can I benefit from porting my lower Performer manifold?

rockin_rick · Nov 7, 2005

With my combo as listed in the sig, is it worth my $$$$ to have my performer lower intake manifold ported? If it was getting done, I'd have Tmoss do it, if he would.

How much torque/HP would I gain and where in the powerband would it be?

Thanks,
Rick

final5-0 · Nov 7, 2005

I would just have to think it would give a gain Rick.

Gotta give you more air flow and ..................

More Flow = More Go

A while back you told me you were pushing your 24's to their limit.
Do you think the extra flow from the porting will be the death of those 24's?

Grady

Joes95GT · Nov 7, 2005

Rick, my example to you would be GTJake, who doesn't come around much anymore. He had his lower done by Tom and it yielded the best FTI/AFR numbers I've ever seen from a low-shift-point, stock block 302.

It could have been due to the fact that his motor only had about 20k original miles on it, but I sincerely doubt that compression/"newness" played that much of a factor.

Like the "old man" Grady D) said, I'd say go for it.

Joe

rockin_rick · Nov 7, 2005

final5-0 said:
A while back you told me you were pushing your 24's to their limit.
Do you think the extra flow from the porting will be the death of those 24's?

Grady

Ahhhhh, most likely... hmmmm I forgot about that. I'll have to consider the cost of some 30's in there too, I guess.

I wonder just how much flow and go....

Rick

rockin_rick · Nov 7, 2005

IIRC, GTJake also had a RPM, though. His setup planted this thought seed in my head a while back... Maybe I should consider a RPM... But I wonder if I'd just give up low end for high end and have a net result of no change of area under the curve

My motor has less that 10K on it

Rick

final5-0 · Nov 7, 2005

rockin_rick said:
IIRC, GTJake also had a RPM, though. His setup planted this thought seed in my head a while back... Maybe I should consider a RPM... But I wonder if I'd just give up low end for high end and have a net result of no change of area under the curve

My motor has less that 10K on it

Rick

I don't think you would loose very much low end Rick and here is a thought or two on why I think that way.

I've got Jakes dyno pull and many others on these forums all in one Excell file that allows me to easily compare them to each other.

When you compare Jakes ported lower to my non ported lower this is kinda how it looks.

The diff between tq curves down low was my advantage to the range of 10 to 20 lbs from the range of 2250 to 2800 rpm and then at about 3300 rpm he matched me and just stayed up on me with a range of 15 to 20 lbs all the way out to a little less than 6K.

Another thing to consider about those two curves is ............
at the time of that pull, Jake had not worked with his tune a whole lot and after talking to him, I felt he had more in it with a bit more tweecing.

IIRC, he did not have his spark curve setup for a quick rate of advance and his total was pretty low with a value of something like 28 or there abouts.

As you know Rick, getting the spark in quicker really makes a difference you can feel so I don't think I'd be outta line in saying his low end was a bit softer than it could have been due to the lazy spark curve.

Grady

95cobradude · Nov 7, 2005

i just put the edelbrock performer rpm II manifold on my car, ass kickin manifold if i do say.

slvrbullit302 · Nov 7, 2005

FWIW When I was running a stock 165k mile 302 with ported E7's, F-cam, 1.6rr, and Stock intake, I made 260rwhp and 278 rwtq. I then switched to one of the early typhoon intakes(RPM clone) I gained 10rwhp and 15rwtq also the peak hp moved up from 5200 to 6000 and I think my torque peaked out pretty close to the same vs. stock intake. With this combo my best ET was a 13.4ish at 103. I was running untuned. Other mods were 75mm TB and MAF, 30# inj., MAC LT's, Prochamber, Cat-back, CAI and timing at 12°.

Just throwing out a little info to justify that you will not see a big drop in low end power by switching to a RPM intake.

Grn92LX · Nov 8, 2005

Joes95GT said:
Rick, my example to you would be GTJake, who doesn't come around much anymore. He had his lower done by Tom and it yielded the best FTI/AFR numbers I've ever seen from a low-shift-point, stock block 302.

