WillPower Rover V8 360° inlet manifold

dyno · Post by **dyno** » Mon Jan 02, 2017 11:20 am

Hi,

Anybody who knows where to find the Willpower 360° Rover V8 inlet manifold in EU ? Someone who stock them? Should be the same as Wildcat.

Anyone second hand? WillPower, Wildcat, Harcourt.....

Happy New-Year to all

Robrover · Post by **Robrover** » Sat Jan 07, 2017 1:08 am

You can get them from the original maker in Oz - Max Wedge Performance operated by Bill Laney and his son

http://www.leylandp76.com/technical/eng ... covers.jpg

dyno · Post by **dyno** » Sat Jan 07, 2017 8:43 am

Thanks a lot.

I could only find a supplier in USA and approx double the price. Was hoping to find in EU but OK, probably no stock at all. Drawback buying in AU is high transport cost to Belgium.

Will take contact asap.

Anyone using this manifold? Someone who has dyno graphs compared with the Edelbrock 180° ?

minorv8 · Post by **minorv8** » Mon Jan 09, 2017 1:50 pm

I bought this manifold from Bill Laney years ago. I used to have a Performer manifold on a 4,6 engine and replaced it with the Wilpower manifold. No other changes netted about 20 hp at top but lost a bunch at lower revs. It is a prime example of single plane vs. dual plane intake. I might have a dyno sheet somewhere, need to find it though.

dyno · Post by **dyno** » Mon Jan 09, 2017 5:24 pm

Interesting. I think the only way to have both world (end low torque and top power) can be achieved by using quad DCOE Webers or anything what looks like.

I'm always fan of most torque, not top power. 20 Bhp may sound a lot but if torque drops 20 Nm at lower (useful) RPM it's a waste of money.

Curious how the power graphs look like.

dyno · Post by **dyno** » Mon Jan 09, 2017 5:24 pm

Interesting. I think the only way to have both world (end low torque and top power) can be achieved by using quad DCOE Webers or anything what looks like.

I'm always fan of most torque, not top power. 20 Bhp may sound a lot but if torque drops 20 Nm at lower (useful) RPM it's a waste of money.

Curious how the power graphs look like.

dyno · Post by **dyno** » Mon Jan 09, 2017 5:24 pm

Interesting. I think the only way to have both world (end low torque and top power) can be achieved by using quad DCOE Webers or anything what looks like.

I'm always fan of most torque, not top power. 20 Bhp may sound a lot but if torque drops 20 Nm at lower (useful) RPM it's a waste of money.

Curious how the power graphs look like.

sidecar · Post by **sidecar** » Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:59 pm

I wonder what cutting some metal away from the divider on the Edelbrock manifold would do?

dyno · Post by **dyno** » Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:23 pm

maybe best to start with fitting an open spacer and see what happens. I think it will hurt torque.

sidecar · Post by **sidecar** » Mon Jan 09, 2017 9:37 pm

dyno wrote:maybe best to start with fitting an open spacer and see what happens. I think it will hurt torque.

Actually I do run an open wedge spacer in order to level up my carb, I also run a NOS plate which is more or less open. My car is pretty light so it usually has enough torque to get me into trouble.

minorv8 · Post by **minorv8** » Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:01 am

I'm always fan of most torque, not top power. 20 Bhp may sound a lot but if torque drops 20 Nm at lower (useful) RPM it's a waste of money.

Found some old data, these are all measured at the same rolling road. Absolute values are what they are, just values...

Baseline 4,6 with Performer intake and Edelbrock 500 cfm carb 274 hp / 416 Nm

Next measurement with Merlin heads, all the rest as above 286 hp / 420 Nm

Last measurement with Wilpower intake 305 hp / 409 Nm. Note this is the manifold change only, nothing was done to the timing nor jetting due to lack of time.

Interestingly, I lost something like 60 Nm at about 2500 Nm. With proper tuning the difference should be less but below 4700 rpm the Wilpower gave less torque everywhere. Above 4700 it was better than Edelbrock.

If you like low end torque I would forget the Wilpower. Edelbrock Performer manifold is a good item and will work close to 300 hp level. I never tried the divider wall mod but used a 1" thick 4 hole spacer.

Some engines like spacers, some don´t. I never ran mine without, the logic was to add some plenum volume since the Performer was designed to 3,5 litre engine size.

What is you curent engine spec ?

dyno · Post by **dyno** » Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:14 am

Stock 4,6 ltr short block (9,25/1 CR), intermediate front, Lucas distributor, Bosch vacuum canister with retard, stock heads (only small rework at the valve seat area), ARP studs, currently Edelbrock inlet manifold in and rebuild Holley 600 CFM. Boost performance turbo manifold and single Garret GT30 ball bearing turbo. Mix of 50% 98 octane and 50% Ethanol. Just to be on the save side. Estimated boost pressure 600 - 700 mbar.

The idea of using the Wilpower manifold was having a better mixture distribution and running without any restriction. If it really does lower torque so much up to 4700 RPM it's not what I should use. I do know, in an atmo engine the engine will react more to pulse tuning as in a turbo but still, there will be no miracles.

I will keep the engine RPM low (max 6000 RPM to be save) so I better try first with what I got.

minorv8 · Post by **minorv8** » Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:35 am

I believe that your Garrett will take care of the low rpm torque

Any idea how the mixture behaves from cylinder to cylinder with the edelbrock manifold ?

DaveEFI · Post by **DaveEFI** » Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:46 am

dyno wrote:Interesting. I think the only way to have both world (end low torque and top power) can be achieved by using quad DCOE Webers or anything what looks like.

I'm always fan of most torque, not top power. 20 Bhp may sound a lot but if torque drops 20 Nm at lower (useful) RPM it's a waste of money.

Curious how the power graphs look like.

Don't think so. You get best low end by speeding up the airflow through the carb. Basically, with a smaller choke size. Which is why SUs shouldn't be ignored - they vary the choke size. Or a twin choke carb were one is larger than the other.

One reason why injection is better. The fuel atomisation is more consistant.

dyno · Post by **dyno** » Tue Jan 10, 2017 11:26 am

Indeed, Garret will not take care of low torque because usual it's where they don't produce full boost en even then. Blowers take care about low torque, turbo's are better when you struggle on top.

No idea how good the Edelbrock will be for fuel atomization and how even the mixture will be. One thing is for sure, the big drops of a carburetor are usual an advance in turbo's, taking out a lot of heat form the incoming air. I did this exercise before on a standard Pinto and power with carb was up all time compared to the fuel injection system.

I'm not building this carb / turbo engine to prove carbs make more or less power as fuel injected engine. I'm a carburetor company so normal we have to use a carb to show customers it can be done. If I would make a serious over the top turbo engine I would use fuel injection (and did, but where no Rover V8). Carbs can be complex to tune for high boost.

Yes, never under estimate an SU carburetor. On my dyno I've seen you can run engines extreme (dangerous) lean at light load on SU's without hesitate. Not even possible with fuel injection. If you can add the right quantity of extra fuel at the right time they can do a great job.