Edelbrock Performer Vs Weiand Stealth Manifold
05-25-2005, 05:12 PM
#1
Safety Car
Thread Starter
Member Since: Apr 2004
Location: WAY DEEP INSIDE AMERICO,YES YOU LIVE HERE TO!! TX
Posts: 3,997
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Edelbrock Performer Vs Weiand Stealth Manifold
Why is it most here would rather run edelbrocks 0-5000 performer intake
than the weiand stealth manifold, 0-6800 RPM???
This looks like a good street intake
Both start at off idel, the the stealth goes to 6800.
than the weiand stealth manifold, 0-6800 RPM???
This looks like a good street intake
Both start at off idel, the the stealth goes to 6800.
05-25-2005, 05:47 PM
#2
Team Owner
Stealth doesn't have an option to run the Quadrajet--square bore only.
That's why I went with an Action plus, which flows up to 6000 (if I remember right), which my engine may see occasionally. also the action plus allowed me to use my divorced choke with little modification.
just my 2 cents,
trw
That's why I went with an Action plus, which flows up to 6000 (if I remember right), which my engine may see occasionally. also the action plus allowed me to use my divorced choke with little modification.
just my 2 cents,
trw
05-25-2005, 06:00 PM
#4
Team Owner
I don't know if I'd say that square bore is more performance oriented...there's a lot of guys racing out there with spread bore setups...just ask anyone with a quadrajet tuned by lars...my brother's 75 with a quadrajet is a darn good autocrossing car (the 411 gears and M22 don't hurt either)
However, a lot of the big cfm carbs (850 plus) come as a square bore...Mighty demons, double pumper holleys, etc. There is also the issue of hood height, which is always a problem with vettes...most people are running some sort of stock hood, with minimal clearance (the issue I ran into). I wanted to keep the stock numbers matching carb (I had dumped a lot of money into it, and could't see getting rid of it) so I went with a spread bore intake. If I had run the stealth, and an adapter, I 'd have to get some sort of drop assembly, which I believe will restrict air flow, not something I wanted.
Honestly, if I had a square bore carb that i wanted to use, I'd go with a stealth...it's a darn good intake.
just my opinion,
trw
However, a lot of the big cfm carbs (850 plus) come as a square bore...Mighty demons, double pumper holleys, etc. There is also the issue of hood height, which is always a problem with vettes...most people are running some sort of stock hood, with minimal clearance (the issue I ran into). I wanted to keep the stock numbers matching carb (I had dumped a lot of money into it, and could't see getting rid of it) so I went with a spread bore intake. If I had run the stealth, and an adapter, I 'd have to get some sort of drop assembly, which I believe will restrict air flow, not something I wanted.
Honestly, if I had a square bore carb that i wanted to use, I'd go with a stealth...it's a darn good intake.
just my opinion,
trw
05-25-2005, 07:31 PM
#5
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Dec 2000
Location: Eastern Connecticut
Posts: 2,198
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I read an article on carcraft.com where they compared a performer, performer rpm and stock q-jet manifold. Both manifolds lost power below 3800 rpm to the stock manifold, and they had a major flat spot from 2000-2700 with an edelbrock carb.
I wonder if the Weiand Action Plus would have that flat spot? The only article I could find testing that manifold compared it to a two-bbl motor. My guess is Edelbrock spends more on magazine ads.
Of course the performer and rpm made more power at higher rpms, making 18 or 30 more peak HP respectively.
Joe
http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/24898/index.html#
The tests were conducted on Westech’s SuperFlow engine dyno using an 8.67:1 355ci small-block Chevy equipped with aftermarket aluminum cylinder heads, headers, and a healthy performance flat-tappet hydraulic cam (0.472/0.472-inch lift, 220/228-degrees duration at 0.050).
I wonder if the Weiand Action Plus would have that flat spot? The only article I could find testing that manifold compared it to a two-bbl motor. My guess is Edelbrock spends more on magazine ads.
Of course the performer and rpm made more power at higher rpms, making 18 or 30 more peak HP respectively.
Joe
http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/24898/index.html#
The tests were conducted on Westech’s SuperFlow engine dyno using an 8.67:1 355ci small-block Chevy equipped with aftermarket aluminum cylinder heads, headers, and a healthy performance flat-tappet hydraulic cam (0.472/0.472-inch lift, 220/228-degrees duration at 0.050).