It could have been due to the fact that his motor only had about 20k original miles on it, but I sincerely doubt that compression/"newness" played that much of a factor.

Like the "old man" Grady D) said, I'd say go for it.

Joe

Actually, Toms89LX50 had the best stock bottom afr/fti numbers at a low rpm. He made 347rwhp. He used a ported rpm manifold and a HELL of a camshaft. Made killer low end and ran hard upstairs!

Joes95GT · Nov 8, 2005

As far as I know, Jake had a Performer manifold....

I know he tore up the motor, and maybe that's when he changed. I know his initial numbers were the biggest I've ever seen for a AFR/FTI/Performer car.

Joe

zenboy99 · Nov 8, 2005

Joes95GT said:
As far as I know, Jake had a Performer manifold....

I know he tore up the motor, and maybe that's when he changed. I know his initial numbers were the biggest I've ever seen for a AFR/FTI/Performer car.

Joe

Yes he was running a Performer. He also trapped 110mph his first time out without a great 60 foot.

WhiteDevil · Nov 8, 2005

Yeah he ran a performer but im sure the porting would help. I would wait till i had a reason for the intake to come off before i did it. But im going to get it done this summer by TMOSS.

tmoss · Nov 9, 2005

Yes, you will pick up good power. Your heads flow ~250cfm@.500" and your intake flows about 220cfm - 30cfm is significant power potential and I'd bet the FTI cam will be up to the task.......

rockin_rick · Nov 11, 2005

Would porting just the lower and not the upper allow the full 250cfm? IOW- just the lower is the restriction, correct?

Thanks,
Rick

tmoss · Nov 11, 2005

Yes, just like the stock lower, the Cobra/GT40/Explorer - the Performer lower is the restriction.

mytight95 · Nov 12, 2005

how much could you get a performer (entire manifold) to flow if you had to take guess Tom? I am just curious, but do you think you could get it to flow over 250, and with porting it out that much and still having the longer runners it would still hold all its low end and possibly gain some right?

tmoss · Nov 12, 2005

250~270 is not a problem, even higher. How much is max depends on how much time is put into the work - but why go to extremes? I only recommend what is economically feasible for what you need. Done properly, an intake will not loose low end due to the intake work. The dynos I have of before-and-afters have shown no loss down low and gains over most of (if not all) the rpm range.

5spd GT · Nov 12, 2005

I'm getting a lower ported by Tom soon

Toms89lx50 made those numbers with some tricks like low accessories/afw/and higher revving engine.

A higher 60ft can usually relate to a higher mph in general. Just because one has a "worse" 60ft doesn't mean it hurts their performance. In fact some of my worst 60ft's (a bit to much spin) induced my highest traps because off the line your putting out more power even though it causes you to spin. Hope that made sense

Grn92LX · Nov 12, 2005

5spd GT said:
Toms89lx50 made those numbers with some tricks like low accessories/afw/and higher revving engine.

His car peaked @ a low 5,800 and was nose diving after 6,000. I'm starring at the graph now. You won't see a power difference on the dyno with lighter internals, you'll see that @ the track.

The ported performer lower sounds like a nice upgrade for you low rpm 302 guys

Tom, what kinda gains can be seen with port matching a lower to the head? I have a slight port mismatch with my R lower and heads but I think it may be due to the heads being milled a bit and the block being decked to 0.

5spd GT · Nov 12, 2005

So what is a "nose dive". 5,800rpm is higher than most 302 afr/fti combos peak at on the street. That isn't "low".

Good question by the way. I believe Tom allows you to send him a stitch of the heads and he can match them. Is their an extra cost to doing that?

can I benefit from porting my lower Performer manifold?

Member

Mustang Master

New Member

Member

Member

Mustang Master

Banned

New Member

Fidanza Man!

New Member

New Member

Gettin Wired

Member

Gettin Wired

Active Member

Gettin Wired

"the 5.0 owns all"

Fidanza Man!

"the 5.0 owns all"

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency