Okay...I want real-world information here, not conjecture! Does the Edelbrock Performer manifold improve performance vs. the stock aluminum intake on my '79?

I know the '79 intake is not as low-rise as some other years, thanks to the mid-rise hood on those cars. But in reality how good is the stock intake?

Inquiring minds want to know...

The SB Performer was evidently changed at least once. The early ones were evidently no better than 79 L-82 intake. GKull has said he found it no better.
At the end of the 80s about +15 better than the normal iron non egr intake.
Mountainmotor has said is good for over 400 HP on a 350. Also race engines w/ a 500 cfm 2 barrel, the 2101 is said to be good for about 370HP.
2101 good for over 430 HP on a 383.

Does this engine have headers on it? If not, that would be a better place to start your modifications. Back in the '70's the exhaust systems were very restrictive.

BigBlockk

Later.....

I've got stock ram's horns feeding into 2½" duals. I'd like to keep the rams horns if possible. (In fact, there's a place near here that'll ceramic coat them for $175!!!)

I know the ram's horns aren't perfect, but they still flow OK if everything behind them is sufficiently open...

But back to the topic -- I'm not sure if Ganey's response was a "yes" or "no" for my particular situation

The Ram HOrn manifolds are as good as Tri-Y headers. Four tube headers flow better, but hey they are factory and they work. The Performer Series manifolds are great options in that they flow well, are inexpensive, and good up to 5500 RPM. Don't think the OEM manifold is good to that high and RPM but I've been wrong before.

So if you expect to be in a power band up to that RPM, then the Performer Series is a good option. If the motor you are building is never going to see that, then use the factory OEM manifold.

One combination,On the dyno , cast iron Q-jet 365 hp..
Alum. Q-jet 375 hp
Performer RPM 398 hp

Note , EGTs improved by 100 degrees , becoming more uniform over the factory intakes. VE improved by 5 % .
Only jetting was changed to maximize HP.

I can't speak directly about the Performer, but I went from the factory '66 350 horse aluminum high rise to the Performer RPM air gap and it made a BIG difference. -- stronger mid-range, and much stronger high rpm performance. The only change was the manifold, I didn't change the carb (Holley).

I got mine out this weekend for the first time with headers and, and intake working together (before just intake and stock manifolds- 327/350) I ran it once in the morning with no muffs in the hookers - unbelievable the perfomance improvement - I immediately realized 2 things - 1. I have more horsepower than I realized, and 2. I needed to instlall the mufflers asap - embarrassingly loud - now it is too quiet with the hooker mufflers, but still more than enough power - I highly recommend it.

Anyone know what the stall speed is of a Turbo 350 torque convertor?

I am planning to build a 383 stroker motor and I have a few questions

Do I need to purchase a 400 crank?
What length connecting rods are needed?
What type of pistons are best? (I would like to use domed pistons)
I have a extra 350 block (must be machined to accomadate a 400 crank)
Does the crank have to be externally or internally balanced?
What type of cam is best?
Wish to use cast iron heads (64cc)
Which carb? Manifold?

Goal: 400hp 400+lbs/ft torque

Unless you are talking about the Edelbrock RPM Performer, no.

Hi Page,
The Performer I fitted seemed to improve things a bit, nothing dramatic, but definitely better throttle response. The RPM & air gap versions are better for performance, but then you'll get all the clearance issues with the filter.
(Stall speed for a 1981 TH350C converter was 1800 rpm)

The Edelbrock Performer is a good COPY of the Chevy intake.

I might add that a GM LT-1 intake will be close to a Performer RPM in power; the Performer will have closer exhaust gas temps and still be a better choice for absolute power.
We dynoed that comparison also.

Wasn't the LT-1 intake also used on the later L-82's?

Flowed Performer

Low side - 238CFM @28" H2O
High side - 278CFM @28" H2O

That is some high velocity going on there in those small ports . Much better than sewer pipes will flow .

Many people over cam , more people over intake manifold
" new term there "

i went to the dyno yesterday with my 77, L 48, 129k, tired old beast, no air pump, headers, 2 into 1 exhaust with cataytic converter, engine burns oil on start up and all things considered runs ok, (i beleive my intake is cast iron) best pull was 142.7 hp and 235.1 ft lbs. can't compare to any thing else but these are real numbers off a stock engine. no conjecture here....

I'm running the Edelbrock Performer EPS. I'm seeing improved engine response up to about 5500 RPM but I've not dynoed. However I also completely changed everything else by building a seperate motor. Not sure this answers your question.

The later L-82s used a Q-jet on an alum copy of the medium rise cast iron. The LT-1 used a Holley.