bjones9858

I'm new to the forum - lots of good information. Anyone have any experience with the edelbrock torker II and Performer manifolds? I bought this 76 L48 about a year ago and someone in its past put a torker II with a Edelbrock 1406 carb on it. Its a crate engine that seems pretty tight. Also has a cam (unknown but maybe Edelbrock?), headers and true duals. I've rebuilt the carb and replaced the dist cap and rotor (Mallory comp 9000). Runs a whole lot better. But looking for more low end. Would changing to the Performer dual plane give me an improvement I could feel in the seat of my pants?

mountainmotor

Quote:
"Would changing to the Performer dual plane give me an improvement I could feel in the seat of my pants?"

Probably so.You have pretty good hood clearance with your year.Edelbrock makes a new EPS manifold exclusively to fit square bore carbs like you have.You might want to check them out.

Welcome to the forum!

Ganey

While it would be nice to have the cam specs., probably Yes.

:cool:

Lt1er

The cam, the heads and the compression ratio is what really determines how much torque and hp you have across the board. If you really compare all the car magazines dyno tests you will see that torque readings only very by a few foot pounds both plus and minus throught the rpm range.

So the percentage gains are so small IMO that you would never feel it. If you really want more low end torque bump the compression to 10+ and advance the cam a couple of degrees.

UKPaul

Hi there,
I'm just about to fit a Performer to my motor (once I get off of my Butt and do it), on the basis that it will be good for what I want ie. lots of bottom end torque & a good mid range. As far as I've learn't (from this excellent forum, no less), the single plane manifolds are of more use at the top end. Basically, I've got no pratical experience but I've gotta say " Damn fine choice of Bikes, mate :) ).
Paul

tsw71

How much you gain will depend on the cam you have. If your cam does not make much torque down low, then the intake swap will probably not gain you much. Also, is your car a 4speed or auto?( if auto, does it have a stall converter?) I switched from the Performer to TorquerII a couple years ago, and really did not notice much of a difference in low end torque. The only thing that really stood out was the change in mid and upper range. In my case, the low first gear of the five speed may help to overcome any loss down low. With that said, you have nothing to lose in trying. You can pick up a used Performer on Ebay for $50 and give it a try. If that does not help, then it may be time for a different cam that suits your needs.

Tom

bjones9858

Thanks to all for the advice. This is a great forum! It's an automatic. I'm assuming the cam is the edelbrock for the torker II. Since the carb, manifold and cam were most likely installed on the crate engine when it was put in (sounds logical but who knows?) I think I'll pick up a performer on ebay and see how it works. The carb rebuild and dist cap and a change in timing made a big difference. Before I couldn't even chirp the tires now I get a big ole patch of rubber. (It's good to have some American iron to keep the Road King company what with all those Brit bikes and the MGA.)
OH, and no offense Paul. (I see you're in the UK.) My first bike was a Firebird Scrambler. Love BSAs! I'm lusting after a Speed Triple right now but my wife thinks the garage is too full.


[Modified by bjones9858, 12:26 PM 2/7/2002]

427TRI

Bill, if you spend anytime above 5000 rpm with this motor, you'll want the RPM version, or another EXCELLENT choice is the Z28 mani or Holley clone.

Regardles of cam choice, you WILL feel better bottom end with a dual plane.

You might have to tweak the carb some again, as the fuel signal with a 180 degree manifold will be better. You might need less pump shot and a heavier power enrichment spring.




[Modified by 427TRI, 10:42 AM 2/7/2002]

tsw71

In most cases I would agree, but with the TorquerII ,you really aren't losing much. Keep in mind that though it is a single plane, it is what I would call a low to medium rise intake with narrow runners that are also longer that those that you will find in most other single plane intakes. For insatance, I had an old street dominator(the old single plane version) that I tried many years ago. This thing was the typical single plane with short runners and it was an absolute mistake with the setup I was running then. The Torquer II has much better street characteristics. I can lug the engine down to 1500 in high gear and still have a surprising amount of torque. This would not be the case with most other single planes. Also keep in mind that the reason the torquerII is used by alot of Vette guys is because it fits under the small block hoods. A high rise dual plane will not fit in most cases.

