• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

porting , polishing intakes

  • Thread starter Thread starter sorrell
  • Start date Start date Sep 1, 2005
S

sorrell

New Member
Aug 30, 2005
16
0
0
Sep 1, 2005
#1
  • Sep 1, 2005
  • #1
Just bought upper and lower typhoon intakes and was wondering if any one where I could get some info on porting polishing , inside of runners a little rough
 

txstang84

15 Year Member
May 21, 2005
1,639
42
69
Tuscola, tx
Sep 1, 2005
#2
  • Sep 1, 2005
  • #2
i think theres a tech article on MM&FF's, or 5.0's website for that...
 

maverick0716

Founding Member
Jan 12, 2002
3,924
0
56
Chilliwack, BC, Canada
Sep 1, 2005
#3
  • Sep 1, 2005
  • #3
From what I've heard polishing intake ports is not a good idea. There needs to be some velocity to an intake charge to get the fuel mixture right.....or something
 

Daniel50

New Member
Mar 30, 2005
716
1
0
Discovery Bay, CA
Sep 1, 2005
#4
  • Sep 1, 2005
  • #4
go to tmoss website. he has an article on how to do it
 

tmoss

Gettin Wired
Founding Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,153
32
128
Saint Louis, MO
Sep 2, 2005
#5
  • Sep 2, 2005
  • #5
link in my signature..........
 

vikingpower

New Member
Dec 6, 2004
656
0
0
CWU Ellensburg, WA
Sep 2, 2005
#6
  • Sep 2, 2005
  • #6
I used a cartridge roll kit and some porting carbide bits I got from Summit, its pretty easy just time consuming. Make sure you get the longest mandrels you can find to reach all the way in the runners. Also, one of the runners in the lower has a bad kink in at the bottom, I used my carbide bits to reshape it by removing a some material. Thats about all the port work it needs, then just polish the runners to your level of satisfaction. I dont remember which runner had the kink in it, but its pretty obvious when you're examining it. I also did a lot of work on the TB opening becuase I bought a 75mm TB to go along with the manifold. Overall, works great!
 

jrod95gt

Founding Member
Sep 7, 2000
1,096
0
36
Katy, TX
Sep 6, 2005
#7
  • Sep 6, 2005
  • #7
maverick0716 said:
From what I've heard polishing intake ports is not a good idea. There needs to be some velocity to an intake charge to get the fuel mixture right.....or something
Click to expand...

seems like I heard that for carb intakes because the fuel and air travel through the intake together, so you want it to tumble around a bit and get mixed together. In an EFI manifold, the fuel isn't introduced until right where it meets the heads. I would think smoother is better for airflow.
Also, I don't think the smooth walls would have a great effect on velocity(aside from turbulent vs. laminar airflow; that could be a bigger difference than I thought), that has more to do with the actual size of the runners, yes?
 

maverick0716

Founding Member
Jan 12, 2002
3,924
0
56
Chilliwack, BC, Canada
Sep 6, 2005
#8
  • Sep 6, 2005
  • #8
jrod95gt said:
seems like I heard that for carb intakes because the fuel and air travel through the intake together, so you want it to tumble around a bit and get mixed together. In an EFI manifold, the fuel isn't introduced until right where it meets the heads. I would think smoother is better for airflow.
Also, I don't think the smooth walls would have a great effect on velocity(aside from turbulent vs. laminar airflow; that could be a bigger difference than I thought), that has more to do with the actual size of the runners, yes?
Click to expand...
That makes perfect sense. I was thinking carbureted intake
 

tmoss

Gettin Wired
Founding Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,153
32
128
Saint Louis, MO
Sep 6, 2005
#9
  • Sep 6, 2005
  • #9
You alos don't want the wet carb airlfow to encounter much obstruction as that tends to cause the fuel to puddle out of the airflow - i.e. when using a smaller carb (600-650cfm) on a 347 and an open or dual plane intake - use a open spacer under the carb to give the air/fuel a larger turning radius to avoid the air/fuel from hitting the intake bottom causing fuel puddling. If using larger carbs, the velocity throught he venturies is less and the issue is reduced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Engine Forged flat top pistons from 5.0 fit a 351 build?
  • PonyGTrider
  • May 22, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
17
Views
1K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Feb 1, 2026
PonyGTrider
A
Discussion on mild budget build/ top end
  • Acesario
  • Feb 21, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
644
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 23, 2026
General karthief
Engine Catch Can or not?
  • R82148V
  • Mar 4, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
9
Views
308
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Mar 6, 2026
ctandc
C
351W/5.8 EFI intake manifolds fading away...
  • Ryno5150
  • Jan 13, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
484
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 7, 2026
nickyb
C
Dyno day! # guesses?
  • clayton seiders
  • Aug 15, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
15
Views
351
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Aug 16, 2025
Scrapla347
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?