[MY69prix]

I haven't been able to find an answer online, so I'll ask here. I have a 69 GP with a YH code 400. It has it's original intake (9794284) and original Quadrajet. I will be rebuilding/refreshing the engine in the near future, and have a chance to obtain a Ram Air 3 intake (9799068) very reasonably. I can't seem to find what the differences are in these intakes . Ideas? Thanks......Rick

[b-man]

Functionally all are exactly the same.

[tom s]

There is no diff from a 69 RA III intake and a 69 intake.Tom

[Formulas]

Save your money .. D'port Ram Air intakes are the same as the standard intakes not even a different part number
Everyone likes to throw around the Ram Air badge my original 1970 Formula has the 068 intake it was born with and its just the plain jane 4bbl 400 auto

[Cliff R]

All Pontiac spread bore iron intakes are excellent, even the later EGR versions. The worst of the bunch are the early EGR versions, they weigh a LOT more than early non-EGR units and extend so far down to accommodate the EGR passages they require a different valley pan. Personally I would avoid any of those.

The 1967 unit is also a one year only design, and has an exhaust channel across the front of it where the carb sits. They flow as good as later units but may require minor modifications to get a good seal if the original gasket and steel shim aren't used.

The 1972 is the best of the bunch because it has small openings on BOTH sides for the exhaust crossover, so will work with early and late cylinder heads without leaking at the passengers side intake gasket/exhaust crossover passage.

Often avoided are the later EGR units with the "D" shaped openings. Don't shy away from those, they are excellent and lighter that earlier EGR versions.

ALL of them are superior to the Edebrock Performer, and run with the RPM to about 500hp. So buying an RPM to replace a stock intake doesn't do much for most street engines, aside moving the carb 1" or so closer to the hood and taking a few pounds off the engine........Cliff

[64speed]

If your engine parameters will support it a lot of people have good luck with the Torker II

[Baron Von Zeppelin]

Originally Posted by MY69prix

... YH code 400. It has it's original intake (9794284) ... and have a chance to obtain a Ram Air 3 intake (9799068) very reasonably.

You already have a 69 Ram Air 3 Intake
Won't need a 70 model

In an old test in HPP magazine - the 70 did outflow all the others by a slim margin.
Wouldn't lose a wink of sleep about it though.

You probably have an XH 400 with 62 Heads , great engine.
Think YH was the low code 428

[steve25]

Yes to the above, the YH code was for the 1969 small valve 360 hp 428 motor.

[MY69prix]

Correct...it is an XH code.....not YH. (I can see it much better after some cleaning.)

[MY69prix]

Thanks to all for your experienced input. I did suspect from pics I found all over the net that my stock 400 intake was the same as the "Ram Air 3"....but the differing part #'s made me curious. My engine build will be all stock Pontiac; my only intended change will be an 068 cam and some porting / polishing on the heads and intake. Otherwise, the engine will be as it came from the factory. Thanks again folks.....I'm SURE I'll have more questions when the build begins soon. Rick

[grivera]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

All Pontiac spread bore iron intakes are excellent, even the later EGR versions. The worst of the bunch are the early EGR versions, they weigh a LOT more than early non-EGR units and extend so far down to accommodate the EGR passages they require a different valley pan. Personally I would avoid any of those.

The 1967 unit is also a one year only design, and has an exhaust channel across the front of it where the carb sits. They flow as good as later units but may require minor modifications to get a good seal if the original gasket and steel shim aren't used.

The 1972 is the best of the bunch because it has small openings on BOTH sides for the exhaust crossover, so will work with early and late cylinder heads without leaking at the passengers side intake gasket/exhaust crossover passage.

Often avoided are the later EGR units with the "D" shaped openings. Don't shy away from those, they are excellent and lighter that earlier EGR versions.

ALL of them are superior to the Edebrock Performer, and run with the RPM to about 500hp. So buying an RPM to replace a stock intake doesn't do much for most street engines, aside moving the carb 1" or so closer to the hood and taking a few pounds off the engine........Cliff

I have a nice 1972 dated Jan 13 1972. Will it need 1972 intake gaskets to fit 1969 heads?

[Cliff R]

1972 intakes have small holes on both sides so use the later intake gaskets with the smaller openings at the exhaust crossovers......

[Joe's Garage]

Originally Posted by grivera

I have a nice 1972 dated Jan 13 1972. Will it need 1972 intake gaskets to fit 1969 heads?

FelPro MS90205 gaskets work well on 1972-up intakes.

[steve25]

Just for the record if a GP was born with a 428 in it, it would have fender emblems stating that.

[RocktimusPryme]

Do the later D shaped secondary ports on like 77 intakes have any performance loss vs the earlier intakes that have full 360* holes?

I know Ive seen people say that as a platform they are just as good if you are going to work on one, but Im curious is there is any loss in performance as cast vs the earlier intakes?

[Baron Von Zeppelin]

Originally Posted by steve25

Just for the record if a GP was born with a 428 in it, it would have fender emblems stating that.

67 = fender emblem
68 = rocker molding emblem
69 = no exterior CID emblem

[Baron Von Zeppelin]

Originally Posted by RocktimusPryme

Do the later D shaped secondary ports on like 77 intakes have any performance loss vs the earlier intakes that have full 360* holes?

I know Ive seen people say that as a platform they are just as good if you are going to work on one, but Im curious is there is any loss in performance as cast vs the earlier intakes?

The folks who have done stock Qjet intake tests say they all flow comparably the same.
But it hurts my eyes to see the D-shape secondary openings

[Sirrotica]

I have an EGR 1976 D shaped secondaries on a 455 with a mild cam, and ported 5C heads, with headers. It runs just as strong as any non EGR iron intake I've ever used. I built the engine in 1988 and the guy that used to own the car was very cautious because he almost swapped ends while driving the 76 T/A it was installed in. It was a very strong combination right up to 5000 RPM, where the 268 HE cam runs out of breath.

I used that intake because it was a budget build, and no extra money in his budget for an aluminum intake, so I used what we had that came on the original 400 engine that came in the car. This was long before anyone had done flow testing on the EGR intakes. I was hesitant to use it, but it performed likely as good as anything else that was available back in 1988. After getting the car running and driving It was a very strong street combonation, so I just left the iron intake on it.

Although the cam is rather small the car with a 3.23 axle was very street friendly, and actually got in the upper teens in fuel mileage.

I still have that engine, and want to use it in an 84 GP street car I'm working on in the future. It may get a larger cam, and a HSD intake when I insall it.

[Sirrotica]

Originally Posted by Baron Von Zeppelin

67 = fender emblem
68 = rocker molding emblem
69 = no exterior CID emblem

To add to that, the 69 J models could also be ordered with a 428 engine, although rare, I have seen J models that were factory equipped with the larger displacement 428 option engine. I used to believe if it wasn't an SJ it had a 400 inch engine, but was shown the window sticker of a J model with the 428 engine option, and the guy still owned the car, and was the original owner. You just needed to know which boxes to check off to get the J with the bigger engine.

[RocktimusPryme]

Originally Posted by Baron Von Zeppelin

The folks who have done stock Qjet intake tests say they all flow comparably the same.
But it hurts my eyes to see the D-shape secondary openings

It just looks like a restriction doesn't it?

Ive always wanted to hog one out so Ive considered buying one of those a few times because they are cheaper than the early ones. I have a 67 intake with the heat passage blocked, but I don't want to grind that one up.