Vintage Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,705 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Does anyone have experience with the differences between to following Edelbrock manifolds?

60s Edelbrock F4B

Modern Performer 289

Modern Performer RPM

When I swap the heads and exhaust on my 68 convertible I want to upgrade to an aluminum manifold as well. I wanted a Cobra style but I can’t justify the price. So looking at my options to remain somewhat period correct looking. I have a brand new Performer 289 I can use. As I understand it, this manifold breathes about the same as the stock cast iron manifold and to get better i would need to move up to the RPM. I also have an option to purchase an original F4B in good condition for $250.

This car is a weekend cruiser and doesn’t need to have super high performance, but I want it to have a little kick as well. It has A/C and a C4.

I also have to keep hood clearance in mind. I am currently running a stock 4100 and using a cobra oval air filter. I don’t want a manifold so tall it doesn’t fit under the stock hood.

Appreciate any personal experience you can share.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,071 Posts
You have to take into account where the engine is going to spend most of it's time, rpm wise, and for most street cars that's gonna be about 2k-3k rpm's. The performer is a great intake and IMO will be a nice upgrade over the a factory 4 barrel intake, while keeping a near stock appearance (especially if you painted it engine color). The performer RPM might cost you some down low torque in exchange for some higher rpm HP, and that's fine in some applications but for a nearly stock street driven motor I would hesitate on it being worth it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,587 Posts
Well, if you ask me.....

Edelbrock F4B = Edelbrock-labeled re-cast of the Shelby "Cobra" intake. A bit better (and less weight) than the Ford factory 4V piece.

Edelbrock Performer = Aluminum (less weight) intake with similar performance to the factory 4V piece.

Edelbrock Performer RPM = Aluminum intake with slightly better upper end performance than the "original" Performer.

If you ask me, not considering the weight aspect, if you already have a factory Ford 4V intake, use it; Otherwise of the three, above, pick whichever you like the looks of best. If you have Ford iron heads with untouched ports the only difference you'll feel is in the lightness of your wallet.

If you've ported and port-matched your heads, then there are a couple better (again, my opinion) intakes out there for the 8.2 inch SBF (Weiand Stealth - dual plane, Edelbrock Torker - single plane).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,956 Posts
I agree, the Performer 289 would be your best choice. There's more to making power then just bolting on a bigger intake. The heads, intake, cam and exhaust all need to be upgraded. A bigger intake is only going to make more power if the intake it's replacing is a restriction. If not, then the new bigger intake isn't going to make more power by itself.

The Performer 289 was designed to work with a mild 289/302. I have a new Performer 289 and the ports on that certainly do look bigger then a factory cast iron intake so I'm not sure how it could be a copy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,587 Posts
I agree, the Performer 289 would be your best choice. There's more to making power then just bolting on a bigger intake. The heads, intake, cam and exhaust all need to be upgraded. A bigger intake is only going to make more power if the intake it's replacing is a restriction. If not, then the new bigger intake isn't going to make more power by itself.

The Performer 289 was designed to work with a mild 289/302. I have a new Performer 289 and the ports on that certainly do look bigger then a factory cast iron intake so I'm not sure how it could be a copy.
Not a "copy", but similar in performance to the factory piece. Decent performance from idle to around 5,500 rpm but after that the line on the torque graph drops like a Chevy ("Like a Rock").
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,562 Posts
Use the RPM or Stealth intake and this is why. Both of those intakes work well on mild engines and if you decide you want more power down the road you will not need to replace the intake. Just my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,509 Posts
intakes

Flade, I would choose either the Weiand Stealth 8020, or if you think that one is more than you need you can squeeze a few extra lbs-ft of low rom power using a Weiand Warrior 8124. The 8124 is a dual plane thats taller than stock, but not quite as tall as the Stealth, the shop I worked for sold lots of them. The Weiand intakes both have a wider flange around the carb pad. Some carbs don't seal well to the thin flange Edelbrocks. If you want stock appearance, paint a Weiand blue. It would take a sharp eye to notice. LSG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,230 Posts
Performance improvement from an intake manifold is VERY dependent on the cylinder head being used. "Stock" , period heads do not flow enough air to see a benefit from a manifold beyond the Edelbrock Performer. If an aftermarket head is used , more HP is realized from ANY aftermarket manifold since the engine can breathe. "IF" Ford had made an inline valve head that flowed over 240 cfm "as cast" in the late '60s and the aftermarket had made ones that flowed more ( like the '80s revolution) , Ford performance would be further ahead. The 351W head was not designed to be a performance head , just a larger head for the increased cubic inches. In fully ported form they BARELY match an as cast aluminum head from ANY manufacturer. THAT held back Ford small block performance as I mentioned.
Randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
188 Posts
I put a Performer 289 on my car and haven't looked back. My use for my car is about the same that you describe, and this intake looks good and works great. I don't think you can go wrong...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,455 Posts
I have used both the Performer and Performer RPM. For a 289 that does not see more than 6k rpm, the Performer works. I am with cmefly that the RPM works just as well on a mild engine and has room to grow.

