Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

edelbrock performer RPM Intake

Discussion in '1973-1991 K5 Blazer | Truck | Suburban' started by Jamie, Mar 28, 2001.

  1. Jamie

    Jamie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Johnstown PA.
    Is any one useing this intake and how well does it perform.
     
  2. dyeager535

    dyeager535 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2000
    Posts:
    26,978
    Likes Received:
    189
    Location:
    Roy WA
    Need more info! High RPM use, use the RPM. Low end grunt (torque at low RPM's) get the plain performer. Bigger is not always better, just like everything else, it must be tailored to your anticipated usage


    Dorian
    My K5 and Chev/Olds tech/links page: <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.dorianyeager.com/index2.html>http://www.dorianyeager.com/index2.html</A>
     
  3. K5_73

    K5_73 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2001
    Posts:
    53
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Wichita, Kansas
    The Performer RPM is a good intake for all around use, and has a power range from 1500-6500 RPM. The Performer is also a good all around intake, but it's power range (idle to 5500) is a little better for low end, as dyeager535 said. It just depends on what you want out of your motor.

    Stupid hurts
     
  4. Pure Insanity

    Pure Insanity 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2001
    Posts:
    4,579
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Dade City, Florida
    im runnin an RPM it was more suited to what i built.idle to 5500 is useless if your motor IDLES at 1200.idle is a BIG variable,for me i needed to start pulling higher up than 6-800 rpm cause i dont idle that low.i also have a 2500 stall and 4:88 gears so it all works together.

    PURE INSANITY
    86 blazer silverado 400 horse 350 w/vortec heads 38 x15.5 swampers (40 hawgs next)10 bolts(blah)w/4:88s coming soon,14 bolt.
     
  5. muddin4fun

    muddin4fun 3/4 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2001
    Posts:
    5,644
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    N Texas
    I don't ever go above 5500 rpm so when I put an edelbrock intake on, I'll go for the regular performer. I had one on a dually with a 383 stroker and hoooweee!!! You weren't stoppin that truck!!!

    [​IMG]


    <A target="_blank" HREF=http://muddin4fun.coloradok5.com>http://muddin4fun.coloradok5.com</A>
     
  6. K5_73

    K5_73 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2001
    Posts:
    53
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Wichita, Kansas
    Sweet! That's what's going in the Blazer, as soon as I get the heads done! 383 should be pretty peppy w/ 4.10 gears behind it.

    Stupid hurts
     
  7. Nrose07

    Nrose07 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2000
    Posts:
    267
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Salem ,Or
    Well I have one on my Blazer and love it. The RPM in dyno test after dyno test makes more hp and tq. the whole rpm range. The old myth that the performer is better in the low rpm is false, old myth. But the RPM is a square bore only.

    Displacement, cubes, and did you say you drive a riceburner???
     
  8. dyeager535

    dyeager535 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2000
    Posts:
    26,978
    Likes Received:
    189
    Location:
    Roy WA
    No, thats a fact. You can not flow better at low RPM AND High RPM. Dyno tests do NOT and cannot accurately show low RPM hp/tq. They typically start at 2000RPM. I don't know about anyone else here, but if my motor makes 5 ft lbs of torque off idle, that truck won't start moving, even if it makes 4 billion foot pounds at 4000RPM. There is no argument it makes more horsepower and torque. It's WHERE it makes it. just like a cam, bigger is not better in all cases.

    Dorian
    My K5 and Chev/Olds tech/links page: <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.dorianyeager.com/index2.html>http://www.dorianyeager.com/index2.html</A>
     
  9. Jamie

    Jamie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Johnstown PA.
    The reason I asked this question is because I need an Intake with a heat crossover. So I choose the edelbrock 7116 for the vortec heads I have and will be installing soon. I have a performer 2116 now but for the past to winters here in PA the lack of a heat crossover makes getting around a problem cause the cold fuel mixture hits that cold Intake and turns the fuel back into a liquid. The performer RPM 7116 has an external heat crossover that I plan on hooking up to my headers. I had contacted Edelbrock and said that everything should work fine together. The bottom end is still a stock 400 and my cam is and edelbrock 2103 (400) cam and the vortec heads. The only bad thing is that I have to replace my Q-Jet with a performer 750 carb. If anyone is running a performer cam and performer rpm intake and performer carb I would appriciate any feedback thanx.
     
  10. Nrose07

    Nrose07 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2000
    Posts:
    267
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Salem ,Or
    Well that is also a plus about the RPM, it will solve your problem. This is the setup that I use, 350, TBI, adapter (tbi-squarebore), vortec heads, etc. I run coolant out of the front of the intake, through the crossover, and onto my heater core. The reason that I belive this a better setup then exhaust is that your intake manifold temp. will be regulated to your thermostat. When running exhaust through your crossover the temp. is MUCH higher than needed, is unregulated, and when working the motor (say going up a long hill) your exhaust temp. will rise heating your intake charge creating a lean condition, reducing power and possible pre-detonation.
    The con of running coolant is you have to wait a few min for coolant temp. to rise sufficently. Also you can get away with adapter so you not spending the money on a new carb.

    Displacement, cubes, and did you say you drive a riceburner???
     

Share This Page