chevman24

iTrader: (1)

I have a 3rd gen camaro. I took out the 305 tbi unit and replaced it with a carb 350. The engine originally came out of a 71 pickup.
I have been researching and a dual plane is ideal since its street driven. I have been debating on purchasing an edelbrock rpm air gap. They supposedly make more power, so thats a bonus. The down fall is that they dont have the exhaust crossover. What is the purpose of the crossover, and what types of issues would result if decided to install this manifold?

I appreciate any assistance with the issue.

doc221978

If it's a stock engine the Edelbrock 2101 would be a better choice. The EGR is for emissions, which you obviously ain't to worried about if you removed the TBI. The exhaust crossover is not necessary in your application.

If you want to keep the EGR then use the 3701. It's the same except with EGR provisions, and $40 more. It would make no sense to spend the extra money though. The car won't pass a smog check, so hopefully you don't have them where you're at.

chevman24

iTrader: (1)

No smog checks here. Knock on wood.
So the crossover is just for emissions? Since its not needed in my application; What was the original intent of the crossover then? The original iron intake had the crossover as well. Also the engine never had an egr. The 305 did but i figured the engine wasnt designed for smog so i took out all of the smog equiptment.
It seems that the crossover would just heat up the air fuel mixture when colder fuel ignites better. GM had to have a reason for the crossover.

Thanks again

doc221978

It can affect warm-up to a minor degree, but not starting. If your choke is adjusted and the carb is tuned you should be good. I've never ran all the emissions..... I have always felt it is a waste of space and money. I don't have emission laws either.
----------
I am originally from Michigan, and have ran the 2101 on a number of engines. Most of them started better below freezing then my 2000 blazer does in any weather.

chevman24

iTrader: (1)

The quadrajet had a crack in the baseplate so the float would leak down, so i replaced it with a road demon jr 625. I would prefer not to run a spread bore intake. Both the 2101 and 3701 looked like they were spreadbore.
Thanks again. A cam change is in the works as well so it doesnt hurt to get something more tuned to where the project is headed

doc221978

They are dual pattern. I like the Q-jet and the Holleys. I think you made a good choice that is matched to the engine. Most people always want to go bigger then they need.

chevman24

iTrader: (1)

After my post i noticed they were both dual pattern. Would you still go with the 2101 if you were planning a cam change? Im not getting a cam that will be too extreme since it is primarily a street vehicle but maybe something that produces about 400-430hp.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

'71 truck heads would never support the power an RPM intake would produce over a regular Performer.

Atilla the Fun

That's not so.
The '71 heads are certainly comparable to those used on the GM 290 hp 350 crate engine, which, truth be told, is just an overpriced goodwrench 350 with an L82 cam.
Anyway, even this crappy 7.8:1 crate engine picked up power by switching from a performer to an RPM AirGap.
It's long been known that a good tunnel ram will actually up the flow of most any heads, and this is true of the RPM Air Gap. I've lost the numbers, but the SuperFlow 1020 proved this.
The real issue here is fitting a decent air cleaner under a stock hood. No matter what anyone else here says, if you run the RPM under a stock hood, you hafta compromise the distance between the air cleaner lid and the inlets to the carb's venturis.
The compromise is a Weiand AirStrike.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

Put a Performer RPM on that engine, you're saying it would make more power than a Performer?

Nope, ain't gonna happen.

chevman24

iTrader: (1)

Im just trying to figure out parts that are going to work with the direction that im heading with the build. Yes if i bought the air gap rpm i would mount it. However, i dont plan on purchasing a performer for my current setup when its going to change by spring. Cam, Heads and all of that are in the works. Ive had an RPM intake on the engine before and it performed much better then it did with my current setup

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

It would be nice to have the complete story. Nothing you had said up to this point indicated a change of heads was in the works.

chevman24

iTrader: (1)

I apologize. I'll remember to include all the info in the future.