Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
MC,
Yes, it is really that good so far we are making another 20 hp over the other RPM intake. They are finalizing it and it isn't ready for shipping, but it will be soon contact your local parts store.
-----Original Message-----
From: EFItech
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 7:38 AM
To: edelbrock
Subject: FW: HELLO



-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:41 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: HELLO


The efi EDELBROCK RPM II is it really that much better then the standard edelbrock rpm intake for the 90-93 mustang 5.0's? If it is I really want to purchase one?? and tech info? " What do you guys think could it be that good?"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,554 Posts
20hp on what? That doesn't tell me nothing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Clarification

The original email asked how good it would be on a heads, cam

intake built car. I.e AFR, Rpm intake and cam, with the usual bolt

on's. I just cannnot see how it could be so much better Maybe

on a Blown car but n.a hmmm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
your problem was............"If it is I really want to purchase one"....

of course it is better
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
My guess is that it makes 20 rwhp more at 6500 rpm and no more than 5-10 rwhp at peak. They probably moved the peak up from about 5800 to 6000-6200 rpm (with enough cam) to get the larger numbers they need to sell. I've seen a stock runner length Holley peak at 6200 rpm with a +245 ish cam, so they are probably shooting for at least this.

What's interesting is the large degree of taper to the runners on the RPM II intake.

However, I don't understand how they can pull all this off by leaving that lower unchanged. I've heard that it barely flows 220 cfm, but maybe that was with the upper attached.

We'll see.

What they really need to do is make an emmissions legal, bolt on friendly Vic 5.0 for the 347 +7000 rpm motors. That would sell like hot cakes.

The number one factor in limiting the power output of our emissions legal 331/347 strokers is the ridiculously low power peaks of 5800 rpm, when we need at least 6500 rpm to make the numbers and run the times we want to run. That's what the LS1-LS6 crowd has.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
655 Posts
Well, I hope it is better I suppose, but I wonder if it's an upper change only.

I have a nice new Nitrous Express dual stage plate kit for my EFI Edelbrock RPM waiting to go on my car and would hate to have to change intakes and purchase another new nitrous kit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,627 Posts
I wouldn't rush in and want to buy anything that was as yet unproven. I would imagine that Rick Anderson will be doing some sort of dyno test on it against other similar manifolds in an upcoming MM&FF article once it is released. I mean doesn't he always?

Also, I'm sure Ed Curtis will be looking it over as well and will most likely be posting about it at some point in time. Just don't trust the hype you get from a manufacturers tech line until some independent tuner has a chance to check it out. I'd like to see some hard data on the new and improved Performer RPM heads that have been out for a while now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Minion

I know it is supposed to be better, but after 6 emails back and

forth from Edelbrock no hard proof, tech, or numbers. If it is 20h.p

better then a standard Rpm I think it would be a steal if price is

around the same. The intake is supposed to be released within a

couple weeks and it looks to be a upper only at least that is what

I have gathered. Getiing responses back has been a pain in the

azzz from them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
what I really meant to say was because you said you would buy one if it was better, of course edelbrock is going to tell you it is better.

I'd wait and see how they really compare on a dyno and on the track.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top