to grab ahold of this one

 

nobody has any ideA?

 

What, like all those 8-Weber setups and stuff like that from back in the 50s & 60s?

Although, those didn't use a plenum; it's kind of pointless; they used 8 stacks, with either 8 little air cleaners, or one big one on groups of 4...

One Holley 4-barrel is faster, more reliable, gives better driveability, easier to tune, and otherwise is just all-around a better setup. I suspect why that's why people wuit using them about 40 years ago.

 

that or maybe the 400-500 price per weber DCOE carb. or at least the current prices of them if not a little more. andthe v8 needing 4 of them. at least that is the side draft the downdraft don't know for sure what they run ni this setup.


but still doesn't address my question.

and I ahve seen a few IR based setups that once tuned hold up well and offer good streetability but most of them are imported apps not domestics and also either v12's or I4's with a few I6's scattered about

 

And, that question would be.... ??

Like I said, people quit doing that in the 60s, because it was ineffective. They got beat. Why spend giga$$$ and deal with huge hassle, just so you can get beat by something any lop-eared kid can go to the speed shop and buy for a quarter the cost or less, and slap onto an otherwise identical motor and be winning the race against you in a few minutes. Makes it seem like a dead-end road.

They used a few different kinds of carbs back in those days; some side-draft and some down-draft; I seem to recall side-draft one-barrel Webers as being the system of choice back then. I never had or worked on such a thing myself. I do however recall a picture on a magazine cover of Zora Arkus-Duntov standing beside some monster prototype SBC creation of his, DOHC maybe even, that was equipped with something like that. Must have been in about 66 or 67. But I could be wrong though.

It seems that in practice (the real world), the minimal theoretical advantages of a dry-flow intake system are entirely outweighed by the massive practical disadvantages of a multi-multi carb system.

 

true. I agree in practice this thing would have no value what so ever. too much work to tune, setup and keep working right. the cost to get a setup like this bought let alone working and all the fab that would need to be done unless you can find an intake setup for it seem to also make this not an option. I know they still use IR setups on FI systems as well. but don't know how well they work for sure either


part of why I said I don't plan on doing it.

instead I'm curious as to how operation would be. you wouldn't have the plenum damping the vacuum pulses so I would assume being able to run am much larger carb, there wouldn't be fuel flowing through the intake to drop out, you stuff like that. but then again also thining that at partial throttle it wouldn't (at least in my mind) have as much interaction between the cylinders being the throttle plates should close block most the interaction untill the throttle gets opened up. plus how would the htrottle plates act being that close to the port itself?

this is more a exercise in theory then actually application. unless someone has a lot of time and money on their hands. I'm not worried about the whole getting everythng setup or cost as again this is more theory/curosity then actual design/implementation.