• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

Intake Manifold

  • Thread starter Thread starter 94RIO
  • Start date Start date Jun 10, 2004
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

VibrantRedGT

"STANGNET'S PENGUIN SMACKER"
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
14,679
424
154
Boca Raton, Florida
Jun 10, 2004
#21
  • Jun 10, 2004
  • #21
94GTLaserRC said:
There is a 40% drop from 37 to 22. So youre saying that there is a 40% loss to the rearwheels from the fly wheel?

If you normally consider 15% loss on a 5-speed, the 22 to the wheels represents 26 at the fly. (26-22) = 4. 4 divided by 26 is about 15%.

RC
Click to expand...

Mine only had the stock throttle body and mass air meter at the time. I believe they have a disclaimer about other induction mods.
 

94TURBO5 O

New Member
Mar 14, 2004
2,509
0
0
VA
Jun 10, 2004
#22
  • Jun 10, 2004
  • #22
1 vote here for Cobra intake.
 

Venom351R

Founding Member
Apr 27, 2002
4,548
41
98
MAINE
Jun 10, 2004
#23
  • Jun 10, 2004
  • #23
94SC50 said:
1 vote here for Cobra intake.
Click to expand...


Make that 2..........I put down 21 more RWHP w/ a Cobra Intake and C&L 76MM Mass air unit.
 

RedHot91GT

New Member
Jan 24, 2003
219
0
0
Surprise, AZ
Jun 10, 2004
#24
  • Jun 10, 2004
  • #24
any bad parts to the typhoon? is it pretty much like the performer?
 

VIPERn94Five-0

Founding Member
Apr 28, 2002
3,352
2
58
Poughkeepsie, NY
Jun 11, 2004
#25
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #25
id say go with the Edelbrock Performer 5.0 because later on you could switch the the RPM upper for more power.....dont get the Typhoon, not because its a bad manifold, but because its a copy of the Performer RPM which is too much intake for a stock, or bolt on 5.0...the trick flow street heat would be a good choice as well....i personally dont think you should go with the GT-40, Cobra, or Explorer intakes, just because the Edelbrock seems to be the better intake and has the room to grow in the future....


Anthony
 

stang_gt_1994

Founding Member
Mar 21, 2002
2,723
0
0
Powder Springs, GA (30 min. from Atlanta)
Jun 11, 2004
#26
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #26
Another vote for the performer.
 
R

Road_Runna

20+ Year Stangneter
Dec 23, 2002
594
6
39
Ogden, UT
Jun 11, 2004
#27
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #27
CManT1914 said:
Dude, Edelbrock Performer 5.0! Adds 37 horses to a STOCK 5.0! That's what I'm gonna roll with when I get around to it.

EDIT: Plus, it has a good power band for mostly stock 5.0's, idle-5500 rpm. So if you don't have heads and a cam etc. etc., I think it's a great intake.
Click to expand...

Actually, a FF&MM issue said: If you add both 70mm TB and a Performer Intake Manifold, you'll get a whoppin 40hp BUT the brother's catalog advertises both (they have a package) 35-40HP.

What issue is it??? it's the March issue, I still regret no buying that issue. So just round to the lowest HP. Add some pulley's, and you might be as fast as the 2004 GT's
 

94GTLaserRC

Squint as you approach, lest you be blinded by my
15 Year Member
May 7, 2002
11,178
13
89
Ernan Says "here it comes... dushbag"
Jun 11, 2004
#28
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #28
RedHot91GT said:
any bad parts to the typhoon? is it pretty much like the performer?
Click to expand...

It's not so much "bad parts", the only parts are the bolts, U, L, and plenum cover. The casting is not as smooth, but the ports are big enough anyway. I got mine when they first came out, and a polished version was only $349, and I was already spending $4K plus on the blower and supporting parts. If you're going to piece it together you will not go wrong with a Cobra intake or a Performer 5.0, which as mentioned, can be upgraded.

Yes, JR, the Cobra is nice..I wish I could have stumbled across one when I put my $hit together last year. I love the polished ones with red/black colored plates.

