aftermarket 5.0 4V intake with EGR?

[Saturn V]

The only aftermarket 5.0 4V intake manifold that I can find with EGR provisions is the Edelbrock Performer 302 (p/n 3721). Are there any real performance gains with the Edelbrock 3721 over the factory intake?

Were any other aftermarket intakes made that included provisions for EGR?

[bwguardian]

The advantage to an aftermarket intake is going to be larger intake ports...for the most part. If the heads utilized don't additionally have larger intake ports...like the stock type heads on 82-86 Mustangs...then there will be little gain. There have been a couple of guys on this site in the Cali area that have taken the stock intake and ported it so as to retain the EGR system. I know MARZ is/was running one on his 331.

[Saturn V]

Yes, would definitely upgrade the heads with the intake. It's starting to look like there were no "large port" intakes made with EGR.

[Marz]

Between the Stock 4bbl intake and the Edelbrock EGR the runners are slightly different. The Edelbrock runners are larger. But, the stock 4bbl intake can be improved by porting.

[8ballEinstein]

The Edelbrock Performer is an excellent choice. I've done the port measurements and found a difference of 18% volume increase over stock. I took mine and ported it an extra mm in each dimension since I was coupling it with GT40 heads.

People get the idea this intake is just like stock because it's listed as "stock replacement".

[Saturn V]

Thanks for comments above.

[JACook]

Nearly every intake has smaller port openings than even the stock cylinder heads. That's not
a bad thing. Don't fall into the trap that the intake ports have to match the cylinder head
ports. As long as there are no disruptions in the direction of flow, it can be beneficial to have
a step in the direction opposite flow, and the smaller intake manifold ports will promote torque.

The problem with the stock intake port has little if anything to do with the size of the ports at
the manifold face, but rather, the shape of the area behind the valves. But the real problem is
on the exhaust side, and the huge (for a 5.0) chambers.

The Edelbrock 3721 will make a worthwhile difference at the upper end of the tach, without
killing the lower end of the torque curve. Bigger is not necessarily better.

[mustangracer84]

I have a older holley "street dominator", which is now labeled as a Wieand "X-Celerator", and my old holley intake has an egr port for it. I have ran with it plugged off, but it is a single plane, high velocity intake, and it has made some great power with both e7's and gt40p's, much better performance than a "performer".

[Saturn V]

Nearly every intake has smaller port openings than even the stock cylinder heads. That's not
a bad thing. Don't fall into the trap that the intake ports have to match the cylinder head
ports. As long as there are no disruptions in the direction of flow, it can be beneficial to have
a step in the direction opposite flow, and the smaller intake manifold ports will promote torque.

The problem with the stock intake port has little if anything to do with the size of the ports at
the manifold face, but rather, the shape of the area behind the valves. But the real problem is
on the exhaust side, and the huge (for a 5.0) chambers.

The Edelbrock 3721 will make a worthwhile difference at the upper end of the tach, without
killing the lower end of the torque curve. Bigger is not necessarily better.

OK, thanks. Perhaps I should have shared more about my plans for a different intake. I've been thinking about putting some AFR 165 heads (p/n 1472, 60cc chambers) on my stock 84 engine since these have an E.O. number. I assumed that the stock intake manifold would be too much of a restriction to really take advantage of the better heads. My goal is to stay emissions legal, even though practically it doesn't matter here in Texas (no sniff on car this old and the inspection techs are so bewildered by a carbed engine). I've found a Crane flat tappet cam (H-272-2) with an E.O. number and then there are the JBA 1621 headers. Will the 3721 intake be good enough for the AFR heads? Or would I be wasting money on the heads (I'm planning to find some used) with this combo?

The only emissions legal carb I can find is the factory carb (or the 80163 service replacement, which I have). I assume that to properly tune the above combo I'd need to rejet the carb, but that is probably considered emissions tampering. I believe that the idle mixture screws are accessible on the 80163, so I assume these can be adjusted per Ford service procedures to smooth the idle (and not be considered tampering). Would the engine run too lean with factory jetting and the above combo? Can the carb be tuned with the above combo and still keep it "emissions legal"?.

