Can I bolt a performer RPM intake onto unported D2TE heads without performance problems?

 

Yep, but what performance "problems" would you expect?

--Mike

 

Remember you can go from a smaller port into a larger port...But..the optimum is being the same at the meeting point to make less turbulence....And then going larger.

If you try going from a lagre port into a small port..Its like running in to a wall..

 

I think my problem is that my engines breathing lies somewhere in between the performer and RPM. In a perfect world I'd yank my heads and port-match with the RPM, but I don't have the time right now and this stupid performer sucks. I've got an Iron C7AE 4v intake that appears better suited than the micro-runner performer, but I can't bring myself to torture my back like that. Think I might as well buy the RPM. It couldn't be worse than the performer. The thing that I don't understand is why the performer has intake ports that are considerably smaller than stock C8 through D2 heads. What the hell was edelbrock thinking making an intake that doesn't match up with anything?

 

Like I said before ...you can go from a smaller port to a larger port...But not bass ackwards!

If the intake manifold ports are smaller than the head ports..you wont have a problem.. it wont be optimum but it will be better than stock...

What you dont want to have is the manifold intake ports Bigger than the head ports.
Thats why Port maching is always a plus!! Russ

 

Port match the intake and call it good. You will use less energy and will be more in tune with the universe than trying to pull the cast manifold

--Mike

 

I think Edelbrock was trying to get the flow at a better location and angle into the head port, like a sweet spot. Same thinking as with the old cheby stagger-port design, just a guess...