302 intake questions

Im fininshing up my 302 for my cobra II and I cant decide on a intake. Motor is a stock explorer 302 shortblock with a f cam, eddy performer heads (2.02 1.60 valves) c4 done up by hEro with a 3k stall. 9in rear with 4.11 gears 295 50 15 tire. The intakes I have are stealth, air gap, vic jr and original torker. This car is not a dd but a weekend toy and drive when I want. Its not a race car and will not see a lot if any track time. I plan to spray a 150 max but cant decide on the intake. Which one is better for this motor?

  vic Jr !

I vote for the "original Torker".

LivermoreDave wrote:I vote for the "original Torker".

The "oribinal" Torquer 289 has a somewhat twisted carb pad but, has never been a problem.

Personally for your 302 application, I would use the "Air Gap".

rmcomprandy wrote:

LivermoreDave wrote:I vote for the "original Torker".

The "oribinal" Torquer 289 has a somewhat twisted carb pad but, has never been a problem.

Personally for your 302 application, I would use the "Air Gap".

Is a 150 or smaller ok to spray on a dual plane?
Thanks for the replies

The "part time" spray was included within my selection of intakes. A 150 shot would work OK using a dual plane intake. My thinking, your application's final drive ratio, camshaft and valve sizes may like the Torker. The Torker may offer a bit of streetable performance advantage over the Jr. and a bit more upper end performance than a dual plane considering your engine's operating speed. I guess what I'm attempting to explain the Torker IMO will not hinder the application's performance in either direction.

Dave.

With the heads an cam you have listed, I would use the air gap intake.

It will do fine on the spray with the air gap intake too...

I have had horrible luck with air gap intakes on my small blocks until I was over 11.5 compression. I would use the torker with that stock lowerend.... Just my opinion....

Thanks for the replies. Keep them coming. Is the stealth that bad of a intake for 302?

The Torquer will probably work better when you are at Wide Open Throttle with the nitrous ON ... ALL other times, NOT A CHANCE.

NOW, I will ask you this simple question; what percentage of the actual driving time with this vehicle will you be AT wide open throttle with the nitrous on...?

Only you can make that choice.

85bigblockfox wrote:Im fininshing up my 302 for my cobra II and I cant decide on a intake. Motor is a stock explorer 302 shortblock with a f cam, eddy performer heads (2.02 1.60 valves) c4 done up by hEro with a 3k stall. 9in rear with 4.11 gears 295 50 15 tire. The intakes I have are stealth, air gap, vic jr and original torker. This car is not a dd but a weekend toy and drive when I want. Its not a race car and will not see a lot if any track time. I plan to spray a 150 max but cant decide on the intake. Which one is better for this motor?

If your performer heads are ported to take advantage of the bigger valves, then the Torquer will be a hindrance because the runners are very small unless ported.

Victor jr.

The torquer intake was to small for stock heads IMO ! Air gap is ok .

Victor jr.  

We have dyno'd a bunch of sbf's over the years and that is my observation.

85bigblockfox wrote:

rmcomprandy wrote:

LivermoreDave wrote:I vote for the "original Torker".

The "oribinal" Torquer 289 has a somewhat twisted carb pad but, has never been a problem.

Personally for your 302 application, I would use the "Air Gap".

Is a 150 or smaller ok to spray on a dual plane?
Thanks for the replies

I had no problems with a 150 shot with a Performer on a 351. I tend to agree with the guys who recomend, the Victor Jr.. I replaced a Torquer II with a Victor Jr. on a SBC and it was a major improvement, did not seem to hurt the bottom end with a 3.70 and a 2,800 convertor at all.

The heads are ported and the heads are 60cc so comp should be at 9.2-9.3

Let me know if you don't want the Torker 289.

rmcomprandy wrote:

LivermoreDave wrote:I vote for the "original Torker".

The "oribinal" Torquer 289 has a somewhat twisted carb pad but, has never been a problem.

Personally for your 302 application, I would use the "Air Gap".

thats my choice too.

Dave C. wrote:Let me know if you don't want the Torker 289.

Sent you a pm

i would say vic jr. Thats what i ran on a 302 in a fox body with an extreme energy 282 cam and afr 185 heads. engine ran really hard all the way through redline and that was with a 5 speed and 355 gears. very impressive