I need to get my Performer cleaned up an on eBay. :)

From a performance perspective, no way would I pay $250 for a F4B.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,230 Posts
I agree with 66coupe289 , there is NO power gain or reason to use the F4B over the performer. If you had a Sunbeam Tiger I could see using one as it was a factory option on them. "Modern" manifolds are designed to be better than the original '60s design.
Randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Haven't installed it yet but I'm running a m9424-a Ford intake which is a later copy by Ford of the original "Cobra" intake. these later copies are a lot cheaper than the originals. I paid a C note for mine used. Best part is it looks really good and says Ford Motorsport on it. see pics. Also see manifold comparison pic. also have pdf file with ford install instructions as these are delicate to install on the corners.

sandybob
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,284 Posts
I put a performer 289 and summit 500 CFM 4V on my pretty much stock 289. Significant performance improvement over my stock iron 2V setup (duh). Gosh was that thing surprisingly heavy. Really happy with how the car runs now.

I did put an AFR gauge on my car and discovered my carb was running pretty fat, especially at WOT. It was down in the 9-10 range. I think I went down 2 jet sizes on primary and 3-4 jet sizes on the secondaries. It now cruises between 13.5-15 (mostly around 14) and WOT is between 11-12.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,398 Posts
Performance improvement from an intake manifold is VERY dependent on the cylinder head being used. "Stock" , period heads do not flow enough air to see a benefit from a manifold beyond the Edelbrock Performer. If an aftermarket head is used , more HP is realized from ANY aftermarket manifold since the engine can breathe. "IF" Ford had made an inline valve head that flowed over 240 cfm "as cast" in the late '60s and the aftermarket had made ones that flowed more ( like the '80s revolution) , Ford performance would be further ahead. The 351W head was not designed to be a performance head , just a larger head for the increased cubic inches. In fully ported form they BARELY match an as cast aluminum head from ANY manufacturer. THAT held back Ford small block performance as I mentioned.
Randy

You're forgetting the 351 Cleveland. 2V or 4V, Cleveland heads flow a LOT!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,230 Posts
You're forgetting the 351 Cleveland. 2V or 4V, Cleveland heads flow a LOT!
If you read my post after the "IF" you will see I noted "inline valve" . 50 years ago when the Boss 302 head was introduced via the '69 mid year Boss 302 Mustang , there were NO aftermarket manifolds available . I wasn't forgetting the 351C in either version , I left it out because it isn't a simple "direct" bolt on head to "every" 289-351W block. I have drag raced a Boss 302 style engine since late '70 because of the lack of a performance "inline valve head" , including the infamous tunnel port 302 which I also ran in the day. I also ran the original GT40 iron heads made in '66 which were a bit better than a ported 351W head. My current 331ci engine makes as much with a Vic Jr head as my stroked Boss 302 did 35 years ago.
Randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
801 Posts
Getting back to the original bits here; a stock 289/302 really is very well suited to the Performer 289. While other manifolds will have bigger plenums or can flow more, it is unlikely that anything would work much better, especially for the money. If you were more focused on better heads, headers, and a different cam, I would pick a Weiand Stealth, or perhaps a Performer RPM, keeping in mind that they stick up a lot more and can have problems with hood clearance. The old Cobra intakes aren't bad for 50+ year old technology, but for average power, the Performer 289 works better, because its ports are pretty close to ideal for a stock or mildly warmed over Windsor. The Cobra intake (and F4B) has a larger plenum, and can flow more air, but its distribution is not as good, nor is its port velocity great at low RPMs. With some engine mods, the Cobra intake would perform better on the top end. Not $350 worth better.


Even on the Shelbys, which had a mean solid lifter cam, good Tri-Y headers, and the Cobra intake (along with a pretty big carburetor designed for good peak HP) they still only pulled 306 horsepower, and the low end on those wasn't exactly amazing. Still the intake wasn't the problem for making more horses; the heads and valves were.
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top