[quicksilver97ta]

I have a Torker intake that I would like to port and just see how my engine likes it. I’m running ported iron heads (257/188 @ 600) matched to FEL1233 gaskets and I’ll be running my Q-jet. I understand a T1 can be a choke point in ‘as cast’ form so I am wondering what kind of port work others have found that works. I know some guys have welded two back halves together but I’m not interested in that. Just some instructions/goals as to what works to mod this intake. Right now I'm running a slightly cleaned up repop HO intake and would like to compare against the T1.

[Skip Fix]

I would bet it would be an even wash with your HO intake. At least a medium ported T1 was on my RAIV 400 motor-within 1 HP. It did loose bottom end TQ on the small 400 compared to the HO.

HO Racing had an old manual on porting them, I think I have a copy, not sure if they are still published.Ken and Craig often post here might check with them/

[Tom Vaught]

Hot set-up with a Torquer 1 Intake is using 2 sets of rear runners. (Kennedy style intake).

Tom Vaught

[Dragncar]

All welding 2 back halves together gets you is a Street Dominator. Not worth it. The only thing they are worth using is with a 455 that you want to take some wheel spin out of it while using a Q jet.

[steve25]

With just 3.23 gears out back you will think that up to 5800 rpm that you only had a 2 bbl carb on the motor.
I would not spend the time needed to open my hood to try that manifold on your combo.

[Skip Fix]

Back when we had few manifold choices for Pontiacs the Super Stock guys used them often with a 2" spacer. Some as Tom said would weld two sets of rear runners together as the longer narrower front runners were hard to get the same flow as the shorter fatter rear runners even using the HO Racing recommnedations.

[HWYSTR455]

Originally Posted by Skip Fix

...HO Racing had an old manual on porting them, I think I have a copy, not sure if they are still published.Ken and Craig often post here might check with them...

You mean this one?

.

[Skip Fix]

Yep that is the one, but I think the reversion dam theories are no longer used to grind a lip in the intake port.

[quicksilver97ta]

Hmmm,, well I guess I didn't think the T1 was going to give up much bottom end. How tall is a T1 compared to a T2?

I have run a T2 and a square bore holley to go with it. Basically I would like to try my q-jet on a single plane spread bore. Sounds like an HSD from whats described above.

I thought maybe there was something good about the T1's design for compensation of the smaller primaries higher velocity and some guided porting could make it a better intake. Also, the HO plenum looks stretched out and the runners look short compared to the T1 so I thought there would be some difference in how the engine responds to that.

I can tell by looking the T1's as cast port sizes look really small so perhaps just matching the 1233's and blending that back to the plenum is all I will try.

[taff2]

Torker 1's seem to work well on smaller high revving engines in my experience. My own mild 400 combo made 575hp,revved to 7000rpm and ran 9's in the quarter using a home ported Torker 1. Here's what worked for me: Opening up the ports to match my ported iron heads and then blending back into the manifold runner a couple of inches. Looking down from the carb mounting flange I heavily ground back the tops of the runner entries and blended a smooth radius into the runners-bolt a carb on the manifold ,open the throttles and look down through the venturies-you'll see the areas that need to be cut back. Rounding off and smoothing the runner dividers in the plenum. Adding a 2" open spacer with an 800 double pumper spreadbore Holley ( I later fitted an 850 squarebore double pumper but gained nothing over the 800).
I don't know if these mods are similar to the HO mods as I've not seen a copy, I would like to see a copy if anyone has one they could email me.

[Tom Vaught]

Originally Posted by Dragncar

All welding 2 back halves together gets you is a Street Dominator. Not worth it. The only thing they are worth using is with a 455 that you want to take some wheel spin out of it while using a Q jet.

I would disagree because the T-1 Rear Runners have a whole different shape/ flow characteristic vs the Street Dominator intake. Doubt of Kennedy would have been as fast as he actually was or spent the money he did to match a typical Street Dominator intake (in Super Stock Racing).

Your post makes no sense.

Tom Vaught

[steve25]

Its the average amount of both toqrue and HP that a motor produces that reflects the most on perfromance.If you do decide to put the T1 on do this check of your HO first.
set the trans so it can not down shift or be in overdrive, get the car up to 40 mph and floor it, than do this same test with the T1, your choise will than be clear!!!

[BruceWilkie]

The two rear half mod kind of makes it more of a Victor if you add enough spacer to it... Not really a good low rpm street intake that way... I'd be curious to see what putting two front halves together would do for low rpm use... anyone bother to try?

[Tom Vaught]

The guy who did the two 64 M/T Pontiac cross-rams modded for late model heads (Skip Fix has one, I have one), took the two fronts from my T-1 intakes and made a double T-1 "front runner" manifold for his 326 engine. He used a 500 2-bbl Holley carb as there is not enough room to paste the fronts together, have the runners line up, and mount a 4 bbl intake manifold flange.

Worked fine on his smaller engine.

Because he does Intake Manifold fabrication for a living for McLaren he could play with the intakes for just his time involved.

The cross-rams were expensive deals to mod.

Hope that helps Bruce.

Tom Vaught

[Dragncar]

Sure it does. Cutting, welding and machining a white elephant intake like the T1 is a bad idea. "That" makes no sense. There are so many intakes that that you can just go out and buy and do a better job it is not even funny.
The hot set up with a T1 is called a T2 or a Northwind. Heck my Warrior runs circles around a T1. I have done back to back tests with my Warrior vs a Victor, T1, T2 and RPM and the old PMD designed Warrior beat all of them on a pump gas 455.
People give away T1s, I did. It was given to me by someone else. Street Dominators still have value. They go for 150-200 on E bay.

[Skip Fix]

My RAIV headed 400 with a big solid(259/262 @0.050) in it (spun to 7000) gained 1-2 mph over the '72 HO intake I used(port matched and cleaned plenum) but lost so much bottom end/60 FT I couldn't tune the Qjet enough to make up for it! On the dyno with a smaller 231/239 @ 0.050 they all dynoed within 1 HP.

[lust4speed]

I purchased my T1 back in 1986 and set it up according to the H.O. Book, dropped a 1" spacer on top of it, and ran a Quadrajet. Originally I ran it with a 4-speed and the engine would start to pull about 2,800 RPM, and produced maximum horsepower at 6,300 RPM on the engine dyno.

Rather embarrassing to admit, but that manifold is still on the drag car today. Only change is it now has a 1" adapter with an old 850 Holley sitting on it instead of the Quadrajet. The car would probably be faster with a Victor and Dominator, but I haven't tried it yet. The Victor manifold has been sitting on the shelf for a couple of years waiting for the Dominator purchase.

[taff2]

And there's the bonus with the T1, you get it for free! And with a couple of hours grinding you have a race ready manifold for the smaller engines,it's a win,win situation!

[KEN CROCIE]

The T1 was designed specifically for spread bore carbs. The stepped floor was called a "volu-step" , and was desiged to balance the air flow and A/F ratio when using a spread bore directly on the T1. Put a spacer or square bore on it and mixture goes haywire. In an attempt to improving the performance of our SS/KA SD,The manifold was modified and even in it's double back form ,it is no match for a T2 or Victor. The results and processes were published in the H-O "Torker Tuning Secrets.The "ported to H-O specs" T1 was good in '77 but not so good today. I'll call Craig and see if he wants to comment.

[Skip Fix]

Glenn Tinsley had one on the 74 car way back in the early 80's with a 2" spacer.

I think Jim McFarland that writes tech stuff for many of the magazines esp Circle Track now did some of the work on it while at Edelbrock.

Heck I even found an EGR Torker I years ago!