I dont' remember the exact dimensions, but I remember that the 351w intake is approx 1.2" wider IIRC. 302 intake will fit with adapter plates, though. I believe MPG heads sells the plates (same company as Cam Research)
reson i ask is i jump the gun a auction and won it b4 i noticed it stated for a 351w but I don't thank the guy thats selling realy knows which one it fits. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7938264604&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
Looking at that picture - I would say it is for a 302. Width is approx 9 1/4" on a 302 intake if you want to check it. Either way, you got a good deal at $50.
If it is for a windsor I know I'd be interested if it went up for sale. One way to tell would be to stop by the local machine shop and see if they might have a 302 or 351 on a stand you could try that way if you cant find the measurements
That's the same intake I am running on one of my cars. I can tell you just by looking at the photo...it's for a 289 or 302. That's not a 351 intake.
Did Edelbrock make 2 versions of this intake for the 289-302, One with the carb mounted square and another at an angle like the one in this picture.
the intake I got is no longer in production. and yes there are other like this one but not at the carb base 15 degree angle. there is one on ebay at $29 but the carb base is not at a 15 degree angle.
Weiand, Holley, and Offenhauser all made/make intakes that look nearly identical, but the carbs are square with the engine. Not to nit-pick, but I was always told it was a 20* angle... got a protractor handy? This intake has very well sized plenum and runners. The carb is angled to cure a fuel distribution problem, real or imagined, with the SBF. The Weiand has a smaller plenum, so it will, theoretically, have better throttle response... The Holley is about the same, runners might have a little more diameter. Plenum the same. The Offy is similar externally, but is more aggressive internally. Hope this helps. Btw Jap901: Flow and dyno testing have shown that the Torker 289 benefits greatly from port matching and plenum shaping/smoothing on the 'roof' of the plenum. Work on the bottom half of the plenum shows little result for the effort. Enlarging the port runners beyond just port matching causes loss of low end drivability. I got best power from mine with a 2" open spacer... I guess that lends credibility to the plenum roof porting though. Without the spacer, the air must make a sharp turn into the ports. Mine was not modded. Dave
if you are using the kickdown rod for the trans the angle can cause problems requiring creative manipulation to make it work properly.
