Hot Rod Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I have a 327.

Most of the guys here say to go to the performer intake and 650
rather than the torkerII and 750 that I have now, because I want more torque.

But I have the torker cam to match and down the line when I save some doe, I was going to get rpm heads.

My question is do you guys think if I go to performer with smaller carb will that cam do well with them?

Or should I save up and get those heads, and would it be better?

Wich one really is the best ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,072 Posts
well...Im not a big fan of the Torker cam...or intake for the most part..if your looking for torque. Torker really was a bad choice of names, however, if low speed torque & thorattle response, the Performer intake would work better. as far as carb size, I dont know what size engine you have, or what RPM range you intend to see with it.

oops, sorry...a 327.. yeah 650 CFM will support most 327s to well over 6500 RPMs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
297 Posts
From what I understand and have read, the Torker II intake is best used as a boat anchor......Seriously, go with a Performer RPM intake, or Performer RPM Air Gap if you can stand the looks of it. The cam that you have is made for higher rpms with a narrow power band. The Performer RPM should help out down low and not lose out on the upper end, but 327's are not known for their torque. 650-750, that is up to your engine and see what it likes, start out with the 650.
 

·
wind & fire = guides to power
Joined
·
1,529 Posts
TorkerIIs are just misnamed. They should be called the Victor JRjr. Excellent power in the 3500-6500 range. Most people build strong engines fully capable of running good but baby them around. This prevents the Torkers from reaching their potential 100%VE over a 1000rpm spread from about 4500-5500 rpm.... much like a 104 lobe seperation cam...great for all out racers but they suffer during stop and go traffic when high intake velocity is needed in the 1500-2500 rpm ranges.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter #5 (Edited)
$$$$$$$

327, 9.5 compression with headers.

Do you guys think a performer intake and 600 carb(didnt meen 650) is the best straight up off the line torque for my ap?

Or a TorkerII with 750 and its cam

Wild man has brought up another question.

Alot of poeple sware performer series for off idle torque rather then rpm.
 

·
http://teamrfc.gospelcom.net
Joined
·
1,742 Posts
I think that you should defanetly go with the smaller carb and a performer or performer RPM intake. Which intake to use will depend on the cam you have, and your future plans. I would go with the Performer RPM because it will match a set of RPM heads much better than a performer. As far as heads go, when you get to the point where you are serious about buying a set, look closely at AFR 180's. They WILL make considerably more hp and torque than the RPM heads for not much more money. If you want more info on those heads, search for them in the hotrodder forums. Find a place where I have debated for them.

Good luck
Adam
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,104 Posts
don't do Chevys but

the torker cam power band is 2500-6500

performer manifold is 1000-5500

don't use the torker cam with the performer

NXS wrote it right:

Race=torker, dump the clutch at 3500....
Street= performer or performer rpm intake and cams to match
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,161 Posts
if you already have the intake and carb use them.you can tune the carb down if you have to but really people think that because it isn't a big bore engine that it isn't capable of performing.it is.you should be more concerned with gearing.tighter gears should work better with your set up.if you don't like the way it runs you can change it later.this isn't an exact science.small valves, combustion chamber and intake runner will promote high velocity or good throttle response which is what you want on the street.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,384 Posts
Torker vs Performer RPM

I seriously believe you would be happier with the 600 or 650 CFM carb and the Performer RPM or Air Gap vs the Torker. As many have already noted, the Torker is a misnomer, as it is not a manifold that produces abundances of torque, in the lower end.
A 600 CFM will supply your engine well past your cam and engine displacements needs. And the RPM or Air Gap will significantly improve your driveability on the street. I am presuming this is mostly a street driven vehicle that will occasionally do battle on the drag strip and/ or the Stop Light Grand Prix.
That being the case, driveability is far more critical than being able to turn a kazillion RPM, which your engine may well only see in less than 1% of its lifetime.

You could go to deeper gears, higher stall converter and all that but even with all that, you will just wind up with a higher gas bill at the end of the month, and wont see any worthwhile gains out of it on your street machine.
Since you are already running a stout cam, I would opt for the the Performer RPM or Air Gap, over the standard Performer, to restore your lower end power. You can probably survive ok with that Torker cam but the intake is your killer.
Even with good flowing heads, your displacement is as critical to power output as are the other factors. Your engine is relatively small in displacement so huge intake and head runners arent going to be that much of an advantage to you on a street vehicle, and in fact, could be detrimental to your usual range of engine speed and operation.

A little is good, but a lot isnt always gooder.
 

