Performer vs Performer RPM?????????

:D Well, I was wondering why you didn't say anything. Hadn't realized you've been away so long. ( :D seems like only yesterday) I feel for you though. Keep your spirits up. Somebody's got to be out there :nice: :flag: That first car looks suspiciously like a Stang clone. The second car, wasn't bad looking though.------ maybe with a small block Ford under the hood?????? What was it anyway?
 
  • Sponsors (?)


My neighbor has a 302 he rebuilt not long ago. He's running the Performer RPM intake, a 600 CFM Edelbrock carb, and a cam I'm not sure of. I do know it has a .484" lift. It sounds good and has plenty of power. He did port his heads though. But it idles smooth and he gets around 20 mpg with a C4. If you want, I can find out what cam he has.
 
my car is weird, even with the AFR heads, the car is quicker with the perfomer than the RPM.. and it pulls to 6k rpm... lost .2 and 2mph in the 1/4 with the RPM.. I DID port match the performer to the AFR heads, in about an hour with a die grinder..

I'd go with a 600cfm carb...
 
<<The correct way to size a carb is by your engine displacement and the maximum rpms you will rev to. For a 300 cubic inch engine:

RPM 4k 4500 5k 5500 6k 6500
CFM 280 315 350 380 420 450 stock street
CFM 300 350 385 420 462 500 high performance>>

I find that chart misleading. It would suggest that a 300cid engine would never need more than 500cfm, when I think most people know that more carb than that can perform better.

I think it is just a mathematecal chart to indicate how much cfm is necessary to fill cylinders of a given size. But it does not account for rate, and we all know that the faster you can fill cylinders, the better potential for performance.