Old skool Edelbrock performer 4V intake question

Old skool Edelbrock performer 4V intake question

Joined: September 9th, 2010, 6:02 am

April 17th, 2012, 5:12 am #1

Hello all,

I have this intake that I bought a LONG time ago. All it says on it is Edelbrock F351 4V. I was told from the guy I bought it from that it was off of a cleveland. Doesn't say performer, but I have heard these were the performer intake before they started labelling them "performer".

The problem is, I took it out today and the ports on the thing are MUCH smaller than the ports on my 4V heads... So what gives? I mean these ports are around 1/4 inch smaller all the way around the port... Is this thing for a W motor or something? Has anyone run into this, or is this normal for a performer for a street car?

I can provide pics if needed.

Thanks in advance!

~Mike

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 1st, 2004, 8:05 pm

April 17th, 2012, 6:03 am #2

Yes its designed for the 4V heads. The ports are smaller because the folks at Edelbrock were just sure the ports of the 351C 4V were too big. They didn't understand the 351C 4V back in the 1970s, and they still don't understand it today.

Its always puzzled me, Edelbrock produced the manifold recognized as the best 351C 4V tunnel ram, the UR19, yet the F351-4V and Performer are jokes, they probably perform as well as the factory manifolds but no better. I say probably, because I admittedly I don't know for sure. One thing I do know for sure, the Blue Thunder/Shelby manifold will walk all over that manifold.

-G
____________________________________________________________

Pantera Photos | 351C Historic Information | 351C Technical Information

If you use a 351C 4V powered vehicle for a grocery getter ... the eggs aren't going to make it home!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: December 17th, 2003, 4:14 pm

April 17th, 2012, 6:29 am #3

Hello all,

I have this intake that I bought a LONG time ago. All it says on it is Edelbrock F351 4V. I was told from the guy I bought it from that it was off of a cleveland. Doesn't say performer, but I have heard these were the performer intake before they started labelling them "performer".

The problem is, I took it out today and the ports on the thing are MUCH smaller than the ports on my 4V heads... So what gives? I mean these ports are around 1/4 inch smaller all the way around the port... Is this thing for a W motor or something? Has anyone run into this, or is this normal for a performer for a street car?

I can provide pics if needed.

Thanks in advance!

~Mike
The ports are smaller on that too, just put that in the search and you'll see that it works like a hot damn on a 4v head.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 17th, 2004, 11:02 pm

April 18th, 2012, 5:31 pm #4

Hello all,

I have this intake that I bought a LONG time ago. All it says on it is Edelbrock F351 4V. I was told from the guy I bought it from that it was off of a cleveland. Doesn't say performer, but I have heard these were the performer intake before they started labelling them "performer".

The problem is, I took it out today and the ports on the thing are MUCH smaller than the ports on my 4V heads... So what gives? I mean these ports are around 1/4 inch smaller all the way around the port... Is this thing for a W motor or something? Has anyone run into this, or is this normal for a performer for a street car?

I can provide pics if needed.

Thanks in advance!

~Mike
> All it says on it is Edelbrock F351 4V. I was told from the guy I bought it from
> that it was off of a cleveland. Doesn't say performer, but I have heard these
> were the performer intake before they started labelling them "performer".

Yes. There were both 2V (also available with a Ford Motorsport logo under p/n
M-9424-G351) and 4V versions that varied primarily in the port size. The other
difference is in the choke well. Some F-351 4V manifolds have, others do not.
The current Performer 4V does not have a choke well but the current Performer 2V
and the G351 Motorsport version do have the choke well.

> the ports on the thing are MUCH smaller than the ports on my 4V heads...

That is how Edelbrock designed the intake. The idea was to increase port velocity
to improve lower end response. Whether or not that works is debatable as the flow
still has to expand as it enters the cylinder head. That said, I recently tested
Scott Cook's dual plane intake on my 403C and it did very well with smaller than
stock ports.

