Does anybody know if there is a single plane option for the vortec heads that has the powerband of the torker 2 intake (2,500-6,500? The only ones I have been able to find are the victor series (out of my powerband) and the holley multiport efi.

I like the rpm airgap, but I think the pressure I need to run to make my tbi work is causing "puddling" in the ridges at the bottom of the plenum. Posted this over here because you guys probably have more experiance with single plane carb intakes.

Thank you in advance

 

there's the victor jr. that's probably the only one.

 

The ridges in the bottom of the plenum are there to create turbulance which helps get any "puddled fuel" back into the airstream. A single plane intake will not help. Manifold plenum heat will.

You could stuff a hot water bladder under the plenum in the Airgap and run hot engine coolant (from the heater hose) thru it to warm the intake.

 

So I may be better off going with a performer rpm? (less airgap obviously). I think the victor jr has a power band to 8,000rpm, but I'll have to check.

The other reason I'd like to go with a single plane, is because unlike carbs, there are little choices for tbi units. A single plane would allow each cylinder access to both bores as opposed to one.

I was looking into using Holley's single plane efi manifold, and plugging the injector bosses, but I'm thinking that wouldn't work to well because the intake was designed as a dry intake. What do you guys think?

 

victor jr is fine for 3000-6500...

its a pretty good compromise between hoigh end power and bottom end.. but i personllay would go with a rpm air gap

 

Just about anything has a better power band than a Torker II. I would not put that intake on anything. Sure, people will pipe up and say they saw one or knew of one or even had one that seemed to run good; on the other hand, they probably never did a back-to-back comaprison of it against anything else.

The intake mfrs' "power band" "specs" aren't something you can use by themselves, in a vacuum, to pick an intake. Think about it for a minute; what does that mean? Does it mean anything real-world, like the points at which the torque curve in some motor (if so, what motor?) falls to some fraction of its peak; does it mean the engine will at least run at all at that RPM; just what does it mean? My favorite is a certain otherwise reputable mfr's claim that one of their near-stock dual-plane units has a "power band" of "idle - 7000 RPM". Yeah right!!!

There's no correlation between "pressure you need to run to make your TBI work", and fuel puddling in the intake.

Putting a heater of some kind in the manifold directly defeats the Air Gap feature, plus causes a restriction in the intake tract. That's kind of like 2 steps forward and 3 steps back. I would not consider doing that except as a very last resort, and only as a tepmorary work-around until a more suitable manifold, which I would already have on order, arrived in the mail.

You can use ANY carb manifold, with an adapter for your TBI. Don't limit yourself to intakes that are available from the factory with a TBI flange already cast onto them.

Sounds to me like you have the wrong size injectors.

What is the rest of this motor? Are you stuck with TBI for some reason (emissions or whatever)? If not, and you have enough motor to require a single-plane manifold to reach your "power band", you need to ditch that anyway. You'll have a major struggle ever getting it to run right, especially if you're not the one burning chips for it.

 

There is no way in heck I would use a tbi manifold.....hense asking about the carb intakes.
I also must have miss stated something, but I wouldn't put anything in my plenum.....What I meant was ditching the rpm airgap and going with a standard performer rpm.

I'm thinking my problems were because of 1) lack of heat in plenum, and 2) Holley's poor excuse for an adapter plate. The best way to describe it is to imagine the tbi moved so far forward on the thing, it actually overhangs the plenum. The adapter plate obviously works it's way back to meet the plenum of the intake, but the big problem is that it is not centered at all-and the reasoning behind this is not any engine physics....but to make throttle linkage work on certain applications.

Anyways, the rest of the motor looked like this:
Wiseco forged pistions, 9.5x:1 compression
scat 383 crank, 5.7 rods
Comp cams hyd roller .510"lift int/exh; 220/230 dur, 114lsa
crane aluminum 1.5 roller rockers
rpm airgap
protopline vortec heads 64cc
manley race ready (or something along that name) valves
comp valve springs.
Modded Holley TBI w/85pph injectors, walbro 255 fuel pump


I have many reasons for keeping tbi, which I will not go into because I absolutely do not want this to turn into a debate.
Regardless to say, the car was good for 12s with horrible 2.0 60's. The car will go 11 seconds N/A fuel injection.

Thank you for the help

 

Seems like somebody else makes an adapter plate; can't recall who though. I've heard complaints about the Holley one before.

MR Gasket maybe?

 

How hard could it possibly be to make your own adapter plate? 1/4 plate stock with appropriate holes drilled in it- mission accomplished!

I know a little about Holley FI stuff and I totally beleive that the Holley adapter plate is probably crap. Lord knows their throttle bodies I have used in the past are.

If I was building this engine I would want the TB centered over the intake opening, too. I shortening up the throttle/tranny cables or moving the bracket back would be of minor concern to me in the grand scheme of things.

 

I completely agree. Making a throttle bracket is not hard to do. The only pita about making an adapter plate is that the bores of the tbi also overhang the sides of the squarebore mounting, so they have to be angled in. Still shouldn't be too hard of a task though. Regardless to say, the Holley piece will be going in the recylcle can!!!

 

i would like to know where people came up with the info to back up the oft repeated "Torker II sucks!" line.

The only back to back comparison I saw was a guy that was here that put one on his buds chevelle replacing a performer rpm and gained a tenth and some mph.

If it sucks so bad then why does my 305 with the torker II trap higher than just about any n/a 305 on thirdgen.org that I have heard of? short of muggsyjack who also ran a torker II and also ran an airgap but no back to back comparison was made as far as I know.

If it sucks so bad maybe ill hit like 110 mph with a manifold swap.

Id like to know what you base your criticism of the torker II on because ive seen no one provide any data.

