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

why no holleys?

  • Thread starter Thread starter droptopford 5 0
  • Start date Start date Feb 4, 2007
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Next
First Prev 2 of 3 Next Last

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
Feb 7, 2007
#21
  • Feb 7, 2007
  • #21
sounds like the holley would be a great intake for a 410
 

Killercanary

The car that set the bar.
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
5,676
1
76
Altoona, PA
Feb 7, 2007
#22
  • Feb 7, 2007
  • #22
My dad runs the holley systemax II kit on his '91GT. With the box stock kit he ran a 12.6 at 107mph. He then had the heads and intake ported, a custom FTI cam made up, and he swapped the stock pistons for a set of SRP's that are still the standard bore size, they were only added for PTV clearance. He hasn't had a good pass since we finished ironing the combo out, but before it made the numbers below it had already gone 11.84 at 117mph, we'll have new times this spring, I expect sub 11.50's at 118-119 or so MPH.



I'll be running a holley on my car this year, and I'll be NA.
 

Grn92LX

Fidanza Man!
Founding Member
Jan 14, 2001
6,819
64
129
New York
Feb 7, 2007
#23
  • Feb 7, 2007
  • #23
dp
 

Grn92LX

Fidanza Man!
Founding Member
Jan 14, 2001
6,819
64
129
New York
Feb 7, 2007
#24
  • Feb 7, 2007
  • #24
BlackVert said:
sounds like the holley would be a great intake for a 410
Click to expand...

Way too small for a 410, but they don't make holley lowers for 351 blocks anyway. If I had a 410 it wouldn't have anything smaller than a spyder or a tfs R box if I had the hood clearance and 90mm tb minimum.

Chris (eades) the R intake has pcv. Its a street intake with all vacuum ports and sensor ports and egr. The 90mm opening upper doesn't have egr provision though. I have the 75mm version, but would prefer the 90mm version with a 90mm tb
 

4Jenna

Founding Member
Sep 12, 2001
4,326
6
69
AZ
Feb 7, 2007
#25
  • Feb 7, 2007
  • #25
My bad....yes EGR I meant on certain models
 

droptopford 5 0

Member
Mar 31, 2005
427
0
17
Feb 7, 2007
#26
  • Feb 7, 2007
  • #26
95snoozer said:
Answer: because they are scared to make power

run a cam that revs to 6500 and a set of heads that breath and you will make 330+ with that intake
Click to expand...

i wish i either had a lot of extra cash to make a dependable high-rev combo, or a daily driver to afford makin mistakes... it would be a lot of fun for sure!
 
W

Wade95

New Member
Oct 5, 2002
19
0
0
TarponSprings,FL
Feb 8, 2007
#27
  • Feb 8, 2007
  • #27
I got the kit for a song and put it on my stock GT40 crate motor. Yeah, I hear it's a little big unless you have some xtra cubes (stroker), but for the price I had to do it. Im bout to fire her up for the first time in two months. I'll try to keep ya in the loop. Dyno day is Feb 17th.
 

go-stang5.0

New Member
Jan 27, 2003
2,244
0
0
Glenview,Il
Feb 8, 2007
#28
  • Feb 8, 2007
  • #28
How does my RPM II fair against that thing...anyone have any comparisons? I'm wondering if I got the wrong intake for my car...
 

VibrantRedGT

"STANGNET'S PENGUIN SMACKER"
15 Year Member
Nov 29, 1999
14,679
424
154
Boca Raton, Florida
Feb 8, 2007
#29
  • Feb 8, 2007
  • #29
go-stang5.0 said:
How does my RPM II fair against that thing...anyone have any comparisons? I'm wondering if I got the wrong intake for my car...
Click to expand...

If the RPM II lower is anything like the Performer lower then I'd say its hurting your combo. If I remember correctly the II lower had larger runners. Just from my experience the Eddy lower I had didn't match up at all with 185's and that's why I dumped it for the Holley.
 
G

Green 94 5.0

Founding Member
Mar 25, 2002
2,601
12
79
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Feb 8, 2007
#30
  • Feb 8, 2007
  • #30
VibrantRedGT said:
If the RPM II lower is anything like the Performer lower then I'd say its hurting your combo. If I remember correctly the II lower had larger runners. Just from my experience the Eddy lower I had didn't match up at all with 185's and that's why I dumped it for the Holley.
Click to expand...
it wasnt even close. it would have taken a good amount of porting to match the lower intake to the heads.
 

go-stang5.0

New Member
Jan 27, 2003
2,244
0
0
Glenview,Il
Feb 11, 2007
#31
  • Feb 11, 2007
  • #31
I know the rpm II lower is the same casting as the performer...however the lowers runners are enlarged to port matche the largerr uppers. How much I dont exactly know... Well the valley gaskets are leaking so I'm gonna have to pull it of and reinstall it...I guess I'll check the lowers then and try and portmach if needed.
 

go-stang5.0

New Member
Jan 27, 2003
2,244
0
0
Glenview,Il
Feb 11, 2007
#32
  • Feb 11, 2007
  • #32
It doesn't seem like many people are running the rpm II... Googled and I can't find much info on it. Especially compared to the systemax II. If anyone knows a lot about the rpm II chime in. I bought it just when it came out based on the "then current" info and forgot about it. And now that I look on the web again after like 2 yrs. the only articles I see are the same ones I saw years ago (nothing new)...what gives?
 