> The ports are smaller because the folks at Edelbrock were just sure the ports
> of the 351C 4V were too big. They didn't understand the 351C 4V back in the
> 1970s, and they still don't understand it today.

351C-4V ports are unnecessarily large for most, if not all, applications. Ford
realized it so the subsequent versions of the aluminum high port Cleveland heads
got progressively smaller ports.

> the F351-4V and Performer are jokes, they probably perform as well as the factory
> manifolds but no better. I say probably, because I admittedly I don't know for sure.
> One thing I do know for sure, the Blue Thunder/Shelby manifold will walk all over
> that manifold.

In my dyno testing, the F351-4V was certainly better than the OEM cast iron 4V
intake. The 2V port size RPM Air Gap was better still. Some dyno results are
below. I suspect the largest part of the difference has nothing to do with the
ports but rather the fact that Performer plenum has two oval openings and the stock
Ford iron intake has four circular openings. Out-of-the-box, the Blue Thunder has
quite lived up to its reputation but works great with a bit of plenum work. Like
all the early dual planes, we've flow tested, the Blue Thunder suffers from 4 bad
runners and 4 good runners. Another Pantera owner borrowed my Blue Thunder and tested
it against a Performer on a 377C and it was better only above 6000 RPM but I suspect
that test was biased because of the intake port plates that were used. The owner
road raced his Pantera and did say he had run the prior engine with and without the
intake ports stuffed and the stuffed ports were faster on the road courses. On a
CHI 4V headed 408C, an unported Blue Thunder made something like 17 HP more than the
Performer. The ported Blue Thunder made another 12 HP and was the equal to the
best single planes (Strip Dominator and Scorpion). It would be interesting to see
what a ported Performer would do. It might be a sleeper with good hood clearance
and cheaper/easier to find than the over-the-counter Ford aluminum dual plane.

Note that porting in this context means lowering the divider and radiusing the
plenum to port entry of the bad runners so they match the better runners. The
ports themselves were not altered.

Dan Jones

Factory 4V Iron Intake
Holley 950HP dyno carb, Pantera GTS headers and Magnaflow mufflers.
Same as baseline except for running factory 4V iron square bore intake
manifold and 4 hole 1 inch spacer. The OEM intake required a spacer
for throttle clearance so was tested only with 1" spacers. Not a
really good pull but engine had time to cool. Going to try one more
time but seems to be down about 30HP from our baseline with the single
plane Torker.

RPM HP Torque (ft-lb)
4000 287.6 373.9
4100 293.8 379.2
4200 290.1 363.2
4300 293.2 358.1
4400 299.9 357.8
4500 308.9 360.5
4600 319.7 365.0
4700 331.9 370.4
4800 342.4 374.1
4900 340.8 363.7
5000 344.4 361.8
5100 349.2 359.8
5200 352.3 356.0
5300 357.9 354.6
5400 368.7 357.8
5500 371.6 355.4
5600 366.7 344.1
5700 364.1 335.6
5800 367.3 332.2
5900 371.6 331.9


Factory Iron Test 2 - Same as 1st
Same as previous run. Engine seems to be somewhat rougher and more difficult
to load properly. 12.5 AFR. Going to try an HVH spacer on next pull to see
if it smooths it out somewhat.

RPM HP Torque (ft-lb)
4000 298.0 388.1
4100 296.8 379.9
4200 293.5 367.3
4300 297.7 363.6
4400 303.9 362.8
4700 329.5 367.9
4800 339.7 371.4
4900 351.4 376.0
5000 359.4 378.1
5100 361.7 372.6
5200 364.6 368.1
5300 368.2 364.9
5400 366.6 356.7
5500 365.7 349.0
5600 363.2 340.8
5700 368.8 340.7
5800 348.6 316.1

Factory Iron with HVH Spacer
OEM square bore intake, Pantera GTS headers and Magnaflow mufflers.
Much better with the semi open spacer under carburetor. Most likely due to the
amount of camshaft overlap and the interaction it has with the dual plane type
intake. It will be very interesting to see if this trend continues with the
other larger dual planes.

