Skip Navigation Links
Setup
New Post
Search
Forum Home
Home
Decoder

Original Message
Another opinion
By Ross - 12/17/2001 8:55:10 AM; IP 12.75.103.193
Without a doubt, Bob's right on the dual plane producing more torque. However, I still chose a P-sonic over the Edelbrock RPM for my Mustang. The reason why is that the FE makes so much torque already I wanted to shift the power up a little in a light Mustang. WIth a 250@.050 cam, ported heads w/2.15/1.73 valves, and Hooker Super comps, I still make so much torque that 1st gear is utterly useless if I just stand on it and thats with 3.50 gears right now.

My opinion is that either one is going to run good, but I elected to "over cam and overdo it on the intake" and the motor still doesnt care its making more low end than I need.

With that being said, a dual plane is a little easier to tune, holds a little more vacuum at idle and can run VERY strong, so the decision is yours, but if it were me, I'd run whichever you can get cheaper.

One thing to think about, for shock factor, the dual plane makes the motor look HUGE, the P-sonic doesnt seem to look as massive. I liked the way and Edelbrock F427 looked on mine, the P-sonic doesnt have that same look. I posted a link below to look at the P-sonic

http://members.aol.com/my427stang/myhomepage/engine4.jpg
This thread, so far...
Skip Navigation Links.
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=10074&Reply=10074><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<a href="#" id="anchor10074" onclick="return false;">Edelbrock RPM intake on 427?</a>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Joshua Carroll, <i>12/16/2001</i></font><script type="text/javascript"> new HelpBalloon({ dataURL: 'replyb.aspx?ID=10074', contentMargin: 60, icon: $('anchor10074') }); </script>  Edelbrock RPM intake on 427? -- Joshua Carroll, 12/16/2001
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=10075&Reply=10074><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<a href="#" id="anchor10075" onclick="return false;">RE: Edelbrock RPM intake on 427?</a>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Bob, <i>12/16/2001</i></font><script type="text/javascript"> new HelpBalloon({ dataURL: 'replyb.aspx?ID=10075', contentMargin: 60, icon: $('anchor10075') }); </script>  RE: Edelbrock RPM intake on 427? -- Bob, 12/16/2001
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=10077&Reply=10074><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<a href="#" id="anchor10077" onclick="return false;">Hey Bob, can you explain why...</a>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Jim, <i>12/17/2001</i></font><script type="text/javascript"> new HelpBalloon({ dataURL: 'replyb.aspx?ID=10077', contentMargin: 60, icon: $('anchor10077') }); </script>  Hey Bob, can you explain why... -- Jim, 12/17/2001
Collapse <a href=../ForumFE/reply.aspx?ID=10079&Reply=10074><img src=../images/reply.png width=30 height=10></a>&nbsp;<a href="#" id="anchor10079" onclick="return false;">RE: Hey Bob, can you explain why...</a>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Bob, <i>12/17/2001</i></font><script type="text/javascript"> new HelpBalloon({ dataURL: 'replyb.aspx?ID=10079', contentMargin: 60, icon: $('anchor10079') }); </script>  RE: Hey Bob, can you explain why... -- Bob, 12/17/2001
 RE: Hmmm, thanks! n/m -- Jim, 12/17/2001
 Higher air velocity on a dual plane... -- Dan Davis, 12/17/2001
 A dual plane is better at low RPM because... -- Dave Shoe, 12/17/2001
Collapse <b>Another opinion</b>&nbsp;-- <font color=#0000ff>Ross, <i>12/17/2001</i></font>Another opinion -- Ross, 12/17/2001
 RE:Edelbrock F427? -- Jim, 12/17/2001
 That's nice, but you missed a point! -- Rich Kutzner, 12/23/2001
Post A Response
Name:
Email Address:
Subject:
Post:
Upload Image:
Human Check:   Enter the code 2024135919 in the box