05-25-2005, 09:28 PM
#6
Safety Car
Member Since: Apr 2002
Location: North Royalton, OH
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
5 Posts
St. Jude Donor '06-'07
I am running the Stealth with a Holley 650DP and a stock LT-1 air cleaner - fits under a small block hood with no modifications. very happy with the setup. 
05-25-2005, 10:47 PM
#8
Drifting
Member Since: Sep 2004
Location: Fairview Heights Illinois, near Saint Louis MO, STL C3 Shark
Posts: 1,532
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
I have the performer, cause it was on it when I bought it. emailed edelbrock and they couldn't provide ANY benefit of the performer over a stock iron intake other than weight savings. Kind of disappointing.
05-26-2005, 09:54 AM
#10
Team Owner
Originally Posted by MEGALADON
Why is it most here would rather run edelbrocks 0-5000 performer intake
than the weiand stealth manifold, 0-6800 RPM???
.
than the weiand stealth manifold, 0-6800 RPM???
.
The performer makes less power than the stock aluminum L-82 intake. The performer is made for older pickup trucks not performance machines.
05-26-2005, 10:19 AM
#11
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: Coming home from Luckenbach Texas
Posts: 7,456
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by gkull
Pure ignorance! The performer makes less power than the stock aluminum L-82 intake. The performer is made for older pickup trucks not performance machines.
The performer makes less power than the stock aluminum L-82 intake. The performer is made for older pickup trucks not performance machines.
...and that's why I kept the stock L82 manifold.
05-26-2005, 01:36 PM
#14
Safety Car
Thread Starter
Member Since: Apr 2004
Location: WAY DEEP INSIDE AMERICO,YES YOU LIVE HERE TO!! TX
Posts: 3,997
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by gkull
Pure ignorance! The performer makes less power than the stock aluminum L-82 intake. The performer is made for older pickup trucks not performance machines.
The performer makes less power than the stock aluminum L-82 intake. The performer is made for older pickup trucks not performance machines.I have already learned this, with my own money
05-26-2005, 01:38 PM
#15
Safety Car
Thread Starter
Member Since: Apr 2004
Location: WAY DEEP INSIDE AMERICO,YES YOU LIVE HERE TO!! TX
Posts: 3,997
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by oregonsharkman
Yeah, but i'll take the 31hp gain at revs for $200 any day
Are you talking about the STEALTH???
I notice it has a different design than the performer.
I guess cause it can take a little more RPM.
05-27-2005, 12:43 PM
#16
Advanced
Member Since: May 2004
Location: JONESBOROUGH TN
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am running a Performer EPS manifold Edelbrock 1406 carb and drop base air cleaner on a 77 with stock hood.No problems and happy with performance.The EPS is designed more for the sqaure bore carb and works better than a sqaure bore + adapter on stock manifold.
05-27-2005, 01:40 PM
#17
Melting Slicks
Originally Posted by gkull
Pure ignorance! The performer makes less power than the stock aluminum L-82 intake. The performer is made for older pickup trucks not performance machines.
The performer makes less power than the stock aluminum L-82 intake. The performer is made for older pickup trucks not performance machines.
05-27-2005, 01:52 PM
#18
Race Director
Originally Posted by MEGALADON
Why is it most here would rather run edelbrocks 0-5000 performer intake
than the weiand stealth manifold, 0-6800 RPM???
.
than the weiand stealth manifold, 0-6800 RPM???
.
i beleive i got the performer intake from my engine builder because he had it available in his shop and he likes them....i just went with his recommendation....he also knew i wasn't looking to go to 6800 ....at least its a truthful answer....
05-27-2005, 02:10 PM
#19
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: Coming home from Luckenbach Texas
Posts: 7,456
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by Matt 1980 L-82
So, what is the best overall performance intake to put on?
Use the money you save to get a good set of cylinder heads and a free-flowing exhaust system.
05-27-2005, 03:10 PM
#20
Safety Car
Member Since: Apr 2002
Location: North Royalton, OH
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
5 Posts
St. Jude Donor '06-'07
Originally Posted by page62
Leave your L82 manifold on there. The Qjet is also OK if it's in good condition.
Use the money you save to get a good set of cylinder heads and a free-flowing exhaust system.
Use the money you save to get a good set of cylinder heads and a free-flowing exhaust system.
I jumped on the "get an intake" bandwagon well before I realized that getting air IN to the motor is worthless if you can't also get it OUT. Get some heads and exhaust and you'll probably see terrific results with your stock L82 manifold.