Side note: As I recall, the Torker II was not really marketed as a replacement per se for the Torker when it was introduced, but rather as a more "streetable" single-plane manifold...basically aimed at the guys who just HAD to have a single plane intake because that was the "best", but were running mild small blocks that really should have been using a dual plane intake. Side note #2: In quite a few of the '70s & '80s magazine tests of SBC intakes, the good old Chevrolet factory aluminum dual plate (commonly known as the "Z-28 intake") outperformed a lot of the aftermarket manifolds, to the point where it was embarassing to everyone involved.
Those Z28 intakes are probably the great grandaddy of most of the performance dual planes out there. What's amusing is that in the Pontiac Community the stock cast iron intake is considered good for 500-550hp typically and the reason you go to an aftermarket one is in many cases the weight; Then again if you "Jim Hand mod" one you can shed a ton of weight honestly.
my Torker is probably the oldest one. I know an Air Gap would work better but its too high for clearance. Mine is in a 402 ci L78 clone engine with an 850 dp. Works very well with my L89 heads but I know more is there.
Never had good results with the torker, only the strip dominator after I tested it, nothing worked better for me then that isolated runner manifold 300/25, only my weiand tunnel ram out performed it ! That lil 300 /25 was the lil manifold that could , this manifold is just starting to come into its own at the rpm level at which street manifolds run out of steam , this manifold was the first of it kind made in 1957 and many have copied it because it's just that good 👍
Agreed. On the street, I've got a mild Mark IV 454 with oval port heads, solid cam 850DP with spacer and an AirGap. It only ever sees max 6000rpm and the Air Gap is the best manifold I've used on the street
Exactly correct!!!!!my strip dominator works just fine too!!! most cross plane cranks don't operate at those high rpm's that is mostly reserved to those smaller flat plane cranks . Especially if we are running old school small blocks , I like the looks of old school and think the new LS engines are ugly but don't get me wrong I know they run good but again ugly!!!!!!!
@@thetriode Actually it's considered a isolated runner not quite a tunnel ram , infact i have a few tunnel rams laying around my garage and the only problem I have with tunnel rams is hooking up the linkage on the duel 450 cfm's or the 500 cfm's it's kinda a pain in the ass as I like old school stuff !
I always ran a holley street eliminator dual plane . Back before i started playing with convertors. Even at that i used dual plane on the street. My last build 8 yrs ago saw brodix heafs and port match brodix single plane intake woth a 8 inch risers and a 1 inch phenolic plate
The runner CSA in a T-II was absolutely TINY. From what I remember the port's CSA was actually smaller than a stock 416 head from a 305. I could see how that sort of intake would cause fuel to fall out. They actually made an EFI version of it for some reason. Maybe hood cleraance. I can't imagine how a Performer RPM couldn't absolutely trounce it. That first single plane or a Torker 1 would be an interesting dyno comparison vs a modern dual plane.
16:18 Nowadays ANY, that is ANY, thing sold as a budget item is suspect. Instead of getting a good part at a slight discount, you're getting garbage at a substantial markup.
When the Torker first came out on the market. They were mainly bought by hot rodders just to get the cast iron manifold off their motor. Everybody assumed it would automatically just perform better because it had the name Edelbrock on it. So we all thought that engineers were building a much better manifold than a pig iron manifold. And we now realize it was done to cause a replacement in a purchase of the new next and greatest manifold that was to come out once the Torker sales dropped off.
I had a torker 2 on a sbc and remember the steps in the outside radius runner and Edelbroke said it prevented reversion. It actually worked well on a stock 1979 Z28 engine.
Thanks Eric for the tip on the hose it's useful glad see you like a little progress on the truck too LOL just kidding don't work so hard sometime if you work too hard and too fast you actually slow up great info on the intakes too you absolutely right
I have an old Edelbrock Streetmaster Single Plane. I won't trade it for all the money in the world. I've used it on 383-400 SBC engines, with a 2 inch, 4 hole Tapered Spacer, and it performs great from Idle - 6500 rpm. It's not being used on anything now, and probably will just sit around. I still won't part with it.
You are correct... Edelbrock's Tarantula and Scorpion.... IN 1976 were the number one seller's for most street intakes ( we sold over 100, in December at American High Performance in Beaumont, Tx ) that's why we went to Crower injection and took the World record in SDBA! ( yeah... it was drag boats BUT remember how old most of us were THEN, LOL...) Good info ( we were using a Garrett bench then... in 76' and 77 ) KUDO'S !
Until recently I used a Holley Street Dominator on my Cleveland powered racecar. For that application it was excellent but that manifold came on a 302C road car where it was not so happy. We swapped it for a Performer and it was way better. Back in the dim dark ages I had a 307 Monaro with a Torker,, was horrid and fueled up plugs etc. Swapped it for a factory iron 350 manifold and a Q jet. Then it was good to drive. And ofcourse where does a Performer get its influence,, yup the factory intake! My Sports Sedan engine [350 chev] upgraded from original Victor Jnr on Fuellies, to Bowtie version on Dart 2s to 2925 on Victor 23 deg race heads.. We tried it with the manifold only then with a 1" then 2" spacer where it was best. Though not by a lot. BUT you would never get that set up under a roadcar bonnet. With the 4" bonnet scoop the bonnet rode on the drop base airfilter. With a fibreglass bonnet. Many race categories do not allow any non factory bonnet scoops so that is the reason,, and even then many modern cars do not have that clearance. Current car [with no scoops allowed] will have to live with no spacers on CHI race heads and intake. And with those you can look down the intake and see the back of the valve. Head design for the most part though.
I did all vibrant teflon hose on the Olds. So far it's been great. I was a little leery on summit brand hose ends and the vibrant stuff is really nice for the money.
My car has all Russell stainless steel braided lines and the old real Russell A/N fittings, the new Russell / eddelbrock stuff is made in China as usual so I replace it with the XRP which is decent too
I have an old original Torker I bought back in the 90s when I was youngster and yes poor manifold for racing I'm sure but it actually is a decent street manifold imo and surprisingly makes pretty good low rpm torque, good high rise dual planes I assume are better but it still runs strong. I still have it on my old hot rod truck to this day. But I have said I imagine a performer rpm would work better. I don't know if it changes anything but I have always had a 2" square to spread bore adapter for a modded Q-jet. But yes I agree it's old and antiquated.
I'll try to make this short. my grandmother bought a 1966 Chevelle 300 Deluxe two door post, 2b 327, power glide 10 bolt rearend new. my dad talked her into getting the 327 and not the 230 straight six. i got it off her in 1985, of course i wanted it to go faster. dad had me pull the carb, intake and the heads off. didn't even rebuild the engine, anyways i got Corvette heads and intake at the Pomona swap meet. i put them on that 327 with headers, i could not believe how big of a difference intake and the heads made. i drove that car with that setup with the SAME not rebuilt 327 tell 1994 when i took it off the frame. 2019 gave it to my son for graduating high school. and of course he has plans to LS it.. lol
The old TM1 "Torker"... ran one for years. Runners were sized to suit stock head port dimensions of late 60's/early 70's. It is the lowest rise single plane ever made, I think. But it is an easily streetable single plane. They actually have to be opened up slightly to match a 1204, and don't go further. Main problem is the runners serving end cylinders. Because they are straight, air crashes into the bellmouth of the head opening which presents itself [for the first half inch or so] as a 70+ degree wall - not for racing. But it is a fun period correct piece that can be at home on a daily driver, for die hard old school fans that are happy enough with sub 400hp numbers, and can serve up a combo with a stock torque converter and accessory brackets. [Damn, they ask an arm and a leg for aftermarket accessory mounts these days]. Weiand? Chronic about not having enough meat in the casting to go after a 1206: top edge needs another 1/8th inch or so. Hose tech... if you find routing goes in a tighter radius than 6x diameter, maybe think about angled fittings. If it goes tighter than 5x, reach for fittings without blinking - it will last much longer.
You are right man......run one on a ol school early 327 in my 56 with 4-speed...no power house but nice streetable/fun street car.......Hell everything I got is ol school!
Back in the '70s, I tried a Torker manifold on my Z-28. I went back to my factory cross H Z-28 manifold as it proved better everywhere through the power band.. I thought both Edelbrock and Weiand could have done better.
In the 80’s people were only making 300-400 hp.Hood clearance is Always an issue.Team-G & Victor jr barely had hood clearance with A Spacer.Always comes down to Victor-jr vs performer rpm air.Such A balance tipping point for the street.I put it down to automatic trans = RPM air gap,Manual trans = Victor jr.
