Thread: torker 2

Tweet

Do you think the torker 2 intake would be better suited for bigger cube small blocks or any size built to handle 5500+ rpm's. Might be a silly question why does edlebrock offer rpm and torker combos that are in the same rpm range? I understand single plane increase top end, dual plane rpm mid-high. Think the 327 engine is better suited for rpm or torker combo? Like most people,i wouldnt mind being able to use what parts i have, but i know some combination of parts just wont work together.

Intake manifold design and theory has changed and progressed dramatically over the past 10 or 20 years. Those manifolds we thought were so great at one time have been surpassed by newer, better designs. The Torkers were great manifolds in their day, I ran one on the 351 Cleveland in my 68 Mustang. It was a very strong engine and I think the intake was a big contributor to that performance...........but it was a drag only car and didn't like low rpms.

I know it is hard to pass up using a free speed part, but as Glenn has shown in his post, that manifold is a single plane, designed for high rpm intake. On the street it will be a dog on an engine that is already short on cubes. Ebay would be my suggestion too.

Don

I still have an old TM1 manifold that pre dates the torker. Someday I'll use it on something just because it looks cool. Kinda like those of us who run multi carb stuff because we like the look. Face it single plane intakes definitely look better than dual planes.

I ran a T-2 on a built 355 SBC and 427 BBC vette. I highly recommend it. No problems with low end and mid range; that's what it was built for; and it is relatively low profile (fit the vette).

Kitz