Hot Rods intake manifold for 283, air gap???

Im wondering if a rpm air gap is totally the wrong manifold for a 283 or will it do good?

 

I've got one on a 289 Ford and it works! Nice flat torque curve from 2700 to 5800, it's got plenty of cam.

 

I won't say it is "totally" wrong but there are others better suited for it, just not sure which as I haven't kept up on current intake manifold offerings.
I do have one on my warmed over 350 that I built many years ago and at the time Edelbrock offered both a standard performer and the RPM Air Gap version.

 

I think you'll be very happy with the rpm air gap, it continually proves itself in many dyno proven comparison tests.

 

If you're building a car that needs a 283 instead of a bigger motor, then the air gap will probably look out of place on the car. But that's just a wild guess.

 

In my opinion it is unnecessary, unless you have it sitting on your shelf an Edelbrock C3b or similar high rise manifold would be fine and they are cheap and plentiful.

Pat

 

Air gaps are not as good for mileage or drivability in cold weather if that’s important to you.

 

No heated crossover for warming up the fuel mixture. Here's where your LOCATION in you profile might help.
I am Butch/56sedandelivery.

 

How big is ur cam?

 

Around 250 degrees of duration @ .050, you know a nice little street cam...

 

Wow that's huge. I'm wanting to go 216-218 hyd roller

 

Agree with Squirrel, Moriarty and 1934 coupe-find a C3b or early L79 intake with oil fill tube

 

Heard tell with a 283, a 214 duration at .050 was about ideal for those engines. I am Butch/56sedandelivery.

 

Yep it's a bit snoty, the air gaps are a nice manifold and should work great for you. Not period correct but it will run nice. Mine will probably be changed out for a Victor.

 

Here's a quote from Super Chevy magazine

"Truth be told, any intake manifold that goes up against the Edelbrock Performer RPM Air Gap is likely to have quite the uphill battle. Tested time and time again, the impressive dual-plane intake has proven itself a powerful performer, offering not just impressive peak power but a veritable avalanche of mid-range torque."

 

nice to hear some positive reports, I am replacing my og 4 brl with an air gap. I am not concerned about period correct look as I won't be opening my hood for a show. I am a little concerned about cold weather driving but do so few miles in winter it really should not be an issue.

 

This is true, infact David Frieburger in one of his early dyno test shows did an Air Gap VS RPM test and the difference between the two was less than ten hp and five ftlbs across the board, not something that you will notice on the street.

I think the show on YouTube is Suck Squeeze Bang Blow
for real..

After much looking here it is!


The one thing that the dyno doesn't address is heat soak so I would plug the cross over under the carb if that was your concern.

 

Yup...An intake with a bit of heat will allow a leaner mixture and clean sharp throttle response in a mild tune engine...

 

Most 283 have a road draft tube and use a intake with a vent/fill tube.

You can vent a valve cover but one of the nice things of a 283 is the valve covers without breathers and pcv.

A nice edelbrock C3B will be the best bet.

 

With cam specs this conservative, a Performer or older equivalent, would work just fine.

 

Guys, this thread is 2 years old. Although this is very interesting stuff, I am guessing the OP probably made his decision by now….just saying.

 

My air gap on my 383 stroker works just fine no matter what the temperature is. I can't tell any difference with regard to cold weather operation at all. I chose it because my prior car had a heat soak vapor lock problem and I figured this would keep the carb cooler and perhaps avoid that situation. As it turns out, not so much... It still gets hot under the hood and heat soak is it continuing problem in hot weather.

 

I know but if someone searched this may helped

 

283 what? Stock, nope.

 

One of these days a guy requesting information on a manifold will actually tell what he is planning on doing with it.

“I’m building a 283” for my 37 Chev and plan on pleasure driving and to and from coffee/donut gatherings. I plan on it never seeing 3000 rpm; would a tunnel ram and two 850’s be a good choice?”

I like Freiburger and all his testing on TV but nothing he as ever done will help a cruising guy with exception of beating up headers and showing no change in hp. He’s only interested on 5000 rpm-up. I think he mentions torque to see if any one is listening.
Unless you are racing, all of this is BS. A 325-375” engine, A stock to mild RV cam with 6-8* advance, a heated intake, and 10-1 compression will get 99% of everyone here a happy responsive good mpg engine. To make you really happy will take 4.11 gears and an overdrive.

 

If I remember right, the Ford Y-blocks, the Chrysler hemi, the early Olds and Buicks were all air gap manifolds. Yet this is played up like the invention of the decade.

 

^^^^^^^^
He's not wrong......

 

Yeah, when they first came out for small block Chevies, one of my friends was gushing about how innovative they were, and I said, "Well, every Pontiac I've ever had had one....even the two barrels!".

 

The Y blocks had exhaust passages in the intake to heat it....Some of the others may also.....