Thanks Eric! Always good to get knowledge from pros such as yourself. And thanks for the PSA on crap products too! Been caught out many a time by junk that "looked good". So uh... I guess since gas prices are so high, you went to a smaller fuel tank, so the gauge shows a reading when you put fuel in it! LOL! Have a great day! o7
Hey Eric, Tim here.....LOVED this vid.......i run a mildly ported tqr II on my Pontiac....i've never liked the turn, but it IS a strait shot into my heads.....(i have Kauffman heads).....Kauffman makes a single plane called the "Northwind"....it combines a tqr style with a trqrII entry into the heads......i have spoken to Jeff Kauffman personally, and for my rpm range, he said my manifold is a toss up.....it has to do with rpm/cam......i dont spin mine past 6200....(really 6000)......i wud need more cam....but at my static comp ratio, and cam, Jeff cuda just sold me their intake......instead he said i was rite on the cusp of where their Northwind wud make more power....(ergo a toss up)....what a STAND UP DUDE!!!.........their manifold is expensive, but i can get them to cnc port it the same cnc flow of my heads........he still said it was a toss up, instead, he sold me a larger cam (which he makes MUCH less $ on)....so again, what a STAND UP DUDE.....my point:....seems cam, comp ratio, and rpm, are SIGNIFIFICANT factors in choosin the rite intake.....i wanna get to 10:90's....(at 11 flat...11:05, 11:07, 11:09, 11:06) my 10:90 is elusive)....he cuda sold me the intake, but had me buy a Kauffman Custom grind to make the ET instead....was wonderin ur thoughts......maybe the new cam, AND the Northwind wud bring my ET down???.....i just LOVE ur tech, AND that Jeff spent the time with me, and made less $, but puttin me in the rite direction.....TY SIR, for vids like this.......it IS the reason i'm subscribed, AND have my favorite Weingartner Racing Heads T-shirt!!!!....again, TY sir!!!....PEACE to you!!
At the time that Weiand did pretty good, we used to weld extentions between the ports in the manifold and run a 2 inch spacer, I ran it with a 2 barrel and it worked great
I tested one on the dyno because it was one of the legal intakes for a circle track class and it was awful. It would run ok at part throttle but at or near wide open it wouldn't run on all 8 cylinders. The shorter style of Weiand worked ok.
That was a good idea, I'm running a 2 inch spacer on my manifold but have been experimenting with different spacer plates widths all the way ton4 inch and the 2 inch seams to be the happy medium, I like how the newer manifolds incorporate the spacer already into their designs now like the AFR
I used a Victor Jr for quite a few years on my 355 ci small block, and it ran very well, on and off the track! But I am sure, technology has advanced since then!
I had a Victor jr manifold on my 67 chevy el camino with a 350 with a holley 750cfm single pumper, port and polished trick heads with 1.65:1 rockers and fi cam and headers. It had 4.56:1 posi with a m22 4 speed. A lot of fun
Back in the DayThe Edelbrock Scorpion II was the hot ticket for 2,000 to 7,500 rpm 400 block with 350 Crank ( a destroked 400 with pop top pistons) with a 300 duration 0.500 lift cam, That Edelbrock scorpion two was like a giant funnel, it worked well with a 780 dual feed double pumper Holley with the coreect jetting for the engine. Thing was this was a Full race setup, This was a pain in the butt for a daily driver, 8-10 miles to the gallon cause you were running 4/11 or 4/56 gears, had to take a extra set of intake gaskets and a chaulking gun of sylicone ro seal up the front and back, nust gobbbed that in there. It was 12's in the quarter mile fast but not a fun daily driverThat Edelbrock scorpion two was for wide open throttle high rpm horse power, a 200 notrous shot worked well with this set up. You can forget the A/C, not gonna happpen!!
The early Torker had a twisted carb mount. The Torker II was all about fitting under a low stock hood and easing throttle linkage hookup. The Victor was for racing where you didn't have to fit under a stock hood.
I'm running an original Torker on my 427 BBC for a couple of reasons. First reason is, I needed to cut back on horsepower. Second reason, and nearly as important as the first is (for me personally), it holds a big part of my memories as a young man and seeing these on badass hotrods of the day. It just looks badass with the cocked sideways carb sitting on it. It works great with my 781 heads with small valves to keep the horsepower around 480-500. I can gain another 120hp by changing to another set of heads and a modern designed intake, which I will do one day in the future, but right now I simply do not want to spend several thousand more dollars on my drivetrain to be able to handle the added horsepower/torque!! If I can run low 11's and sneak it into the 10's every now and again, I'm totally happy.
My friend had a small block in his truck and he put a torker II intake, changed the camshaft, ram horn manifolds, dual exhaust with cherry bombs. It lost a lot of bottom end torque while not really gaining all that much in the top end. I don't know / remember what heads, cam, or displacement the engine was.
Stock hood (no cowl) is my big bugaboo. My old single plane torker is low but barely clears hood. Even the newer Edlebrock air gap dual plane is higher.
Thank you for the info brother. I appreciate it. Good info. Learn one teach one. Every day. I try to live by that. It mostly works out for me. USUALLY!!!! Lol
Is there a power level where this doesn’t matter as much? As in, if you have 350hp is it hurting you a significant amount? Obviously at higher power it’s a restriction but at lower power levels is it as big a problem?
Both of the ones he claim are junk … were rockstars on , 041 , 441 junkyard built stuff with a low lift cam like a 280 mega cam with a clutch. I was running 11.50s with a scorpion in the 80’s
Might be surprising but I’ve had a really good luck with porting T2 intakes for the Pontiac’s that I build Not to be confused with the Torquer 1!! No I’m not just port matching I’m talking a complete Plenum porting and reshaping the runners making a line of sight a little bit better Etc the most I’ve made was 665hp 672tq on a street pump gas 535 and I believe there was more left Fwiw the T2 Runners have a lot more gentle curve in a better angle of attack than the T1 Now there is better intake manifolds if you have the hood clearance or you have a scoop. also I will say that the Torquer two for the Pontiac is quite a bit better than the Torquer 2 for a small block Chevy it has a lot more room for porting fwiw
All good and accurate info. IMHO. My first car was a 67 Camaro with a 327 / 275 hp engine with factory Quardrajet and cast iron intake and a 4 speed. The car ran really good in stock form. My uncle bought a car that had a Edelbrock Torker intake on it and he took it off to put something different on it. He gave me the Torker and I though Aluminum intake with a Holley would be better than my old Q-jet and cast iron intake. I installed the Torker and the Holley and my car was slower. Eventually went to a Holley Dual Plane #300-36 and the car woke up and ran much better.
In the 1960's, Weiand and Offenhauser had single plane intakes that were boxes with 8 ports. Then in 1971, Edelbrock came out with the Tarantula, X-runner intake. A short time later, the Torker came out, with smaller volume runners. Holley spent a ton of money developing single plane intakes in the mid-1970's. Back in the 1960's and early 70's, the single plane intake was much more economical to make than dual plane intakes. I did have a Mopar Performance cast iron dual quad single plane intake for the 383. Mopar sold them with carbs, linkage and air cleaners, for both the 383 and 413 engines. Some old two barrel 318 intakes are single plane. The Offenhauser box intakes were the 360 box and the Weiand box intake had the same part numbers as their later X-runner intakes, such as 7500.
in 1979 i bought a offenhauser DUAL PORT sbc intake that had so much down low torque my 63 jeep j200 with a saginaw 4 speed and 4;09 gears would creep in low gear at idle in the deer pasture snd on pavement it would pullaway in third from 30mph. that same intake carried my 350 crate motor with the 350 hyd chev cam to 6k easy. that truck wood get rubber in all four gears on pavement, i still have it but its retired now.
Would one of the crappy single plane manifolds still work good for a boosted application though if fed with an elbow ? The 1st shorter manifold, say for hood clearance ?
As long as the port on the intake is slightly smaller than the head port it doesn’t make much change in velocity. What you don’t want is the intake port larger than the head port creating a step.for the air to climb over
the vic jr is a good manifold for low hood clearance. any other occasion i'll take a strip dominator. torkerII's ive thrown in the trash, just a total pile of garbage.
I had a 347" sbf with performer rpm heads 224-232 @.050. Ran a perf rpm airgap intake with 750 4150 holley. Older guy convinced me to try a weiand I think stealth single plane. It was a dog under 3500 and ran the same up top. I put the rpm back o. As fast as I could. Haha.
Hey Eric, your giving out good stuff for us all. Your opinion, how much power do you think the 2975 is capable on a 434ci ? Customer wants 650hp under a stock hood. Was looking to try the 2972 or the 2978 but I think they both are not available.
Shortly after the Torker and Torker 11 were introduced they were considered terrible even in the mid 80’s as to the comment someone made by probably fine in the 3-400 hp motor the Torker series Dyno’d lower in hp and tq than a decent dual plane , can’t remember what other single planes Edelbrock had but Holley had the strip Dominator that is similar as Victor Junior with a slightly lower pad height .
