Performer 318/360 intake

[a-bodyguy]

there's a hot rod or car craft dyno shoot out from back in the day that pitted the new on the scene air gap against the performer, strip dom, six pack, and maybe torker?

anyway, the performer did admirably well in the lower RPM part not giving up much of anything in that "highway cruise" swath of testing.

granted, it was with eddy alum heads and a high lift cam but still...

point being, i think a gasket/port match and send it. low lift, and value for time invested is bang for the buck. any more than that you're picking fly **** out of pepper.

carb is a little small so there's room for improvement there. a QFT 680 VS would be choice on top of that.

and the torker door stop made more the strip dom
evryone says oh the torker was ported bfd
there guys on here running 10s with the door stop
10s with exh manifolds almost 9s

 

[TT5.9mag]

and the torker door stop made more the strip dom
evryone says oh the torker was ported bfd
there guys on here running 10s with the door stop
10s with exh manifolds almost 9s

To be fair, it’s a torker 2 and it was ported by Dulcich. He’s known for saying “lightly touched up” when he really should say “full blown hog wild”. The torker is a door stop.

 

[crackedback]

Torker II is nothing like the original doorstop, smelter material Torker 340.

 

[a-bodyguy]

To be fair, it’s a torker 2 and it was ported by Dulcich. He’s known for saying “lightly touched up” when he really should say “full blown hog wild”. The torker is a door stop.

The orig torker runs in the 10s

 

[TT5.9mag]

The orig torker runs in the 10s

So what?
If you’ve never done back to back testing with a torker vs ANY OTHER MODERN SINGLE PLANE then you have no comparative data.
If the torker makes 500 hp and you can unbolt it and bolt on a victor with no other changes and pick up 20 then why would you ever bolt the torker on again? Seriously it’s a door stop.

 

[a-bodyguy]

There are many intakes worse then that calling something that runs 10s is bs imo
comparing to new intakes 20 hp bfd
The castings on most new intakes are door stops

 

[middleagecrisis]

I love the old Torker 340 manifold, but then again, I like old-school M/T finned valve covers, as well. I've run it on a 318 (did just fine) and will be running an owner (me) ported version on my 360 with an old solid lifter cam profile. Would I pick up a tenth with a modern manifold over an old-school intake, probably, but a Torker looks more in place under my Duster hood than an air-gap. If I'm wanting the best technology available, I'd still have my STR-8 6.2L, 6 spd. Challenger and not my Duster. The Challenger was comfortable, sounded nasty and could click off an 11 right off the showroom floor. Whatever floats your boat, right?

 

[crackedback]

Plenty of stuff that is junk can run well. In the case of the Torker 340, there were a bunch of better available pieces to run out there.

Same exercise as the guy that build a 650hp engine, bolts a stock torque converter to it, installs in a 15 seconds chassis and thinks a car that runs 11.0 at 135 is a killer efficient ride!

Day 2 period correct stuff, nostalgia has its place.

 

[junkyardhero]

So what?
If you’ve never done back to back testing with a torker vs ANY OTHER MODERN SINGLE PLANE then you have no comparative data.
If the torker makes 500 hp and you can unbolt it and bolt on a victor with no other changes and pick up 20 then why would you ever bolt the torker on again? Seriously it’s a door stop.

i mean I can get a good look at a T-bone by sticking my head up a bull's ***, but I'd rather take a butcher's word for it!

 

[alpha13]

Well he said right there "low compression 360 with stock heads and stockish cam" and he's trying to spend the least amount of money needed so dropping $400+ for an extra 5-10 hp sounds silly to me.

I personally have not seen a test where a performer kept up with an RPM. You are claiming 5-10 I'm not saying you are wrong but I don't see it at 6000 rpm especially on anything modified. If the guy isn't willing to drop the cash then the performer would work like I said. If I was throwing something together quick sure I would use a performer, but if I was trying to make power I would use the RPM. I'm not arguing, just making an informed opinion.

 

[alpha13]

Like I said, mine runs on 87E10 and has since 1999.
The question is, why put a new roof on a building with a crumbling foundation?
OP already has alloy heads; but his pressure is just 145psi, indicating either
1) that his pistons are way down in the holes, or
2) that his stockish cam, ain't so stock.

