Torker II Package???

A67StangMaster · May 9, 2005

I need help I know there are better stuff out there so i need your help.
I need to know what would be best for a All STOCK 351w thats better then
whats in this set from edelbrock. i am looking to give my engine a younger feel. Heads would be the last change for it but something that would fit if i were to change it later on.
HERE IS THE PACKAGE.

Torker II
Power Package Guide
for Ford 351-Windsor V8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Manifolds 5081 199.99
Carburetors 1405 / 1407 / 1412 / 1413 i have a 600cfm holley
Cylinder Heads 60229 / 60259 549.50
Camshaft Kits 5082
Timing Chains 7811 / 7820 47.95
Gear Drive 7892 199.95
Valve Springs 5722 78.39
Retainers (non-rotators) 9733* 73.69
Spring/Retainers/Keeper Kits 5796 (A) 134.88
Water Pumps 8843 149.95

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

brianj5600 · May 9, 2005

I would use the pref RPM over the outdated TQ2 stuff.

mustangdave · May 9, 2005

RPM Air Gap intake

jerry S · May 10, 2005

I have the Torker II on my car and the opinion of my dyno tuner is that it is a dog. I am making power only to 5400 rpm when I should be making power at least to 6000. There might be clearance issues with an RPM Air Gap. It is 1.75 inches taller in the front compared to a Torker II, which means that I have to cut a hole in my hood to make my scoop functional, just like FVIKE did with his.

jikelly · May 10, 2005

I have a wiend stealth manifold, and I sware by it. I think it helps my car make really good power, but I have never done a dyno run so I can't give you any hard numbers.

hobbyhorse · May 11, 2005

I had the Torker II package on my 289 years ago and like was said earlier, its a dog. It had fair midrange but no bottom end or top end power. Even Edelbrock has additted it was a poor design. I don't know why they still sell it except it will fit under a low hood. Most of the Edelbrock cams are old grinds from the 80's or further back. There has been tremendous advances in cam grind technology in the last few years so I wouldn't touch the Edelbrock cams for any performance usage.

brianj5600 · May 11, 2005

My 306 with home ported heads went 11.70's with a T2 intake back in the 80's. Back then there were not many choices.

ron67fb · May 12, 2005

My Torker-plus cam is crap below 2000rpm. Not very streetable even with a T5 and 3.40 gears. Switched to a Performer RPM manifold to try and gain some low end torque but it didn't make much difference.

Like mentioned, that is an old cam grind. Notice that their Performer RPM cam has higher stats in both lift and duration, yet they advertise it as more streetable than their Torker combinations.

But you have a 351 which has better torque than a 289 in the first place, so your experiences may be better.

Jonstantine · May 13, 2005

jerry, have you tried a spacer?
a larger plenum would probably help alot with the intake im guessing

i would stay away from the torker stuff, only because it seems to be very sensative... there are a few guys running fast with the equipment, but many more dissatisfied - you need to know what you're doing

as for the cam, the actual cam companies can probably make you a more efficient cam
i really have not heard of many people using the torker cam (although id like to try it)
but for a street car, i have not been impressed with people running performer rpm cams
i have a performer cam, and like it well enough, but wish it was a bit bigger...

--- for a novice
my advice would be to get an aggressive dual plane intake
call up crane cams and talk to their cam selection hotline
and you can probably get a cheaper waterpump...

jerry S · May 13, 2005

Jonstantine said:
jerry, have you tried a spacer?
a larger plenum would probably help alot with the intake im guessing

i would stay away from the torker stuff, only because it seems to be very sensative... there are a few guys running fast with the equipment, but many more dissatisfied - you need to know what you're doing

as for the cam, the actual cam companies can probably make you a more efficient ca.m i have a performer cam, and like it well enough, but wish it was a bit bigger...

I don't know if a spacer was tried or not. As for my cam, it is pretty good sized. I have a hydraulic flat tappit cam with the following grind:

ADV DUR: INT 297, EXH 308
LIFT: INT 538, EXH 534
DURATION AT .50 DEGREES: INT 236, EXH 242 @ 108 centerline

I had a scare because my build sheet indicated it was a hydraulic roller, which would have busted all the valve springs in my heads. Turns out this was not the case.

As for my water pump, I already ordered the Holley Blue. It should be here any day now. I prolly also will go with the RPM Air Gap and swap the 650 vac secondary carb to a 750 dbl pumper.

With the new water pump eliminating the accessory drag, the bigger carb, the new intake, and the fuel pump with regulator, I think I might be able to find another 20 rwhp from where I am now. That would give me 320 rwhp or so at 6000 rpm and 400 ft/lbs torque at the wheels. I will take it and say thanks.

Jonstantine · May 14, 2005

i know the cam edelbrock lists for a 289 torker 2 intake is 22 degrees shorter on the intake duration....

Torker II Package???

A67StangMaster

New Member

brianj5600

Active Member

mustangdave

My rearend needs a stud and two nuts.

jerry S

New Member

jikelly

hobbyhorse

New Member

brianj5600

Active Member

ron67fb

Jonstantine

jerry S

New Member

Jonstantine

Torker II Package???

New Member

Active Member

My rearend needs a stud and two nuts.

New Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency