Somebody do a search.... The engine was built, I'm thinking 500 hp range. JW tested both ported and none ported on each. The performer didn't do as well when it was NOT port matched. I think JW said the performer ports were casted a bit thicker (reducing the diameter of the ports), but once you match them, very similar (though the B4B did flow slightly better). :Brow: Jim might have it on his web site too. o No:
OK, so has anyone done a comprehensive test on these different manifolds. I'd personally love to see a test of a stock, Edelbrock Performer and B4B, and a SP1. All out of the box and then all ported. I would think a 450-500 HP engine would be perfect. You'd be able to change the jetting and timing to optimize for the intake, but that would be it. Let's see where we can find this info..............
I'm sure the SP1 did come out on top. I am very interested in how a stock/unported intake does against a ported Performer or ported B4B. I've been thinking about getting my car to appear more stock, but don't want to give up much in the performance department. Most of my parts are out of the box, except for my heads.
Go stock if the rpm's are under 5,000 :bglasses: The biggest advantage is the weight savings! The aftermarket pieces do raise the carb some, which really help at the higher rpm's over the stock.
One minor disadvantage with these is that you lose the oportunity to maintain the divorced choke. Gotta go electric.
Response from Greg to the question above: Tommy, They are both very similar manifolds. If you want the stock ram-air air cleaner to line up with the factory scoops, then by all means go with the performer. There are too many variables to specifically state which manifold is 'better'. The older B4B's had large port openings, sometimes larger than the stock head port and gasket, so depending on what was done to the heads, this could be a plus or minus. If I had to buy one, I would go with the B4B, but if I already owned a Performer, I would just use that and definitely not think about it again. Both intakes can be improved upon with porting if the rest of the engine combination is up to the task. Greg Gessler Head Porting 25 Four Corners Road Blairstown, NJ 07825 (908) 362-7692 www.Gesslerheadporting.com Specializing in Stock Appearing Heads, Intakes and Exhaust Manifolds. We look forward to helping you get to the finish line first!
I've never heard anything good about that manifold. I'm told the only benefit over a stock one is the weight savings of about 30 lbs.
http://www.taperformance.com/dynotest1.htm In case it wasn't already posted. The performer numbers are slightly lower than a B4B due (mainly) to the carb relocation.
Is the performance improvement to justify spending the cash and swapping the S-Divider I have now for a new B4B. Th S-Divider I have now I bought back in 93. I have a 70GS with a 455.
I wouldn't think it would be worth it to swap. The dyno doesn't show the slope, but I think the B4B has a flatter torque and hp curve than either the S-divider or SP-1/SPX since they are single plane and the B4B is dual plane.
the rest of the story As Greg mention in his email, the old B4B had a bigger port outlets out of the box than the performer, and on a ported head motor, this tended to give it a slight advantage over an out of the box performer. Look carefully at Edlebrock's specs for the Performer and the new B4B.. port outlet dimensions are the same. I suspect there will be no difference in out of the box performance between these two manifolds. And Troy's pictures above are a perfect example of the problem with a B4B and the factory air cleaner.. see the ripples in the foams?.. that's from the hood scoop grills.. the foams are supposed to on hit the hood scoop seal plates, not the grill of the scoop. The air cleaner is sitting too far forward, and I suspect he cannot use the factory support bracket. Next.. On a different 500 HP 455 we did, here were the results, same dyno, same motor, same day... Stock untouched '70 factory iron intake -- 495HP Stock untouched Performer intake- 499 HP Portmatched B4B - 510 HP Portmatched Performer- 512 HP I have never seen any evidence to support the long held notion of moving the carb pad to improve runner distribution. Well.. at least never seen any evidence that it actually works.. I am sure that was the reasoning behind it. Both the performer and the B4B have horrendous fuel distribution.. look at that dyno chart.. see that the B4B is using more PPH of fuel to make less HP.. that the TA Single plane manifold.. exactly the opposite of what should be happening. Hence the "stagger jet for power" articles of the day... Stagger jetting fixes a manifold problem. IMHO, Edelbrock wasted their time doing this manifold again, what could have been helpful would have been a Performer RPM manifold, like the other makes have. Would have filled the gap between the dual plane and single plane manifolds out there now. The only possible reason for doing this manifold again would be for IHRA Top stock, as it was the required manifold for the STG 2 package that Tom Rix runs, but this new one has the wrong carb pad, that one has to be Holley only unless they have made and exception. I do believe that Tom is actually running a single plane manifold on that car now.. JW
Poor Buick 455... Some of the IHRA Top Stock accepted crate engines....:error: GMs can run a 502 CID Fords can run a 535 CID Mopars can run a 528 CID Hemi
There's a good test I was looking for. So a good ported Performer will give @17 HP over a factory cast intake. Plus it's @40 lbs. lighter, right. All that should be worth .1 to .2 in the quarter. And you could mill the Edelbrock name off of it, paint it red and hardly anyone would know. JW, did you ever put an SP1 on that same engine? I wonder how it would have done with that intake. Possibly another 20-25HP?
Huh? TA and others sell a choke that mounts right on the performer, you will have to make the rod. Took me about 5 minutes... :bglasses: Guess I'll add, I made it from a paint can handle. Perfect diameter, bent & cut easily, and doesn't seem to rust.
How about a ported factory iron intake? If the fuel distribution on the Performer and B4B are so bad, might not a ported iron intake do better (assuming it has better fuel distribution)? Sorry if this has been covered, but it looks like everybody compares a stock iron intake to a ported aulminum, skipping the ported iron "in between". (?) o No:
Never did a port-matched iron manifold, as that particular motor had intake entries approximately stock sized. So the heads matched up with the iron intake and the B4B well, it was only the un-port matched Performer that was at a disadvantage. Unless I was building a motor for a class that required an iron intake, I very much doubt I would ever invest the kind of $$$ it takes to fully port an iron intake. It also shares the same fuel distribution issues as the other dual plane intakes. JW
