Tiger Logo Low Rise vs High Rise Intake Manifold

[kenmat]

Does anyone know what the difference in performance ( ie Horsepower Level) between the Tiger Low Rise intake manifold and the Tiger High Rise intake manifold.
I realize neither one is a power maker compared to many after market manifolds..In fact, they may compare to stock Ford manifolds...Just made out of aluminum.
Maybe someone has real world experience with both..

I even wonder if the Tiger Low Rise manifold offers any benefit over the stock cast irton Ford other than weight and perhaps a minor cooling benefit...
The context of my question would be for a modest personalized 260 in the 230-240 HP range..
Regards
Ken

 

[kbecker]

Does anyone know what the difference in performance ( ie Horsepower Level) between the Tiger Low Rise intake manifold and the Tiger High Rise intake manifold.
I realize neither one is a power maker compared to many after market manifolds..In fact, they may compare to stock Ford manifolds...Just made out of aluminum.
Maybe someone has real world experience with both..

I even wonder if the Tiger Low Rise manifold offers any benefit over the stock cast irton Ford other than weight and perhaps a minor cooling benefit...
The context of my question would be for a modest personalized 260 in the 230-240 HP range..
Regards
Ken

Ken I had a tiger low rise on my 260 way back car ran great but too far back and nothing to compare it to it is like the reg. ford low rise if you do a search of intake manifolds you'll find some information on different manifolds. A 260 with 230-240hp is pretty healthy

 

[michael-king]

Ken...

Is the motor you have already running a 4bbl on a cast manifold and 240ish hp? Of so the low rise will probably be just comparable . maybe some slight flow.. But doubt noticeable... Its worth it for weight. Any weight out of the front of a Tiger is good... Then...there is the look.

Also.. Are you talking using a repro manifold.. As in the modern cnc TIGER lettered low rise and versus the modern repro high rise... If the later.. The last round of repros.. Were they 2014 or 2016? Were cheater manifolds.. They had bigger runners internally iirc.... That said.. Would they only offer advantage up higher and lose a little in the low range on street...

 

[kenmat]

Michael
There is no existing engine..I am just planning/theorizing a modest 260 in the 235-245 HP range..I think that you are right..Namely, the Tiger Low rise would not be noticably different than a stock cast iron Ford unit..
I am leaning towards the Tiger Hi-Rise...Because getting to 240 HP will probably require it along with Air Flow Research "small" cylinder heads and a hydraulic roller cam...and custom pistons in the 10 to 1 range or slightly less..
Also, the low rise seems to be unavailable again...although I have a NOS original one in the box
Ken

 

[michael-king]

Ken,

Are you talking 240rwhp or crank? In the day the full LAT 1 performance kit was rated to 245 hp on the 260.. 4bbl, cam, lifters and distributor.. Then you could add headers and exhaust.

A 240 crank HP 260 shouldn't be to hard.. I dont think you need near 10:1 compression...

If you cab scower the archives of the dorum.. Duke built a stout 260 before his 347 ans documented it well.

Also Buck did an article on a decent HP high efficiency 260

 

[kenmat]

Michael,
Thanks for the references..I will try to look them up..This motor will be built by Ron Grosse Racing in Lodi..They are one of the few that can accomodate 5-bolt Fords on their dyno..
Re 10:1 Compression..might be a little high even tho here in Texas we can buy Leaded premium gas at specialty stations..
Goal is 240 at the crank
Ken

 

[mr55s]

Michael,
Thanks for the references..I will try to look them up..This motor will be built by Ron Grosse Racing in Lodi..They are one of the few that can accomodate 5-bolt Fords on their dyno..
Re 10:1 Compression..might be a little high even tho here in Texas we can buy Leaded premium gas at specialty stations..
Goal is 240 at the crank
Ken

The low rise with a 3/8” boss spacer plate vs the 1” spacer (aluminum) was night and day in performance for the 1” spacer used on the low rise. Runs very well and responsive. Use a vacuum gauge and dial your mixture settings in on both sides of the carb. Make sure your ignition wires are good, check for resistance, another night and day difference.

 

[kenmat]

Michael,
Are you saying that simply changing from a 3/8" spacer to a 1.00" spacer on the same low rise manifold made a big difference....or did you also go from a low rise to a high rise to make a big difference????
Ken

 

[mr55s]

Michael,
Are you saying that simply changing from a 3/8" spacer to a 1.00" spacer on the same low rise manifold made a big difference....or did you also go from a low rise to a high rise to make a big difference????
Ken

I have a Tiger low rise on my car, I was doing some clean up under the hood and had my carb off with the 1” spacer which I have run for years. When I was putting it back together, I thought I would try the boss 302 3/8” spacer to give a bit more room under the hood, and I had one so why not try it. The test run down the highway was not what I had remembered in acceleration. For the next few times I thought it was me thinking I could tell the car was not the same as before. I soon took the 3/8” spacer off and installed the now cleaned up 1” spacer As a simple test. Very noticeable difference in throttle response on the highway. It ran much better. Nothing else was different, nothing was changed other than the 3/8” spacer back to a 1” spacer.

