[Top] [All Lists]

Re: torker& carter AFB -Reply

To: tigers@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: torker& carter AFB -Reply
From: Daniel Jones <djones2@mdc.com>
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 12:59:51 -0500
Super Ford did a big test of intakes on a 5.0L crate motor.  There were lots
of intakes including the Torker II and a reproduction Tiger intake (a low
rise intake, not the F4B.  The test was conducted before the Performer
RPM and Weiand Stealth high rise dual plane intakes became available 
though.  The only high rise tested was the Cobra reproduction intake.
As I remember,  Weiand Xcelerator was the winner.  As far as heights go,
it specs out with an A/B measurement of 3.75" and 4.88".  The Stealth
is very similar to the RPM and measures 4.35" and 5.59".  

Dan Jones

>>> Bob Palmer <rpalmer@ames.ucsd.edu> 05/07/99 09:39pm >>>

I like the way my F4B works, but I have had been using it for the past
twenty years now and don't really know how much better (or worse) some of
the newer manifolds might work. I might be tempted to take Dan's advice and
try the Weiand Xcelerator. Any data comparing it to the Performer RPM?
(That you trust that is.) Also, are there any data comparing the F4B to one
of the popular modern intakes? Would prefer though, all else being more or
less equal, to stick with the parts that are contemporary with the car.



P.S., I probably should mention, for completeness, that there are
variations in where the engine sits, depending on the motor mounts, etc.
Quite a few Tigers out there have the engine lowered and moved back a bit
for clearance and center of gravity reasons. 

At 09:59 AM 5/7/99 -0500, Daniel Jones wrote:
>>>> Steve Laifman <laifman@flash.net> 05/06/99 07:21pm >>>
>Daniel Jones wrote:
>> >The Torker is a HIGH rise manifold.  The Carter is about the same as the
>>I believe it is not a dual plane manifold, and is a bit soggy at the
lower RPM
>>ranges, but superior at the high revs.
>It is a single plane.  Windsor states his is a Torker 289 but what Edelbrock
>now lists is a Torker II which may or may not be the same as a Torker 289.  
>They redesigned some of the early intakes but others were simply renamed.
>Some single planes are much better than others.  Stay away from the x-type 
>single planes that have straight runners into the ports.  The better ones
>gently curved runners.  The best high rise dual planes may beat a so-so
>single plane all the way across the rev range.  A good single plane will 
>win out on the top end and some aren't too bad on the low end either.  The 
>tricky part is when you add the effect of an air cleaner.  I lean towards a
>good medium rise single plane like a Weiand Xcelerator with a full air
>element over a high rise with a restricted element.  That assumes I've got the
>cam and compression to use a single plane in the first place.  Single planes
>can work well but they are more sensitive to engine configuration and tuning.
>Dan Jones

Robert L. Palmer
Dept. of AMES, Univ. of Calif., San Diego

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>