Register or Log In To remove these advertisements. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
05-27-2014, 12:34 PM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: CA
Posts: 846
|
Offenhauser vs Clifford intake
Usually spend most my time on the 47-54 side and needed to venture away for a question...
I have a '49 Chevy 3100 and stuffed a stock 292 in it a few months ago. Loving the inline 6 setup and am looking to spruce it up with some bolt-ons. I have been researching about intakes - mainly the Clifford and Offenhausers and am looking to see if anyone has any personal experience with them. My search over the weekend resulted in hearing that traditional wisdom says the Offy is better for low-end torque and is better for a daily driven vehicle where the Clifford is better geared toward mid to high RPM range. The 292 is completely stock at the moment. Eventually down the road maybe I might punch it, but it is a daily driven truck so I am looking to keep it mild. Has anyone found any main differences to them? I know the runners are a bit different, but haven't found any real articles on comparing them. Thanks.
__________________
"Dixie" - 1988 Chevrolet V30 CC DRW "3+3" | 7.4L 454 (L19) | TH400 | 4" lift | 35"s "Lucille" - 1949 Chevrolet 3100 (on hold) |
05-27-2014, 01:01 PM | #2 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Hemet,Ca.
Posts: 89
|
Re: Offenhauser vs Clifford intake
I have a 68 with a 250 motor and i just installed the clifford intake and headers with dual carbs. its a very nice set up.
|
05-27-2014, 01:37 PM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Bowser
Posts: 13,731
|
Re: Offenhauser vs Clifford intake
The clifford mounts the carb like normal. Front to back.
The offy mounts the carb sideways. Some clifford's have built in heat plate for colder running climates. The offy requires a bolt on heat plate. |
05-27-2014, 01:40 PM | #4 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: CA
Posts: 846
|
Re: Offenhauser vs Clifford intake
Quote:
On my current stock setup I am running a heat plate from Tom Langdon so I am plumbed for that. Thanks again Geezer.
__________________
"Dixie" - 1988 Chevrolet V30 CC DRW "3+3" | 7.4L 454 (L19) | TH400 | 4" lift | 35"s "Lucille" - 1949 Chevrolet 3100 (on hold) |
|
05-27-2014, 02:36 PM | #5 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: troy me
Posts: 106
|
Re: Offenhauser vs Clifford intake
Tom Langdon is THE MAN for these setups!!!!!
|
05-27-2014, 02:48 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Posts: 7,504
|
Re: Offenhauser vs Clifford intake
I have been running the Offy p/n:5416 4 barrel intake on 2 successive 292s in my '68 C/10 since 1978. Both with a Holley 4160 8007 390 CFM and an Edelbrock [AFB] 1404 500 CFM. Runs great. I ran both carbs "sideways" with the primaries facing the drivers fender -- makes for better, more even fuel/air distribution, IMO. Why should "normal" for a V8 be considered a prefferable configuration on an L6?
I don't use carb-heat since I live in the desert and it's hot, mostly. I have Clifford headers, also since 1978, and like their products, but I never ran a Clifford intake, so I can't comment from experience.
__________________
Every 25 years I like to rebuild that 292, whether it needs it or not. Last edited by '68OrangeSunshine; 05-27-2014 at 02:58 PM. |
05-27-2014, 02:52 PM | #7 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: CA
Posts: 846
|
Re: Offenhauser vs Clifford intake
@56Rodder: Yes he is. I spoke to him earlier and he is a wealth of knowledge and is a huge help.
@'68OrangeSunshine: I was following you in a couple of the threads and saw that you had ran the combination before and made the upgrade to the Edelbrock after the Holley. Thanks for all the feedback. After all the info and speaking with Tom - I am going to go with the Offy and 390 I believe.
__________________
"Dixie" - 1988 Chevrolet V30 CC DRW "3+3" | 7.4L 454 (L19) | TH400 | 4" lift | 35"s "Lucille" - 1949 Chevrolet 3100 (on hold) |
05-27-2014, 03:08 PM | #8 |
Moderator
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southern Cal
Posts: 20,031
|
Re: Offenhauser vs Clifford intake
I've been very pleased with the Clifford intake and the Holley 390 combo. Used it on all my Jeeps in the past.
__________________
1972 C/10 Cheyenne Super SWB. Restored, loaded, slammed. 1968 C/10 50th Anniversary LWB. Unrestored, stock, daily driver/work truck. RIP ElJay RIP 67ChevyRedneck RIP Grumpy Old Man RIP FleetsidePaul |
05-27-2014, 04:02 PM | #9 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Brant Lake New York
Posts: 224
|
Re: Offenhauser vs Clifford intake
I just got done doing my research and went with the clifford.. I liked the intergrated water jacket and the open peluim for the forward mounting of the carb, also the pros at Clifford we more than happy to talk to me on the phone when I needed a little advice on which way I wanted to plumb the water jacket. I do not believe offy has any support.. And this is just my option but I prefer the look of the Clifford.
Check out Inliners.org then click on the tech link and then the link for throttle linkage for some great info on mounting a carb to a offey if you go that way. http://www.inliners.org/
__________________
68 GMC 2500 stepside LWB 250CI |
05-28-2014, 05:35 PM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Posts: 7,504
|
Re: Offenhauser vs Clifford intake
Quote:
Prior to deciding to rebuild, I had done 2 things:1] converted to a cable throttle [GM c.'72 style] and 2] bumped up the 390's accelerator pump from stock (35cc?) to 50cc. With the old Rube Goldberg bellcrank on the Holley, I never got near WOT. Also it would jam, lose little hairpins, ice up etc. always at the worst possible time. New cable = Zero Defects. The 50cc was just a lot of fun. Oh, and Nice Color on your '49. Is that "Omaha Orange?"
__________________
Every 25 years I like to rebuild that 292, whether it needs it or not. |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|