Carbs and spacers have been tested to death. YBM issue #108 covered an engine build where just three of the basic carb spacer designs were dyno tested. Here’s the link to that article. http://www.eatonbalancing.com/blog/2012/09/29/carburetor-spacer-testing/
The latest issue of the YBM (#120) goes into detail on the effect of the slot in the plenum divider which gives some insight on how that slot affects the torque values by itself. For the most part, each engine combination likes something a little different but there are some trends that do come to the forefront.
.
John’s intake as well as the Blue Thunder intake works well with almost any carburetor but head flow is the key here. With either of these intake manifolds, stock heads prefer smaller sized carbs while cylinder heads with increased flow capabilities will make more power with larger carbs being used. This is simply a case where whichever piece has the minimum flow values, be it the heads or the intake, dictates the optimum cfm of the carb being used.
.
There are very few instances where the intake port runners would be sized smaller than the heads if looking to maximize power numbers. It essentially boils down to the intake manifold simply needing to outflow the cylinder heads if wanting to maximize the benefits of any cylinder head flow increases. Out of the box Mummert and Blue Thunder intakes do this in fine fashion on most home ported cylinder heads. When porting the aluminum heads, then porting the aluminum intakes becomes prerequisite simply due to the intake manifold still needing to outflow the heads in order to maximize any head porting benefits.
.
The factory ECZ-B intake was well matched to the factory G and 113 heads but if the heads are ported, then the intake needs to be appropriately ported so it can keep up with the cylinder head flow requirements.

Lorena, Texas (South of Waco)