RPM HP Torque (ft-lb)
4000 292.8 380.7
4100 299.3 384.0
4200 302.6 378.5
4300 311.4 380.3
4400 319.3 381.0
4500 326.4 381.2
4600 334.6 382.3
4700 342.4 382.7
4800 352.2 384.7
4900 359.0 385.1
5000 362.7 381.2
5100 368.0 378.7
5200 373.6 377.4
5300 378.4 374.7
5400 380.4 370.2
5500 380.8 363.6
5600 383.1 358.9
5700 380.8 351.5
5800 374.7 339.5
5900 376.2 334.7
6000 381.3 333.8
6100 373.2 321.2


Performer with 4 Hole 1 Inch Spacer
950 HP dyno carb, Pantera GTS headers and Magnaflow mufflers.
Note: Intake is actually the earlier F-351 4V version but appears identical to
the current Performer. The Perfomrer required a spacer for throttle clearance
so was tested only with 1" spacers. Baseline for Edelbrock Performer intake
with 4 hole 1 inch spacer which was needed to allow clearance for fuel log.
Good solid pull and for whatever reason the engine didn't seem to mind the 1
inch 4 hole on this dual plane. Going to try the HVH spacer next.

RPM HP Torque (ft-lb)
4100 300.0 384.1
4200 303.2 379.6
4300 312.9 382.0
4400 319.7 381.8
4500 324.6 379.2
4600 331.5 378.5
4700 341.3 380.9
4800 350.0 383.5
4900 354.6 380.0
5000 358.2 375.9
5100 362.0 373.0
5200 367.8 371.2
5300 369.6 366.9
5400 372.6 362.5
5500 377.5 360.3
5600 381.3 357.1
5700 381.4 352.1
5800 374.6 339.3
5900 371.9 330.6
6000 363.0 317.9
6100 370.5 318.4


Performer with HVH Spacer
950 HP dyno carb, Pantera GTS headers and Magnaflow mufflers.
HVH was also better on the Edelbrock Performer but not as drastic as with the
factory iron piece. Performer is better than factory cast iron intake or so
it seems on this engine.

RPM HP Torque (ft-lb)
4100 308.1 391.7
4200 310.7 390.1
4300 322.5 394.8
4400 324.6 387.8
4500 330.6 386.1
4600 339.2 387.3
4700 349.3 390.2
4800 361.1 394.7
4900 371.3 397.5
5000 371.1 390.1
5100 375.3 386.4
5200 378.2 382.4
5300 377.7 374.5
5400 380.6 370.1
5500 385.1 367.5
5600 388.3 363.8
5700 390.4 359.5
5800 390.1 353.3
5900 391.1 348.2
6000 382.4 334.8
6100 384.2 331.1


Performer RPM Air Gap 2V
950 HP dyno carb, Pantera GTS headers and Magnaflow mufflers.
Baseline for Performer RPM airgap intake. Like many of the intakes designed
for 2V heads, the RPM Air Gap will fit either 2V or 4V heads. Running with
no spacer. Going to try the 4 hole 1 inch and HVH spacers next. Good solid
pull with good numbers.

RPM HP Torque (ft-lb)
4000 312.4 405.7
4100 311.9 401.8
4200 320.7 399.9
4300 329.1 402.7
4400 335.8 400.9
4500 344.8 402.2
4600 350.7 400.7
4700 355.8 397.6
4800 362.7 396.7
4900 370.0 396.6
5000 376.2 395.1
5100 381.8 393.1
5200 386.7 390.4
5300 390.3 387.2
5400 392.9 382.1
5500 398.1 380.0
5600 396.7 372.1
5700 394.6 363.6
5800 392.6 355.6
5900 393.2 350.1
6000 396.6 346.9
6100 394.3 339.4


Performer RPM Air Gap with HVH
950 HP dyno carb, Pantera GTS headers and Magnaflow mufflers.
HVH spacer seems to run about in the middle of the bare intake or 4 hole 1
inch. Good all around performance making over 380HP and torque.

