OLDER EDELBROCK PERFORMER INTAKE POTENTIAL ON A 340

-
CFD244

CFD244

"I LOST MY ID IN A FLOOD"
FABO Gold Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
4,162
Reaction score
5,865
Location
Northern Ontario, Canada
Hi Folks

Just wondering how this manifold stacks up against the OEM 1971 cast intake and the LD 340 intake. I would be running a factory TQ ON A 1971 340 with about 9.3 : 1 SCR. Cam is a Comp XE 262 with a 727 (2500 stall), and sure grip 3.23's in a 1971 Demon. I would gasket match the intake ports, but that would be it for mods. I like the LD, but I don't want to modify it for the TQ. What say Ye? Thanks FABO
 
I'd run the LD340 personally. Don't be afraid to cut it, unless you are saving it for another build.

Mine is off getting 060 taken off right now.
 
CFD244 said:
Hi Folks

Just wondering how this manifold stacks up against the OEM 1971 cast intake and the LD 340 intake. I would be running a factory TQ ON A 1971 340 with about 9.3 : 1 SCR. Cam is a Comp XE 262 with a 727 (2500 stall), and sure grip 3.23's in a 1971 Demon. I would gasket match the intake ports, but that would be it for mods. I like the LD, but I don't want to modify it for the TQ. What say Ye? Thanks FABO
Click to expand...
If you don't already have an LD340, you could look for one of the later issues of the manifold- their carburetor flange is already set up for a TQ with extra material around the carb flange's secondary area, unlike the earlier manifolds. All you have to do is open up the secondary area a bit.
1698798934128.png

Between the Performer and the factory manifold, about the only advantage to the Performer is less weight. I doubt you'd notice much, if any, difference performance-wise.
 
i'd say everything is about even until probably 6K where the stocker and performer will start to fall off.

i think the LD is the better choice, but not by enough to cut one for a spread bore. if you have the hood clearance you could run a spacer/adapter.

performer w/ matched ports and TQ will be a nice piece.
 
The LD340 is a legend in MoPar circles.
Some is myth and folk lore and some it just plain works.
My 71 340 has one and a TQ and is amazing. Doug’s headers, a good cam, 3.91 sure grip and a 833 4 speed in my Demon. It just keeps pulling.
Syleng1
 
In Australia the LD340 is a really, really rare piece of merchandise, and this weekend gone I found mine needed machining after Zero deck and thinner head gaskets.
I agonised about cutting it, but I bought the thing because I wanted it for this engine, so it gets the chop.
 
70coupe said:
In Australia the LD340 is a really, really rare piece of merchandise, and this weekend gone I found mine needed machining after Zero deck and thinner head gaskets.
I agonised about cutting it, but I bought the thing because I wanted it for this engine, so it gets the chop.
Click to expand...
Cut the intake surfaces of the heads, not the manifold. Then you'll be able to switch manifolds if the mood ever strikes you, and you won't have to have the new manifold cut (again...).
 
Professor Fate said:
Cut the intake surfaces of the heads, not the manifold. Then you'll be able to switch manifolds if the mood ever strikes you, and you won't have to have the new manifold cut (again...).
Click to expand...
Would have worked well if I had picked it up before I assembled the engine (amateur!).
Too late now, and I don't plan on any changes - this will be the only SB build I do, the rest of my cars are Hemi 6 powered :)
 
CFD244 said:
Hi Folks

Just wondering how this manifold stacks up against the OEM 1971 cast intake and the LD 340 intake. I would be running a factory TQ ON A 1971 340 with about 9.3 : 1 SCR. Cam is a Comp XE 262 with a 727 (2500 stall), and sure grip 3.23's in a 1971 Demon. I would gasket match the intake ports, but that would be it for mods. I like the LD, but I don't want to modify it for the TQ. What say Ye? Thanks FABO
Click to expand...
What are the warmest days up there summertime? And I forget, headers on it now? Honestly for that size cam, I'd run the stock intake, unless You wanna drop a little weight & get a Performer dirt cheap. A factory TQ SB intake is more than capable enough for that cam. The LD intakes really come on when You get a cam in the 280&up range, I Iove 'em, but You can do 12's w/a TQ intake & a more aggressive cam no problem.
 
Last edited:
I keep hearing how good the LD intake is, & some claim better than the Performer. Hard to believe that Edel would make a more modern intake than performs worse than the one it is meant to replace.

Does anybody have an actual dyno test comparison?
 
70coupe said:
Would have worked well if I had picked it up before I assembled the engine (amateur!).
Too late now, and I don't plan on any changes - this will be the only SB build I do, the rest of my cars are Hemi 6 powered :)
Click to expand...
My decision on that would be easy. I'd yank them heads right back off.
 
i think the performer was more aimed at the 318 and 360 2V crowd, what with the provisions for a choke, EGR and coil as well as AC mounts incorporated into it-- more of a "better factory replacement" piece. where as the RPM was more along the lines of the LD lineage- noticeably larger plenum, runners, bigger ports.

i don't have the article/info to back it up-- i'm too lazy to find it, but i remember it being that the three of them were about 5~7hp away from each other on the same set up. obviously, you could conduct the test to favor one over the other, but on a basic level that was the gist of it.
 
In my opinion, the "plain" Edelbrock Performer won't be any better than an early OEM TQ intake even in stock applications but it saves weight. The RPM & Air-Gap would likely be a step up and both are identical internally. Downside there is that any adapters being used to go from square to spread bore normally result in a flow reduction.

Here is a dyno test article, but no OEM spread bore intake.

Small block intake dyno test.

(Gotta look at the #'s through the operating range, not peak numbers.)
 
CFD244 said:
Hi Folks

Just wondering how this manifold stacks up against the OEM 1971 cast intake and the LD 340 intake. I would be running a factory TQ ON A 1971 340 with about 9.3 : 1 SCR. Cam is a Comp XE 262 with a 727 (2500 stall), and sure grip 3.23's in a 1971 Demon. I would gasket match the intake ports, but that would be it for mods. I like the LD, but I don't want to modify it for the TQ. What say Ye? Thanks FABO
Click to expand...
Going against the grain here. Dont think there would be a hill of beans difference between any of them for a a street car with that cam and stock heads that have not been worked. I would run the one I already had before buying something different.

Different story if you have money spent on buying a set of heads or porting the ones you have.

Performer intake in terms of port size is a tweener designed to split the difference in Between the 318 and 360 port size. I wouldn't waste time trying to gasket match it to the heads for a basic street engine build.
 
Bewy said:
I keep hearing how good the LD intake is, & some claim better than the Performer. Hard to believe that Edel would make a more modern intake than performs worse than the one it is meant to replace.

Does anybody have an actual dyno test comparison?
Click to expand...
You're confusing Performer & Performer RPM, the Performer was nowhere near intended as a replacement for the LD's...the LD's were for drag racing where the stock design, but not component, had to be used if I'm not mistaken. The RPM is a better overall intake for street duty, and I know there's a Dulcich dyno romp that does just that comparo, You gotta search MT/HR TV to find it....this discussion has been done over & over...
 
I Have all 3 intakes. I passed on installing the LD because of the mods needed (buyers remorse :BangHead: ), and installed the OEM factory iron. The engine hasn't been fired yet........

I bought a parts car with a 318 and Performer on it. When I pulled off the Holley, I found a spreadbore opening and am wondering if that would be better than my OEM intake.
 
There are 340's running lo 10's with stock cast intakes. Grind the part number off, paint it aluminum and run
the stock piece. If i could find a reasonably priced 68 cast intake i would consider taking the LD340 off mine
to put it back to factory.
 
The alum MP one is a remake of the 1968 /340 intake ...makes good power...

20231101_202054.jpg
 
Killer6,
Post #17. I am not confusing anything. The Perf & the RPM were designed for different rpm ranges.
The LD intake is listed in my 1979 Edel catalog.............with a 1500-5500 rpm range. Does 5500 upper limit sound like it is designed for drag racing?
The Perf is listed in my 1986 catalog, & surprise, surprise the rpm range is.....1500-5500 rpm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top