Tom

nunus79

I switched from a Performer to a Weiand TeamG single plane. I didn't retune the Qjet when I switched. Test driving impression, no gain in off-idle throttle response or low end torquey feel. It felt just about the same as the dual-plane down low. Mid range and up is where a noticeable boost is felt. With that seat of the pants testing, I took it to the track expecting improved results. Just before the freeway cutoff leading to the track I punched the throttle and got my first 2-3 chirp ever. Further making me believe that my ETs were going to be improved.

When I made my first run I was nearly 0.4 sec & 4 mph slower than my last outing. Two more identical runs confirmed it. I was making less power. To this day, I haven't gotten around to retuning the carb. There are indications of it running too lean. I was going to try a Holley carb, but since got sidetracked on my new Z28 :D.

I believe with the proper carb & tuning, the single plane will make more power over the dual plane. If all you are concerned with is the low end, stick with the dual plane as the single plane will not boost it. If you are looking to boost the mid to upper range, a single plane may be just the ticket. So, to turn this logic upon your situation, you got nothing to lose by going to a Performer.

bjones9858

Thanks for the advice guys. The Torker II really picks up at about 60 to 70 mph but by then you're running out of road. I'm going to give the Performer a shot and see how it feels.

jdunne

You might find there is more improvement from the Airgap....worth considering...john :chevy

bjones9858

Thanks John, but do you know if the Airgap will fit under the hood?

mountainshark76

To answer that, yes an air gap does fit under the hood i have one on my 76
but it limits your air cleaner slection :eek: you must use a drop base then you have a choise to make about using the distributer shield :rolleyes:
i can tell you the air gap Rocks :cool: :cool: :cool:

bjones9858

Maybe I should go out and measure the hood clearance like they recommend on the Edelbrock site. And what's a distributor shield? - just kidding, I've had mine off for so long while fiddling with the timing, I forgot there was one. That brings up another question if I can piggy-back on this thread. I've assumed the cam won't allow for factory timing. It will barely run at that setting. Read an article where the guy recommended setting with a vacuum gauge. I set it at max vacuum - 21 lbs. at idle with good results. This seems to work best, lots more power. But it's way beyond the gauge on the block. You can just barely see the timing mark as it passes under the water pump. Kinda green at this though - I may not be understanding the process.

Edzred72

Holy cow :eek: :eek: :eek: It's like the Royal British Motorcycle Museum!!
Great bikes :yesnod: :yesnod: Great Harley too!!! :D :D :D

UKPaul

Maybe I should stop off for a look next time I'm in the US - looking at those bikes + a Vette would sure beat Disneyland :jester
Those boxes of Beeza should be smuggled into the house in the dead of night. It's amazing how fast a bike can be built once indoors :lol:
I've just recently built the motor for a '75 Trident lowrider. Sprayed the cylinder Barrels in gloss black paint and what a difference, the engine looks so much nicer than the standard bare alloy finish. Well :cool: (not that I'm suggesting that you pull it apart or anything ;) )
:cheers:


[Modified by UKPaul, 6:22 PM 2/8/2002]

Edzred72

[QUOTE]Hi there, but I've gotta say " Damn fine choice of Bikes, mate :) ).
Paul
Hey Paul:
Back in the early 70's I had a 67 Norton Atlas. Hi compress pistons, cam, rejetted carbs.. and man that 750 could run with the big dogs. Hell to kick start, wouldn't idle for nothin... but crack that throttle and ....BYE...BYE!! Blew away many a Trumpet and Beezer back then. It also handel'd better that any bike I've ever owned. (Z-1 Kaw included) It's good to see Triumph making bikes again. British bikes were always top quality, easy to work on and mod... it was sad to see when the ricers ruined that market. Happy riding.. and keep the rubber side down!!! :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
PS> My older brother who always owned Norton Commando's in the 70's just picked up a 72 or 73 (not sure) last week. Looks and runs great... I'm looking forward to taking it for a spin this spring.!!

Vetterodder

Setting timing by idle vacuum is great if you only idle. If you actually drive the car, use a timing light and set it for optimum maximum advance. A bigger cam with more overlap will want more advance but what is added to initial is also being added to total. Once you reach the optimum total, too much advance not only hurts power, it hurts the motor. Assuming that you meant "inches" and not "pounds", 21 inches would indicate a mild cam at a very idle speed.

bjones9858

Thanks Vetterodder, I do plan on actually driving the car after I make the inches to pounds conversion on the vacuum. :bb But the initial timing setting is my problem, don't know what it should be with the cam of unknown origin. I'm kind of going by feel - whats seems to run best. Preciate your help.