[Rar_421]

My number 17 heads were opened up for the RA 4
Intake and there isn't enough meat on the factory intake to match,what dual plane intake has enough to match the RA4 gasket? Would the regular Edelbrock performer have enough material and be able to seal properly?

[b-man]

There’s always the RAIV reproduction intakes.

I doubt the regular Performer would be a better than the factory iron intake when it comes to having enough material at the top of the ports.

I would think the Performer RPM would be an ideal piece for your needs if you have room for an intake that’s 1-1/4” taller than stock, otherwise I’d use the RAIV/455 HO repro.

[mysticmissle]

we ran a regular performer on unported 1970 lemans 350 car, i think they were 47 or 17? either way intake was excellent on the
little motor, ran high 13s however i would put an iron one on if it was mine.

[Rar_421]

Mysticmissile would the port mismatch be an issue on my setup?

[b-man]

Tell you what, I had a pair of 1971 455 HO heads and port matched factory HO intake on my 455 powered ‘64 GTO bracket car., no exhaust crossover with blocking plates bolted to the heads.

I swapped on a 1969 iron intake that was absolutely untouched and the exhaust crossover was completely functional and not blocked off.

The car ran just as good or better with the iron intake that had at least a 1/8” to 3/16” mismatch at the top of the port, plus it had exhaust heat which didn’t adversely affect the 1/4 mile times.

If it was my 350 I’d bolt on a factory intake and run it.

[Rar_421]

B-man I do have a 68 Intake so that's what I'll do,I had the Intake in storage and got antsy waiting for my short block to get back from the machine shop,if I would checked before hand i would of left the heads alone,measure twice cut once as my old shop teacher said!

[PunchT37]

Like Bart says, on a 350 especially, I`d run it as is. What you don`t want is the intake port opening larger than the head.

[mysticmissle]

should be fine as long as the gasket seals bolt intake(s) loosely on wo carb and look down the runners with a flash light on. remember to snug the timing cover to intake bolt and see how the port alignment looks no need to guess

[Formulabruce]

Put on a performer and use the RA4 gasket and you'll be fine. If you don't use the tall " cathederal" ra4 gasket, you can get a whistling sound. : credit Shaker455...

[steve25]

If the gasket match to the RA4 port size on your 17 castings was not carried out 2 or more inches into the runner then your really not picking up much additional flow that the stock D port manifold can’t handle anyway!

These enough meat to do a RA4 port match on both the 67 and earlier AFB intakes and the later Q-jet intakes as seen in these two photos.
The matching on the AFB intakes will only have enough roof height to match thru the thickness of the manifolds flange area so the whole process is a waste of time so just do a standard D port gasket gasket
Match and leave it at that.

The iron Q-jet can be blended in much deeper making the process worth while.

As far as the performer goes just run it as is out of the box.

The main concern in intake port matching is that the flange area is not smaller then the manifold runners.

The other way around like your posting about is not a issue so don’t loose sleep over it!

[b-man]

Originally Posted by mysticmissle

should be fine as long as the gasket seals bolt intake(s) loosely on wo carb and look down the runners with a flash light on. remember to snug the timing cover to intake bolt and see how the port alignment looks no need to guess

How would he be able to look down any of the runners to check port match when there’s really no line of sight on a dual plane? Maybe on a single plane Victor intake or similar, sure.

[Schurkey]

Video scope.

I guess there's adapters that fit onto the cell-phone camera that can do a similar job.