Rangepony
Active Member
So I pulled the heads on my 74 Road Runner 340 to do some valve work and drill out some broken off bolts. I think the original intake weighs around 10,000 pounds.....I'm thinking an aluminum upgrade...any recommendations?
Intake recommendations for my 73 Road Runner 340
- Thread starter Rangepony
- Start date
Just my thought, did it run good? I like stock but thats me. Why change it
If you go for an aluminum replacement, I would suggest you stick with a dual plane manifold. They help with low end torque which your 340 needs (I had a 73 Road Runner with a 340 for 42 years). Overall, I don't think you will see a huge performance gain though.
Nirvana
Well-Known Member
Performer RPM
Rangepony, All depends of the primary use of the car. Daily driver the aluminum Edelbrock Performer is a good one.
Basically the same as your stock cast iron. That way the use of the factory Thermoquad can be retained.If you still run one.
If I remember the stock cast intake weighs 51 lbs. Heavy indeed.
Anyway if you plan on more power and higher RPM driving ,the Performer RPM . But it is not a spread bore so a different carb or a spread bore adapter
may be needed. Watch out for air cleaner to hood clearance .
Basically the same as your stock cast iron. That way the use of the factory Thermoquad can be retained.If you still run one.
If I remember the stock cast intake weighs 51 lbs. Heavy indeed.
Anyway if you plan on more power and higher RPM driving ,the Performer RPM . But it is not a spread bore so a different carb or a spread bore adapter
may be needed. Watch out for air cleaner to hood clearance .
I agree with Darter6 it may turn out to replacing a bunch of parts. Not just your intake.
Curiousyellow71
Well-Known Member
496 polara
Well-Known Member
Big thing is if you are running a thermoquad you need a spread bore intake. Edelbrock Performer may be the easiest to find. Make sure the ports are opened up fully to match your heads.
Ron_M
Well-Known Member
Nothing says I've got nostalgia, period aftermarket correctness, direct connection recommended and coolness more than an Edelbrock LD340. I'd seek out one of those, just gotta be patient. There was a DC bulletin on modifying so that you could run the TQ. You might get lucky and find one already done.
That would definitely up the "wow" factor.
That would definitely up the "wow" factor.
451Mopar
Well-Known Member
The Edelbrock Performer is pretty good for stock to mild engines, but the ports need to be gasket matched for a 340/360 as they neck down to 318 size near the gasket area.
On the one I have, the EGR / emission version, the ports are pretty much 340/360 size except about 1/2" (maybe a bit more) from the gasket, so gasket matching was pretty easy.
The Edelbrock RPM is a good choice if doing a performance build, or just want to run a square flange carb.
On the one I have, the EGR / emission version, the ports are pretty much 340/360 size except about 1/2" (maybe a bit more) from the gasket, so gasket matching was pretty easy.
The Edelbrock RPM is a good choice if doing a performance build, or just want to run a square flange carb.
451Mopar
Well-Known Member
I was surprised to see the regular performer out flowed the RPM version?
Runcharger
Well-Known Member
It's always surprising to see just how good the stock and the LD340 are. I street raced a solid lifter 69 Cuda 340 back in the day with tin valvecovers and a spacer on a stock intake. Got lots of races with it and won them all. It was a money maker.
- Local time
- 2:12 AM
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2013
- Messages
- 601
- Reaction score
- 686
- Location
- West Central Indiana
I did a lot of research last year on SMB intakes for a friend's Valiant. He wanted to maintain the choke on the AVS carb, so he wanted the choke well on the intake.
However for pure balance in the rummers the Performer RPM wins hands down and it weighs 23 pounds less than an OEM iron intake does.
When ran on a dyno the Performer RPM had a lot better horsepower and torque throughout the rpm range than most. Definitely a great intake to consider.
Tom
However for pure balance in the rummers the Performer RPM wins hands down and it weighs 23 pounds less than an OEM iron intake does.
When ran on a dyno the Performer RPM had a lot better horsepower and torque throughout the rpm range than most. Definitely a great intake to consider.
Tom
- Local time
- 2:12 AM
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2009
- Messages
- 19,733
- Reaction score
- 39,199
- Location
- State of insanity
Perhaps additional info on the car/engine, and it's intended use may be beneficial. If your engine is stock, I'm not sure you'd benefit much on a low-compression engine. If that's the only modification done or will do.
496 polara
Well-Known Member
You say valve work,what are you doing to it?
lemondana
Well-Known Member
Use what you have, unless you're racing for world record. Does the extra weight really matter? HELL NO! When you use the factory stuff everything fits. Spend your money elsewhere. For a street driven car, it's hard to beat the factory Thermoquad setup. I've been using them for 45 years, I won't use anything else!
Curiousyellow71
Well-Known Member
I was surprised how well the performer did in that. But, I guess there is more going on then just flow. Our first experience with a LA Edelbrock performer was when I was in high school. We learned of the port size the hard way when we pulled the 2 barrel off our 318 and 340 performer intake we had bought had much bigger ports. But, we preceded and installed the performer intake anyway. But, it ran great. We later replaced the performer w a smaller 273-318 port 4 barrel intake and it was a downgrade...the performer ran better. Even with the ports unmatched.
Last edited:
BeepBeepRR
Well-Known Member
Rangepony
Active Member
It runs pretty good....I discovered some broken and cracked vacuum lines so it should be better when I get it back together. I like stock as well....I might need two or three guys to come help me lift it back in place!
Rangepony
Active Member
Just a stock valve job....no real performance upgrades.....Stock is good with me as I just want to cruise
Similar threads
