Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide!

Moparchat - Home of MOPAR enthusiasts worldwide! (http://www.moparchat.com/forums/index.php)
-   Performance Talk (http://www.moparchat.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   High-Rise vs Low-Rise Intake Manifold for 340 (http://www.moparchat.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86133)

Kaizen340 10-03-2004 08:51 PM

High-Rise vs Low-Rise Intake Manifold for 340
 
Hello,

I'm new to forums, so please forgive me if this has been covered. I cannot seem to get the search forum tool to work, nor can I view or post in any other areas except this one.

I have a '69 340 from a Dodge Dart in my 98 Dakota. It runs great from about 3000rpm and up, but I am rarely at that RPM. I'm looking for a little more down low, like 1500-4500rpm, 5000 tops. I have a Edelbrock Performer RPM manifold, with a Hughes HE1423AL. The cam is ground for power from 1200 to 4800rpm, just where I want it, but I think the Performer RPM is robbing some low end power. I have a 5 speed in it also. The Performer RPM is a high rise manifold, do you think a low rise would suit me better? If so, which would you recommend? I was thinking about trying the Weiand Action Plus or the regular Edelbrock Performer. Thanks in advance for any advice you can give me. I think I made a mistake with the Performer RPM, and don't want to do it again!

Josh
98 Dakota w/340

MoparMarcIdaho 10-03-2004 09:22 PM

Hey Josh,how are you running that in a 98? No computer it sounds like.A dual plane intake will give you better low end torque if thats what you want to know.You can also recurve the distributor to give you more advance at lower RPMs,try this first and if its still doogy down low switch intakes.

rumblefish360 10-04-2004 04:17 PM

Humm, Thats where that cam is rated to work in. Did you degree in the cam? Also , whats the rear ratio and tire size combo. The RPM isn't really out of range for this cam.
The cam does start a tiny bit lower than the RPM is slated for. But it should not be a problem.
Also, what carb are you running or is it F.I. ?

jd-indy 10-04-2004 11:02 PM

I think the RPM intake might make a little less power than the performer down below 2000rpm, but I doubt it would be worth the small gain unless you could get one cheap. You would lose overall power. The performer is not much better than a stock intake. Other hi-rise 2 plane intakes will be similar to the rpm in low power. The 98 dakota weighs about 4000lbs and unless you have a pretty steep gear, it will be tough to make the 340 run with a lot of low end power.

rumblefish360 10-05-2004 10:40 AM

What JD siad. Also, in thinking, add a 4 hole spacer to the carb if possible.

345Dart 10-05-2004 11:07 AM

RPM performer
 
Adding a 1" 4 hole spacer to my 340 with the RPM performer made a big difference in the 2-3000rpm power/torque output. cheap test and tune - give it a try

cryppie 10-06-2004 07:24 AM

If you decide to go with the Performer, I have a brand new one that has been ported by Hughes Engines listed on eBay right now.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=7926088746

I am selling it for my father because he just went through the same issue as you described. He also has a 340 and had the RPM on it, then took it off because of loss of low-end power. He bought this one from Hughes Engines, who ported it, but he didn't like how it looked. It was going to be chromed and put on a show car, but he said it just didn't look as good as the RPM. I told him that this one would have been perfect for his setup and the type of driving he does, but I guess you can't overlook how things look on a show car... Anyway, I would also like more information about your truck, and pics if you can post them. It sounds like an interesting project. Good luck.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:46 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.