Another what intake to use on my 340 thread!

-
oliver

oliver

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2011
Messages
567
Reaction score
252
Location
Vallejo, CA
Oh yay, another one of these... but bear with me here. I have two choices, both worth of my setup. A non-airgap performer rpm and a torker II 340. My setup is:

.060 over 340 (~350 ci now)
KB 243, I beams, forged crank
10.5:1 Static and about 8:1 dynamic compression ratio's
solid roller .550 lift, 288 adv. duration, 244 @ .050
harland sharp 1.5 rockers
750cfm edelbrock
J heads, stainless valves, 2.02 intake 1.6 exhaust, fully ported and polished ( dont know exact flow #'s)
a833 OD 4 speed
3.91 rear gears
3300 pound car
7k rpm limit

I have to decide what intake to part match and which one to sell, im sure there is going to be lots of love for he rpm, but any real input?

Oh, heres a couple pics of the motor.

20120229_123154.jpg

20120229_123207.jpg

20120229_123220.jpg
 
Ditto. Engine is still on the lighter side of the single plane vs Dual plane useage and the car is heavy so a torque advantage would be realized. You'l make better use of the torque gain when driving or atthe track. If there was more gear and a lighter weight involved, like 4.30 gear and 300 lbs. lighter, I'd be looking at the single plane a little more closely.
Real nice build though.
 
Salty Dog said:
Ditto. Engine is still on the lighter side of the single plane vs Dual plane useage and the car is heavy so a torque advantage would be realized. You'l make better use of the torque gain when driving or atthe track. If there was more gear and a lighter weight involved, I'd be looking at the single plane a little more closely.
Real nice build though.
Click to expand...

Sounds right, not 100% sure on the weight i over estimated to be sure. Its actually a 66 belvedere that this engine is going into and it scaled out at 3050 with the slant 6 in it, i figure the motor will be about the same, but i will be adding weight with the blow proof bellhousing and the 8 3/4 instead of the 7 1/4 rear end. Even if the car weighs 3100 you would still go with the dual plane? Thanks for the comment, took a long time gathering up the right parts for the build.
 
Umm, yea, I thnk so. How ever, far be it from me NOT to try out the single plane. I'd do it just for the Ha-ha's of doing it. Gaskets are cheap and so is permatex. I've run 11's with the TorkerII360. Similar set up.
 
Salty Dog said:
Umm, yea, I thnk so. How ever, far be it from me NOT to try out the single plane. I'd do it just for the Ha-ha's of doing it. Gaskets are cheap and so is permatex. I've run 11's with the TorkerII360. Similar set up.
Click to expand...

Have you run a dual plane? If so, how was it compared to the torker?
 
I made the move from a TorkerII360 to a Air-Gap RPM. There was a very noticeable difference in the change. At the time, it was a 10-1, 360 with a Purple 292/.509 cam, Edelbrock heads 750 cfm and Hooker Super Comp headers (1-3/4 tube) 4spd and 4.10's

Much lower/mid torque gained, no top end loss noticed. Never track run.

I'd run the Torker if I was ignoring anything under 3300 rpm, hi stall, hi gear ratio light car, under 3000 lbs. It is a great on the cheap intake, otherwise, leave it alone unless your spending most of your time at / above 3300 rpm and well above.

Block the heat cross over unless you NEED IT!
 
What's the application? 7000 RPM leads me to believe its not going to be a street only car, but here goes.

Race? Street?

For street I would say the RPM hands down. It is going to make at least the same power and more torque in the RPM range you will be in all the time.

For race, there's a lot of anecdotal information on this forum that the Airgap version of the RPM actually outdoes the Victor in most cases, including stroker motors.

For a dual purpose vehicle I would choose the RPM. Even if the performance in the article below for the RPM and the Torker were reversed, I am guessing you would miss the torque on the street more than the .05 on the track.

However, if you are going to spray it heavily the Torker is worth considering.

The local aggregate heavily suggests that the TorkerII is not a particularly good intake single plane or otherwise. The RPM is nearly identical to the Air Gap with better cold start behavior.

My personal feelings are that I wouldn't run the Torker just because of the difficulty of getting some of the bolts in/out while removing/installing the intake. :)

FWIW, there's an article here that compares the Torker II to the Air gap version.

http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/...dyno_testing_small_block_intakes/viewall.html

Sounds like a very fun combo in a cool car.
 
Any oiling mods? Stock oiling system and pan w 7000 RPMs usually=spun rod bearings. RPM air gap is my vote.
 
swinger340 said:
Any oiling mods? Stock oiling system and pan w 7000 RPMs usually=spun rod bearings. RPM air gap is my vote.
Click to expand...

standard volume oil pump with high pressure spring. i'll take my chances, im also going to be running pretty light oil because of the clearances im using.
 
Going for max HP for race? Eddy Victor.
 
StrokerScamp said:
Going for max HP for race? Eddy Victor.
Click to expand...

Nope, just an engine to match my driving style. I would do victor if i was going to race it. I think i'll stick with my rpm and attempt to pawn off the torker ii to some one.
 
oliver said:
standard volume oil pump with high pressure spring. i'll take my chances, im also going to be running pretty light oil because of the clearances im using.
Click to expand...

Use full synthetic (5w-30) will help prevent the oil problem. Id suggest you get the milodon road race oil pan (sit above the k frame and holds 6 quarts) plus the pan a spot for an oil temp sender. I have one on my 340 and autoxcuda help design the pan.
 
I like the RPM, looks like it has better flow shape instead of just an X with harsh turns at the port.
 
On my 340 build my machinist immediately recommended I use oil restrictors to the heads to force oil to the crank/cam, and the use of roller rockers, due to this motor's tendendency to spin bearings. A healthy oil pump of course and he says I can spin it up there all day long. So definately I would suggest oil system mods, especially if you are already using roller rockers, off topic I know, just wanted to share my .02. As far as intake, I vote rpm airgap, by far one of the best intakes with a great broad power range. I have used it on chevys and fords too, they always make great low end torque and pull as high as 7500 with great results!
 
oliver said:
Nope, just an engine to match my driving style. I would do victor if i was going to race it. I think i'll stick with my rpm and attempt to pawn off the torker ii to some one.
Click to expand...

I think that's a wise decision. Even those chinkese knock off RPMs are really good on the street. That's what I got for my 318.
 
For what your doing with the car I say you really won't notice the difference. The air gap is a better design for the street. I just pulled a torker off of my restoration project. I am going to hide a LD340 on it ground clean and painted, I have basically the same motor and carb. It worked just fine with the torker. But I just opted to go with the dual plane for the factory apearance. My other Duster has a single plain. It is not lacking any torque at all.
 

Attachments

  • DSCF0094.jpg
    132.1 KB · Views: 207
StrokerScamp said:
I think that's a wise decision. Even those chinkese knock off RPMs are really good on the street. That's what I got for my 318.
Click to expand...

In my opinion, the non-air gap RPM is vastly superior to the Chinese deal, especially if you're looking to turn 7000 RPM. The runner cross section is much larger on the edelbrock, to say nothing of shape, plenum, or even Chinese QC.
 
I would go with the RPM. I have used the RPM and the RPM Air-gap on the same engine, but I didn’t notice a difference in ET at the track. I have not used the torker II, but I have used the Victor....So, long story short, I would use the RPM. Yes you could spin your engine up to 7k, but that cam/head combo will probably be done before that so I don’t see that being an issue.

FWIW, I used a 1 inch spacer on my RPM manifolds, it just always ET’ed better with a little more MPH. My current stroker motor used an Air-gap for a while, ran 10.90’s with it in GOOD air. I switched to a Victor and picked up a chuck after tuning it for a year…it ran 10.88 on the brakes in “ok” air last summer. It should be in the 10.7’s EASY this spring with some good air.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top