# Edelbrock intake



## banshman (Mar 23, 2017)

All,
I'm turning my non original 68 into a ram air. I would like to get some more power by adding the 2156 intake. Will this work with holley sniper efi and the ram air parts? Has anyone done this before? 

Thanks


----------



## ponchonlefty (8 mo ago)

the edelbrock 2156 is a good intake for up to 400 hp from what i have read. the factory pontiac intake is actually a better intake but lots heavier. if the sniper is square bore you can use a thin adapter. as the 2156 and factory intake is spread bore. i am putting something similar together. my combo is 400 with number 16 heads and 041 cam. im going to use a factory intake i ported but i have a 2156 also. tell us more about your engine combo.


----------



## Jim K (Nov 17, 2020)

I've got a 2156 sitting on my shelf in my shop. It's a mediocre performer at best plus it's much taller than a factory manifold so if you are wanting to turn your intake system into a ram air set up, the height issue might come into play as clearances will be hard to manage with it. As left said, a factory 4 bbl intake is probably a better choice if you want a ram air set up. The best intake I ever had was a factory intake that I took to a local chrome shop and after plugging all the threaded holes with a plug/bolt had them drop it in their caustic tank for a day or two. That opened up all the runners by eating at the binders in the casting. The divider between the siamese intake runners got a little thin, but gasket matching and diligent use of black RTV took care of that. Another option for you is one of the repro RA IV or 455 HO intakes.


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

What these gents said. The factory intakes cannot be beat. It's a decades-old proven fact.


----------



## banshman (Mar 23, 2017)

interesting, Its a mostly stock 400, .030 over bore, screw in studs, 3 angle valve job, balanced. This is what the paperwork I have says from the shop that rebuilt in in 1985, yes 1985. Story goes the guy didn't like the cam after rebuild so in the midst of changing the cam he died. That's how I got the car. Inside the motor looks brand new. I still have to go through it though. It has #15 heads since its a 68 400 from a "full size" Pontiac. I'm trying to extract the most HP for as little as I can. I figured intake, roller rockers, cam and EFI. I'm doing a tremec TKX 5sp with 3.55 gears. The cam still baffles me, valve springs, etc...What do you recommend to clean the rust from inside the intake? Any other thoughts?

Thanks


----------



## ponchonlefty (8 mo ago)

banshman said:


> interesting, Its a mostly stock 400, .030 over bore, screw in studs, 3 angle valve job, balanced. This is what the paperwork I have says from the shop that rebuilt in in 1985, yes 1985. Story goes the guy didn't like the cam after rebuild so in the midst of changing the cam he died. That's how I got the car. Inside the motor looks brand new. I still have to go through it though. It has #15 heads since its a 68 400 from a "full size" Pontiac. I'm trying to extract the most HP for as little as I can. I figured intake, roller rockers, cam and EFI. I'm doing a tremec TKX 5sp with 3.55 gears. The cam still baffles me, valve springs, etc...What do you recommend to clean the rust from inside the intake? Any other thoughts?
> 
> Thanks


you could blast it.or soak the intake in vinegar or a rust remover.


----------



## Jared (Apr 19, 2013)

May want to reach out to Holley with this question. I had heard that you need to run an open plenum intake, like the Torquer II, for some of the EFI systems.


----------



## banshman (Mar 23, 2017)

Good ideas, I will reach out to holley


----------



## banshman (Mar 23, 2017)

This comes from holley. "While a single plan manifold can have better distribution for a throttle body application, The Sniper is fully capable of being utilized on a dual plane manifold"


----------



## Jared (Apr 19, 2013)

I think this would still rule out a factory Pontiac manifold. You'd need to either open up the holes or run an adapter plate. You may be able to use the Performer you have running an adapter plate like @ponchonlefty said. Or something like this which will help clean up the throttle linkage install.



https://www.summitracing.com/parts/sum-g1419


----------



## banshman (Mar 23, 2017)

Holleys website has a video showing install on a factory manifold. They put what looks like a thick gasket with 4 holes that match the intake holes.I didnt buy the edelbrock yet and the consensus seems to be to use the factory manifold. maybe ill gasket match the ports a little on the factory one


----------



## banshman (Mar 23, 2017)

Sniper EFI Quadrajet™ - Holley







www.holley.com


----------



## Jim K (Nov 17, 2020)

I don't know much about conversion to EFI but wouldn't that entail dropping the gas tank and/or installing a new tank designed for in-tank fuel pump? for me personally, you can't beat a well set up carburetor.


