Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
What did you have before? I have a GT 40 now and hate to spend $500 + for 10 hp above 5000 rpm's.

Thanx, JOHN:joy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
675 Posts
I need a better intake had car dynoed and my GT40 is holding me back the dam thing stop pulling at 4500 and leveled off. I think the gt40 is for stock heads or the old gt40 heads. I am thinking of buying the performer rpm but now you have me thinking of rpm2 hhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmm?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
I'm trying to decide between the RPM and the RPM2 now. I am installing RPM 202 heads and a TFS stage 1 in my 5.0.

Does anyone know if there are any downsides to choosing the RPM2 intake over the original RPM aside from its cost?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
418 Posts
I had several small problems during installation which are all pretty minor.

1) 1/8" npt plugs would not screw into upper (hole was tapped correctly, npt plug supplied bad),

2) Fuel rail requires much shorter bolts since the holes aren't tapped as deep. This probably has to do with the larger runners.

3) The material above the injector bosses on a couple needs to be larger to allow the injectors to sit in the boss' correctly.

4) Don't remember if its 1/2" or 3/8" NPT fittings on the bottom side of the upper intake on either end hit the cover plate screws when install the fittings

5) The "CNC" porting on the lower intake where the upper and lower meet leaves alot to be desired. My guess is it was done by hand based on the grinder cuts and not CNC'd as stated which leaves nice consistent tool marks. This is my opinion!

6) On the inside of the upper, looking thru the throttle body area, there's a casting ridge that runs from front to back.

7) Otherwise my only real complaint is the runners are slightly taller than my AFR 185's. Due to time constraints, I had to forgo port matching my heads to the RPM II. I expected the RPM II port to match a 1250 gasket since everybodys has been saying it does and it did match side to side but not top to bottom.

Their instructions are pretty generic but if you've ever installed an intake then its a no brainer. The overall fit was really nice. It looks good. The car feels really strong both low and higher rpms. Problem number 5 is probably my biggest complaint especially for the amount of money.

I emailed ebock with my problems and complaints, hopefully they'll iron out some of these problems so others don't have the same problems and there's a better product as a result.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
654 Posts
Did you port the lower of the GT40 intake? I was very happy with mine, did need to open lower upto 1250 gasket but it pulled right upto 6200 were heads & cam started fell off. But I do like the Edel 2 I wish it was out before I bought my Track Heat
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
what did you guys pay for the rpm2?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
418 Posts
$529 @ HP
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,092 Posts
I know a guy who dyno'd the RPM2 against the original RPM and say sizable gains.....

Healthy 306 over 370RWHP...with the old.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,567 Posts
There's no doubt the V plenum is a better design than the T plenum. The only advantage of the old RPM is the large opening that you can use to get into and port the upper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
I emailed Edelbrock asking the basic differences between the old and new RPM. The response was short and sweet... but at least made up my mind.

The RPM II is a race manifold, plain and simple. It’s designed for a hot street setup that frequents the strip. You may loose some bottom end with this intake, but it will make up for it in high-end power. If you’re doing more street driving than anything, I wouldn’t recommend this intake.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top