BTW r90, i would definately go with the victor manifold, dont pay too much attention to those powerband figures they give. Ive seen dynotests where they put a victor JR on a STOCK lg4 and it gained power across the powerband lol, something like 25 hp

 

Pablo, I can answer that question for you, because it doesnt cost as much as a victor jr. Its the same reason that the iron heads we've used for thirty years are now no good. Because they arent the cream of the aftermarket crop. There is nothing wrong with the torquer II. Many people have them and love them. They perform good on the street and at the track.

 

I should have known better than to offer to help. I'll know better next time I guess.

 

dont take it that way RB. Obviously you cant trust what the manufacturers say, and you cant expect an intake to make you engine rev to 7K. All im sayign is that when you match your cam to heads and intake, it will work fine. If you put a torquer II on a stock 305 with all other items stock as well, I am sure performance would suffer.

 

im not criticising you RB, im just wondering where you came up with that because Ive heard it repeated by many people but I've yet to see the source of that information. Have you seen a back to back test using that manifold and another?

I just want to be "in the know" because it seems like right now everyone knows something about that manifold that I dont. And I own it!

 

Pablo,
So the victor jr. should be alright. My combo will look like this then: Victor Jr., Protopline vortec heads (64cc) (just got done smoothing ports and polishing), hyd roller .544" int/exh(w/1.6rr's) 220/230 114 lsa. Not sure what kind of forged pistons yet, but compression will be in the 9.5:1-10.5:1 range. The 383 setup uses the 5.7" rods

I'm going to try to keep the adapter plate to a 3/4". Last go around, she had no problem pulling to 6k-only thing holding me back was the distribution. Do you see any problems with this setup?

 

not really, id go with a little more cam though, duration wise.. lift is great

 

I did finally do a back to back comparison between the Torker 2 and an airgap dual plane..... Even with a high stall converter (5400) the dual plane went faster. Granted this was with a relatively mild 230 dur./.496 lift/106 LCA cam. I would guess that for the torker to be effective, the cam and compression must match. I am running a legitimate static CR of 11.4 - 1 with pro topline heads. This may create a reversion problem with this cam. When we changed, ET dropped from 7.55 to 7.43. MPH only picked up by about .4 in 1/8th mile.

 

Thanks Muggsy, thats the sort of info I wanted to hear. Doesnt sound like the torker is too terrible but i suppose i may gain something swapping to this victor jr sitting in my room heh-heh

 

I was surprised. On the 305 the torker worked better, but car was not as consisent. With 350 the dual plane is faster. I may try again after swapping to stronger cam.

 

well that adds a whole new dimension to it.. what was the difference between the air gap and torker II on the 305?

 

8.11 with Torker and 8.07 with Airgap. The only major difference between the two motors was 11.4 CR for 350 and 10.5 for 305 (poor cyl walls, low comp.)

 

hmm i thought you said the torker was faster on the 305

 

Thinking back, the torker was on 305 with different cam. My bad. With 350, comparison was exact as both were used with same cam and rocker ratio. I should have realized it when I checked numbers last night. Am in market for victor for next stage of development. I may try that too. See if it works better than airgap dual plane on current setup.

During last few weeks w/305 a lot of stuff changed, tire sizes, carb setting for vac. sec. 750 etc. Found cranking compression as low as 120 P.S.I. so we swapped in new 350. Would have liked to see 7's in 1/8th with 305. May bore and re-assemble at a later date.

 

l to as well will keep my TBI setup due to the enviroment l run in..100+ to -40 temps....anyway was wondering what intakes were availible to replace stock one short of the tbi one from holley l think it was...will go up to a 454 tb or aftermarket tb to replace the stock one..carb recomondations welcomed...haveing probs locateing these two parts..links would be greatly apprieciated....will keep stock bottom end as its fresh for now...heads are PN.14101083..are these heads worth putting a set of roller rockers on and keeping? and any ideas for a cam to match this set up...is a daily driver daily warrior...l hate traffic..

Note will also have chip done for it and will replace stock fuel pump as well..will be running electric water pump and fan..A/C will keep...airpump is long gone years ago...headers and good exhaust..700r4 trany..rear end unshure as of yet ..in anycase thought one of you folks whos been down this road would be kind enough to share :O)..also should ecm be replaced?

Thanx kindly

One confused Critter.....:hail:

 

Don't take this the wrong way but, why do you need a single plan intake for a cam that 230@.050 stats? I would think, you would loose much needed low end. That cam is going to peak at 5800rpm, a single plane intake would be mismatched to that powerband, even though the manufactuer's powerbands are kinda generic. I would tend to think that a medium-high rise dual plane would be better suited to take advantage of the excellent velocity of the vortec heads, which aren't going to support a 7500rpm powerband even if the cam was bigger. Again, I could be way off here, but thats just my .02

 

I am running a 230@ .050 duration cam and saw an improvement in ET with dual plane over single plane torker 2. I am running a loose converter and expected that it would allow motor to flash past weak point of single plane. It did not.

 

Well, I'm toying with the idea of going with the comp cams 306-8, the next step up. I think duration is around 228/234, but I will probably just stick with the 305-8 and go with the 1.6 rr's. Keep in mind it is hydraulic roller

The reason I am going single plane is because I am running tbi. There is theory and fact behind it, which I will not do into. Worse comes to worse, I do still have the rpm airgap.

I went with the eagle 4340 H-beam rods, and Wiseco 10.7:1 forged pistons The bottom end should hold up nicely with the scat crank. I've also slightly ported and polished the heads.
I'm not sure of actual flow numbers, but I know the protoplines outflow the gm vortec heads. And there are quite a few guys running gm vortecs at 6,500rpm at the local circle track, so hopefully the heads flow pretty nicely.....but I'm not looking to spin her to 7k or anything.