----------



## banshman (Mar 23, 2017)

Yes, holley has a factory style tank efi ready


----------



## ponchonlefty (8 mo ago)

banshman said:


> Sniper EFI Quadrajet™ - Holley
> 
> 
> 
> ...


that looks like the ticket.


----------



## lust4speed (Jul 5, 2019)

The smallish intake runners on the standard Performer are about 85% as large as a cast iron Pontiac manifold, and best suited for a stout 350 or very mild 400. It simply won't flow enough to produce really decent power. The Performer RPM does have larger runners than stock cast iron manifolds and is a great performance piece. Port and gasket match a cast iron manifold to an inch of it's life and it works as good as a stock RPM manifold. If you devote as much time cleaning up the RPM as you did the cast iron manifold, the RPM is going to stomp the cast iron manifold.

Edelbrock corporation has a somewhat sick sense of humor, the Performer RPM is a dual plane manifold and is great for producing torque in the lower RPM range and pretty fair in the upper. The two Edelbrock Torker manifolds are single plane and produce power in the upper RPM range, and don't really make that great of power down low. Swap names around and they would be more correct. And finally, the standard Performer does not perform.


----------



## PDub (Sep 8, 2019)

I'm currently in the engine rebuild process of taking my 400 to a 468 stroker. I've done some research and believe the Performer RPM is the way to go instead of the Performer or Torker. Not too sure if I will be able to put my RAM Air breather back on given that intake is a little taller than my stock manifold. I guess I will find out when my engine is completed, which is probably another 3 months from now.


----------



## banshman (Mar 23, 2017)

Keep me posted


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

What Ponchonlefty said. Soak that intake in vinegar for a couple of weeks. I would not blast it. No worries about the engine being done in the mid '80's. The 389 in my '65 I rebuilt in 1981 and the 400 in my '67 I rebuilt in 1988....with USA made parts. Probably why they still run great decades later and are anvil-dependable. What's scary is that I raise the hood of my '65 and realize the last time I saw the inside of it's engine was when I was 20 years old. I turn 62 in February!


----------



## Baaad65 (Aug 29, 2019)

lust4speed said:


> The smallish intake runners on the standard Performer are about 85% as large as a cast iron Pontiac manifold, and best suited for a stout 350 or very mild 400. It simply won't flow enough to produce really decent power. The Performer RPM does have larger runners than stock cast iron manifolds and is a great performance piece. Port and gasket match a cast iron manifold to an inch of it's life and it works as good as a stock RPM manifold. If you devote as much time cleaning up the RPM as you did the cast iron manifold, the RPM is going to stomp the cast iron manifold.
> 
> Edelbrock corporation has a somewhat sick sense of humor, the Performer RPM is a dual plane manifold and is great for producing torque in the lower RPM range and pretty fair in the upper. The two Edelbrock Torker manifolds are single plane and produce power in the upper RPM range, and don't really make that great of power down low. Swap names around and they would be more correct. And finally, the standard Performer does not perform.


I have the Performer RPM with a 1/2" phenolic spacer so am I getting a combo of a dual plane and a single plane?


----------



## ponchonlefty (8 mo ago)

geeteeohguy said:


> What Ponchonlefty said. Soak that intake in vinegar for a couple of weeks. I would not blast it. No worries about the engine being done in the mid '80's. The 389 in my '65 I rebuilt in 1981 and the 400 in my '67 I rebuilt in 1988....with USA made parts. Probably why they still run great decades later and are anvil-dependable. What's scary is that I raise the hood of my '65 and realize the last time I saw the inside of it's engine was when I was 20 years old. I turn 62 in February!


do you think blasting is too rough? i was thinking of blasting with walnut shells. in the ports to maybe smooth places i cant reach. what ya think?