145 psi is fast approaching a lazy-dog bottom-end, and with nearly always a sluggish throttle response, when the carb is correctly sized; and the 600 is too small for the cam and heads.
And; since we're NOT in the racing forum, and since, I have a lifetime of experience as a streeter, and since, the OP is asking for an opinion, here it is again;

for me, my opinion is, that porting is NOT the next thing to spend money on.
The next thing is to get the pressure out of the basement.

Kern Dog; you are free to state your opinion as to the OP's request.
You are not free to downplay anyone else's opinion.
Let the OP make that decision.

I'm with you AJ. If I was building stock set up I wouldn't splurge for those high dollar cylinder heads. However, if I needed new heads anyway I might look into it for maybe an upgraded bottom end in the future. Perhaps that was what the OP was thinking when he got them. Perhaps not.

 

[TT5.9mag]

Plenty of stuff that is junk can run well. In the case of the Torker 340, there were a bunch of better available pieces to run out there.

Same exercise as the guy that build a 650hp engine, bolts a stock torque converter to it, installs in a 15 seconds chassis and thinks a car that runs 11.0 at 135 is a killer efficient ride!

Day 2 period correct stuff, nostalgia has its place.

What a great post.

 

[crackedback]

I personally have not seen a test where a performer kept up with an RPM. You are claiming 5-10 I'm not saying you are wrong but I don't see it at 6000 rpm especially on anything modified. If the guy isn't willing to drop the cash then the performer would work like I said. If I was throwing something together quick sure I would use a performer, but if I was trying to make power I would use the RPM. I'm not arguing, just making an informed opinion.

Port match a 318/360 and they do really well. 318/360 is the lower RPM level so of course the AG is going to do better in a range the 318/360 wasn't designed for. Throw a 600 on it to choke it out even more, not making it to the higher range anyways. Same as the old 284 vs 292 cam choice. 292 was only better in the last 500 rpm of range in most every case. Smaller cam 280 or 284 was better for a hot streeter.

We had a 360 with an SP2P intake go high 11's... yippee. Horrible high rpm intake, made it work.

OP isn't spinning those revs most of the time. The change in power where he's likely to drive isn't worth the cash outlay to get the "better" intake. Effort to port it, yes, if he want to spend time on it.
If it were me, no chance I spend a dollar on an AG to use on that rig.

 

[alpha13]

Port match a 318/360 and they do really well. 318/360 is the lower RPM level so of course the AG is going to do better in a range the 318/360 wasn't designed for. Throw a 600 on it to choke it out even more, not making it to the higher range anyways. Same as the old 284 vs 292 cam choice. 292 was only better in the last 500 rpm of range in most every case. Smaller cam 280 or 284 was better for a hot streeter.

We had a 360 with an SP2P intake go high 11's... yippee. Horrible high rpm intake, made it work.

OP isn't spinning those revs most of the time. The change in power where he's likely to drive isn't worth the cash outlay to get the "better" intake. Effort to port it, yes, if he want to spend time on it.
If it were me, no chance I spend a dollar on an AG to use on that rig.

I don't disagree.

 

[junkyardhero]

I personally have not seen a test where a performer kept up with an RPM. You are claiming 5-10 I'm not saying you are wrong but I don't see it at 6000 rpm especially on anything modified. If the guy isn't willing to drop the cash then the performer would work like I said. If I was throwing something together quick sure I would use a performer, but if I was trying to make power I would use the RPM. I'm not arguing, just making an informed opinion.

we're not talking about what it's making at 6K

we're talking about what it would make for his particular combo and how that could benefit what his intended use is which is as a highway cruiser, likely sub 4K. and in the testing the performer not only held its own, but in several instances it out shined the air gap, six pack, torker 2 and strip dom within those parameters.

here's the article: Dyno-Testing Small-Block Intakes - Induction Extravaganza - Hardcore Tech: Dyno Blast

 

[Bewy]

Edel lists the rpm range for the Performer as idle -5500 rpm on 318-340-360 engines. So about idle to 5300 on a 360.
Edel lists the RPM as 1500-6500. The power range has been shifted upwards from the Performer. Unless the rest of the combo still has power climbing at 5300, I would use the Performer.

 

[Woody500]

I’m not sure for a cruiser the juice will be worth the squeeze. The amount of time you’ll need to spend on it to gain really anything on a mild combo is not worth it. Leave it alone and go drive the crap out of it. You’ll never miss the 4-5 hp you coulda had.

Mercruiser Marine left huge mismatches, and supposedly when then matched loses low torque performance. I discussed this elsewhere.
Do more research.

