Late but what the heck. I have to agree with the "newer designs are going to be better" line of thinking. Although I have seen an article that measured temps on the air-gap vs performer and they found that after a few minutes there was really no difference, the heat soak eliminated the air gap advantage. So in that case I think hype of a new design is raising sales more than actual difference, but there are probably other changes in the passages too that would make a difference too. A few Stealth's are showing up on ebay, but prices are staying pretty high, a lot of people looking for a good used one. I saved about $40 over new for one that is like new, but that's about as cheap as they get. I think $168 at summit. People are dumping Performers, so you will definitely get it cheap. And then you have to ask yourself why are people dumping them? A lot of people have decided they aren't the thing to have anymore and I'm sure a lot of them did their research.
Can I join in too? (and I don't even use a carb) I spent 15+ years in Research and Development (the industry is irrelevant). From that experience, I do know that one cannot state as fact that "Widget A is better than Widget B" without actually conducting tests (acquiring many data points) in a controlled environment while changing no other variables. Summary: I do not believe one can make a statement that a certain intake is better than another unless ALL the others have been measured against it in a controlled environment. And even then, all one can really say is that "Tests indicate that Widget C works best on the engine that was used during the testing" The intake that works best on one setup does not make it a FACT that it is best for all applications. There are entirely too many variables to consider. Wow. It was like I was on a soapbox or something (I'm really not). Obviously, this is all my opinion and I'm enjoying the thread (i]and[/i] making a mental note to search for this thread if the subject comes up again). Sorry for the interruption. Back to you in the studio, Bob.
Anybody running an Offy 360? How does it work out with a small cam, headers and 650 cfm vac sec Holley? Not wanting drag car performance, just good torque on the street. Reason I ask is thats the combo I plan to use, already have the intake and carb.
This is where I don't agree... They change engine products to achieve certain goals as follows: Cut costs Cut weight Consolidate designs to fit more vehicles Add marketing options (like air gaps) Increase performance Notice which priority is at the bottom of my list... Case in point: The Torker 289: Problems: Complex casting (read costly) Limited fitment due to shrinking hood clearance and factory addition of more plumbing in the late 70s/early 80s Solution: Torker 302: Simple casting Lower profile More holes for more plumbing Fits more vehicles now because of all the pork added. Performance: Down the drain... I could go on and on with such cases, but there are not enough hours in the day. Very few equal a true increase in performance or quality. Dave
I never said that it would be a problem, just that it's basically "bolt-&-go", since everything is basically a copy of the factory unit, only aluminum... Yes, I already knew this. My '68 factory cast iron intake did not have the spacer when I got it, so I bought one. The original '73 2-V intake used a 1-inch EGR spacer. Both manifolds are the same height. The Edelbrock Performer without any spacer is pretty much the height of the cast iron unit with the spacer. That's what I was trying to say before. My main point was that the factory 4-V intake manifold works very well, aside from being heavy cast iron. So even though the Performer is not much of a Performance upgrade from that, it's a hell of an upgrade from the stock 2-V intake. A more radical, yet street-driven engine would benefit more from the Performer RPM...
So, TL, do you need an extra Performer 289 intake??? I got one up for sale If one is good, 2 must be better... Scott
I need to stop blabbing about how good these things are. They are going to get hard to find cheap anymore if I keep running my mouth.
I guess I will just hang it on the wall in my garage with my other decorations. Currently, I have my old cam, a few exhaust valves, a piston (from an exploded chevy), my old 2.79 rear gears and spiders, and someday MAYBE a side pipe or two! I might hang up one of my old heads, if I can figure out how to hang a 50lb chunk of iron on drywall...
I will post my opinions on the Torker when I get it installed. The only problem is, I will be installing the Torker, GT40P heads, and headers, all replacing stock components (except for the Performer intake). So, you will probably hear nothing but positive remarks, and I really won't know how much of the improvement was from any one of the components. I usually do one change at a time, just so I can learn what kind of improvements each item gives me. But since the heads were off, and the headers were still in the mail, and I found a Torker while it was all disassembled, I figured I would cut the shock towers and put it all together at once.
Way back when the Torker II was a new manifold I ran a series of flow tests to find the best manifold for high performance use. I got one of every type made for the 302 and flowed them on a ported head. The Offenhouser I used was one that came with three inserts for more or less torque. Was that the 360? If it was it was the best of all of the manifolds in terms of airflow. I ran it without any inserts and slightly modified the port entry in the plenum. I can check the model when I get home, I still have the manifold.