----------



## ponchonlefty (8 mo ago)

Baaad65 said:


> I have the Performer RPM with a 1/2" phenolic spacer so am I getting a combo of a dual plane and a single plane?


spacers can help and can hurt performance. you have to experiment to see which your combo likes. you may not even see a difference. thats why you test and tune. like you i dont have much track experience. so take my advice as a guide not fact. i have read and researched anything i could find.im taking notes on your results also.


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

ponchonlefty said:


> do you think blasting is too rough? i was thinking of blasting with walnut shells. in the ports to maybe smooth places i cant reach. what ya think?


Not really, but I've seen too many engines ruined by various grits not cleaned out well enough. And rear ends and transmissions, too. I like mild acids because the original texture and finish is left intact. Have seen many, many ruined parts at swap meets over the years that were media blasted, particularly brass and aluminum stuff and carburetors. 
I like media blasting for frames and suspension and that's about it.


----------



## Baaad65 (Aug 29, 2019)

ponchonlefty said:


> spacers can help and can hurt performance. you have to experiment to see which your combo likes. you may not even see a difference. thats why you test and tune. like you i dont have much track experience. so take my advice as a guide not fact. i have read and researched anything i could find.im taking notes on your results also.


Got it, did it more to get the heat away from the carb...didn't hurt performance but can't tell if it helped much.


----------



## Jared (Apr 19, 2013)

I'm running a Torquer on mine with a 1" spacer. This was the combo recommended to me by the shop the did the port work on my heads. Disclaimer the the shop only does Pontiac builds. I went with it even though most recommendations on here was to not use it on a street car. I figured that even if I was leaving some low end on the table with this combo, the car would have plenty of power on hand. As is, it can barely take off without lighting up the rear and it pulls hard at all RPMs in all gears and has fantastic throttle response.


----------



## Mike Honcho (10 mo ago)

I believe intake is an important factor but cam and heads are the biggest part of the power equation.


----------



## lust4speed (Jul 5, 2019)

Either a Torker or Torker II with a 1" spacer is an excellent combo for anything over a 428ci build from idle on up. Not going to miss that miniscule amount of torque that "might" be missing in the very low RPM range. My son's Firebird dropped from 11.42 in the quarter with an RPM manifold to 11.28 when he talked me out of my old Torker with the 1" spacer. Memory says that the Torker and 1" spacer sat a 1/2" higher than the RPM and got a little tight with the Firebird's hood. My 67 GTO didn't have a problem with the height of the combination.

Now I've seen a bunch of parts ruined when some bozo used sand blasting on steel and aluminum parts. I've never changed the overall appearance of parts using #6 or #7 glass bead media and they come out looking like new castings. No problem in cleaning the parts since the media blasting cleans very well in itself and normal cleanup afterwards gets things squeaky clean. Most all aftermarket new aluminum parts from brackets, heads, to manifolds go through the same final media blasting to make them look so good when you open the box.

The below parts were media blasted before porting and then media blasted afterwards. I've been using my blast cabinet for over 30 years and have yet to see an residue show up in bearings or oil filter.









New Holley Street Dominator manifold photo from internet:









My media blasted used manifold. This Holley Dominator manifold looked like something the cat dragged with overspray and gasket sealant everywhere when I got it. Media blasting brought it back from the dead, and now has the same look as a new one from Summit.









Now the one thing I absolutely will not media blast is a stock Pontiac valley pan. Absolutely no way to clean things without cutting the spot welds and separating the top and bottom. Just toss the old one in the recycle pile and order the appropriate new one out from Butler.

