Edelbrock Intakes -- Torker vs. Performer RPM or RPM Air Gap

Discussion in 'Classic Mustang Specific Tech' started by Pbum5, Nov 11, 2005.

  1. Just wanted to hear some opinions on intakes.

    I currently have Edelbrock Torker (early style with the twisted carb) on my 289.
    Don’t know the specs of my cam, have ported heads with 1.94 and 1.60.
    Headers, 650 DP. It comes alive at about 2500 or so and pulls to about 6000rpms.
    I have been very happy with the intake I have a 1” spacer on it to.
    I have 4 spd.

    Just wondering if the

    Performer RPM or
    Performer RPM Air Gap

    might be a better intake than my old school Torker.
    I've heard the Torker II's suck.
  2. I'm actually thinking of upgrading from my stock intake to the Performer RPM.
  3. the performer rpm intake will give you better low end, power should start coming on around 1500 rpm, and it will still pull to 6k rpm. you should also see an improvement in overall drivability as well, and perhaps fuel economy.
  4. I know I love my air gap. It was something that I could tell just from switching from a performer to it. With my cam it doesn't like to be below 1500 and loves 2k-6500. With a sick engine I managed a 1.9 60 foot so it has some torque to it.
  5. thanks for the replies..

    so is it a better are they better intakes than the torker?

    I know the low end will be better but how much is any do you loose on the mid and high end?

    any more opinions
  6. I had a Torker II and replaced it with an RPM Air Gap. Dyno tuning shows that I lost power at the low end and gained at the high end. Go figure.
  7. with just stock ported heads with larger valves you should feel a huge difference going to an air gap dual plane- single plane is a little much for what you told us of your set up.

    BTW- i'm still running the old style performer RPM on mine - works great!
  8. Take a look at the Stealth, too. I've had an Air-Gap, but discarded it in favor of the Stealth, which has much more taper in the runners, and the casting and machining quality was superior. Everyone I know who has one is very happy with it. It pulls to 6500RPM, too. The problem with the Air-Gap is that the last inch or more of the runners are not tapered, so you cannot effectively port-match the port to the head, if needed. This is a problem for heads like AFR 185s, but may not be a problem for stock heads, or stockers with mild porting.
  9. I was going to go witha Vic Jr. intake because single planes are the best, but after some readingI saw the RPM Airgap and how it measured up. On an engine going to 6500rpms it only lost 7hp to the Vic Jr. but gained like 40 ft/lbs of torque. I need to dig it up and see what the exact numbers are. Hopefully you won't have clearance issues with your car I had some.I have dealt with the clearance issues to my benefit. I am using the factory air cleaner housing and snorkel with a K&N filter element. What I did was put it on the carb without the lid on top, and put a touch of oil on the top lip of the filter element. Then closed my hood and lifted it it up to see if I make a seal with the top of the hood and luckily I did. Now I can keep the cool factory look but also create a ram air effect. I have got to get some pics up sometime.
  10. Yes, huge problem. Had to gasket match instead of port match because of it.
  11. My testimonial? I love my Stealth. My old heads and torker 289 intake used to kill my motor off at 5500. The Stealth is rated to 6800 rpms but, I've had this motor over 7000 rpms several times and it's still pulling.

    I'd almost run it on a stroker.
  12. There is so much taper in the Stealth that you can easily port it handle a stroker. I expect a HP peak around 5800-6000RPM with my 331, which is fine for a hyd. roller cam. It should pull to 6500RPM, if the valve springs hold up.
  13. thanks for all the responses.
    So it sounds like the Stealth is the way to go.

    I did a search on Summit and it looks like the Stealth has a rear water passage does this create and coolng issues?
  14. No. However, it would have the potential to warm the intake charge, although it does not appear to be a problem. Edelbrocks don't have it, supposedly to reduce intake charge temp.