[grnt37]

I have a 75' pont 400 in my T-37 im looking to buy a edelbrock performer rpm intake.Would this be a good intake?Engine was rebuilt has 066 grind cam,headers and thats about it.I was also looking at the holley street avenger carb 670.Any idears???

[Karch]

For the money, and street performance (this is the street forum), you can't beat the 68-71 factory 4bbl intake and one of Cliff Ruggles carbs, from what I hear (very loud and clear).

Do a search for Cliff R

[Mr. P-Body]

With that little cam, RPM is a bad idea. Performer would be a much better choice. The comments about the factory iron intakes ('pre-73) are accurate, as are the comments about Cliff and his Q-Jets....

Jim

[69birdboy]

According to a recent article in HPP, a 75 intake should work as well as the earlier one, too. Only advantage you'll have going to an edelbrock is that it is lighter (aluminum), assuming the article is correct.

My guess is, with that cam, it doesn't matter which of those intakes you use.

[grandville455]

....Stock intake cliffs q-jet...

[Tim john]

Listen to the above advice for it is valid and sound. Stick with a stock iron intake (pre 73) and get with Cliff for one of his carburetors (Qjet). These items alone will enhance your vehicles performance.

Tim john---

[gtoformula]

I too would go with the stock intake. I've even pulled off Edelbrocks and Holleys to put the stock ones back on. A 68-71 intake works great, but used a divorced choke (coil stove on the intake). Your 1975 probably has a choke that is heated by a tube that leads from the intake to the coil housing in the passenger side of the carb. If you can find a 1972 intake that would be your best bet. The 1972 is a pre-emission intake and has no provision for the EGR. It also doesn't have the secondary restriction that exists in the EGR intakes. In addition it is set up for the later choke tue heater like you have on your 1975. They can be had on eBay for $50- or more. Here's a link to one that's on eBay right now. It indicates that it is a 1971, but it has the choke style that you need for your stock Q-Jet.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...RK%3AMEWA%3AIT

[BVR421]

but guys, a factory manifold and a custom factory carb? That will only cost about a third of new shiny stuff from the Summit catalog? No special fuel lines and aircleaners required? Great gas mileage and better power? Where's the fun in that?

NO BLING! LOL

[Steve C.]

Nice to have opinions..... personaly I wouldn't run a factory intake just because its soooooooooooooo damn ugly !

[grnt37]

Hey guys thanks for the replies,here's a better explanation of what my plans are"when I save enough money".I have an old pb4 edelbrock w/ a 600 holley on the car right now.Im not crazy about quadrajets,although I know they can be a great carb if bulit right.My friend has a '70 GTO SS/IA car w/a 400 and a quadrajet runs low 10's.I had a '69 cast intake before w/ a quadrajet car just didn't run good.Although that could of been my fault?Future plans are aluminum heads and a better cam,thats why I was thinking the rpm intake.Would the car run like crap w/ the rpm intake until I change everything?I do know it would run better w/ the performer intake,but when time comes I'll need a better intake with the new heads and cam.As I mentioned for now it has the 066 cam 273/282 .410/.414 lift.Again thanks for the info!:

[GRX]

Originally Posted by Steve C.

Nice to have opinions..... personaly I wouldn't run a factory intake just because its soooooooooooooo damn ugly !

Have your stock intake baked, shot peened, & hot tanked. Then clean up the rough spots & casting flash. Lastly coat with hi-temp silver paint & bake it in. Did that with some hi-temp AlumiBlast on my stock '67 intake. Looks great!

[Steve C.]

Or port match & blend the runners on a Edelbrock Performer intake as necessary to meet the needs of the heads. And for the weight savings advantage, and in my opinion for the looks of a aluminum intake on a motor.
To keep its good looks, try using a satin-finish clear, not high gloss paint. Try Aervoe clear engine enamel, it looks trick. Or other non-gloss, clear options.

But I can understand those that for numbers matching stuff or trying to keep the engine compartmet looking stock then of coarse you have no choice, the ugly heavy factory piece.

Or you could paint the alumimum intake blue

[Karch]

Originally Posted by grnt37

Hey guys thanks for the replies,here's a better explanation of what my plans are"when I save enough money".I have an old pb4 edelbrock w/ a 600 holley on the car right now.Im not crazy about quadrajets,although I know they can be a great carb if bulit right.My friend has a '70 GTO SS/IA car w/a 400 and a quadrajet runs low 10's.I had a '69 cast intake before w/ a quadrajet car just didn't run good.Although that could of been my fault?Future plans are aluminum heads and a better cam,thats why I was thinking the rpm intake.Would the car run like crap w/ the rpm intake until I change everything?I do know it would run better w/ the performer intake,but when time comes I'll need a better intake with the new heads and cam.As I mentioned for now it has the 066 cam 273/282 .410/.414 lift.Again thanks for the info!:

From my personal experience, that P4B is maxed out on a 326 with soft valve springs, a worn 066 cam, and single exhaust.

Seriously, I ran one and absolutely thought it was good only to cover up the intake ports while the engine sat.

The performer is OK up to a very mild 400, as the runners and plenum are small. The RPM is a bit much for your current combo, but won't kill you.

