460 Ford Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Got my 466 apart for a little freshen up, intake gaskets,valve seals, new springs, and have been considering trying a TORKER 2 in place of my current Performer RPM (non-air gap).

The car is 73 Mach1 with C6 trans/2500 Coan converter & 3:89 gears w/spool.
Motor pretty mild 9:1 466, D3VE heads with some exhaust porting,stock valve sizes,Crane hyd cam 220/230-.520/.530 Holley 850 DP, Hooker 1-7/8 headers
It runs [email protected] with above combination.

Used to be a fairly active track car, but not as much any more.
Very little street driving with the car, just once in a while for fun so I dont really care about manners or driveablility but with the Performer RPM the throttle response & low/mid torque is great.....but I cant help but wonder if the Torker 2 will pick it up on the top.
With the 2500 converter, perhaps any sacrifice in low end will not be noticed?
It seems the Performer RPM has only moderate plenum volume and rather small but smooth/shapely runners.
Let me know what you guys think before I just blow a couple hundred bucks.

thanks
Rick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
684 Posts
I switched from a SCJ iron with a 830cfm annular to a Torker II with a 950HP. On the dyno the Torker II made significantly more power above 3800 RPM (20-25lb-ft on average). In the car it feels a bit more sluggish but pulls hard to 6K. I haven't tried the 830 annular on the Torker II. I should do that. I might stick with the dual plane, but it's an easy swap and the Torker II's are pretty reasonable right now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
526 Posts
1st off, love the 73 Mach1's
IMO you are running nice ET's for the mild build.
They are heavy though, I assume you have full interior.
Now to the intake, I believe the RPM would work better on your car.
You have 3.89's but you only have a 2500 converter.
I think the Torquer II would work better with a 3000 stall but even then I think the RPM would be a better choice.
I believe you can still get one cheap from Lem here on the forum so you could try it, but I think your car would be faster with the dual plane. (assuming good traction with drag radials or slicks)
If you do try a torquer II, take it to the track and let us know how it ran.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Quick question. Does the Performer RPM fit under the hood?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,854 Posts
I love the Torquer II for horsepower but, on a "mostly street" type vehicle it doesn't have very good "part throttle" grunt. Getting some more hood clearance is the major reason for using it on the street unless the vehicle is super light like a Cobra kit car or something...
Get an "air gap" for a slight upgrade to what you have.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
181 Posts
I am running essentially the same setup as you are on one of my '73s (a Grande in this case).

While building the car (472), all of my research pointed to the RPM as the better choice for this mostly street car; the Air Gap was not available at the time. I have been extremely pleased with the build although I have not yet taken it to the track - - currently being painted.

If you do go with the Air Gap, I too would be interested in the results. As you noted, they are relatively cheap.

BTW, I had absolutely no problems with hood clearance using the NASA (NACA) hood.

BT
www.7171mustang.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,483 Posts
I have a similar combination in my car and gained three tenths switching from a Torker II to a non-rpm Performer. That was with 3.25 gears and a little heavier car. My guess is that it'll be a wash with your car being a little lighter and having deeper gears.

It doesn't really apply to you, but there was also a major improvement in drivability with the swith to the Performer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Torker

Thanks guys, appreciate all the input here as I have been on the fence about this one for a while.
Unless the Torker is really horrible, I wouldnt mind sacrificing some low end if there is a definite gain to be had in the upper, and theres only a certain amount of torque I can hook up anyway as I do not have an elaborate suspension setup...or even a good one for that matter.
I have thought about the Air Gap but I run my RPM with heat passages blocked so I dont know if there is any real advantage there.
Just wondering if the combination will pick up anywhere in the powerband with a Torker or not.

Rick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,854 Posts
Thanks guys, appreciate all the input here as I have been on the fence about this one for a while.
Unless the Torker is really horrible, I wouldnt mind sacrificing some low end if there is a definite gain to be had in the upper, and theres only a certain amount of torque I can hook up anyway as I do not have an elaborate suspension setup...or even a good one for that matter.
I have thought about the Air Gap but I run my RPM with heat passages blocked so I dont know if there is any real advantage there.
Just wondering if the combination will pick up anywhere in the powerband with a Torker or not.

Rick
The RPM "Air Gap" has larger runners than a regular RPM.

The "Torquer II" with a 1" thick "Cloverleaf" spacer will make more horsepower however, the throttle response will suffer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Jetting

Really tempted to try the Torker2/cloverleaf combo just to see what happens. If I make the switch to the single plane should I anticipate going up a couple of jet sizes on the 850dp?
This setup liked running #83 jets on primary & secondary with the performer RPM intake and no spacer.
Forgot to mention I was running 26" tire & ran out of RPM before running out of track.
Probably could have gone to a 28" tire but also ran out of money before I ran out of ideas...
Also for reference, I was shifting around 5200-5400.

thanks,
Rick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
camshaft info

Forgot to add this to my previous post about jetting:

The exact cam specs are as follows:
Crane H288
226/230 @.050 .522/.530 lift
112 lobe separation
installed straight up


Rick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
No to hijack, but I'm running a Torker II / 750 Edelbrock on my '78 460 in my mud racing truck. Truck is HEAVY weighing in around 8,000 lbs! Running (550 LB / Each) terra tires and 2.5 ton rockwell axles with 6.72 gears. I'm just now finishing the build so I have not run it very much. It is 100% offroad use only and typically will need power down low to get the tires spinning and keep them spinning.

My question, should I consider swapping to an air gap / performer to have more low end?

The motor is stock with the exception of the intake, carb and exhaust. I have plans to completley go through it to build a ~400 to 500 hp motor one day. Obviously it will benefit from a mild cam etc. too. Basically, I want to begin gathering parts little by little so that I can do it all at once.

Opinions?
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top