Difference in Offenhauser Intake Manifolds

[ford4wd08]

I have no idea if I would ever pursue a new intake manifold for my 2.8 in my B2, but after a little looking around today, I noticed that there are two listed on summit's site that say they will work for the 2.8 V6. They have two different model numbers too: 6097 T vs 6097 DP.

Anyone know what the difference is? Maybe I missed it on the web page, but I'm not sure I understand anything other than the larger price difference between them.

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ofy-6097t

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ofy-6097dp

Just debating whether I would drop any more coin into my 2.8 to see how it would do...

 

[fastpakr]

The 6097DP is the only one I can remember ever seeing. I know there was a 6096 designed for reusing the stock two barrel carb. From a quick glance at the Offenhauser catalog I'm not sure what the 6097t is. There's a previous thread here that references it though:
https://www.therangerstation.com/forums/index.php?threads/found-an-offenhauser-4bbl-manifold.184295/

Maybe @bobbywalter can explain the difference since he suggested using it.

 

[ford4wd08]

The 6097DP is the only one I can remember ever seeing. I know there was a 6096 designed for reusing the stock two barrel carb. From a quick glance at the Offenhauser catalog I'm not sure what the 6097t is. There's a previous thread here that references it though:
https://www.therangerstation.com/forums/index.php?threads/found-an-offenhauser-4bbl-manifold.184295/

Maybe @bobbywalter can explain the difference since he suggested using it.

I saw that same thread as well.... So I did more searching.....

 

[19Walt93]

The 6097T is just the top half, a 6097dp is a two piece manifold. I used one on a 2.8 I built for a friend's Sunbeam Alpine and it worked great but I paid $125 for it at a swap meet, I knew they were expensive but I never expected over $600.

 

[fastpakr]

Thanks for clarifying. As I recall mine came used as well. I'd long since forgotten how expensive they were new.

 

[ford4wd08]

The 6097T is just the top half, a 6097dp is a two piece manifold. I used one on a 2.8 I built for a friend's Sunbeam Alpine and it worked great but I paid $125 for it at a swap meet, I knew they were expensive but I never expected over $600.

I don't know that I understand just the top half? I assume it is a 2 pc manifold? Any body have any pictures? I know these are becoming as rare as hens teeth just like the 2.8!

If anyone has a lead on any used offy's for the 2.8, let me know!

 

[fastpakr]

It's definitely a two piece manifold. I just remembered having to hand cut the gasket between them because mine didn't come with one and at the time I couldn't find an easily available replacement. A quick search isn't pointing me to any pictures of the two sections separated. Basically it's just the top center unit that is the adapter to the 4v carb. I'd assume that the 6096 and 6097 use the same lower unit and just come with different upper sections.

 

[19Walt93]

If you look at the picture, you can see the bolts that hold the 2 piece manifold together. The 6097t is the upper section the carb bolts to, the lower half bolts to the engine.

 

[ford4wd08]

If you look at the picture, you can see the bolts that hold the 2 piece manifold together. The 6097t is the upper section the carb bolts to, the lower half bolts to the engine.
View attachment 43006

Ah, yes I see it now. Thank you both for the explanation.

600 bones is a lot of cash. What types of improvements will you see with this intake.

 

[fastpakr]

Honestly? I'd never pay that kind of money for it. It's perfect if you're putting it with a cam and headers on a small, light car. Not really an obvious mod for a truck, especially with the cost involved. For the money involved you could be well on your way in collecting parts for a V8 swap that would put you far ahead of where a built 2.8 could go.

 

[ford4wd08]

I figured it would not be cost beneficial.

 

[19Walt93]

I used the manifold on a 78 Mustang 2.8 with heads planed .030", Comps middle of 3 offered cams, 1 1/2" headers, a 390 cfm Holley, and a recurved Duraspark distributor. The T5 came out of my daughter's wrecked 4 cylinder Mustang and had a 3.95 low, the 8" rear had 3.00 gears in a Currie housing to fit under the Alpine- which weighed less than 2000 lbs with the Ford running gear. Rolling into the throttle in low, the secondaries would snap open at about 4000 and pin the tach. In a truck I'd use a V8 transmission to get a closer ratio spread and a lot deeper rear gear.
If I was building a 2.8 for a Ranger, being a frugal Yankee( I know, that's redundant), I would gasket match the stock manifold and maybe look into a SLIGHTLY larger 2150 carb. You spend most of your time on just the primaries,anyway.The size of the venturi is embossed in a circle on the side of the carb, 1.08 and 1.12 are common small V8 carbs, some 429's came with a 500 cfm Motorcraft 2150 that would be way too big for a 2.8.
The rebuilt 78 Mustang 2150 in my basement is a 1.08, so I'd go to a 1.12 if you don't mind sacrificing some low rpm throttle response.

 

[ford4wd08]

I used the manifold on a 78 Mustang 2.8 with heads planed .030", Comps middle of 3 offered cams, 1 1/2" headers, a 390 cfm Holley, and a recurved Duraspark distributor. The T5 came out of my daughter's wrecked 4 cylinder Mustang and had a 3.95 low, the 8" rear had 3.00 gears in a Currie housing to fit under the Alpine- which weighed less than 2000 lbs with the Ford running gear. Rolling into the throttle in low, the secondaries would snap open at about 4000 and pin the tach. In a truck I'd use a V8 transmission to get a closer ratio spread and a lot deeper rear gear.
If I was building a 2.8 for a Ranger, being a frugal Yankee( I know, that's redundant), I would gasket match the stock manifold and maybe look into a SLIGHTLY larger 2150 carb. You spend most of your time on just the primaries,anyway.The size of the venturi is embossed in a circle on the side of the carb, 1.08 and 1.12 are common small V8 carbs, some 429's came with a 500 cfm Motorcraft 2150 that would be way too big for a 2.8.
The rebuilt 78 Mustang 2150 in my basement is a 1.08, so I'd go to a 1.12 if you don't mind sacrificing some low rpm throttle response.

I have a non-feedback 2150 from a pinto right now. I believe it is a 1.08.

I would like to keep low end if I could. Sounds like I'll just drive it! Need the transmission issues sorted out first!

 

[bobbywalter]

http://racerwalsh.com/product-category/6-cylinder/2-8/?product_orderby=rating&product_view=list



and tom morana.




600 ...well...1500 for total induction with all new stuff is reasonable. 11 to 1 with forged pistons and decked heads with bg valves...it will break t5's no problem.

 

[Tim russell]

I have no idea if I would ever pursue a new intake manifold for my 2.8 in my B2, but after a little looking around today, I noticed that there are two listed on summit's site that say they will work for the 2.8 V6. They have two different model numbers too: 6097 T vs 6097 DP.

Anyone know what the difference is? Maybe I missed it on the web page, but I'm not sure I understand anything other than the larger price difference between them.

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ofy-6097t

https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ofy-6097dp

Just debating whether I would drop any more coin into my 2.8 to see how it would do...

I believe the dp is dual plane and the other is a dual port