I ran the Holley Strip Dominator on my little .030 over 327 /331 cid SBC..wow it really increased the rpm range and had really good gains mid to upper rpm range,,just like it was advertised..this was the early 80's. actually considering picking another one up.
None of these intakes are as cool as the one I built in 1989. I used an Edelbrock twin carb tunnel ram, drilled it for injector rails, put two stock 302 Mustang GT throttle bodies on it, and that 1986 Mercury Capri I built, had one of the first flying toilet speed density tunnel rams!!! I didn't even care if it hauled ass I just wanted to look cool. I succeeded!!!🤪💯💯💯
If my Edelbrock TR1X is sweating all over the lifter Valley, like a cold on a hot day, does that mean my engine is tuned too rich, or could it be that my carburetors are 5 ft away from my motor? LOL 🤪👍
Those old torkers and xcellerators are odd intakes that fall in an wierd category, there not a dual plane but not a high rpm single plane ripper... I personally can say at least the gen 1 Torker works fine on a mildly modified street SBC, they make surprisingly good low end TQ and pull not half bad up top, better than a standard performer but on a fun street car the low rpm TQ advantages from the performer isn't enough of a gain to warrant the loss in high rpm power imo. There surprisingly versatile intakes I spotted an old Torker 1 on a old 70s tow truck on power nation they dragged out of junk yard lol. With a mild SBC on the dyno would you see a difference between a Torker and a perf RPM definitely...On a mild street car I bet it would be a lot harder to tell. When I see someone ask about these on forums and keyboard experts say there junk,paper weight, toss in trash, use it for a tire chock, they suck....yada yada I say don't listen to them there not as bad as these guys say they work fine if it was as horrifically bad as they say Edelbrock wouldn't have manufactured them for decades (and still do I think), is there better options of course there is but most of these guys that hate on em dont actually have any actual experience with it there just regergitating shit they heard from the same fashion from probably a guy who tried one grossly in the wrong application likely like tossed a Torker on a 600hp SBC or a 140hp 305 and it didn't work very good..... mind blower... just try it I think you will find it works just fine and upgrade later on if you feel the need to. Also I was under the impression the Torker 2s we're aimed towards improving higher rpm power in C3 corvettes with there terrible hood clearance (or anything else with minimal hood clearance) and the only options are the terrible factory iron smog intake, a low rise dual plane that starts weezing after 5000rpm so in that situation the low rise single plane probably was a viable option back in the day. Or I'm totally wrong?✌️
I ran the weiand 7546 for years. It seemed to work well with 650 Holley. I have also run an SY1 crossram single 4 barrel with the recommended Holley 830 cfm carb. Edelbrock Smokey Yunick manifold made in 60-70’s. But have been told there are better manifolds. Been told the standard Edelbrock victor Jr would make around 40 more hp than the crossram. We will see. The crossram makes stupid seat of the pants feel, from 3500 to 6500 on the highway, honestly it never seems to stop pulling. Maybe one day I will get the car to chassis dyno.
I gotta say, the Weiand Team G has always given me better numbers that anything expect maybe the really high end Edelbrock stuff (Yes I know there is a 7 and 8000rpm version)
Here,s an dumb question, what happens if you shorten the port dividers and knife edge the dividers and install what they used to call a turtle which was glued to the floor of the manifold, to help distribute equal flow thru the intake ports?
Unfortunately. I'm building a 4.3 Chevy Vortec V6. I'm probably going to have to fab. A intake. Thanks for the info. Vortec heads should have had the intake ports razed up. They had to make a new intake anyway right. ?????
Great vid. I am a little confused though. I have a 406 crate motor stock Al fast burn heads, intake cam heads compression, I am running 1/8mile is a light roadster. I have a super victor 2 laying around I thought about putting on it but thought it would actually hurt the motor off the line and not give any performance gain since I shift at 5800. Do I have it backwards, and it would help low end? Sine I already have it, any reason not to put it on this combo?
Thanks for sharing your wealth of knowledge Eric. I know they aren't great performers today, but I think everyone would like to hear your thoughts on old crossrams like the SY-1 and the current Offy intake. Is the entry from the plenum into the runner considered a 'turn'?
I'm building a boosted 5.3 Ls. This is going to be street drivin and street raced, looking for the 1-1,100hp range. I know everyone thinks you have to run a holly high ram, or the texas speed intake but I absolutely love the looks of a tall single plane with a Wilson elbow. So I think I'm going to run a holley split 4150 with a split Wilson elbow. I know they used to say that air distribution sucked on carb style intakes. Is that even a factor anymore with efi and a turbo forcing air down its throat?
Sure there are better manifolds today then the holly 300 -25 but that was the one before all the rest after market manifolds and it worked pretty decent I know I had several for different small blocks builds , one that is specifically designed for their own heads is the one that AFR makes , AFR heads are among the best so im sure their manifolds aren't to shabby either!
Strip Dominator actually alittle better than the AFR as cast singleplane. The 2 piece composite AFR from a few years back was better than the Strip Dominator. But it's no longer available.
Hi Eric, love your videos!! Can you compare an Edelbrock 2701 vs a Weiand 7547-1? I am a dirt race IMCA guy and our rules only allow these two intakes, I was wondering if you know or have data to compare these two manifolds and which one performs better? We can only use a 2 barrel holley (500cfm) too! Cam lift profiles typically can't be over .450 either so every ounce of air is rather critical. Hope you can help...I am happy to supply you with these intakes if you want to conduct a test? Thank you!
I seen a dyno test comparing a bunch of intakes on a 450hp 350 SBC. Surprisingly the original Torker made more power than the Torker 2 on the same engine. The Torker 2 was junk, it was way down on power.
Good info Eric! Have a 408 SBF in the camp with a ported victor Jr... Seems to work pretty good even spinning to 7800 rpm... Had it ported when the heads were done because he already had the manifold. Haven't pushed it to see what ET will be. Fighting suspension issues at the moment. Looks like it would probably pick up some with a taller one though. 🤔
@@YerkitRacingChannel The guy that's building my motor hasn't determined the exact rpm range. Still waiting on rods to show up so we can figure out exact compression and stuff. But if I had to make a guess. Between 6200-6800. This is going in a 67 fastback. Being build for street driving. A little drag racing and auto x/track days.
Wow! I remember them open plenum which had the optional steel divider plate for making better bottom end supposedly?!? Lmao! I can't say that they actually did that by adding the divider or not? But it was a bit of a different design where we were fooled into believing that it would work! But I've run these intakes before and they are pretty pathetic for either top end or bottom end never had any good results from these hermaphrodite style intakes! Seemed like they were not good at bottom end power nor top end power. 😕 The tourqer 2 was another sad attempt at not really knowing what it was actually meant for? They were actually attempting to lengen the intake runners by adding the additional turns in the intake runners, which of course means more resistance having to make those turns just to get into the head ports. The super Victor series were probably the best off the shelf intakes you could get and keep it under your hoods. I have a single carb and dual carb tunnel ram and the dual carb would definitely out perform a single. When they made the single and kept the same top of the tunnel ram in dimension rather than adjusting the plenum size of the single carbs into a smaller plenum, they probably would have been more more efficient than just keeping the giant plenum on top of them, it would have made it a much better performance intake. They were going more for looks than performance or were just being cheap and not wanting to redesigned and make a whole new casting? But yes the Team G was the competition to the Victor Jr and weren't that bad either. Don't forget about the twisted intakes which put your carb barrels more in line with the intake runners. They were definitely different looking from the norm! But never thought they did much better than a straight design single 4 barrel plenum? It seems like back in the 80s and even early 90s these manufacturers were appeasing more for the looks than that of actual airflow and velocity? If you grew up in this time frame you would know what I'm talking about?! SMFH! This was the error of chrome and gold plating and wild paint schemes, right before the whole billet aluminum phase came to be! Yuck!!! Lol!
cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0367/8791/2749/files/6_34.jpg?v=1601291337 Here's a link to a pic of an OEM dual plane for an SBC; Wouldn't be surprised if many were like this. I want the mfg to explain how they would even get close to that layout with a divider. Think about how much cross talk you'd have between 5 and 7 on the even bank. That alone would probably make things haywire.
Watch every video, never really know what to say. Going to use your help to port the trick flow 325's on a 460. Ordered some 60 grit stones and paper rolls.
Eric, would you give me a recommendation on what sbc intake I should use for a 3000lb ish, bracket car? I have a brand new set of AFR 210cc heads still in the box. They are the Competition Ported heads, supposed to flow 322cfm @ .650 lift. They have the steam holes drilled, and springs for a Solid Roller Camshaft. I talked myself out of the AFR 220 heads because I've read so much about putting too big of a cylinder head on an engine might be worse than not big enough. And the 210's have 2.08 intake valves, and the 220's have the bigger 2.10 intake valves. I can always go bigger in the future. I THINK? I'm pretty sure they said the 210 and 220 both use the same foundation. Is this true? Planning on building a 10:5:1 compression 406 sbc. Not exactly sure yet if I'm going to use a glide or turbo transmission, 4.56-4.88 rear gear, if it's going to be a glide, may do the same rear gear for the turbo transmission too. I'm thinking about using a Super Victor intake, but not 100% sure yet. Kinda wanting some other recommendations, that might be as good or better. Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Take care, be safe, and have fun regardless.
@@WeingartnerRacing Yeah, I kinda know that now after watching your videos and some others. I was thinking about the 2.10 intake valves too, but nowadays it doesn't seem to be an issue. QUESTION, can my AFR 210's be worked on to make them 220cc or possibly bigger and valve done too. I've been buying parts here and there over the past couple years when I'm able to. I have Eagle 4340, crankshaft, Eagle 4340 H-Beam rods with L-19 rod bolts, but the pistons I bought at a sale turned out to be 18 degree instead of 23 degree. So i need pistons now too. Anyways I'm writing wayyy too much. After I get close to having almost everything I need I plan on sending you my heads and intake to port match or completely revamp them whatever it needs. If you have any available spots to do the work for me once I'm close. Anyways, love the informative videos you put out, thanks so much for sharing then. Take care, be safe, and have fun regardless.
Fun Fact some of that braided line comes from "Off Shore" sources....Just say NO! Another thing I've heard is the VERY EARLY CAST 2975 Victor JR intake has a better runner shape worth 6-10HP over the later ones. The early intakes have ribbeed valley with a freeze plug in them for avalley breather....that was revised after about 6-9 months of production. Also there are "Off Shore" copies of the 2925 Super Victor....STAY FAR AWAY! I bought one off of Ebay and the port divider was over an 1/8" off from the cylinder head....
What do you think about the Wilson super victor for sbc? Should I just go straight for the super victor 2, 421 ci 12.5 cr with AFR 227 #1068 for bracket racing.
I know you can judge an intake just by its physical appearance, uh, um, no you can't. Let's take, for example, runner shape. The runner may look like it can flow a certain way, but now, you have to introduce actual, real time flow from cylinder to cylinder. You have to factor in scavenging, for example. One cylinder on its downstroke, pulling from the main plenum, while another one, let's say, the port right next to it, it's just finishing up sucking in its fuel charge. Meanwhile, across the way, inside the plenum, you have another one that's getting ready to suck some intake charge. You can't tell me, at 6,000 RPM, for example, that will be a nice even intake charge right into the port. There will be turbulence. Little vortices, backflow, pulsation....... you can't 100% say how an intake is going to flow, until it's put to the test, throughout the RPM range, and different displacements will also create different results. My point is, there's too many factors involved. One of the best ways I have found, is just to try the damn thing. It either works with your combination, or it doesn't. It's $300 +/-, and if it doesn't make your motor haul ass, put it on ebay, and try another one. What works best for me? Check out the motors that are making good power, and winning races, and borrow their combination, or portions of it. 😜👍
Soooo, what would you recommend if you’re rpm limited (I.e. with a Pontiac engine), but still want/need to run a single plane intake, say for nitrous? And how do these points (line of sight, runner length) differ, if at all, when using MPFI? Thank you! Great video as per usual.
@@hectorortega9131 Butler Pontiac builds some fire breathing monsters from stroking the old 400 pontiac blocks. The tech is a little different than a SBC, but you can build huge power with pontiac engines. See for example the Crow run by Midwest Street Cars
Look for a Doug Nash Warrior. I've ran mid 10s in a 67 Firebird with a 400 Pontiac NA using that intake. Used it on 455s also with good results. Kinda rare these days. Pontiac Super Victor works good if ya have the room for it. I've ran low 11s with a old Torker on a 455 Pontiac that I drove everyday. The Holley Street Dominator was a decent intake also.
I run that same weiand you have there and never even considered the problem with that sharp turn. All along I've been defending them but I see the problem now. I'm boosting mine so I wonder if it's as much of a problem?
I wish I could find a "junk yard " with cars that had parts like these intakes. I know you didn't mean to say it but it put a picture in my mind of 80's and older race and street cars prime for the picking. Would be nice but I doubt that it would last very long though before it was sold out.
@@poker8193 yeah you could. I used to know a bunch myself but it is so outdated nowadays. You can still do it today but now you would have to go to swap meets and deal with gready old men that knows all the #'s and combos too. They also keep most of the better stuff for them or their buddies so pickings are slim that way too.
Every different shaped manifold is shaped for a specific design use. Some look great but performs like shit on the street. Really, it all boils down as to what you want & how plus where you drive your car or truck. I'm a big fan of highly modified cast iron for many reasons. I've also had huge success with the Offenhauser Dual Port 360. For bad ass racing is the Weiand Tarantula.
All this has to be taken into context. For a 3-400 hp motor these I'm sure work great. But obviously when you go up in power you need more airflow and the newer design starts to make a difference. All good Info. Just my opinion. There are good running cars out there with the older style manifolds.
I don’t remember where I got this idea of cfm v manifold type. On the same engine an open plane would be better with a smaller carb a dual plane better with a larger carb. Is there any validity to that statement?
Eric, can I get your input. I am building a 383 for my truck. It's going to be a daily driver. It's going to turn 6500 rpms, I been looking at intakes and was thinking about getting Holley's sheet metal single carb 2 piece intake. They say it's good for I think 1800 rpms up to 7200. I know ots a tall intake I am going with the stealth Sniper like what you have. I would like your thoughts please
Well, those are all Single Planet design for mid range engine revs to higher rev range and the far left intake appeared to be a lowrider or dual plane design?
That Weiand intake is a low rise single plane..dual planes have the divider on the carburetor pad / base where the carburetor bolts to the intake manifold.
Side note: As I recall, the Torker II was not really marketed as a replacement per se for the Torker when it was introduced, but rather as a more "streetable" single-plane manifold...basically aimed at the guys who just HAD to have a single plane intake because that was the "best", but were running mild small blocks that really should have been using a dual plane intake. Side note #2: In quite a few of the '70s & '80s magazine tests of SBC intakes, the good old Chevrolet factory aluminum dual plate (commonly known as the "Z-28 intake") outperformed a lot of the aftermarket manifolds, to the point where it was embarassing to everyone involved.
Those Z28 intakes are probably the great grandaddy of most of the performance dual planes out there. What's amusing is that in the Pontiac Community the stock cast iron intake is considered good for 500-550hp typically and the reason you go to an aftermarket one is in many cases the weight; Then again if you "Jim Hand mod" one you can shed a ton of weight honestly.
my Torker is probably the oldest one. I know an Air Gap would work better but its too high for clearance.
Mine is in a 402 ci L78 clone engine with an 850 dp. Works very well with my L89 heads but I know more is there.
Never had good results with the torker, only the strip dominator after I tested it, nothing worked better for me then that isolated runner manifold 300/25, only my weiand tunnel ram out performed it ! That lil 300 /25 was the lil manifold that could , this manifold is just starting to come into its own at the rpm level at which street manifolds run out of steam , this manifold was the first of it kind made in 1957 and many have copied it because it's just that good 👍
I don't run any SBCs that turn 9,000 RPM so I've found that throwing on a RPM Air Gap and calling it a day works good.
even the rpm is fine.......
Agreed.
On the street, I've got a mild Mark IV 454 with oval port heads, solid cam 850DP with spacer and an AirGap. It only ever sees max 6000rpm and the Air Gap is the best manifold I've used on the street
Exactly correct!!!!!my strip dominator works just fine too!!! most cross plane cranks don't operate at those high rpm's that is mostly reserved to those smaller flat plane cranks . Especially if we are running old school small blocks , I like the looks of old school and think the new LS engines are ugly but don't get me wrong I know they run good but again ugly!!!!!!!
@@johnalarcon5006 I'd hope they'd run good considering they're basically running what amounts to a folded down EFI equipped tunnel ram.
@@thetriode Actually it's considered a isolated runner not quite a tunnel ram , infact i have a few tunnel rams laying around my garage and the only problem I have with tunnel rams is hooking up the linkage on the duel 450 cfm's or the 500 cfm's it's kinda a pain in the ass as I like old school stuff !
I always ran a holley street eliminator dual plane . Back before i started playing with convertors. Even at that i used dual plane on the street. My last build 8 yrs ago saw brodix heafs and port match brodix single plane intake woth a 8 inch risers and a 1 inch phenolic plate
The runner CSA in a T-II was absolutely TINY. From what I remember the port's CSA was actually smaller than a stock 416 head from a 305. I could see how that sort of intake would cause fuel to fall out. They actually made an EFI version of it for some reason. Maybe hood cleraance.
I can't imagine how a Performer RPM couldn't absolutely trounce it. That first single plane or a Torker 1 would be an interesting dyno comparison vs a modern dual plane.
16:18 Nowadays ANY, that is ANY, thing sold as a budget item is suspect. Instead of getting a good part at a slight discount, you're getting garbage at a substantial markup.
great advice in the video, great advice in the comments.
When the Torker first came out on the market. They were mainly bought by hot rodders just to get the cast iron manifold off their motor. Everybody assumed it would automatically just perform better because it had the name Edelbrock on it. So we all thought that engineers were building a much better manifold than a pig iron manifold. And we now realize it was done to cause a replacement in a purchase of the new next and greatest manifold that was to come out once the Torker sales dropped off.
I had a torker 2 on a sbc and remember the steps in the outside radius runner and Edelbroke said it prevented reversion. It actually worked well on a stock 1979 Z28 engine.
Thanks Eric for the tip on the hose it's useful glad see you like a little progress on the truck too LOL just kidding don't work so hard sometime if you work too hard and too fast you actually slow up great info on the intakes too you absolutely right
I have an old Edelbrock Streetmaster Single Plane. I won't trade it for all the money in the world. I've used it on 383-400 SBC engines, with a 2 inch, 4 hole Tapered Spacer, and it performs great from Idle - 6500 rpm. It's not being used on anything now, and probably will just sit around. I still won't part with it.
When you have something good its best to hold onto it.
Awesome information, thanks for posting!
You are correct... Edelbrock's Tarantula and Scorpion.... IN 1976 were the number one seller's for most street intakes ( we sold over 100, in December at American High Performance in Beaumont, Tx ) that's why we went to Crower injection and took the World record in SDBA! ( yeah... it was drag boats BUT remember how old most of us were THEN, LOL...)
Good info ( we were using a Garrett bench then... in 76' and 77 ) KUDO'S !
Until recently I used a Holley Street Dominator on my Cleveland powered racecar. For that application it was excellent but that manifold came on a 302C road car where it was not so happy. We swapped it for a Performer and it was way better.
Back in the dim dark ages I had a 307 Monaro with a Torker,, was horrid and fueled up plugs etc. Swapped it for a factory iron 350 manifold and a Q jet. Then it was good to drive. And ofcourse where does a Performer get its influence,, yup the factory intake!
My Sports Sedan engine [350 chev] upgraded from original Victor Jnr on Fuellies, to Bowtie version on Dart 2s to 2925 on Victor 23 deg race heads.. We tried it with the manifold only then with a 1" then 2" spacer where it was best. Though not by a lot. BUT you would never get that set up under a roadcar bonnet. With the 4" bonnet scoop the bonnet rode on the drop base airfilter. With a fibreglass bonnet.
Many race categories do not allow any non factory bonnet scoops so that is the reason,, and even then many modern cars do not have that clearance.
Current car [with no scoops allowed] will have to live with no spacers on CHI race heads and intake. And with those you can look down the intake and see the back of the valve. Head design for the most part though.
I did all vibrant teflon hose on the Olds. So far it's been great. I was a little leery on summit brand hose ends and the vibrant stuff is really nice for the money.
My car has all Russell stainless steel braided lines and the old real Russell A/N fittings, the new Russell / eddelbrock stuff is made in China as usual so I replace it with the XRP which is decent too
,,,,,,,,thank you Eric for the time and energy..........................
I have an old original Torker I bought back in the 90s when I was youngster and yes poor manifold for racing I'm sure but it actually is a decent street manifold imo and surprisingly makes pretty good low rpm torque, good high rise dual planes I assume are better but it still runs strong. I still have it on my old hot rod truck to this day. But I have said I imagine a performer rpm would work better. I don't know if it changes anything but I have always had a 2" square to spread bore adapter for a modded Q-jet. But yes I agree it's old and antiquated.
I'll try to make this short. my grandmother bought a 1966 Chevelle 300 Deluxe two door post, 2b 327, power glide 10 bolt rearend new. my dad talked her into getting the 327 and not the 230 straight six. i got it off her in 1985, of course i wanted it to go faster. dad had me pull the carb, intake and the heads off. didn't even rebuild the engine, anyways i got Corvette heads and intake at the Pomona swap meet. i put them on that 327 with headers, i could not believe how big of a difference intake and the heads made. i drove that car with that setup with the SAME not rebuilt 327 tell 1994 when i took it off the frame. 2019 gave it to my son for graduating high school. and of course he has plans to LS it.. lol
The old TM1 "Torker"... ran one for years. Runners were sized to suit stock head port dimensions of late 60's/early 70's. It is the lowest rise single plane ever made, I think. But it is an easily streetable single plane. They actually have to be opened up slightly to match a 1204, and don't go further. Main problem is the runners serving end cylinders. Because they are straight, air crashes into the bellmouth of the head opening which presents itself [for the first half inch or so] as a 70+ degree wall - not for racing. But it is a fun period correct piece that can be at home on a daily driver, for die hard old school fans that are happy enough with sub 400hp numbers, and can serve up a combo with a stock torque converter and accessory brackets. [Damn, they ask an arm and a leg for aftermarket accessory mounts these days].
Weiand? Chronic about not having enough meat in the casting to go after a 1206: top edge needs another 1/8th inch or so.
Hose tech... if you find routing goes in a tighter radius than 6x diameter, maybe think about angled fittings. If it goes tighter than 5x, reach for fittings without blinking - it will last much longer.
You are right man......run one on a ol school early 327 in my 56 with 4-speed...no power house but nice streetable/fun street car.......Hell everything I got is ol school!
TM-1 that is.
Back in the '70s, I tried a Torker manifold on my Z-28. I went back to my factory cross H Z-28 manifold as it proved better everywhere through the power band.. I thought both Edelbrock and Weiand could have done better.
In the 80’s people were only making 300-400 hp.Hood clearance is Always an issue.Team-G & Victor jr barely had hood clearance with A Spacer.Always comes down to Victor-jr vs performer rpm air.Such A balance tipping point for the street.I put it down to automatic trans = RPM air gap,Manual trans = Victor jr.
Thanks Eric! Always good to get knowledge from pros such as yourself. And thanks for the PSA on crap products too! Been caught out many a time by junk that "looked good".
So uh... I guess since gas prices are so high, you went to a smaller fuel tank, so the gauge shows a reading when you put fuel in it! LOL!
Have a great day! o7
Hey Eric,
Tim here.....LOVED this vid.......i run a mildly ported tqr II on my Pontiac....i've never liked the turn, but it IS a strait shot into my heads.....(i have Kauffman heads).....Kauffman makes a single plane called the "Northwind"....it combines a tqr style with a trqrII entry into the heads......i have spoken to Jeff Kauffman personally, and for my rpm range, he said my manifold is a toss up.....it has to do with rpm/cam......i dont spin mine past 6200....(really 6000)......i wud need more cam....but at my static comp ratio, and cam, Jeff cuda just sold me their intake......instead he said i was rite on the cusp of where their Northwind wud make more power....(ergo a toss up)....what a STAND UP DUDE!!!.........their manifold is expensive, but i can get them to cnc port it the same cnc flow of my heads........he still said it was a toss up, instead, he sold me a larger cam (which he makes MUCH less $ on)....so again, what a STAND UP DUDE.....my point:....seems cam, comp ratio, and rpm, are SIGNIFIFICANT factors in choosin the rite intake.....i wanna get to 10:90's....(at 11 flat...11:05, 11:07, 11:09, 11:06) my 10:90 is elusive)....he cuda sold me the intake, but had me buy a Kauffman Custom grind to make the ET instead....was wonderin ur thoughts......maybe the new cam, AND the Northwind wud bring my ET down???.....i just LOVE ur tech, AND that Jeff spent the time with me, and made less $, but puttin me in the rite direction.....TY SIR, for vids like this.......it IS the reason i'm subscribed, AND have my favorite Weingartner Racing Heads T-shirt!!!!....again, TY sir!!!....PEACE to you!!
New to the channel ; great information. Thank you.
Thanks for watching.
Great information, thanks brotha! 👍
At the time that Weiand did pretty good, we used to weld extentions between the ports in the manifold and run a 2 inch spacer, I ran it with a 2 barrel and it worked great
I tested one on the dyno because it was one of the legal intakes for a circle track class and it was awful. It would run ok at part throttle but at or near wide open it wouldn't run on all 8 cylinders. The shorter style of Weiand worked ok.
That was a good idea, I'm running a 2 inch spacer on my manifold but have been experimenting with different spacer plates widths all the way ton4 inch and the 2 inch seams to be the happy medium, I like how the newer manifolds incorporate the spacer already into their designs now like the AFR
Thank you sir! Always liked the torquer and the 7546 will put them away and get team G !
I used a Victor Jr for quite a few years on my 355 ci small block, and it ran very well, on and off the track! But I am sure, technology has advanced since then!
Its still a good intake.
I carry red horse hose and fittings at work. They are really nice and the finish on the fittings looks really good after years of service.
I've had GREAT success with Vibrant hose and fittings. GREAT GREAT success.
I had a Victor jr manifold on my 67 chevy el camino with a 350 with a holley 750cfm single pumper, port and polished trick heads with 1.65:1 rockers and fi cam and headers. It had 4.56:1 posi with a m22 4 speed. A lot of fun
Its not a bad manifold for as old as it is.
Back in the DayThe Edelbrock Scorpion II was the hot ticket for 2,000 to 7,500 rpm 400 block with 350 Crank ( a destroked 400 with pop top pistons) with a 300 duration 0.500 lift cam, That Edelbrock scorpion two was like a giant funnel, it worked well with a 780 dual feed double pumper Holley with the coreect jetting for the engine. Thing was this was a Full race setup, This was a pain in the butt for a daily driver, 8-10 miles to the gallon cause you were running 4/11 or 4/56 gears, had to take a extra set of intake gaskets and a chaulking gun of sylicone ro seal up the front and back, nust gobbbed that in there. It was 12's in the quarter mile fast but not a fun daily driverThat Edelbrock scorpion two was for wide open throttle high rpm horse power, a 200 notrous shot worked well with this set up. You can forget the A/C, not gonna happpen!!
The early Torker had a twisted carb mount. The Torker II was all about fitting under a low stock hood and easing throttle linkage hookup. The Victor was for racing where you didn't have to fit under a stock hood.
Guy I knew who raced little windsor fords swore the old school twisted torker kicked the crap out of the Victor and all the newer stuff
I'm running an original Torker on my 427 BBC for a couple of reasons. First reason is, I needed to cut back on horsepower. Second reason, and nearly as important as the first is (for me personally), it holds a big part of my memories as a young man and seeing these on badass hotrods of the day. It just looks badass with the cocked sideways carb sitting on it. It works great with my 781 heads with small valves to keep the horsepower around 480-500. I can gain another 120hp by changing to another set of heads and a modern designed intake, which I will do one day in the future, but right now I simply do not want to spend several thousand more dollars on my drivetrain to be able to handle the added horsepower/torque!! If I can run low 11's and sneak it into the 10's every now and again, I'm totally happy.
My friend had a small block in his truck and he put a torker II intake, changed the camshaft, ram horn manifolds, dual exhaust with cherry bombs. It lost a lot of bottom end torque while not really gaining all that much in the top end. I don't know / remember what heads, cam, or displacement the engine was.
Stock hood (no cowl) is my big bugaboo. My old single plane torker is low but barely clears hood. Even the newer Edlebrock air gap dual plane is higher.
Thank you for the info brother. I appreciate it. Good info. Learn one teach one. Every day. I try to live by that. It mostly works out for me. USUALLY!!!! Lol
Is there a power level where this doesn’t matter as much? As in, if you have 350hp is it hurting you a significant amount? Obviously at higher power it’s a restriction but at lower power levels is it as big a problem?
I remember in the day, The Weiand Team G was the shiznit on SBC.
They make 3 different heights for SBC still. I'm guessing the tallest of the 3 is the best of them
Both of the ones he claim are junk … were rockstars on , 041 , 441 junkyard built stuff with a low lift cam like a 280 mega cam with a clutch. I was running 11.50s with a scorpion in the 80’s
tourqer 2
@@mctigmctiggy1475 if you gotta ask it was before you were born. Super Shops Automotive Performance Wholesalers 🇺🇸
team G 3000 to 8500!!!! they make power.
Might be surprising but I’ve had a really good luck with porting T2 intakes for the Pontiac’s that I build
Not to be confused with the Torquer 1!!
No I’m not just port matching I’m talking a complete Plenum porting and reshaping the runners making a line of sight a little bit better Etc
the most I’ve made was 665hp 672tq on a street pump gas 535 and I believe there was more left
Fwiw the T2 Runners have a lot more gentle curve in a better angle of attack than the T1
Now there is better intake manifolds if you have the hood clearance or you have a scoop.
also I will say that the Torquer two for the Pontiac is quite a bit better than the Torquer 2 for a small block Chevy it has a lot more room for porting fwiw
All good and accurate info. IMHO. My first car was a 67 Camaro with a 327 / 275 hp engine with factory Quardrajet and cast iron intake and a 4 speed. The car ran really good in stock form. My uncle bought a car that had a Edelbrock Torker intake on it and he took it off to put something different on it. He gave me the Torker and I though Aluminum intake with a Holley would be better than my old Q-jet and cast iron intake. I installed the Torker and the Holley and my car was slower. Eventually went to a Holley Dual Plane #300-36 and the car woke up and ran much better.
300-36 fav dua plane intake ever for the sbc . Why they stopped making them sucks
Great vidja Eric 🤙🏼
In the 1960's, Weiand and Offenhauser had single plane intakes that were boxes with 8 ports. Then in 1971, Edelbrock came out with the Tarantula, X-runner intake. A short time later, the Torker came out, with smaller volume runners. Holley spent a ton of money developing single plane intakes in the mid-1970's. Back in the 1960's and early 70's, the single plane intake was much more economical to make than dual plane intakes. I did have a Mopar Performance cast iron dual quad single plane intake for the 383. Mopar sold them with carbs, linkage and air cleaners, for both the 383 and 413 engines. Some old two barrel 318 intakes are single plane. The Offenhauser box intakes were the 360 box and the Weiand box intake had the same part numbers as their later X-runner intakes, such as 7500.
in 1979 i bought a offenhauser DUAL PORT sbc intake that had so much down low torque my 63 jeep j200 with a saginaw 4 speed and 4;09 gears would creep in low gear at idle in the deer pasture snd on pavement it would pullaway in third from 30mph. that same intake carried my 350 crate motor with the 350 hyd chev cam to 6k easy. that truck wood get rubber in all four gears on pavement, i still have it but its retired now.
Would one of the crappy single plane manifolds still work good for a boosted application though if fed with an elbow ? The 1st shorter manifold, say for hood clearance ?
Hi Eric, what would your advise be for forced induction manifold?? Similar, bigger plenum??
As long as the port on the intake is slightly smaller than the head port it doesn’t make much change in velocity. What you don’t want is the intake port larger than the head port creating a step.for the air to climb over
Exactly it's all about the flow!!!!!!
I misread the title of this video as, "Stupid Manifold Information," as in... stupid information, related to manifolds. Watched it anyway! lol
Thanks for watching anyway.
the vic jr is a good manifold for low hood clearance. any other occasion i'll take a strip dominator. torkerII's ive thrown in the trash, just a total pile of garbage.
Good Video Eric! What about the Ford CHI Manifold and mods to it ? A lot of Ford Guys watching .
I had a 347" sbf with performer rpm heads 224-232 @.050. Ran a perf rpm airgap intake with 750 4150 holley. Older guy convinced me to try a weiand I think stealth single plane. It was a dog under 3500 and ran the same up top. I put the rpm back o. As fast as I could. Haha.
Street Master was pretty similar to torker but really low port entry into the head. Early attempts but soon abandoned thank goodness!
I have good luck with a team G intake on my mopar rb engine. Runs good right up to 6k rpm.
"Victor Jr won't make the power of these".... Haha! Funny how things work.
Hey Eric, your giving out good stuff for us all. Your opinion, how much power do you think the 2975 is capable on a 434ci ? Customer wants 650hp under a stock hood. Was looking to try the 2972 or the 2978 but I think they both are not available.
Shortly after the Torker and Torker 11 were introduced they were considered terrible even in the mid 80’s as to the comment someone made by probably fine in the 3-400 hp motor the Torker series Dyno’d lower in hp and tq than a decent dual plane , can’t remember what other single planes Edelbrock had but Holley had the strip Dominator that is similar as Victor Junior with a slightly lower pad height .
The big block Mopar version of the Torker even had big indents in the runners to clear the bolts. Not sure what they were thinking.
I ran the Holley Strip Dominator on my little .030 over 327 /331 cid SBC..wow it really increased the rpm range and had really good gains mid to upper rpm range,,just like it was advertised..this was the early 80's. actually considering picking another one up.