RPM HP Torque (ft-lb)
4100 310.1 400.8
4200 314.8 394.1
4300 324.0 395.7
4400 337.1 401.9
4500 349.7 407.9
4600 354.2 404.6
4700 360.2 402.3
4800 367.3 401.8
4900 373.6 400.4
5000 377.2 396.5
5100 381.3 392.6
5200 388.5 392.1
5300 392.9 389.9
5400 395.3 384.4
5500 400.1 381.5
5600 399.1 375.0
5700 390.8 360.2
5800 388.7 351.9
5900 386.0 343.7
6000 384.1 336.2
6100 386.9 332.9


Performer RPM Air Gap with 4 hole 1 Inch
950 HP dyno carb, Pantera GTS headers and Magnaflow mufflers.
Good pull and engine picked up about 5 horsepower and about 10lbs/ft with 4
hole. A good swap and about the best all around combo for these heads etc.

RPM HP Torque (ft-lb)
4000 312.9 409.3
4100 316.6 406.5
4200 324.3 404.7
4300 332.7 407.4
4400 346.3 410.7
4500 349.2 408.1
4600 354.1 404.4
4700 362.8 405.1
4800 371.3 406.4
4900 375.1 402.2
5000 380.3 399.3
5100 387.9 399.1
5200 394.1 398.1
5300 395.3 391.9
5400 398.6 387.7
5500 401.6 383.4
5600 403.3 378.3
5700 400.8 369.4
5800 401.7 363.7
5900 401.1 357.2
6000 403.1 352.5

We had a distributor clearance issue with the Blue Thunder so it wouldn't fit on
this engine. We did test the Blue Thunder on a couple of 408C street engines.
On the first with iron 4V heads, In those tests, a ported Ford aluminum dual
plane made 31 HP and 23 ft-lbs more than an unported Blue Thunder. A Strip
Dominator (with 1" spacer) made 15 HP more at peak than the ported dual plane
Ford so the unported Blue Thunder was down about 47 HP to the Strip Dominator.
On the second 408C with CHI 4V heads, a ported Blue Thunder and Strip Dominator
were very close with the unported Blue Thunder intake lagging by maybe 15 HP
There are several differences that may account for the better (or less bad)
performance of the unported Blue Thunder this time around:

1. Mike's ported Blue Thunder has a flat pad which may harm the wet flow
characteristics of the manifold.

2. Mike's ported Blue Thunder has no spacer. The previous Strip Dominator
and Ford intakes were tested with several 1" spacers. We've seen 10+ HP
with the right spacer (varies from intake to intake).

3. Glen's 408C used iron 4V heads and Mike's used CHI 4V heads. The CHI port
entry shape is quite different than that of the iron heads and may be better
suited to the Blue Thunder intake runners.

4. Some intakes are more combination sensitive than others and I designed
Mike's cam to work best with the dimensions of the Blue Thunder intake.

Dave developed the intake on the flow bench without a spacer and subsequent
dyno testing showed the intake made the same power with or without a spacer.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 1st, 2004, 8:05 pm

April 18th, 2012, 7:02 pm #5

Since the Edelbrock Performer has a slotted carb pad, instead of a 4 hole carb pad, the aluminum Ford manifolds D1ZZ-9424-G or D1ZX-9425-DA may make a better apples to apples dyno comparison?