 

[boss-tiger]

I am a fan of dual plain low rise like Edelbrock Performer for mid performance, driver cars. I have one on a 275 HP mild build 289 and no complaints for crusing around, good cold starting and overall would recommend (but it is modern style intake, not period correct for a Tiger), very good performance up to 3500 RPM (which is higher than I normally shift these days anyway). Low rise intake will also provide max carb/air cleaner clearance underneath your hood with plenty of room for carb spacer.

High rise has better performance, better mid to upper RPM torque - I have run an Edelbrock F4b in past (and will run again on my current project in progress) and had no complaints except it did seem to not start as easily cold (may have been other factors), plus under hood clearance was a bit tight for sure. F4b is also a dual plain intake and a big plus is that it is period correct for the Tiger and was actually offered as LAT option - my suggeestion if your wanting to keep the car as stock as possible look for a good F4b instake, you can still find but inspect well (warning there is a lot of used racing junk out there).

Last but not least, best performance and HP would be a single plain high rise - not so good low end performance but get the engiine RPM's up and it will produce the best HP. I have run when I was younger and not the best for starting an engine cold or hot was my experience, around town in low RPM was kind of disapointing but spin the engine over 3000 RPM and that is what the single plain intake was all about

A lot to take in, plenty of people out there smarter than but hope this helps

 

[boss-tiger]

Add: you will notice added performance on your 260 build going to a 4bb setup when the secondaries open up (also then reduces gas milage), but not huge HP gain (any input from others please - my guess +30 HP ish). Difference of stock SBF 4bbl vs. Edelbrock performer I would say the Performer would benifit from technology improvements since the 60's. F4B even though a 60's engineering intake is a very good intake IMO and has many happy customers using on Tigers. Another option you could consider is a sleeper 260 - in the 80's I bought a Tiger with a mild build 260, believe I had 289 heads, had a larger 2 bbl Holley carb, mild HYD cam - was a lot of fun (good gas milage, very very reliable, and was a daily driver)

Nothing wrong with original 260, 2 bbl setup, it is only original once ...

 

[kbecker]

Just run your tiger low rise intake ports on mine are the same as my rpm air gap, here's a picture of my ported intake next
to a stock 1964 low rise manifold. Mine didn't have a spacer may just run a 1 inch spacer and my tiger low rise instead of
my rpm air gap

 

[Austin Healer]

I'm running an F4B with a couple of phenolic spacers for a total of 1/2". Easy cold starting, runs great and doesn't boil the float bowls dry after I shut it off. I'm using Hipo 289 heads as these have threaded rockers from the get go. The carb is a Holley 1850-12 600 CFM unit with vacuum secondaries and a manual choke (which I never need to use). The F4B has a threaded port for the PCV, so the spacer doesn't have to. I have plenty of power and get reasonable gas mileage as long as I don't drive like a lunatic! better than 20MPG on the hiway. The F4B I have is the large oval 2 port design. the center divider has NOT been cut, part of why I fit the phenolic spacers.

I have a client's Mk1 in the shop now with a low rise and a Autolite 4bbl... it also has a 1/2" alloy spacer. I have to say that I am unimpressed with the way it runs, mostly due to the carb just being way too big. we
are going to change out the spacer for a 1/2" phenolic spacer from Speedway (which I'll tap and thread for a PCV port) and then fit the smaller 1848 Holley. I'll let you know how it turns out.

 

[kbecker]

I have a Tiger low rise on my car, I was doing some clean up under the hood and had my carb off with the 1” spacer which I have run for years. When I was putting it back together, I thought I would try the boss 302 3/8” spacer to give a bit more room under the hood, and I had one so why not try it. The test run down the highway was not what I had remembered in acceleration. For the next few times I thought it was me thinking I could tell the car was not the same as before. I soon took the 3/8” spacer off and installed the now cleaned up 1” spacer As a simple test. Very noticeable difference in throttle response on the highway. It ran much better. Nothing else was different, nothing was changed other than the 3/8” spacer back to a 1” spacer.

With all the manifold talk and using spacers had to do a mockup with my Tiger low rise using a 1-inch spacer,
with the spacer the carb sits higher so you can read the tiger script before the carb would be in the way

 

[mr55s]

With all the manifold talk and using spacers had to do a mockup with my Tiger low rise using a 1-inch spacer,
with the spacer the carb sits higher so you can read the tiger script before the carb would be in the way

View attachment 16672

Nice and clean looking, here is one in the car with hoses…. I have a breather for you if your interested.