Media blasting doesn't remove material and will not change port size. So if you want to open up the manifold it would be time to break out the die grinder and have at it. The heads and the stock cast iron manifold in the first photo have had extensive porting done. I converted the pair of 670's in the center of the photo to an 83cc semi-open chamber design, and have been on my 67 GTO since 2009 along with the cast iron 1967 manifold pictured. The painted #62 heads laying flat in the photo were completed the same way back then and are currently on my son's 65 2+2. The outer upright heads are #96 heads and ended up on a friends GTO.


----------



## Baaad65 (Aug 29, 2019)

lust4speed said:


> Either a Torker or Torker II with a 1" spacer is an excellent combo for anything over a 428ci build from idle on up. Not going to miss that miniscule amount of torque that "might" be missing in the very low RPM range. My son's Firebird dropped from 11.42 in the quarter with an RPM manifold to 11.28 when he talked me out of my old Torker with the 1" spacer. Memory says that the Torker and 1" spacer sat a 1/2" higher than the RPM and got a little tight with the Firebird's hood. My 67 GTO didn't have a problem with the height of the combination.
> 
> Now I've seen a bunch of parts ruined when some bozo used sand blasting on steel and aluminum parts. I've never changed the overall appearance of parts using #6 or #7 glass bead media and they come out looking like new castings. No problem in cleaning the parts since the media blasting cleans very well in itself and normal cleanup afterwards gets things squeaky clean. Most all aftermarket new aluminum parts from brackets, heads, to manifolds go through the same final media blasting to make them look so good when you open the box.
> 
> ...


Wow they all look really good. Here I stayed away from the Torker manifolds because of their advertised rpm range, you're right the names should be switched but their marketing department knew what they were doing.


----------



## Jared (Apr 19, 2013)

lust4speed said:


> Either a Torker or Torker II with a 1" spacer is an excellent combo for anything over a 428ci build from idle on up. Not going to miss that miniscule amount of torque that "might" be missing in the very low RPM range. My son's Firebird dropped from 11.42 in the quarter with an RPM manifold to 11.28 when he talked me out of my old Torker with the 1" spacer. Memory says that the Torker and 1" spacer sat a 1/2" higher than the RPM and got a little tight with the Firebird's hood. My 67 GTO didn't have a problem with the height of the combination.
> 
> Now I've seen a bunch of parts ruined when some bozo used sand blasting on steel and aluminum parts. I've never changed the overall appearance of parts using #6 or #7 glass bead media and they come out looking like new castings. No problem in cleaning the parts since the media blasting cleans very well in itself and normal cleanup afterwards gets things squeaky clean. Most all aftermarket new aluminum parts from brackets, heads, to manifolds go through the same final media blasting to make them look so good when you open the box.
> 
> ...


Great information here. Realized by your post, not only did I misspeak and and list the wrong intake, Ispelled the name of the intake wrong to boot. I'm running a Torker II. Same idea. My engine is a high strung 461 which could be why Darrin recommended the top end configuration that he did. Only low end issue it struggles with is traction. My rear gears are not ideal for this set up either. I'm running 3.23's with a 4 speed.


----------



## lust4speed (Jul 5, 2019)

Baaad65 said:


> ...Here I stayed away from the Torker manifolds because of their advertised rpm range...


Whether it is cams, manifolds, or anything else the manufacturers don't bother to differentiate between any of the Pontiac engine sizes. So they cover their rears by giving an RPM range that really applies to a 326 or 350 engine without any mention of how the part will perform with a lot more cubic inches. The more cubes, the more forgiving things become. By the time you get up to over 428ci, any of the street manifolds will behave properly from off-idle and above.


----------



## Baaad65 (Aug 29, 2019)

lust4speed said:


> Whether it is cams, manifolds, or anything else the manufacturers don't bother to differentiate between any of the Pontiac engine sizes. So they cover their rears by giving an RPM range that really applies to a 326 or 350 engine without any mention of how the part will perform with a lot more cubic inches. The more cubes, the more forgiving things become. By the time you get up to over 428ci, any of the street manifolds will behave properly from off-idle and above.


So would there be any benefit to me swapping from my Performer RPM with a 1/2" spacer to a Torker II and spacer? It didn't seem to run out of power racing it.


----------

