Intake - Pontiac GTO Forum
User Tag List

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 7 (permalink) Old 04-06-2017, 06:43 PM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: SouthEast Kansas
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Intake

I got a question, i got 3 intakes and which one of the intakes (excluding the triple duece) would yall suggest be good for my 455 build? One is a torker and the one in back is an RPM i believe, i havnt actually got to look at them very good. Found them in an attic of a buddy and bought all 3 but havnt gotten them down yet lol
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	20170401_155800_1491521936010.jpg
Views:	46
Size:	620.6 KB
ID:	89145  
Tyler Thornton is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 7 (permalink) Old 04-06-2017, 10:46 PM
Super Moderator
 
BearGFR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Springtown, TX
Posts: 5,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Garage
For a street engine, it's very hard to out-perform the factory iron intake. They're very good. The single plain Torker is going to be more of a high rpm manifold at the expense of some bottom end (not that Pontiacs are hurting for bottom end). The RPM is a decent compromise, though in some applications you can run into fitment issues because it's taller.
Depending on who you talk to, you'll find people who have very unkind things to say about the Torker. If you're willing to take the time to properly prepare a factory intake, match the ports to the heads, separate the water crossover so that pesky bolt doesn't mess up your careful matching work, etc, they work really well.

Bear

BearGFR
Springtown, TEXAS
BearGFR is offline  
post #3 of 7 (permalink) Old 04-06-2017, 10:59 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: aurora, colorado
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
performer rpm gets my vote

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyler Thornton View Post
I got a question, i got 3 intakes and which one of the intakes (excluding the triple duece) would yall suggest be good for my 455 build? One is a torker and the one in back is an RPM i believe, i havnt actually got to look at them very good. Found them in an attic of a buddy and bought all 3 but havnt gotten them down yet lol
the performer rpm (not the performer) works very well on my warmed over 455...
john23 is offline  
 
post #4 of 7 (permalink) Old 04-07-2017, 10:02 AM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: SouthEast Kansas
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Thanks guys! Lots of good info!
Tyler Thornton is offline  
post #5 of 7 (permalink) Old 04-08-2017, 12:16 AM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: SouthEast Kansas
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Finally got them home, one is a regular performer and the tall one is a torker2!
Tyler Thornton is offline  
post #6 of 7 (permalink) Old 04-08-2017, 08:27 AM
 
PontiacJim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gastonia, NC - Born & raised in Connecticut - 31 years
Posts: 3,451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 347 Post(s)
Garage
As noted, the factory cast iron dual-plane manifold and Q-jet are probably the best combo for under 6,000 RPM performance - with the best being the aluminum Ram Air IV with its slightly larger ports which are designed to math the large ports found on the RAIV heads. But, stock heads can be gasket/port matched to the RAIV size and the RAIV intake used.

The Torker2 is much different than the original Torker. Both are "open plenum" single plane manifolds. The original Torker manifold was/is a good manifold for upper-mid/top end horsepower. It gave up low end/lower-mid range power which is not what you want for a street engine. Does not mean it is a bad manifold as a 455 has plenty of low end torque and the use of a Torker might even calm this down a bit if traction is a problem and then pick up the lost power higher up in the RPM range. My info says the Torker really came on at 5,000 RPM's and up. However, the Torker2 looks to be a redesign aimed more at using the factory intake runners and the larger open plenum. It is rated for 2,500-6,000 RPM's which shows its loss at the lower RPM's, but probably not a problem with the torque of a 455. If I used it, I would use a Q-jet having the smaller primaries to keep airflow/velocity up at lower RPM's which should make it perform good. You definitely want vacuum secondaries on any carb you run, not mechanical unless you have a high stall converter and 3.90 - 4.11 gearing. Here are the specs for the Torker2: Intake Manifolds - Pontiac - Torker II Series - Edelbrock, LLC.

The factory tri-power is another good option. Two different sizes on the end carbs, with the '66 intake having larger outboard carbs. The '66 is prefered. These are a good choice, but if you use an HEI distributor with the larger cap, the HEI will not fit. Just more expense in carbs if you have to purchase them and the linkages. Once set-up, very little problems.

The RPM Performer has good reviews. Looks to be the best choice of the 3 intakes you have if not using the stock cast intake. Rated at 1500-6500 RPM's which puts it really where you want it down in the lower RPM range for street cruisin'. It is a "dual plane" manifold. Intake Manifolds - Pontiac - Performer RPM Series - Edelbrock, LLC.

You want to match all your parts when building any Pontiac engine. Select your cam choice first, then build around this. With 3 intakes, you may want to simply experiment and try them all to see which works best for you.

Here is a comment by Cliff Ruggles on his use/comparison of intake manifolds:

In general terms the RPM dual planes are decent intakes. In some applications they are taller than stock intakes, and cause hood clearance issues, problems with Shaker assemblies and some "Ram Air" set-ups.

