have you ever switched from dual plane to a single?

[dans70mach1 11]

has anyone ever gone from say a performer to a rpm intake? or rpm to the air gap? How about a rpm to vic jr style? did you feel any difference or see any difference in drivability? Looking through intakes online and I saw a add for a torker2 for a 351w and the add stated that there was no differnce felt between that and a air gap manifold. Just wondering if anyone has gone through and changed intakes and felt a difference.

 

now i know the sopposed to's, single plane for track and dual for any street driving.

[Cupid 10]

I just went from a Performer to RPM Air Gap. Still working on the car. If you can give me another week or so, i'll let you know. It will be hard to give you a very accurate assessment, because all other components were not keep constant. I changed a lot of components, e.g. valve train, cam, heads.

[B-Man 11]

Really depends on your driving. When I did this many years ago I thought I lost on the bottom end...just not the same grunt. It does help on the top end when you get the rpm's up over 4-5000. For a street car I personally don't think they are worth the change.

[Jayru 17]

I went from a performer to a performer RPM air gap. I had to because the performer wouldn't work with the ports on my GT-40x heads. I was using the performer with stock heads before the swap.

 

Even with the head change, i could feel a slight loss in the bottom end driving around town with the new intake. It pulled like hell in the upper rpm though! With the performer and stock heads it had more lowend grunt, but felt flat in the upper rpm's.

 

I have very low gears though (3.00), when i swap to a set of 3.55's or 3.73's at some point, i think that will make up for the loss in low end grunt and improve the seat of the pants feel.

Edited April 3, 2009 by Jayru

[dans70mach1 11]

ill be running 4:10 gears, but was reading a artical in engine masters and they built a 351w with the air gap intake and said they couldnt justify the use of a vic jr intake due to very little top end gain over the air gap...I know i will be running a stall convertor and a cam mat5ched in the right rpm range 3000-7000 and flat tops w/ 2 reliefs. I had my mind set but havent purchased yet...I do appreciate everyones input and I have some time before this thing gets off the ground. but I am working on it every day....

[69gmachine 15]

There's a big difference between a Vic Jr and a Torker II. The size of the runners and plenum make the Torker II somewhere between an RPM and the Vic Jr, although probably closer to the RPM. I don't think I lose anything to an RPM with my 408 using a Torker II. I used a Weiand Excelerator on a 302 back in the 70s and it worked great also. Again, runner size is more important than just being a "single plane".

[Fordrevhead 29]

yeah in general you will lose low end torque and gain some HP on top end. Not worthwhile IMO

[EastYorkStang 63]

I changed from a Performer Rpm to a Torker II but mostly because it allowed my shaker to fit correctly. When I take it out of storage I can do a drive test. According to the folks at Edelbrock there should'nt be any major driveability issues.

[dans70mach1 11]

yeah would like to know. What is supposed to be isnt always... Single plane less torque than a dual etc...

[Cantedvalve 128]

I went from a Performer to a Weiand Xcellerator. Actually SOLVED a lot of my driveability issues. Also, having the proper parts matched together helps too. A stock convertor with a single plane intake wont be much fun... get a convertor up around 2200-2500 and things will fall in place.

[bnickel 10,004]

yeah would like to know. What is supposed to be isnt always... Single plane less torque than a dual etc...

 

 

to be honest on a 351w with a better heads and a mild or bigger cam the torker II will probably out perform a performer even a performer RPM just about everywhere, except maybe the upper low end and mid range where there probably won't be much difference at all. the reason is because the torker II has pretty small runners and plenum for a single plane intake, especially compared to more modern intakes like the RPM and air gap. it's also very short for a single plane, almost the same height as a peformer actually.

 

i read an interesting article on a brand new 69 351w crate motor from a 69 hot rod magazine that showed there wasn't a whole lot of difference at the lower and mid range between a stock 69 4v intake and the shelby hi-rise intake (not the same as what came on 69 shelbys as that would be a medirum riser) but the shelby intake blew it away at the upper end. for a long time the shelby hi-riser was considered one of the best intakes you could get for a 351w. now keep in mind this was back in 69 with limited cam profiles and stock heads so the big restriction was really the heads not the intake. i plan on using the medium riser C90X intake like what would have been on a shelby except mine is the Ford Muscle Parts version, i'll be using GT-40X heads and i may have to do some modifications to the intake to make it work with the heads but that's ok, because i'm going for a period correct look on the cougar, even have a bunch of other period correct peices for the engine already, mostly ignition stuff but when i pop the hood i want it to look like stock 69 or 69 and early 70's performance bits stuff under the hood.

[bnickel 10,004]

yeah would like to know. What is supposed to be isnt always... Single plane less torque than a dual etc...

 

 

to be honest on a 351w with a better heads and a mild or bigger cam the torker II will probably out perform a performer even a performer RPM just about everywhere, except maybe the upper low end and mid range where there probably won't be much difference at all. the reason is because the torker II has pretty small runners and plenum for a single plane intake, especially compared to more modern intakes like the RPM and air gap. it's also very short for a single plane, almost the same height as a peformer actually.

 

i read an interesting article on a brand new 69 351w crate motor from a 69 hot rod magazine that showed there wasn't a whole lot of difference at the lower and mid range between a stock 69 4v intake and the shelby hi-rise intake (not the same as what came on 69 shelbys as that would be a medirum riser) but the shelby intake blew it away at the upper end. for a long time the shelby hi-riser was considered one of the best intakes you could get for a 351w. now keep in mind this was back in 69 with limited cam profiles and stock heads so the big restriction was really the heads not the intake. i plan on using the medium riser C90X intake like what would have been on a shelby except mine is the Ford Muscle Parts version, i'll be using GT-40X heads and i may have to do some modifications to the intake to make it work with the heads but that's ok, because i'm going for a period correct look on the cougar, even have a bunch of other period correct peices for the engine already, mostly ignition stuff but when i pop the hood i want it to look like stock 69 or 69 and early 70's performance bits stuff under the hood.

[dans70mach1 11]

there will be plenty of cam, convertor and 200cc heads with some nice port work

[dans70mach1 11]

there will be plenty of cam, convertor and 200cc heads with some nice port work