All of the factory 351C manifolds are low rise designs with scrunched runners (technical term). The carburetor is off-set toward the rear of the manifolds so the carburetor primaries are close to the middle of the intake. This supposedly makes for a better performing manifold for cruising, when only the carburetor primaries are in use. Unfortunately this negatively impacts the manifolds' performance when the secondaries kick-in. Its obvious the factory manifolds had a mission other than performance, they were designed for hoovering, for cruising around town and picking up groceries.

I can be tough on Vic's products, but I'll admit the Edelbrock Performer 4V (#2665) should be as good of an intake as any of the factory intakes, maybe a bit better. Although the runners don't flare open to match with the 4V intake port entrance like the factory manifolds do, in reality the Edelbrock manifolds runners are no more scrunched (there's that technical term again) than the factory manifold runners. At least Edelbrock located the carburetor properly in the middle of their intake manifold.

I mentioned in Zach's thread the other day that we don't drive dynos. These manifolds have their place, if a person's 351C powered car is mainly intended for hoovering or buying beer on weekends, these manifolds are just the ticket; in fact the factory manifolds with the off-set carburetors may actaully edge-out Vic's manifold for that application.

But if you're looking for wide-powerband performance the Shelby/Blue Thunder manifold is a whole different animal. Compare it visually to the factory Boss 302 manifold, you'll see they are almost twins. The Boss 302 & Shelby/Blue Thunder 351C manifolds were designed to take maximum advantage of the "wide open induction system" design of the 4V intake port. Compared to the 351C factory manifolds and the Edelbrock Performer they are in a whole different league. The Shelby/Blue Thunder manifold can provide good drivability around town, but it can pull on top in a way not possible with the scrunched manifolds. And it may be counter-intuitive in todays hot-rod culture, but that manifold provides great throttle response too, big cross-section runners and all (assuming the carb & ignition are dialed-in and the cam is configured well). It best compliments the power characteristic of the 4V heads; i.e. the Charging Rhino.



-G
____________________________________________________________

Pantera Photos | 351C Historic Information | 351C Technical Information

If you use a 351C 4V powered vehicle for a grocery getter ... the eggs aren't going to make it home!
Last edited by gpence on April 18th, 2012, 7:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: December 16th, 2003, 1:59 am

April 20th, 2012, 6:55 am #6





there'll be phantoms, there'll be fires on the road... and the white man dancing
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 17th, 2004, 11:02 pm

April 20th, 2012, 3:35 pm #7

Since the Edelbrock Performer has a slotted carb pad, instead of a 4 hole carb pad, the aluminum Ford manifolds D1ZZ-9424-G or D1ZX-9425-DA may make a better apples to apples dyno comparison?

All of the factory 351C manifolds are low rise designs with scrunched runners (technical term). The carburetor is off-set toward the rear of the manifolds so the carburetor primaries are close to the middle of the intake. This supposedly makes for a better performing manifold for cruising, when only the carburetor primaries are in use. Unfortunately this negatively impacts the manifolds' performance when the secondaries kick-in. Its obvious the factory manifolds had a mission other than performance, they were designed for hoovering, for cruising around town and picking up groceries.

I can be tough on Vic's products, but I'll admit the Edelbrock Performer 4V (#2665) should be as good of an intake as any of the factory intakes, maybe a bit better. Although the runners don't flare open to match with the 4V intake port entrance like the factory manifolds do, in reality the Edelbrock manifolds runners are no more scrunched (there's that technical term again) than the factory manifold runners. At least Edelbrock located the carburetor properly in the middle of their intake manifold.

I mentioned in Zach's thread the other day that we don't drive dynos. These manifolds have their place, if a person's 351C powered car is mainly intended for hoovering or buying beer on weekends, these manifolds are just the ticket; in fact the factory manifolds with the off-set carburetors may actaully edge-out Vic's manifold for that application.