Grn92LX

Fidanza Man!
Founding Member
Jan 14, 2001
6,819
64
129
New York
Feb 11, 2007
#33
  • Feb 11, 2007
  • #33
go-stang5.0 said:
I know the rpm II lower is the same casting as the performer...however the lowers runners are enlarged to port matche the largerr uppers.
Click to expand...

No, its not. The rpm II is in a league of its own compared to the performer/rpm stuff. Its a completly different intake. I like the rpm II.
 

go-stang5.0

New Member
Jan 27, 2003
2,244
0
0
Glenview,Il
Feb 12, 2007
#34
  • Feb 12, 2007
  • #34
So anyone have any concrete info it....
 
R

RAD

New Member
Jun 16, 2006
167
0
0
Jun 4, 2007
#35
  • Jun 4, 2007
  • #35
Killercanary said:
My dad runs the holley systemax II kit on his '91GT. With the box stock kit he ran a 12.6 at 107mph. He then had the heads and intake ported, a custom FTI cam made up, and he swapped the stock pistons for a set of SRP's that are still the standard bore size, they were only added for PTV clearance. He hasn't had a good pass since we finished ironing the combo out, but before it made the numbers below it had already gone 11.84 at 117mph, we'll have new times this spring, I expect sub 11.50's at 118-119 or so MPH.



I'll be running a holley on my car this year, and I'll be NA.
Click to expand...

Dad have any new times with this setup? How you like systemax II intake on yours new engine?
 

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
Jun 4, 2007
#36
  • Jun 4, 2007
  • #36
VibrantRedGT said:
The intake ports on the Holley are huge. They fit on the AFR 185's fine but when matching the Edelbrock lower on them I would have needed a major port job.

The Holley intake is the reason why Justin Timberlake named his new CD like that.

Click to expand...

so a holley upper bolts up to an edelbrock lower?

hmmmmmm ... i wonder if it will bolt up to an edelbrock lower made for a 351w .... hmmmmmmmm
 

JJ95GTID

Active Member
Sep 22, 2003
1,141
4
49
Phoenix, AZ
Jun 4, 2007
#37
  • Jun 4, 2007
  • #37
BlackVert said:
so a holley upper bolts up to an edelbrock lower?

hmmmmmm ... i wonder if it will bolt up to an edelbrock lower made for a 351w .... hmmmmmmmm
Click to expand...

No, he is talking about matching the Edlebrock lower intake to the AFR185 heads compared to the Holley lower intake to AFR185 heads.

The Holley upper intake will NOT bolt up to the Edlebrock lower intake.
 

Killercanary

The car that set the bar.
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
5,676
1
76
Altoona, PA
Jun 4, 2007
#38
  • Jun 4, 2007
  • #38
RAD said:
Dad have any new times with this setup? How you like systemax II intake on yours new engine?
Click to expand...


Actually he does, he recenlty ran an 11.64 at 117.9mph. He did switch to a manual rack and 27" hoosier QTP's though.


I can't really comment yet on mine. I only have 100miles on it now and I haven't laid into the throttle yet. I need to put a few hundred miles before I'll be able to go WOT and let you know. It doesn't fell doggy to me at all thus far though and it lines up pretty well with my AFR 165's.
 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"
Founding Member
Aug 7, 2002
9,516
6
99
Arkansas
Jun 4, 2007
#39
  • Jun 4, 2007
  • #39
95snoozer said:
Answer: because they are scared to make power

run a cam that revs to 6500 and a set of heads that breath and you will make 330+ with that intake
Click to expand...

A very inaccurate statement there.

Do you really think someone is afraid to get an extra 20rwhp?

Combos are tailored to the individual, not a track queen all the time.

LOL at your comment, read up and get realistic.
 

badstang123

New Member
Jan 17, 2006
397
0
0
Santa Clarita, CA
Jun 4, 2007
#40
  • Jun 4, 2007
  • #40
5spd GT said:
A very inaccurate statement there.

Do you really think someone is afraid to get an extra 20rwhp?

Combos are tailored to the individual, not a track queen all the time.

LOL at your comment, read up and get realistic.
Click to expand...

What do you mean? I take my street driven stock longblock to 6,500 all the time

Note: ExXxXxtreeeeemeeee Sarcasm!
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Next
First Prev 2 of 3 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
1K
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
B
Where to go from here on my build…
  • B0udreaux
  • Jul 14, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
8
Views
292
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jul 18, 2026
AeroCoupe
Which one of these 3 intakes make the most sense for my 331 combo
  • from6to8
  • Jul 25, 2024
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
7
Views
2K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jul 26, 2024
AeroCoupe
SN95 Desktop 363 Engine Combination - Looking for input
  • WhiteCobra95
  • Sep 8, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 6, 2025
Habu135
J
68 Mustang with Foxbody Engine Stalling Issues - MSPNP2
  • JayV68Stang
  • Mar 13, 2025
  • Digital Self-tuning Forum
Replies
3
Views
475
Digital Self-tuning Forum Mar 13, 2025
JayV68Stang
J
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?