Does the combo above even make sense? Is 400 HP at the flywheel a realistic goal?

I have a older holley "street dominator", which is now labeled as a Wieand "X-Celerator", and my old holley intake has an egr port for it. I have ran with it plugged off, but it is a single plane, high velocity intake, and it has made some great power with both e7's and gt40p's, much better performance than a "performer".

A single plane intake with EGR port? Is the EGR port in the carb flange, like on the stock intake? I wasn't able to find a Weiand new with EGR, though I only searched online a few minutes.

[JACook]

The old Holley Street Dominators came in at least a couple different versions. One was a divided
single-plane with an EGR valve pad on the rear of the intake, the other one I had was a dual
plane that did not have the EGR pad, but could be drilled to use the factory plate. Both had
small runners, and neither were particularly good intakes.

The single-plane EGR one had an EO number though, and the modified dual-plane looked enough
like stock no one ever questioned it.

The factory 4180c can not only be tuned to work with your combination, it will probably work
better than whatever you might choose to replace it with. Even though rejetting might technically
be considered tampering, no one is going to pull your fuel bowls off to check, and anymore, I don't
think you'll find a smog tech anywhere that cares if the idle mixture screw plugs are missing.

[mustangracer84]

The old Holley Street Dominators came in at least a couple different versions. One was a divided
single-plane with an EGR valve pad on the rear of the intake... Both had
small runners, and neither were particularly good intakes.

The single-plane EGR one had an EO number though...

I agree and disagree with you at the same time, as that is the one I have ran myself. I completely agree, any performer rpm airgap, or better will out perform it. But of all the smog legal carb intakes, I'd take this one over them. Agreed, the ports are smaller than most of the other non-smog, performance intakes, however If you or you know someone who knows how to weld aluminum, it wouldn't be too difficult to do some serious modifications to the intake where nobody would see unless they pulled the intake off. That old Holley intake was on my 302 with a trick flow stage 1 cam and 1.72 rockers, stock gt40p heads, equal length shorties, w/a $50 ebay distributor, and a crappy tune still kicked out 273 hp. Which was a lot better than my stock '84 intake.

[Saturn V]

I agree and disagree with you at the same time, as that is the one I have ran myself. I completely agree, any performer rpm airgap, or better will out perform it. But of all the smog legal carb intakes, I'd take this one over them. Agreed, the ports are smaller than most of the other non-smog, performance intakes, however If you or you know someone who knows how to weld aluminum, it wouldn't be too difficult to do some serious modifications to the intake where nobody would see unless they pulled the intake off. That old Holley intake was on my 302 with a trick flow stage 1 cam and 1.72 rockers, stock gt40p heads, equal length shorties, w/a $50 ebay distributor, and a crappy tune still kicked out 273 hp. Which was a lot better than my stock '84 intake.

COLD sold this one last year, and like JACook mentioned, it does look like you could drill a hole for EGR in the stock location on the carb flange. mustangracer, do you have a pic of the single plane intake with EGR?

[todd900ss]

The problem with the stock intake port has little if anything to do with the size of the ports at
the manifold face, but rather, the shape of the area behind the valves. But the real problem is on the exhaust side, and the huge (for a 5.0) chambers.

Are you saying the size of the exhaust ports or combustion chambers? Both?

[BaconB8]

I think great performance can be had with the emission legal parts that are available. People don't usually go this route because there are other easier ways. Great flowing heads, a modest cam like a stock hydraulic roller, more compression, and a proper dyno tuning session are all it will take to make your car beat other more expensive rides.

I think its cool you're doing it this way, even though you could do it easier.

[JACook]

Are you saying the size of the exhaust ports or combustion chambers? Both?

Both. Small, pinched exhaust ports, and large inefficient combustion chambers.

[xctasy]

COLD sold this one last year, and like JACook mentioned, it does look like you could drill a hole for EGR in the stock location on the carb flange. mustangracer, do you have a pic of the single plane intake with EGR?

What makes it so hard is the early EO order system wasn't something CARB or the BAR saw eye to eye on, so the early EO versions are prized.

Nowdays, SEMA is very carefull to avoid problems, so everything is strictly 'off road use"



Holley had some major issues with the 4010/4011 capable Street Dominators in and about 1988, and a 4-bbl replacment manifold wasn't a legal upgrade, so the EO number became invalid. Roughly 95% of all 302 and 5.0's were 2-bbl engines, the 4V 83-85's were rareatiescompared with total Smog 302 production from 1968 to 2001.

The common versions were Holley Street Dominator PN #300-70 with the runner "water cross-over" in back. EO Approved





Another was the non rear water cross over PN #300-61. EGR capable, EO







Now, they are sold as dual plane PN #300-39. No EGR, off road.



There were 351 W versions, not EO approved.

[Hemlock]

Wow this is an old thread!

I used the Edelbrock Performer EGR Manifold on my first "smog legal' 347 build back in 2007, I used it in conjunction with Edelbrock EGR Performer aluminum heads, E303 cam, factory carb, factory 85 headers and upgraded MSD ignition system. It made 300 RWHP and ran really well. No where near 400 flywheel HP unfortunately, more like around 340 HP. It also would not pass smog with that configuration either without major tweaking during the test. After my oil pump broke on that motor I totally changed my build.

The bottom line is you need to pick one goal or the other with the old push rod 302's, "Smog Legal" or "Muscle Motor", you can't have both unless you go with a modern power plant like a Coyote 5.0. The Coyote motor in stock configuration is a 430 HP motor out of the box and it will pass smog with no problems. The conversion will cost you around $8,000-$9,000 if you do it right. This is a build I am currently considering.

Robert

[JACook]

Since this has already been revived...

I have both versions of that Holley Street Dominator EGR intake on my shelf. Neither one of them ran as good
as a stock '85 HO intake, let alone the 3721 Performer. I'm still running the 3721 on my '85 hatch, still happy
with the way it runs.

[qikgts]

I have both versions of that Holley Street Dominator EGR intake on my shelf. Neither one of them ran as good
as a stock '85 HO intake

What were the combo's Mr. Cook?

[erratic50]

My personal experience with the stock 85 4-barrel is that they will choke the engine at around 5500. Swapping to headers would get you to 5600. Swapping intakes gets you to 6000. 1.7:1 rockers will help to 6100-6300 ish. That's an extra 800 RPM of usable power out of a stock longblock, and around 40 ponies gained with as much gain in torque too.

Not to mention they are one hell of a lot more fun to drive.

Very similar results from the 86 with the "terrible" E6 heads too.

For every 800 RPM gained in 1st, how many more R's will there be in 2nd at the shift...... avoid a flat spot and come in within a few hundred RPm of peak torque headed to peak HP. Huge difference seat of the pants.

In most instances, so worth it. I run 0-60 in 1st in my T5Z equipped 86. Around 87 in 2nd... (speedometer buried, lol). 3rd is WAY more fun shifting in and still running 4K pulling for its life.

[xctasy]

What were the combo's Mr. Cook?

'85 GT Hatch, 5-speed T-Top, Eibachs, Konis, & ARE 5-Spokes ... '85 GT Vert, CFI/AOD, all factory...

except for
the #3721 Edelbrock,
2-bbl EGR adaptor,
JBA headers and
cat back 86 exhaust, IIRC.


The scary part was the variations required to get 2 and 4-bbl carb cars to fly through the Fed Sniffer test.

1. Even the 351 Windsor Street Dominator had two different intake runner configuration's.

2. The four variations of the Holley Street Dominator 5.0 4BBL versions mast have made it "a little bit hard" for a EO approved code number track and trace.

3. As Ford found out, Sequentail or even Bank Fire multiple Port EFi made the control of the TAB/TAD circuits the same as all the 1978 EECI to 1984 EECVI engines. The 157 to 210 hp carb HO's passed emissions with the four corner idle and its two stage power valve and a myriad of pre EECI emission devices and Load Control Valves and bowl vent control systems.

The HO 5.0 EFi "℞" Federal Detox prescription were a heck of a lot simpler than the 1982 to 1985 Carb 5.0 RS Capris and GT Mustang 5.0's

It's interesting that to get it to pass the sniffer test, the Port EFi ended up having to use four cataylsts instead of either the two versions 1982 2V or 1983-1985 4V HO (passenger side Primary light off, long bed behind transmission).

The 1980-1985 CFi only needed one...

4. To conclusviely pass the tests, 50000 mile durablity and Emissions EO's are required for every different part. The carb has to be EO logged, or you can't use it. The gain full EO compliance, new combination has to pass a three tier zero emissions test, specfic to

the engine year,
carb figuration,
State,
transmission
and axle ratio range specification.

Stock,
then with the modifications.

These must show no increase in four gas emissions at any part in the 7 mile LA Basin FTP 75 test. Ovenight hydrocarbons leaching, purge cylce. Cold cycle, lght off, and over the road loads which of EECIV vehciles are montiored by open and closed loop "Stoich" narrow band O2 sensor.

If the tests show any MPG or emission compliance chage from stock that is greater, the whole tests must be reconducted untill they pass to gain compliance.


Good luck with that.....

The new 1987 onwards Holley 4010, and 4011 weren't ever EO approved, only the 4180C over the counter replacement.

The 4150/4160, never, and the Spreadbore 4165/4175 were canned early on, the little 4-bbl mechanical secondary 430 cfm 4360 was never sold in the volume Holley expected.


The very good GM Rochester Quadrajet on the 1970 and 1971 Lima 385 429 V-8 a two year only deal, and then Ford blundered through with the 600 and 715 cfm Spreadbore Autolite and Motorcraft 4350G's for seven long years, and a huge crutch of expensive detail changes before it too bit the dust in 1978.

The very smart Carter Thermoquad TQ 9600/9800's bit the dust in 1985.


As we saw from jayhawk261 1985 Mustang GT Paxton Supercharger kit,

http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthre...985-Mustang-GT











One version of the 5.0 SBF 4-BBL Offenhauser Dualport 360 was EO certified, but there was no way even Saleen and Paxton could get the SN 89 blower to pass any of the EO requirements untill the advent of Port EFi.



Feedback Open and Closed loop narrow band O2 sensors
TAD/TAB control of the one large EGR valve
and the Purge cylce control without float bowls to ruin the evaopertive emissions,

they were the true master stroke of true feedback EEC port injected Fords.



Que the hourly rate of the tripled glassed Professor Brane Stawm

HDYMTPOSW= How Did You Make This P.O.S Work....

[BaconB8]

Fun thread from way back.

Since my reply in 2012, I built an emission passing 85 using the Eddy performer egr, and made 280/320 to the tires with a stock cam. Its a .030 302 as well, so no stroker. The car passes with a 4180c, but dyno'd with a 1850. The dyno session was with an offroad-h as well.

The car looks and sounds stock.

[JACook]

My personal experience with the stock 85 4-barrel is that they will choke the engine at around 5500. Swapping to headers would get you to 5600. Swapping intakes gets you to 6000. 1.7:1 rockers will help to 6100-6300 ish. That's an extra 800 RPM of usable power out of a stock longblock, and around 40 ponies gained with as much gain in torque too.

Not to mention they are one hell of a lot more fun to drive.

That's been my experience too, and I'll add that it pulls cleanly rolling into the throttle from around 1200 RPM.
Mine's got 1-5/8 JBA shorties feeding into a 4-cat Magnaflow X-pipe, then 2-1/2" duals all the way back to the
bumper, with 3-chamber Flowmasters under the back seat. Stock longblock, stock cam, 1.6 FMS Blue roller
rockers, 3.55s out back. Never an issue passing the emissions test every 2 years, even though that Magnaflow
X-pipe is technically not in spec for an '85. Most recent one was at a 'Red Sign' station. The guy only made me
change out the gas cap was all, 'cause the rubber seal was cracked a bit.

The car is set up for corner carving, so those 3.55s end up being more gear than the rear tires can handle. ;-)

And yeah, it's a blast to drive, and not fussy at all wading through traffic.

And Dean, the Hatch is not all stock, but the CFI 'Vert still is...

[xctasy]

.......

Que Australian comedian.


Q. How do you make a dog go meow?

A. Put it in the freezer for three days, then put it through a band saw......meooooooooooowwwwwwww.....