But if you're looking for wide-powerband performance the Shelby/Blue Thunder manifold is a whole different animal. Compare it visually to the factory Boss 302 manifold, you'll see they are almost twins. The Boss 302 & Shelby/Blue Thunder 351C manifolds were designed to take maximum advantage of the "wide open induction system" design of the 4V intake port. Compared to the 351C factory manifolds and the Edelbrock Performer they are in a whole different league. The Shelby/Blue Thunder manifold can provide good drivability around town, but it can pull on top in a way not possible with the scrunched manifolds. And it may be counter-intuitive in todays hot-rod culture, but that manifold provides great throttle response too, big cross-section runners and all (assuming the carb & ignition are dialed-in and the cam is configured well). It best compliments the power characteristic of the 4V heads; i.e. the Charging Rhino.



-G
____________________________________________________________

Pantera Photos | 351C Historic Information | 351C Technical Information

If you use a 351C 4V powered vehicle for a grocery getter ... the eggs aren't going to make it home!
> a better apples to apples dyno comparison?

Yes. I only had one of those (a D1ZX-9425-DA we modified using the flow bench
to fix the four bad runners) and after it beat the unmodified Blue Thunder
across the RPM range (31 HP and 23 ft-lbs), Glen talked me out of it. I've
tried to find a replacement but haven't come across one at a reasonable cost.
I have found and purchased the spread bore version (D1ZX-9425-CA) but that's
not an apples-to-apples comparison because of the Motorcraft 4300D specific
carb pad. I'm sure the unmodified Blue Thunder is a great improvement over
the stock cast iron intake but it still leaves a lot on the table. You can't
escape the fact that 4 of the Blue Thunder runners flow in the 250 CFM range
when the head is flowing in the 320 CFM range. A rather minor casting
revision (or the plenum modifications we did) would greatly improve the Blue
Thunder.

Dan Jones
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 1st, 2004, 8:05 pm

April 20th, 2012, 9:53 pm #8

Power characteristic is more of a concern to me than numbers.

But having written that, I have no problem helping the charging rhino charge a little harder either.

I do have my reservations about cutting down the plenum divider.

I would be curious if the flow in the 4 "lagging" runners can be brought up without shaving down the plenum divider.

If not, I'd like to know how shaving the divider affects the manifold vacuum at idle & low rpm and how it affects the powerband; indicated by how low in rpm the motor can be loaded on the dyno. If the motor can be loaded on the dyno just as low with the plenum divider cut down as it can with the plenum divider full height, AND if the effect on vacuum is minimal, then I'm all for cutting down the divider. If not, then I would prefer to keep the divider full height rather than bringing the flow up in the 4 "lagging" runners.

Dan will you be attending the POCA rally this year?

-G
Last edited by gpence on April 20th, 2012, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 1st, 2004, 8:05 pm

April 20th, 2012, 9:58 pm #9





there'll be phantoms, there'll be fires on the road... and the white man dancing
are enough to drive a man to drink

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 23rd, 2008, 4:51 am

April 21st, 2012, 1:18 pm #10

Power characteristic is more of a concern to me than numbers.

But having written that, I have no problem helping the charging rhino charge a little harder either.

I do have my reservations about cutting down the plenum divider.

I would be curious if the flow in the 4 "lagging" runners can be brought up without shaving down the plenum divider.

If not, I'd like to know how shaving the divider affects the manifold vacuum at idle & low rpm and how it affects the powerband; indicated by how low in rpm the motor can be loaded on the dyno. If the motor can be loaded on the dyno just as low with the plenum divider cut down as it can with the plenum divider full height, AND if the effect on vacuum is minimal, then I'm all for cutting down the divider. If not, then I would prefer to keep the divider full height rather than bringing the flow up in the 4 "lagging" runners.

Dan will you be attending the POCA rally this year?

-G
+1 on this.

After reading this thread on speedtalk:

http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26669

And this:

http://community-2.webtv.net/mattgru/carb/

I also am curious to know if the 4 bad runners can be brought up without touching the divider, as I will probably be using a Blue Thunder intake when I build my engine.
Quote
Like
Share