Intake manifold swap?

[a6t9vette]

Im thinking about swaping out the iron stock intake on my 383. Im on the fence about trying to keep the engine as stock as possible, but also looking to get some performace, and reduce the heat soak into the fuel system. Any of you made the swap and what are you running? Im thinking about doing the Edelbrock Performer RPM.

Also I saw one post about clearance with this intake, Im hoping I can keep the stock air cleaner if thats possible.

 

[mcmopar]

If you want to remain stock looking go with the Mopar Performance M1 Dual Plane intake. It looks just like the stocker and will allow you to use your stock air cleaner.
I have the Edelbrock Performer RPM and I must use a drop base air cleaner assembly for hood clearance. It is the best all around intake out there for the 383 but it is too high to use the stock air cleaner assembly.
Here is a good article on 383 intakes:
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/hrdp_0712_mopar_intake_manifold_comparo/index.html

 

[Basketcase]

mine has an Edelbrock Torker with a Holley DP, and I use the factory air cleaner.

 

[dobie]

I have an Edlebrock Performer as well.

 

[a6t9vette]

Dobie, is it a Performer or Performer RPM? Any pics of your set up?

Basketcase: How do you like the Torquer, I wasnt sure if that was a good choice for my stock motor since its not going to rev that much, Any pics of your set up?

 

[Basketcase]

yeah I like it fine. I'll snap a couple pics tomorrow.

 

[mcmopar]

The Torker is actually great for a stock engine since it makes good power up to 5500 rpm. It isn't called the Torker for nothing.

 

[A12]

oops is that an Edelbrock intake that's in my '68 road runner with the Edekbrock name and numbers ground off and a Holley 670 Street Avenger under that stock air filter....... oh, and a Comp Cam, some springs a little more compression and.......

That's an electronic distributor too with the wiring for the ECU wrapped in with the stock wiring harness and then run through the firewall junction block (through an un-used terminal) and the ECU mounted inside the car under the dash. I finally had to put a hose on the distributor vacuum advance and just run it somewhere near the carb (not connected) to keep the eagle eyed mechanics from pointing that out, it's still missing in this photo. Stock........looking


MikeR

 

[a6t9vette]

Mike, thanks for the pic im hoping to do something similar. Is that the Edelbrock Performer, or Performer RPM?

Mcmopar, I was more concerned about the bottom end since most of the info on the Torquer I read said it was better top end....

 

[Hoosier Bird]

Mine has a TM6.....I'll let you know how it works out.

 

[Basketcase]

.

 

[Basketcase]

.

 

[Basketcase]

.

 

[Basketcase]

.

 

[Hoosier Bird]

Is there any difference in a torker and a tm6? :huh:

 

[ACME A12]

Is there any difference in a torker and a tm6? :huh:

TM6 is an old, single plane race intake from the 60's and the Torker is basically a newer (if you can call the seventies "newer"...), more street-friendly version from what I understand...

Ray

 

[mcmopar]

The Torker is better for bottom end and the TM-6 for top end when comparing between the two. Give that article I posted a read as there is some good info in there.
They are both "X" type single plane intakes. TM stands for "Tarantula Mopar". Actually the Torker came out first and then the Edelbrock Tarantula intakes came out just a little bit afterwards IIRC. Both were introduced in the 1970's.
If you look at the two intakes side by side you will notice that the tops of the runners on the Torker are farther below the carb flange than the TM-6's. I suspect this has something to do with how they perform. It may be that the runners on the TM-6 are taller if they have not been moved up on the plenum for more of a ram effect but kept the same size as the Torker's.
I've run both intakes on this car. When I owned it the first time I had a Torker and a dual plane Edelbrock DP-4B. When I got the car back in 2000 it had a TM-6 on it. I didn't like the TM-6 all that much as it lacked low the low end grunt of a dual plane. The DP-4B was a fine intake and is not far behind the Performer RPM in terms of horsepower and torque. I got my DP-4B for $50 at a swap meet but sold it after buying the Performer RPM. Had I known how well it performed in the intake manifold test I posted I probably would have kept it as it was low enough that I could run the stock air cleaner assembly. I definitely prefer the hot dual plane Edelbrock intakes to their single plane stablemates for street operation with this Comp XE275HL-10 cam and 3.55 gears.

PS - sorry about that - I just noticed that my link was to the wrong page. I have corrected it and now it links to the intake manifold comparison. See page 7 of the article for the TM-6 test and page 8 for the Torker test.
To make a long story short - the Torker outperforms the TM-6 on this mildly hopped up 383 by just a smidge.

 

[ACME A12]

The Tarantulas came out in the sixties - Hot Rod's Mopar Intake Manifold Shootout Part 2 says "Edelbrock's old TM6 was the standard for race single-plane manifolds from the '60s, and many an old-timer believes it has never been bettered." As for the Torker series, I can recall buying a Torker 340 back in '79 when they were considered a "new" intake. Now I just feel old...

I think the fact that you can still buy a Torker new from Edelbrock pretty much clears up any mysteries about their introduction timeline...

As all of this relates to Gary's TM6 - I say run it!

:jester:

 

[mcmopar]

Yeah - you may be correct. I get the two of them mixed up. I put a Torker on my transplanted 440 in my first road runner in 1977. The TM-6 was probably produced before then. Hmmm...sounds like a fun investigation to see when each one came out.

 

[A12]

Mike, thanks for the pic im hoping to do something similar. Is that the Edelbrock Performer, or Performer RPM?

Mcmopar, I was more concerned about the bottom end since most of the info on the Torquer I read said it was better top end....

Mc, that's an Edelbrock DP4B. Here is a photo of the engine back in 2003 before it was put in. Anyone know if there is a difference between a DP4B and a CH4B because the I.D. characters have been ground off of this manifold for a while (I think this manifold saw use in a F.A.S.T. car at one point ) and when I asked today the person I got it from immediately said DP4B and then said they are no longer available but you may find one or a CH4B....which maybe this was but pretty sure it is a DP4B :toetap: :crazy: I tried to compare the two but can't see an external difference. Can anyone clear that one up, thanks.