I think you are better off saving your money and waiting until you are ready for the heads and cam, because you will invariably need a lot more parts and money than you probably anticipated.

Oh, one tip for your psyche, if you are a person who saves all your receipts, do yourself a favor and never add them all up

[krisr]

Originally Posted by Steve C.

Nice to have opinions..... personaly I wouldn't run a factory intake just because its soooooooooooooo damn ugly !

That and put a stock iron manifold on a set of scales.... Then put a performer (not RPM) on that same set of scales.... I know which one i'd use...

[Cliff R]

"Nice to have opinions..... personaly I wouldn't run a factory intake just because its soooooooooooooo damn ugly !"

So is the Q-jet carb that I have sitting on mine!....but....it has managed to win at the Pontiac Tri Power Nat's, the APEX Performance Street Car event, fastest street car racing at local track(s) on numerous occassions, more bracket racing events than I can remember, etc.

The very best part about running the Q-jet on the iron intake, is the look you get when folks take a gander under the hood in the staging lanes, right after you just blasted off a 7.30 1/8th mile run @ over 94mph with a "daily driven" car......the look....PRICELESS!......Cliff

PS: The Peformer intake is probably OK for 350's and 400's to about 425hp. It failed our testing MISERABLY on our 455 at 500hp, couldn't even use it, acted like a restrictor plate!......Cliff

[Steve C.]

Slight change of subject, but sort of related...

About 8 months ago I had the unique opportunity to try one of Cliff's modified Q-jets on my car. Both on the street and back-to-back testing at the drag strip. As expected on the street it had slightly better off throttle driveability compared to my modified Holley HP950 carbuerator. But odly enough the fuel milage was not all that different.
On the track it ran to within .11 ET of my carb and to within 1.35 mph.
At that piticular time we had made a change to a smaller cam and also had other issues so I'll we could muster were mid-11 second runs, but needless to say WE were impressed !
Both Cliff and I knew going in his carb was not going to stay on my car.... yes personaly, like a factory intake, I think the apperance of the Q-jet carb sucks. We did this experiment out of interest. And I might note when I sent it back to Cliff he later found a issue with the Q-jet, and if corrected it might have run a little better. I don't remember what it specificaly was but I do believe it was something very simple in the way we had it set up, not a flaw in his work.
If anyone wants one of the best Q-jets around I would highly recommend going to Cliff..... that is if you don't mind having that ugly thing sitting on your engine

[Cliff R]

Thanks Steve. The "issue" was very minor, someplace in shipping it back and forth, the link from the pull-off to the secondary airflap was bent, only allowing the secondary airflaps to open about 70 percent of the distance they should have. Not a big deal, as this would have only taken 50 or so cfm out of the carb. It could have actually happened on the return shipping back here, but we did track test the carb prior to sending it out, so it was fine at some point?

I've come to like the "ugly" look of the Q-jet, and LOVE the look you get from the folks who gander over to see what you are using to go so fast!......Cliff

[b-man]

Originally Posted by grnt37

Hey guys thanks for the replies,here's a better explanation of what my plans are"when I save enough money".I have an old pb4 edelbrock w/ a 600 holley on the car right now.Im not crazy about quadrajets,although I know they can be a great carb if bulit right.My friend has a '70 GTO SS/IA car w/a 400 and a quadrajet runs low 10's.I had a '69 cast intake before w/ a quadrajet car just didn't run good.Although that could of been my fault?Future plans are aluminum heads and a better cam,thats why I was thinking the rpm intake.Would the car run like crap w/ the rpm intake until I change everything?I do know it would run better w/ the performer intake,but when time comes I'll need a better intake with the new heads and cam.As I mentioned for now it has the 066 cam 273/282 .410/.414 lift.Again thanks for the info!:

If you're planning to upgrade in the future buying the RPM intake now would be a wise move. It will run surprisingly well on your near-stock 400.

Definitely get hooked up with one of Cliff's Q-jets, best carb for the money in terms of both performance and fuel efficiency.

I'm sure a Holley that's properly tuned will give you the same power, but on the more street-oriented combos (no big solid-roller cams that won't pull decent mileage no matter what carb is there) the Q-jet will offer better gas mileage.

Anyone who says gas mileage doesn't matter is full of it, the higher price of fuel nowadays will limit the amount of use these cars will get for most people. A car that can get, for example 10 MPG instead of 8 MPG, will equal a lot more fun per dollar and that definitely matters for most of us.

My street 406 with E-heads, RPM intake, Crower 60916 flat-tappet hydraulic cam (221/229,.500"/.517" w/1.65s) and one of Cliff's 800 Q-jets:

[grandville455]

B-man thats beautiful!! When will it be running?

[b-man]

Originally Posted by grandville455

B-man thats beautiful!! When will it be running?

Hoping for late this year. Been so busy with work, plus I bought a new car and have less motivation as I no longer need the car it goes into for daily duty.

A new TH400, 10" Continental and a 3.36 posi along with a new fuel system is going in too. I'm upgrading my '64 Tempest with about 100 more ponies along with better fuel mileage.

The old low-compression Tri-Power 462 just uses too much fuel for the performance it returns (10 city, 13 hwy), so in goes the 406.