Tfs-r Or Edelbrock Performer Rpm Ii Intake

B

braxus

New Member

Oct 25, 2014

6

0

1

Oct 25, 2014

#1

• Oct 25, 2014

• #1

I'm planning on building a 5.8L EFI engine for a 95 Mustang GT. The engine I'm going for streetability, better mileage, low to midrange torque, while enjoying a bump in overall power. Im using a roller cam with 208/216 duration, approx. 9.5 compression, AFR 185 heads, and Hooker shorty headers. Which intake would flow better for a power band between 1500-5500 rpm? The Edelbrock Performer RPM II or the TFS-R intake? I notice the TFS has a 75mm opening, where the RPM II has a 70mm opening. The Edelbrock is cheaper for me here.

 

RangerJoe

I leave the horn on while driving

15 Year Member

Apr 26, 2010

2,560

1,146

184

Georgia

Oct 25, 2014

#2

• Oct 25, 2014

• #2

I'm not really a big fan of the TFS intakes, with the exception of maybe the R intake. I vote rpm II, but really with that large of a motor, I bet some of the larger intakes would do fine as well.

Joe

 

stykthyn

I want to measure mine. It doesn't look that tall.

15 Year Member

Jul 6, 2006

5,232

2,652

223

gainesville

Oct 26, 2014

#3

• Oct 26, 2014

• #3

Edelbrock but hold on.....you're building a 351 for better mileage?

 

B

braxus

New Member

Oct 25, 2014

6

0

1

Oct 26, 2014

#4

• Oct 26, 2014

• #4

stykthyn said:

you're building a 351 for better mileage?

Click to expand...

I should clarify- better mileage for a 351W that is. My last 351W I only got 200Km out of a tank of gas. I want to do better then that this time.

 

A5literMan

At least it is lumpy...

5 Year Member

Jul 30, 2011

4,674

2,343

194

Illinois

Oct 26, 2014

#5

• Oct 26, 2014

• #5

For those 2 choices and your engine parameters I vote Eddy rpm. Just a fwiw though,the intake will not effect your gas consumption in and of itself,very much if at all.

 

Micheal Nadeau

Active Member

Dec 30, 2013

258

32

49

Savannah, GA

Oct 27, 2014

#6

• Oct 27, 2014

• #6

Build a 302 then.