 

[TT5.9mag]

Mercruiser Marine left huge mismatches, and supposedly and then when matched loses low torque performance. I discussed this elsewhere.
Do more research.

Huh? I can’t follow that train of thought. But (if I do follow you) I find it very hard to believe that port matching an intake to a head will loose “low torque performance “. And by that I think you mean low rpm torque. How bout you show me a dyno graph proving what you just claimed, I’ll wait. I don’t need to do any more research, I’ve done plenty.

 

[4eighteener]

Re-averaging the dyno numbers from a more cruiser friendly 4600 rpm, the difference between the standard performer and the air gap is;
Per: average hp =315
Eag: average hp =325

Per: average torque =435
Eag: average torque =447

That's only 10hp difference, which I suspect might dissappear or perhaps the performer might be higher if the dyno was taken down to 1500 rpms, or, if a little gasket match porting was done on the performer.
Same with the 12lbs of torque difference.

I added their numbers on the torker 2, and it doesn't appear to match the averages they posted. Perhaps the n/a at 1500 rpm threw them off.
Extrapolating what the torker 2 horsepower and torque is at 3000 rpm, while not 100% accurate should be fairly close with the torker 2 @ 314.9 average horsepower and 431.27 lbs of torque average, almost identical to the standard performer.
Of course if the dyno was run from 1500 to 4600, the torker 2 would fair even worse.

Why would anyone use a doorstop torker?
Well, I picked one up recently for $40, and the cost of an airgap being $497.95, about 12x the cost, but definitely not 12x the performance loss. Even the speedmaster version is now selling for $303, unless you catch their once a year sale.
I vote for the OP to keep the standard performer for now with his current configuration and intended use.

 

[alpha13]

we're not talking about what it's making at 6K

we're talking about what it would make for his particular combo and how that could benefit what his intended use is which is as a highway cruiser, likely sub 4K. and in the testing the performer not only held its own, but in several instances it out shined the air gap, six pack, torker 2 and strip dom within those parameters.

here's the article: Dyno-Testing Small-Block Intakes - Induction Extravaganza - Hardcore Tech: Dyno Blast

If you want to post that article that would be great. I've looked and cannot find it. Also, what I was referring to was that basically the RPM manifold was going to better everywhere Including 6000rpm. I should have been more specific.

 

[alpha13]

we're not talking about what it's making at 6K

we're talking about what it would make for his particular combo and how that could benefit what his intended use is which is as a highway cruiser, likely sub 4K. and in the testing the performer not only held its own, but in several instances it out shined the air gap, six pack, torker 2 and strip dom within those parameters.

here's the article: Dyno-Testing Small-Block Intakes - Induction Extravaganza - Hardcore Tech: Dyno Blast

I just saw you posted it. Thanks I'll check it out

 

[junkyardhero]

I just saw you posted it. Thanks I'll check it out

a point of consideration on the article, besides no pulls/data below 3K the test mule is several deviations northward from what OP has cooking and is basically configured to be mid-higher rpm romper with 10:1 compression, ported eddy heads and a stout 272/276 .558/.564 solid lifter cam.

 

[Woody500]

Huh? I can’t follow that train of thought. But (if I do follow you) I find it very hard to believe that port matching an intake to a head will loose “low torque performance “. And by that I think you mean low rpm torque. How bout you show me a dyno graph proving what you just claimed, I’ll wait. I don’t need to do any more research, I’ve done plenty.

I've mentioned it & not going over it again as I've been contrarily dismissed.
Do your own Research!

 

[Mojoe9955]

The low rise Performer intake has small runners designed for the 318 heads. They won't flow alot of air. It works alright on a 360 if you aren't turning alot of RPM and any intake that is port matched will definitely make a difference. However, I wouldn't spend alot of time with a Performer on a 360 unless you didn't have another option. There are much better intake manifolds on the market for the 360 that don't give up any bottom end. The the Edelbrock Performer RPM intake is basically the best intake manifold you can buy. Works great at all engine speeds and is good on stock engines all the way to a more serious race engine. It's a great design.

Does Edlebrock still sell the RPM head and intake package?

 

[Woody500]

And facts are facts. The performer, in the test Dulcich did for hot rod, made more torque down low than the rpm air gap did. They started the runs at 3000 for all the tests and the performer was ahead there in torque and horsepower, even on a 10:1 solid cammed 360 with ported heads. For a cruiser that’s never going to see 4000 rpm the performer gets the job done, dare I say better than anything else.

There's your research right there.