[luckyluc68]

I'm wondering if anybody would have info on the"Edelbrock S.P.2.P".Running a strong rebuilt 455 with the .041 cam,ported heads ,800 edelbrock carb for my 75 T/A car.This will be a summer daily driver and to the strip on weekends.I have different opinions on this intake.I have a ported 1969 350 H.0 intake as well and kinda stuck on which one to go with.I was told the Edelbrock S.P.2.P is between the peformer(idle-5,500rpm) and the R.P.M(1,500-6,500).But im not able to find any info(RPM range) at Edelbrock site.Does anyone know of these intakes? Which one would you pick between the two i have to choose from.It looks exacly like a RPM and super light compared to the cast 1969 H.O intake.I will post a few pics as soon as my bateries charge.Thanks,Luc

[luckyluc68]

I'm wondering if anybody would have info on the"Edelbrock S.P.2.P".Running a strong rebuilt 455 with the .041 cam,ported heads ,800 edelbrock carb for my 75 T/A car.This will be a summer daily driver and to the strip on weekends.I have different opinions on this intake.I have a ported 1969 350 H.0 intake as well and kinda stuck on which one to go with.I was told the Edelbrock S.P.2.P is between the peformer(idle-5,500rpm) and the R.P.M(1,500-6,500).But im not able to find any info(RPM range) at Edelbrock site.Does anyone know of these intakes? Which one would you pick between the two i have to choose from.It looks exacly like a RPM and super light compared to the cast 1969 H.O intake.I will post a few pics as soon as my bateries charge.Thanks,Luc

[shaker455]

Luc,
I had one of the old Edelbrock s.p.2.p. intakes and there just an older verison of the current standard performer.

Some say they didn't perform as well because of the narrower runner size and the RPM range is the same as the performer idle to 5500 rpm.

With your set up I'd say get a RPM intake and go with Larry Navarro's "WFO" aircleaner kit for T/A's with taller than stock intakes.

[Skip Fix]

From what I remember those intakes were made with smaller runner for fuwl efficiency during the gas crunch years.

[b-man]

The SP2P (Single Plane 2-Plane) was intended for use on '70s low-compression smogger engines, NOT a good performance intake by any measure. 3500 RPM and below is where this intake works best.

The '69 350 HO intake (same exact intake that came on all '69 4-barrel 400 and 428 engines except the RAIV 400) is by far superior to the SP2P.

[PunchT37]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by b-man:
The SP2P (Single Plane 2-Plane) was intended for use on '70s low-compression smogger engines, NOT a good performance intake by any measure. 3500 RPM and below is where this intake works best.

The '69 350 HO intake (same exact intake that came on all '69 4-barrel 400 and 428 engines except the RAIV 400) is by far superior to the SP2P. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ditto. SP2P=garbage

[Goatracer1]

b-man is right. Edelbrock came out with that manifold just for low compression engines. It was not intended for high performance use.

[buwalda]

Ditto to what the others say.
I actually have an old E'brock catalog that has the SP2P in it. The rpm range quoted is 1000 - 4000 rpm. Because Pontiac intakes fit engines from 326 up to 455 cubes, the rpm ranges quoted are probably for the mid size engine, the 400. So with a 455, you could expect an even lower rpm range. Also, using this intake would be a total mismatch for the cam, ported heads, 800 cfm carb, etc. Like attaching a garden hose to a fire hydrant. The cast iron intake you have would be far superior.

[9 sec TA]

the sp2p intake is a piece of junk! only use on a 350 low comp eng, that was a 2 bbl to start with. the runners are so small and narrow. the factory 68-72 steel intake, will work great, good luck. thanks

[screamingchief]

Its probably usefull for melting down to fill your exhaust cross-overs with though...LOL

[luckyluc68]

It says in the Jim Hand book,that i can do some work to the 69 HO intake that will make it compatible to a Performer RPM intake.Like grinding it to a dual plane,seperate water jacket, to use 1 inch spacer to raise carb and to port the holes to match intake gaskets.Has anyone ever tried this out?
PS...anyone want to buy a Edelbrock S.P.2.P aluminium intake..lol

[b-man]

You can modify the stock iron intake, but the gains won't be huge. I ran a completely stock '69 iron intake on a 455 that had lightly ported '71 455 HO heads on it. The head ports were at least 1/8" taller than the iron mainfold ports, like all of the '71 HO roundports are. I was using a cam slightly larger than the RAIV cam in that 455 (HO Racing HC-03, 244/252@.050).

Even without matching the ports or even blocking off the exhaust crossover or separating the water crossover the engine was a hard-runner, easily running low-12s in the 1/4 mile. I had replaced a port-matched aluminum '71 455 HO intake with the unmodified '69 iron one, both intakes ran the same.

I really wouldn't place a whole lot of importance on manifold mods for your iron intake, they run very well 'as-is'.

[luckyluc68]

Thanks for the help to all..it sounds like i should not spend money on a intake(keep cast one)instead of a RPM intake,and spend the money where it would improve performance.