I would also add that fitment of the Edelbrock intakes these days is hit and miss.....FULLY expect to get the grinder out for some set-ups!

Most applications do not need or benefit from an aftermarket intake manifold, despite what you may read in the magazines. Same deal with carburetors, distributors, camshafts, etc. Keep in mind that the aftermarket industry is here to serve us, and magazines must promote aftermarket parts, or it all goes away. You will NEVER read once where a factory iron intake, or q-jet will outrun aftermarket parts everyplace, even though we have done this on many occassions, on the dyno and at the track testing parts. Not a big deal to me, my mission in life is NOT to outrun shiney aftermarket parts, just to show folks that you can run as fast or faster with stock parts, if using them is among your goal(s) for the project.

For decades folks have been tossing out factory iron intakes and factory carburetors to install aftermarket aluminum intakes and carburetors, just to loose or make no more power than the factory parts.

Several years ago we tested 3 intakes back to back on the dyno on a pretty stout 428 Pontiac engine we built here in our shop.

The engine was topped with unported aftermarket aluminum heads flowing apprx 260cfm. A 236/242/110 custom ground hydraulic roller cam was installed, compression ratio at 10.6 to 1. We tested a factory 1971 Pontiac HO intake, stock aside from gasket matching and opening it up to two big holes/same size shape as the Edelbrock RPM intake. My own iron intake, which is modified in the same manner, and a port matched Edelbrock RPM intake were also tested.

The HO intake made 487hp.

The RPM made 491HP.

My own iron intake made 497hp.

The RPM intake actually pulled peak power down by 200rpm's. The 500hp engine just didn't want or need that much runner volume for the power level. (Make sure to read the last sentence again, this testing was done on a 500 HP engine, which also produced over 540ft lbs peak torque!!!)

Keep in mind that larger runners increase plenum volume and reduce port velocity. If the engine is getting enough air with smaller runners, then larger runners do not always make more power. They can also shift power curves, narrow up the power curve, and make less "average" power as well.

How many little tiny 350 engines do you see with HUGE intakes sitting on them, feeding factory iron heads and some sort of "high performance" aftermarket camshaft?

I'd bet my next pay check most of them made or make LESS power than the factory intake.

I also did some pretty extensive intake manifold and spacer testing a few years ago, at the dragstrip. It took several outings, and at that time my car was powered by a 455 engine making about 500hp.

I tested several single plane intakes, Holley Street Dominator, Torquer I, and the Edelbrock Performer and Performer RPM, against my modified factory iron intake.

We also obtained and tested a newly released Tomahawk intake (single plane).

The testing was done over several weeks, and each intake was raced on at least one outing, and another one swapped on for as many runs as we could get in. Then it was left in place, made another outing, and raced at least 3 runs, swapped in another one, left it on for another outing, etc.

It took some time and quite a few runs as I had to average numbers and take weather and track conditions into account.

When the smoke cleared and the dust settled, the quickest (ET) run from all intakes was made with the iron intake in place!

The only intake that ran faster in MPH was the newly release Tomahawk intake. It was a solid 2mph faster on the top end of the track, but gave up so much starting line (.09 seconds) and mid-range power that it went slower in elapsed time.

When you read this, consider that this testing was done on a mid-11 second street car, that is deadly consistant at the track.

That testing was extended to spacers as well, 4 hole, fully open, semi-open and fully divided. All on the iron intake. The quickest runs were made with no spacer at all, fastest MPH with a semi-open spacer.

So much for intake and spacer testing, my engine still uses a "modified" factory intake, even though the new engine makes quite a bit more power than the old one. I use the stock parts because they work, and the look you get from folks who wonder by in the staging lanes who gander at the q-jet sitting on the stock intake, then at the ET, then back at the carb/intake......PRICELESS!!!......Cliff
PontiacJim is offline  
post #7 of 7 (permalink) Old 04-08-2017, 09:18 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: aurora, colorado
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
really good info... may i ask the elevation of your track and a typical density altitude when you were doing the comparison runs? thank you.
john23 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Pontiac GTO Forum > The 1964-1974 Pontiac Tempest, Lemans & GTO > 1964-1974 Tempest, LeMans & GTO Engine Tuning and High Performance

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Pontiac GTO Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone know what intake this is? Icefan71 1964-1974 Tempest, LeMans & GTO Technical and Electrical Wiring 6 06-28-2011 07:44 PM
intake ?? bayhammer Intake and Exhaust Discussions 7 05-18-2011 08:57 AM
intake huitt06 Intake and Exhaust Discussions 7 04-19-2009 03:21 PM
One-off intake. ouijaguy Service, Maintenance and Technical Discussion 12 09-14-2005 05:34 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome