Single plane Torker II

-
It somewhat depends on what you want out of the car.... single plane is better for mid and high range so it's more suited for racing. It will still work fine on the street but you will give up some low end grunt. If you're just looking to get the car running so you can drive it, it'll be good.
 
A lot of people trash that intake and rightfully call it a “Tweener” intake because it is in between a good dual plane (RPM exempt) and a got d single plane for racing.

I have used it before and haven’t a bad thing to say about it. But keep in mind that the operating RPM range is higher than dual planes by a thousand RPM. This intake is best used with something a bit aggressive camshaft duration wise and high stall converters.

How is this intake going to be used?
What is your intended engine combo?
 
QuickDart360 said:
How does the victor 340 compare to torker intake as far as streetability?
Click to expand...

It’s been quit sometime since I have owned my Torker II 340. I just got my first Victor 340. Between the two, I’d rather run the Victor 340. Lower height, smaller plenum, IMO, a better power maker. But more racey with shorter runners.

There both single plane intakes, so, there not going to be small cam, low stall, medium gear ratio friendly on the street intake manifold.

If I had to run ether one on the street, I’d would hope it would be on at least 390 cubes. The larger cubic in h engine makes more of a air demand on the intake track system. Because of this, the intake seems to shrink in its ability as the engine grows in size making it more acceptable for the street.

RustyRatRod said:
As @crackedback would say, they make good doorstops. lol
Click to expand...

Considering the current and better intake(s) available today, I agree. I wouldn’t use it unless it was the only intake available to me for use. Restriction on hood clearance, some crazy rule, dyno test, etc....
Or with a supercharger?????

The RPM is the intake to go to today for somewhere up to the mid to low 11 second range. Somewhere around here seems to be the division line. Mind you, it’s a blurry line due to the immense wide and varied factors involved in each and every build and car as well as reason & setting in which there built.
As an example a dedicated track car would/could possibly use a single plane to its advantage. This of course would need to be tested by the owner.

As I keep reading throughout the years, this 11.5/11 second range seems to be the break line. After this approximate E.T. area, a single plane is better in the strip. And now can begin the argument of which single plane is best for that job.

Considering in the first post the engine mentioned is a 340, it would be much my belief that a RPM would be the single best intake choice for a street, street/strip engine in an easy 90% + of all builds. By the time a 340 is built to take advantage of a single plane intake, the components used to be better than the RPM are not so street friendly and are more track oriented ignoring any useable RPM below 3500.

At that point, launching a strip car @3.5K+, your not concerned with low end torque. No need for a dual plane.
 
A bodies are light enough that you can get away with a single plane. If you have a high stall torque converter and lower rear end ratio even more so. I ran one on my 408 dart, both with an auto (2800 converter) and a 4 speed with 3:55 gears. It worked great.
 
d55dave said:
A bodies are light .... I ran one on my 408 dart, both with an auto (2800 converter) and a 4 speed with 3:55 gears. It worked great.
Click to expand...

A perfect example on how a large engine makes the intake smaller. Have you tried to run a Torker II 340 on a 318? Just for comparison sakes?
 
This one I have is a Chrysler one and has the corrugation inside on the bottom so I guess it really isn't a Torker II but from the outside it looks almost the same
 
I got my on a victor 340 and so far like it because it's different. I do have 3.91's nad a 9.5" FTI 3400-3600 stall converter. Cam is the 292 mopar purple shaft. Engine is a 360 KB 107 pistons, 340 X-heads and car is a dodge dart sport.
 
I've got an old Torker on the 340 in my Duster 727 RMVB, 3.23's . Haven't run a different manifold yet, so I don't have a real comparison. But I can say I have no problems driving around town with it. Great throttle response of the line, no traction, but instant response lol. And it pulls nicely up to redline. That said, I don't have the cam specs but it's clearly not stock and I run a higher than stock stall converter (3500 now). Maybe someday I'll try something else, but for now I'm really happy with how the car is running, and I'd rather spend the money elsewhere, like on some 3.91- 4.10's.

Pat
 
I'm cheap. If I already own it, I'm using it. Then if I don't like the way the car runs I'll replace it.
 
The Torker II is not a bad intake. It works pretty well with the redisign.

The original Torker 340... should have been smelted back down to make better intakes like the LD4b and LD340. Doorstop of the highest degree. POS! LOL
 
Looks just like this but it's a mopar one
s-l1600.jpg
 
yellow rose said:
I agree. That intake certainly isn't as bad as the original Torker. I'd run it and see what happens.
Click to expand...
Hey yellow rose so what is your opinion on the victor 340? Think it's a descent intake? I ask you because in the past you have suggested single plane intakes.
 
Richie said:
Looks just like this but it's a mopar one.
Click to expand...
Richie, you need to be more on target. Start with a picture of what you have.
Mopar doesn’t make a TorkerII340. There intake “Just like it” is a poor description and the performance of it is nothing like the Edelbrock.
Come on man! Get that picture up.

Here’s food for thought; 360 Street/Strip Bruiser-Dyno results
 
Last edited:
72-73 340 intake and not close in any way to the torker340 or torker II

Similar to a Performer 318/360/performer RPM/LD340/LD4b intake. It's also a thermoquad base.
 
Last edited:
That will also be a dual plane intake Richie, and other than the weight of the cast iron is very comparable performance wise to a lot of the older aftermarket dual plane aluminum intakes.
 
Are you sure it's a dual plane because I've had that carb off...I'll have to look again..Senior moment :(
 
crackedback said:
The Torker II is not a bad intake. It works pretty well with the redisign.

The original Torker 340... should have been smelted back down to make better intakes like the LD4b and LD340. Doorstop of the highest degree. POS! LOL
Click to expand...

ok, then I had it backwards......as usual. Sorry bout that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top