None of these intakes are as cool as the one I built in 1989. I used an Edelbrock twin carb tunnel ram, drilled it for injector rails, put two stock 302 Mustang GT throttle bodies on it, and that 1986 Mercury Capri I built, had one of the first flying toilet speed density tunnel rams!!! I didn't even care if it hauled ass I just wanted to look cool. I succeeded!!!🤪💯💯💯
If my Edelbrock TR1X is sweating all over the lifter Valley, like a cold on a hot day, does that mean my engine is tuned too rich, or could it be that my carburetors are 5 ft away from my motor? LOL 🤪👍
Hot rod fuel hose is what I use in Canada. Ptfe with a lifetime warranty. One mans garage in lethbridge alberta
Those old torkers and xcellerators are odd intakes that fall in an wierd category, there not a dual plane but not a high rpm single plane ripper... I personally can say at least the gen 1 Torker works fine on a mildly modified street SBC, they make surprisingly good low end TQ and pull not half bad up top, better than a standard performer but on a fun street car the low rpm TQ advantages from the performer isn't enough of a gain to warrant the loss in high rpm power imo. There surprisingly versatile intakes I spotted an old Torker 1 on a old 70s tow truck on power nation they dragged out of junk yard lol. With a mild SBC on the dyno would you see a difference between a Torker and a perf RPM definitely...On a mild street car I bet it would be a lot harder to tell. When I see someone ask about these on forums and keyboard experts say there junk,paper weight, toss in trash, use it for a tire chock, they suck....yada yada I say don't listen to them there not as bad as these guys say they work fine if it was as horrifically bad as they say Edelbrock wouldn't have manufactured them for decades (and still do I think), is there better options of course there is but most of these guys that hate on em dont actually have any actual experience with it there just regergitating shit they heard from the same fashion from probably a guy who tried one grossly in the wrong application likely like tossed a Torker on a 600hp SBC or a 140hp 305 and it didn't work very good..... mind blower... just try it I think you will find it works just fine and upgrade later on if you feel the need to. Also I was under the impression the Torker 2s we're aimed towards improving higher rpm power in C3 corvettes with there terrible hood clearance (or anything else with minimal hood clearance) and the only options are the terrible factory iron smog intake, a low rise dual plane that starts weezing after 5000rpm so in that situation the low rise single plane probably was a viable option back in the day.
Or I'm totally wrong?✌️
I ran the weiand 7546 for years. It seemed to work well with 650 Holley.
I have also run an SY1 crossram single 4 barrel with the recommended Holley 830 cfm carb. Edelbrock Smokey Yunick manifold made in 60-70’s. But have been told there are better manifolds. Been told the standard Edelbrock victor Jr would make around 40 more hp than the crossram. We will see.
The crossram makes stupid seat of the pants feel, from 3500 to 6500 on the highway, honestly it never seems to stop pulling. Maybe one day I will get the car to chassis dyno.
Im curious what you find.
I gotta say, the Weiand Team G has always given me better numbers that anything expect maybe the really high end Edelbrock stuff (Yes I know there is a 7 and 8000rpm version)
Here,s an dumb question, what happens if you shorten the port dividers and knife edge the dividers and install what they used to call a turtle which was glued to the floor of the manifold, to help distribute equal flow thru the intake ports?
Unfortunately. I'm building a 4.3 Chevy Vortec V6. I'm probably going to have to fab. A intake. Thanks for the info. Vortec heads should have had the intake ports razed up. They had to make a new intake anyway right. ?????
Great vid. I am a little confused though. I have a 406 crate motor stock Al fast burn heads, intake cam heads compression, I am running 1/8mile is a light roadster. I have a super victor 2 laying around I thought about putting on it but thought it would actually hurt the motor off the line and not give any performance gain since I shift at 5800. Do I have it backwards, and it would help low end? Sine I already have it, any reason not to put it on this combo?
That one could go either way. I would say test it and find out. My thinking is 60ft will be done but still have same ET.
Please do intake comparison on Ford intakes.
I really want to go super victor on my 427w build. Instead of Vic Jr & RPM air gap.
If you texture the roof or floor of the intake runners would it help with vaporization?
Thanks for sharing your wealth of knowledge Eric.
I know they aren't great performers today, but I think everyone would like to hear your thoughts on old crossrams like the SY-1 and the current Offy intake.
Is the entry from the plenum into the runner considered a 'turn'?
They have a nice length for torque.
I'm building a boosted 5.3 Ls. This is going to be street drivin and street raced, looking for the 1-1,100hp range. I know everyone thinks you have to run a holly high ram, or the texas speed intake but I absolutely love the looks of a tall single plane with a Wilson elbow. So I think I'm going to run a holley split 4150 with a split Wilson elbow. I know they used to say that air distribution sucked on carb style intakes. Is that even a factor anymore with efi and a turbo forcing air down its throat?
Sure there are better manifolds today then the holly 300 -25 but that was the one before all the rest after market manifolds and it worked pretty decent I know I had several for different small blocks builds , one that is specifically designed for their own heads is the one that AFR makes , AFR heads are among the best so im sure their manifolds aren't to shabby either!
They are ok but in some situations other manifolds are better.
@@WeingartnerRacing Most definitely!
Strip Dominator actually alittle better than the AFR as cast singleplane. The 2 piece composite AFR from a few years back was better than the Strip Dominator. But it's no longer available.
Hi Eric, love your videos!! Can you compare an Edelbrock 2701 vs a Weiand 7547-1? I am a dirt race IMCA guy and our rules only allow these two intakes, I was wondering if you know or have data to compare these two manifolds and which one performs better? We can only use a 2 barrel holley (500cfm) too! Cam lift profiles typically can't be over .450 either so every ounce of air is rather critical. Hope you can help...I am happy to supply you with these intakes if you want to conduct a test? Thank you!
would also appreciate more information about the 7547 because hood clearance is an issue for me.
Im curious how different plenum volumes affect flow and atomization.
I seen a dyno test comparing a bunch of intakes on a 450hp 350 SBC. Surprisingly the original Torker made more power than the Torker 2 on the same engine. The Torker 2 was junk, it was way down on power.
Good info Eric! Have a 408 SBF in the camp with a ported victor Jr... Seems to work pretty good even spinning to 7800 rpm... Had it ported when the heads were done because he already had the manifold. Haven't pushed it to see what ET will be. Fighting suspension issues at the moment. Looks like it would probably pick up some with a taller one though. 🤔
I'm building a 427 sbf right now.
AFR 205 heads.
Looking to run a super victor. Because it's taller and has longer runners.
@@I_like_turtles_67 should be a strong motor! What rpm are you going to turn with it?
@@YerkitRacingChannel The guy that's building my motor hasn't determined the exact rpm range. Still waiting on rods to show up so we can figure out exact compression and stuff. But if I had to make a guess. Between 6200-6800.
This is going in a 67 fastback. Being build for street driving. A little drag racing and auto x/track days.
@@I_like_turtles_67 awesome man! Sounds like a cool build!
Wow! I remember them open plenum which had the optional steel divider plate for making better bottom end supposedly?!? Lmao! I can't say that they actually did that by adding the divider or not? But it was a bit of a different design where we were fooled into believing that it would work! But I've run these intakes before and they are pretty pathetic for either top end or bottom end never had any good results from these hermaphrodite style intakes! Seemed like they were not good at bottom end power nor top end power. 😕 The tourqer 2 was another sad attempt at not really knowing what it was actually meant for? They were actually attempting to lengen the intake runners by adding the additional turns in the intake runners, which of course means more resistance having to make those turns just to get into the head ports. The super Victor series were probably the best off the shelf intakes you could get and keep it under your hoods. I have a single carb and dual carb tunnel ram and the dual carb would definitely out perform a single. When they made the single and kept the same top of the tunnel ram in dimension rather than adjusting the plenum size of the single carbs into a smaller plenum, they probably would have been more more efficient than just keeping the giant plenum on top of them, it would have made it a much better performance intake. They were going more for looks than performance or were just being cheap and not wanting to redesigned and make a whole new casting? But yes the Team G was the competition to the Victor Jr and weren't that bad either. Don't forget about the twisted intakes which put your carb barrels more in line with the intake runners. They were definitely different looking from the norm! But never thought they did much better than a straight design single 4 barrel plenum? It seems like back in the 80s and even early 90s these manufacturers were appeasing more for the looks than that of actual airflow and velocity? If you grew up in this time frame you would know what I'm talking about?! SMFH! This was the error of chrome and gold plating and wild paint schemes, right before the whole billet aluminum phase came to be! Yuck!!! Lol!
cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0367/8791/2749/files/6_34.jpg?v=1601291337
Here's a link to a pic of an OEM dual plane for an SBC; Wouldn't be surprised if many were like this. I want the mfg to explain how they would even get close to that layout with a divider. Think about how much cross talk you'd have between 5 and 7 on the even bank. That alone would probably make things haywire.