RC
 
S

SuperDust22

The Power of Pixie Dust?!
Oct 19, 2003
1,821
0
0
Gilbert,AZ
Jun 11, 2004
#29
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #29
I love my cobra it is not as good as the eddy but it can be had way cheaper.
 

tmoss

Gettin Wired
Founding Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,153
32
128
Saint Louis, MO
Jun 11, 2004
#30
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #30
What it all copmes down to is cost, personnal preference, and the RIGHT combination. I can show you cars with Edelbrocks that don't perform as well as cars with Explorer or Cobra intakes and I can show you cars with Eddys that make better power than the Cobra style. It's only ONE PIECE of your combination.
 
F

fordfreak$

New Member
Jun 7, 2004
4
0
0
Northern NJ
Jun 11, 2004
#31
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #31
rudeone707 said:
dude the gt40 is almost exactly like the Cobra/Explorer intakes, they all use the same lower.
Click to expand...


The lower is not the problem. The upper runners are long and large, and will definetely kill your low end.
 

VIPERn94Five-0

Founding Member
Apr 28, 2002
3,352
2
58
Poughkeepsie, NY
Jun 11, 2004
#32
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #32
fordfreak$ said:
The lower is not the problem. The upper runners are long and large, and will definetely kill your low end.
Click to expand...
nah, i dont think so. It shouldnt hurt low end that much. Its in the same league s the Performer, and the Performer advertises no lost low end toruque...and larger runners are better for low end, and not so good for top end...its the short runner intake that take away from low end. take a look at the Edelbrock intakes...as their RPM range goes up the runners get MUCH shorter....just compare a Performer 5.0 to a Victor JR...


Anthony
 

94GTLaserRC

Squint as you approach, lest you be blinded by my
15 Year Member
May 7, 2002
11,178
13
89
Ernan Says "here it comes... dushbag"
Jun 11, 2004
#33
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #33
VIPERn94Five-0 said:
nah, i dont think so. It shouldnt hurt low end that much. Its in the same league s the Performer, and the Performer advertises no lost low end toruque...and larger runners are better for low end, and not so good for top end...its the short runner intake that take away from low end. take a look at the Edelbrock intakes...as their RPM range goes up the runners get MUCH shorter....just compare a Performer 5.0 to a Victor JR...


Anthony
Click to expand...

RIGHT!
The shorter runners are needed for the higher powered cars with more mods. The longer runners create more velocity (low end tq), but less TOTAL air flow (less upper end HP). Look at the runner length on the stockers.
RC
 

stang_gt_1994

Founding Member
Mar 21, 2002
2,723
0
0
Powder Springs, GA (30 min. from Atlanta)
Jun 11, 2004
#34
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #34
True that. Long runners = more bottom end.
 

tmoss

Gettin Wired
Founding Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,153
32
128
Saint Louis, MO
Jun 11, 2004
#35
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #35
My new combo makes 270RWTQ SAE @ 2,000 rpm. Those runners aren't hurtin anything. Let me say this again - it's all in the COMBO - all the parts have to work together!
 

VIPERn94Five-0

Founding Member
Apr 28, 2002
3,352
2
58
Poughkeepsie, NY
Jun 11, 2004
#36
  • Jun 11, 2004
  • #36
tmoss said:
My new combo makes 270RWTQ SAE @ 2,000 rpm. Those runners aren't hurtin anything. Let me say this again - it's all in the COMBO - all the parts have to work together!
Click to expand...
Tmoss is total right about the combo thing....its ALL in the combo...and thats why i was sold on the AFR/Edelbrock/FTI combo because they seem to be making the best power (read: not the MOST peak, but the most useable)


Anthony
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

9
Unknown engine tick
  • 94 Daily
  • Oct 31, 2025
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
3
Views
173
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Nov 1, 2025
91AOD5.0LX
351W/5.8 EFI intake manifolds fading away...
  • Ryno5150
  • Jan 13, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
7
Views
567
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 7, 2026
nickyb
J
Intake
  • James S
  • Jul 10, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
10
Views
207
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 12, 2026
James S
J
J
SN95 Hello new to this app
  • James S
  • Jun 10, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
135
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 11, 2026
Habu135
Y
BBK SSI Crossover tube
  • yaboity
  • May 17, 2025
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
19
Views
742
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jun 7, 2025
yaboity
Y
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?