tour,tore...pour, pore, poor.. I'm going crazy :)

Ok I'm going crazy over this merger thing..
I wanna sound American.. let's say GENERAL AMERICAN (even if I know there is no such thing anymore...). Anyway, what's the most common way of saying these words ( tore, tour, pore, pour,poor)? which are the homophones?
Please help me :)

Hi, I have found a nice website wich is http://www.merriam-webster.com/ on this website you can hear how words are pronounced

website *which* is

For me, Tore, pore, and pour rhyme. Tour and poor also rhyme... :)

(Do you know X-SAMPA? If not, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-SAMPA .)

My speech has been unaffected by the pour-poor merger, so I use what would be the traditional pronunciations for General American. I have:

tore - ["t_hO@`]
pour - ["p_hO@`]

tour - ["t_hU@`]
poor - ["p_hU@`]

But of course you could just look them up at dictionary.com.

As for how many Americans have the merger (to whatever extent) and how many don't? I honestly don't know. But you couldn't go wrong using the more conservative pronunciations.

(But I think British Received Pronunciation is a different story: from what I've read, the merged pronunciations have in some cases become so widespread that they've basically become standard, and the unmerged ones would sound stilted - for example with modern RP "poor" ["p_hO:].)

General American:

tore / tor\ /
tour / tur\ /
pore / por\ /
pour / por\ /
poor / por\ /

and it's "I want to sound American"
we don't really write 'wanna'

Don't Americans say too-er for tour?

<<Don't Americans say too-er for tour? >>

I don't.
I say it like tu:r

like the '-dure' of endure

I agree with this.

"tore / tor\ /
tour / tur\ /
pore / por\ /
pour / por\ /
poor / por\ / "

That is how I say them.

I myself have:

"tore" [ˈtʰɔːʁ] from /tor/
"tour" [ˈtʲʰʉ̯uːʁ] from /tur/
"pore" [ˈpʰɔːʁ] from /por/
"pour" [ˈpʰɔːʁ] from /por/
"poor" [ˈpʰuːʁ] from /pur/

I myself disagree with the idea that GA has /por/ for "poor", and rather would say that GA has /pur/ even though it is not uncommon for otherwise GA-like dialects to have /por/ for "poor".

cure [kj@r]
sure [S@r]
youre [j@r]

That set is less homogeneous for me. Going from most formal/careful to least formal/careful, I have:

"cure" [ˈkʰjuːʁ], [ˈkʰjʁ̩ː]
"sure" [ˈʃʲʉ̯uːʁ], [ˈʃʲʁ̩ː], [ˈtʃʲʰʁ̩ː]
"your" [ˈjɔːʁ], [ˈjʁ̩ː]

<<I myself disagree with the idea that GA has /por/ for "poor", and rather would say that GA has /pur/ even though it is not uncommon for otherwise GA-like dialects to have /por/ for "poor". >>

my grandmother, who was from the midwest, used to say 'poor' as /pur/,
along with 'door' /dur/, 'you're' /jur/, but that's not how most people say it. I was under the impression that this was due to prescriptivist tendencies (i.e. 'oo' = /u/) because I always noted she did it very consciously and stressed. she was from N. Missouri

Well, historically, in most English dialects "poor" was /puːr/ and "you're" was /juːr/. but "door" was /doːr/ because for some reason it was passed over in most cases with respect to the Great Vowel Shift.

Ok, thank you guys, you really helped me :)
I had these doubts because I've been talking a lot with a girl from New York lately, and she says poor and tour using the same vowel as in door, so I got a little confused.. I guess it's a New York thing.