·
http://teamrfc.gospelcom.net
Joined
·
1,742 Posts
I agree with max, a 600 carb would work fine. One thing to think about is that you dont use a bigger carb to get more fuel. That may sound weird, but it is true. You use a bigger carb to get the airflow you want to match your engine, if it needs it. A carb that is too big will make your engine lazy at low speeds because the air at the carb will lack velocity, a carb that is too big, will run out of air on the top end. Its all about matching the parts, so that you have the highest velocity where you want it, which in your case is probably 6000 RPM or under. I also agree about the torquer. It is called the torquer because it produces a little more torque than a normal SINGLE PLANE. I am not yelling, I just wanted to stress that. The dual plane design of the performer series manifolds will make much more torque, and overall run better on your engine.

Adam
 

·
I need a bucket of arc sparks
Joined
·
895 Posts
I ran a Torker II with a 600 Holley and headers on a 71 Mustang that had a 302, auto trans for 4 or 5 years. The car had 4:10 gears and it still was slug off the line. The intake didn't really come in until 3000 rpm give or take a few hundred RPMs. I changed the intake to a Performer RPM and tire spin became a problem. There was a big difference in bottom end power, I was alot more happy with the Performer RPM. There wasn't that much of a difference at the top end. I am kind of surprised that Edelbrock still makers Torker intakes, the RPM and Victor series are superior to them. Torkers intakes are old technology, I would go with the Performer RPM or even a Weiand Stealth before using a Torker II.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,538 Posts
you will produce little torque with the single plane torquer. a good choice for a full race application, but would suck on a street driver. you need a performer dual plane style,to give maxium torque in a smaller cubic inch engine.

dont use the torquer cam! use a modern 260-268 style
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,384 Posts
Torker vs Performer RPM

The only single plenum intake Ive ever had experience with that worked good on the street is the Weiand X-celerator, this due to it having a smaller than usual plenum for the style intake.
That being said, I would still opt for a dual plane intake for the street.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,384 Posts
intakes

From what Ive been able to garner from this web site, theres little or no difference in which is actually better off the line.
However the RPM does definately work better in the mid and upper end. If I were running your engine, I think I would opt for the RPM, as its range is 1500-6500 vs 0-6000. Below 1500 RPM, your engine isnt doing that much either way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
single vs. dual plane

Someone may have already said this, and I may have skimmed over it, but something else to consider is that with a single plane, you actually do not need as large of a carb to make the same power as a dual plane. Let me reiterate:

For the same approximate power:
Single plane = x sized carb
Dual plane = larger than x sized carb

This is an oversimplification, but even Edelbrock will agree if you look it up or call them and ask.

So, if you're going from a Torker and 750 to a Performer (RPM) and a 600, you're making two large changes which will affect your low-end driveability. Even if you're planning on spending the money on a new intake and carb eventually, I would try one or the other first, and see if that gets you where you want to be. The Torker is a fairly low-rise design, and with the right carb, should be streetable, while still producing good top end. I would try a smaller carb first (600), as it's easier than swapping intakes. If that makes you happy, great. If not, then spend the money and time and swap to a Performer RPM intake.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,018 Posts
I had both a Performer RPM and a Team-G intake on my small block. The Performer RPM kicked the Team-G intake's butt and the team-G is similiar to the torquer II. That was with 11.0:1 cr, SBC 350, 200cc iron eagle heads, 292H compcam, in a 2800lb car with a 5 spd and 3.90 gear.

You would think a car that light and with low gears wouldn't notice a torque change because of an intake. But the torque loss was very apparent.

I think the performer rpm air gap has drivability issues in cold weather due to no heat riser. I'm having that problem with my BBC right now.

But......
If you really want to increase torque, I think you're are working on the wrong side of that engine. Install a 350 crank and a set of pistons that will make 10:1 with 64 cc cylinder heads. Another 1/4" of stroke does wonders, plus a little more compression helps the low end torque of a cammed engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
454C10, but, did you change the carb when you changed intakes? A smaller carb on a single plane has the potential to produce the same top end as a larger carb on a dual plane. I won't argue that dual planes are the ultimate solution for low end, but a single plane with a somewhat smaller carb can produce very respectable low end.

Case in point, I have a single plane Clifford on a stock, worn out (rings shot, at least one cam lobe gone) Ford 300 I6, with a Road Demon 525. The carb is actually even still a little too big, but I got a good deal on it. It pulls hard from 1000 rpm, although driveability from 400-1000 suffered compared to the stock 1v... gee, speaking of which, the Ford 300, known for being a torque monster, had a single plane on it from the factory... with a ~200 cfm 1 barrel carb... but with that setup, it'll pull from below idle speed with ease.

If anyone wants to discuss theory and why there are different size requirements for single vs. dual plane, let me know. I'm not going to type it out right now, as I've worked hard all day and it's time to drink beer, but if anyone is interested, I'm game.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,384 Posts
single vs dual plane

The idea that a single plane will do a lot better with a smaller carb, make better torque, and run just as hard on the big end is correct. been proven too many times.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top