When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Do any members have personal experience and opinions about these Edelbrock manifolds. I currently use an insulative spacer to keep my carb cool. If I buy an Air Gap (performer air gap), I will not have room for the spacer so I need to know if they really work.
Re: Do these "Air Gap" intakes really work ??? (jeffs)
The air gap manifolds definitely work. They keep the intake charge from being pre-heated by the engine oil in the lifter valley splashing up off the cam and crank, and they let cooler outside ambient air flow beneath the runners. Hot rod mag did a comprison on these a long time ago and found them to be pretty successful for peak HP. You can probably find the article in their archives.
Winter driving may be more problematic as warm up will not be as complete or as fast.
Re: Do these "Air Gap" intakes really work ??? (jeffs)
i rrespective of the air "cooling" effect,the runners are longer and straighter.I have a 750 holley vac sec and needed to put a spacer on as the holley doesnt have enough direct vac ports,so i put them on the spacer.....this is on a strong 383 in a 74R...IT ALL FITS UNDER THE HOOD,JUST.....john :chevy ;)
From: Who says "Nothing is impossible" ? I've been doing nothing for years.
Re: Do these "Air Gap" intakes really work ??? (Clink69)
I found a big difference in mid to high RPM range when I swapped the Performer for the RPM Air Gap, it all depends on the motor, the lower the performance the less you will notice a gain as a matter of fact the Performer ( or similar ) would be a better choice in some applications.
My carb also stays cool, when the motor is heated up on a hot day I can hold my finger on the carb bowls, I would have burned it before :D
Re: Do these "Air Gap" intakes really work ??? (MotorHead)
There's a big diff between the performer and either RPM intake (gap or no-gap). The generic performer DIES at ~5500 RPM, the RPMs do better up to ~6500 (probably the longer runners?).
IMHO
From: Pettis Performance 565 with two stages of Nitrous Supply nitrous 1.082, 4.61 at 155, 7.17 at 192
Re: Do these "Air Gap" intakes really work ??? (jeffs)
There is a differance betwen the Performer and the RPM or Air gap. There is no differance between the Air gap and the RPM in documented tests. I have the Air gap and like the way it looks, but believe me the top of the intake is not cool when the motor has been running. In fact on hot days the fuel will get hot and the car will not like to idle. A carb spacer would work better on a Performer than a Air Gap would by its self.
Re: Do these "Air Gap" intakes really work ??? (69 N.O.X. RATT)
There is a differance betwen the Performer and the RPM or Air gap. There is no differance between the Air gap and the RPM in documented tests. I have the Air gap and like the way it looks, but believe me the top of the intake is not cool when the motor has been running. In fact on hot days the fuel will get hot and the car will not like to idle. A carb spacer would work better on a Performer than a Air Gap would by its self.
If you are talking about the performer Air Gap that is true(not much gap). But my performer RPM Air Gap does stay cool (you can stick your hand under the carb on this one).
From: Pettis Performance 565 with two stages of Nitrous Supply nitrous 1.082, 4.61 at 155, 7.17 at 192
Re: Do these "Air Gap" intakes really work ??? (Clink69)
[QUOTE]There is a differance betwen the Performer and the RPM or Air gap. There is no differance between the Air gap and the RPM in documented tests. I have the Air gap and like the way it looks, but believe me the top of the intake is not cool when the motor has been running. In fact on hot days the fuel will get hot and the car will not like to idle. A carb spacer would work better on a Performer than a Air Gap would by its self.
If you are talking about the performer Air Gap that is true(not much gap). But my performer RPM Air Gap does stay cool (you can stick your hand under the carb on this one).
I do not think they make a Performer Air Gap. I am talking about the Performer RPM Air Gap. On my 454 it is not cool to the touch. You have to ask how much air gets under the little gap in there any ways. It is not enough to make any differance. Think about how fast the air is coming through the carb any ways.
That being said I think the RPM Air Gap is the best all around intake out there. I know of a few guys that have switched from a RPM Air Gap to a Victor Jr. in pretty fast street cars ( low and mid 11's) and went faster with the RPM Air Gap. Not only that but the car was much more streetable :chevy
Re: Do these "Air Gap" intakes really work ??? (jeffs)
The big question is why change???????????? Edelbrock is big on marketing. Whether it works or not. EDel air gaps boil the fuel in a carb just like any other intake manifold that doesn't have a thermal spacer.
Your Pro 1's are huge. They have to have a single plane to even get close to a port match. Going to dual plane will not gain any low end TQ. Your cam is really the deciding factor along with port velocity
I just looked over your motor specs. Your real problem is lack of compression
Re: Do these "Air Gap" intakes really work ??? (tersian)
Lt1er - your right about poor port velocity. I did not say it in the original post, but I am also swapping out the Pro 1 heads and going to either 190 or 195 cc heads.
With these different heads, a dual plane intake, and a cam better suited for low-to-mid rpm power, I will improve the performance where the engine spends most of its time.
In my case, bigger was not better. I wish I was smarter when I had this engine built. Don't get me wrong, this thing REALLY takes off after about 4000 rpm. I just think I will enjoy a lower power range setup better.
Re: Do these "Air Gap" intakes really work ??? (jeffs)
Are your pistons dished to get such low compression? my 355 with flat tops is @10.5. I'm also using a solid cam with 114 lobe centers so it really runs well even with 238/248 duration. Your 406 could be made to really run with 230 cc heads. All you need is a correct cam and high 10:1 compression. At your altitude if you never planned on going down to sea level without octane booster could even use in the low 11:1
IMO it would very easy to keep everything you have and just stuff in a cam that really traps the pressure that you have. If you like Hydro cams the Crane power max 272 with 1.6 rockers would really run.