Now Im paranoid about my fuel lines...lol. I assumed they're pretty much all the same.
New Mopar super Victor looks closer to SV 2 for chevy. only buy the best fuel lines . not off brand
Just picked up a torker for my 455 olds., street motor.
What are the effects of reversion on these manifolds?
On the tunnel style is there a coolant passage shunt.
Im not sure what you are talking about.
Lee Shepherd help make the holley 300-25.what about the 300-100 manifold?
Watch every video, never really know what to say. Going to use your help to port the trick flow 325's on a 460. Ordered some 60 grit stones and paper rolls.
Eric, would you give me a recommendation on what sbc intake I should use for a 3000lb ish, bracket car? I have a brand new set of AFR 210cc heads still in the box. They are the Competition Ported heads, supposed to flow 322cfm @ .650 lift. They have the steam holes drilled, and springs for a Solid Roller Camshaft. I talked myself out of the AFR 220 heads because I've read so much about putting too big of a cylinder head on an engine might be worse than not big enough. And the 210's have 2.08 intake valves, and the 220's have the bigger 2.10 intake valves. I can always go bigger in the future.
I THINK? I'm pretty sure they said the 210 and 220 both use the same foundation. Is this true?
Planning on building a 10:5:1 compression 406 sbc. Not exactly sure yet if I'm going to use a glide or turbo transmission, 4.56-4.88 rear gear, if it's going to be a glide, may do the same rear gear for the turbo transmission too.
I'm thinking about using a Super Victor intake, but not 100% sure yet. Kinda wanting some other recommendations, that might be as good or better. Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
Take care, be safe, and have fun regardless.
A 220cc head is not too big for a 406 especially if it’s raced. A super victor would work fine.
@@WeingartnerRacing Yeah, I kinda know that now after watching your videos and some others. I was thinking about the 2.10 intake valves too, but nowadays it doesn't seem to be an issue. QUESTION, can my AFR 210's be worked on to make them 220cc or possibly bigger and valve done too. I've been buying parts here and there over the past couple years when I'm able to. I have Eagle 4340, crankshaft, Eagle 4340 H-Beam rods with L-19 rod bolts, but the pistons I bought at a sale turned out to be 18 degree instead of 23 degree. So i need pistons now too. Anyways I'm writing wayyy too much. After I get close to having almost everything I need I plan on sending you my heads and intake to port match or completely revamp them whatever it needs. If you have any available spots to do the work for me once I'm close. Anyways, love the informative videos you put out, thanks so much for sharing then.
Take care, be safe, and have fun regardless.
I got 421 n they told vitor Jr to snake wit the cam I got say I got go bigger to super vitor n head of AFR 220
Look at the Nascar engine. The height of the plenum and runner length will shock you. Even the exhaust are a unique 2 into 1.
I got a 347 SBF with Dart Pro 1 heads & a Torker. Won't spin it past 6,000 based on cam size. Ditch it for a dual plane?
Yes
Fun Fact some of that braided line comes from "Off Shore" sources....Just say NO! Another thing I've heard is the VERY EARLY CAST 2975 Victor JR intake has a better runner shape worth 6-10HP over the later ones. The early intakes have ribbeed valley with a freeze plug in them for avalley breather....that was revised after about 6-9 months of production. Also there are "Off Shore" copies of the 2925 Super Victor....STAY FAR AWAY! I bought one off of Ebay and the port divider was over an 1/8" off from the cylinder head....
What do you think about the Wilson super victor for sbc? Should I just go straight for the super victor 2,
421 ci 12.5 cr with AFR 227 #1068 for bracket racing.
Super victor 2 is better.
@@WeingartnerRacing What are your thoughts on the Victor E #2978 on a 427 sbc with AFR 227s #1068 ? I have hood clearance issues.
What about the taller Team G with the built in Spacer is it similar to the middle 2 ?
No lower profile and not as good.
Any comments on the Holley Pontiac Street Dominator. They show good numbers on the dyno.
I know you can judge an intake just by its physical appearance, uh, um, no you can't. Let's take, for example, runner shape. The runner may look like it can flow a certain way, but now, you have to introduce actual, real time flow from cylinder to cylinder. You have to factor in scavenging, for example. One cylinder on its downstroke, pulling from the main plenum, while another one, let's say, the port right next to it, it's just finishing up sucking in its fuel charge. Meanwhile, across the way, inside the plenum, you have another one that's getting ready to suck some intake charge. You can't tell me, at 6,000 RPM, for example, that will be a nice even intake charge right into the port. There will be turbulence. Little vortices, backflow, pulsation....... you can't 100% say how an intake is going to flow, until it's put to the test, throughout the RPM range, and different displacements will also create different results. My point is, there's too many factors involved. One of the best ways I have found, is just to try the damn thing. It either works with your combination, or it doesn't. It's $300 +/-, and if it doesn't make your motor haul ass, put it on ebay, and try another one. What works best for me? Check out the motors that are making good power, and winning races, and borrow their combination, or portions of it. 😜👍
Soooo, what would you recommend if you’re rpm limited (I.e. with a Pontiac engine), but still want/need to run a single plane intake, say for nitrous? And how do these points (line of sight, runner length) differ, if at all, when using MPFI? Thank you! Great video as per usual.
The recomention is, ditch that pontiac motor.
@@hectorortega9131 Butler Pontiac builds some fire breathing monsters from stroking the old 400 pontiac blocks. The tech is a little different than a SBC, but you can build huge power with pontiac engines. See for example the Crow run by Midwest Street Cars
Look for a Doug Nash Warrior. I've ran mid 10s in a 67 Firebird with a 400 Pontiac NA using that intake. Used it on 455s also with good results. Kinda rare these days. Pontiac Super Victor works good if ya have the room for it. I've ran low 11s with a old Torker on a 455 Pontiac that I drove everyday. The Holley Street Dominator was a decent intake also.
They sell a Super Victor Pontiac EFI intake with the bungs already there.
Fragola is good shit. I've never had a problem with none of their goods.
Look at all those air gap manifolds.
I run that same weiand you have there and never even considered the problem with that sharp turn. All along I've been defending them but I see the problem now. I'm boosting mine so I wonder if it's as much of a problem?
Lots of boost pushes it out straighter.
I wish I could find a "junk yard " with cars that had parts like these intakes. I know you didn't mean to say it but it put a picture in my mind of 80's and older race and street cars prime for the picking. Would be nice but I doubt that it would last very long though before it was sold out.
Used to be able to build. 7 second 1/8th mile car for under a grand with junk yard stuff. My old man knew every Chevy cast number by heart.
@@poker8193 yeah you could. I used to know a bunch myself but it is so outdated nowadays. You can still do it today but now you would have to go to swap meets and deal with gready old men that knows all the #'s and combos too. They also keep most of the better stuff for them or their buddies so pickings are slim that way too.
@@cjcoleman7372 everyone crushed out back home. When scrap got up. So we don’t even have junk yards now
Every different shaped manifold is shaped for a specific design use. Some look great but performs like shit on the street. Really, it all boils down as to what you want & how plus where you drive your car or truck. I'm a big fan of highly modified cast iron for many reasons. I've also had huge success with the Offenhauser Dual Port 360. For bad ass racing is the Weiand Tarantula.
Manifold spacer tests, open and ported dual and single videos...... nothing fancy, just a little myth busting plain Jane off the shelf...
I was gonna say my uncle always talked about Vic Jr...
Right on
All this has to be taken into context. For a 3-400 hp motor these I'm sure work great. But obviously when you go up in power you need more airflow and the newer design starts to make a difference. All good Info. Just my opinion. There are good running cars out there with the older style manifolds.
With that much power you could use a dual plane.
There are 400 small blocks running around with afr 195 heads and air gaps making 500-525 HP
Have you or do you do EFI multi-sport manifolds, I have a world product intake
Dangit !!
I hate it when I don't think of something that is this obvious ....
You are welcome.
I don’t remember where I got this idea of cfm v manifold type. On the same engine an open plane would be better with a smaller carb a dual plane better with a larger carb. Is there any validity to that statement?
No that’s false.
Eric, can I get your input. I am building a 383 for my truck. It's going to be a daily driver. It's going to turn 6500 rpms, I been looking at intakes and was thinking about getting Holley's sheet metal single carb 2 piece intake. They say it's good for I think 1800 rpms up to 7200. I know ots a tall intake I am going with the stealth Sniper like what you have. I would like your thoughts please
I would avoid that intake.
@@WeingartnerRacing what is it about that intake you don't like?
Well, those are all Single Planet design for mid range engine revs to higher rev range and the far left intake appeared to be a lowrider or dual plane design?
That Weiand intake is a low rise single plane..dual planes have the divider on the carburetor pad / base where the carburetor bolts to the intake manifold.