MY_2K_Z

iTrader: (1)

http://m.ebay.com/itm/SHEET-METAL-INTAKE-MANIFOLD-TIG-WELDED-ALUMINUM-W-FUEL-RAILS-LS1-LS2-/111817394004?nav=SEARCH
It's a short version designed to fit under the cowl of 4th gens. Also says it's been revised with thicker material.
Just wondering if anyone had tried one out yet.
Tall vs. short

sbcgenII

iTrader: (1)

That's the same prescion metal craft intake people have been knocking off for years. Holley sells it to now. Far from new. Multiple posts about that intake in this section.

MY_2K_Z

iTrader: (1)

No it's not. It's a shorter version of it

sbcgenII

iTrader: (1)

Okay shorter than the Holley still a PMC knock off.

MY_2K_Z

iTrader: (1)

See the difference in heights between the original China intake and the new shorter version
One is 9" tall the new one is 6"

The Alchemist

iTrader: (19)

So that will make it ever worse than the 9" version unless you're building a motor that spins to 8000rpm. It's going to be a slug below 6000rpm.

Shorter runners are great for making top end power, but kill low end. Sure, if you had a DOHC motor that was still pulling up to 8500rpm, you'd want to use a shorter runner intake manifold. Or in a drag car setup, where you're stall flashes to 5500rpm, and you shift at 7500, ok, this might give you some benefit.

aknovaman

iTrader: (7)

It really can't be that be as bad as some describe. Look at the short 94-97 LT1 intake runner length and it s not a slouch below 5,000 rpm. It's just not the idea length and design.

Is it worth $500, unlikely. Does it look cool, yes. Does it perform well, only a direct dyno comparison would tell across a wide rpm.

The Alchemist

iTrader: (19)

This has been beaten to death. On an LS motor, a short runner intake loses power below 5000 rpm dramatically every single time. Do a search for the intake shootout this past year.

JoeNova

The 9" tall version made less power and torque everywhere from idle to the stock LS1 rev limiter compared to the old style truck intake. The 6" version is just going to push that power loss higher into the RPM range before it starts to gain anything.

transam69230

iTrader: (49)

I have no issues with my shorty intake from PMC, check sig for power numbers and ET.

JoeNova

Your logic is invalid.
"I ran mid 8s on a sheet metal intake so they must be good".
What about the guys who have ran 7s on the stock plastic intakes?
Or what about the stock bottom end guys running quicker than you on a junkyard engine?

Unless you have a back to back comparison, you can't claim something is good just because it keeps up with the rest of your combo.

The Alchemist

iTrader: (19)

What if you were to pick up a ton of power down low, and ran 0.5 second quicker with a better intake?

MY_2K_Z

iTrader: (1)

I didn't mean to start a debate about wether it would make power. Just wondered if anyone else had noticed it. When browsing through eBay it looks just like all the rest unless you notice it's not much taller than the fuel rails.

gols1go

iTrader: (4)

You guys have me curious. Not in any way saying that the data did not show the 9" intake to be a at lower rpm, but what is the deal with the Holley high ram and Edlebrock. It has short runners too, right? There are tons of individuals running them on street driven, lower rpm based vehicles and love them. Not saying that there isn't a better option for those setup's either other than the Holley or Eldebrock..........but I am curious as to why this is the case.

Thoughts????

The Holley Hi-Ram


Holley dimensions; runners just shy of 9" from base of plenum(highest point of runner) to valley(lowest point of runner)


Holley runner design


Edlebrock ProFlow


Edlebrock dimensions; runners even shorter as the valley to top of plenum height equals only 9.54"

alocker

iTrader: (10)

It might be a better option for those with hood clearance issues. Just know you are basically buying it for looks and there's nothing wrong with that.

stevieturbo

And in the same test everyone refers to, they too made worse power pretty much everywhere below 6000rpm than any of the other intakes, including stock LS1

Whether 20-30hp below 6k matters or not tom most, probably not. In some cases it was more, in others less. But the big intakes did seem to shine most above 6500rpm...ironically where most LS users stop revving their engines lol.

Now I'm sure cam choice, head choice etc etc will all impact those power/torque curves too, but it was still a good test overall and for me really did highlight just how good the OEM style long runner intake work, especially the aftermarket versions of them

Only downside with FAST and some plastic intakes are peoples concern about them handling boost. Although I think they are all old concerns, not so much valid now ?

But if you like an intake based on looks or fitment, just go for it. Any LS engine will make shitloads of power with virtually any intake on it, some will just be more efficient than others in certain areas.

transam69230

iTrader: (49)

Probably would pick up some power, but it holds 26lbs of boost so far, fits under the stock cowl with wipers, and hasn't exploded or caused me a single issue.

DavidBoren

Transam69230, that is legit, your car is no slouch. Damn.

If this little sheetmetal intake fits under the 4th gen factory cowl, and holds 25psi/supports 1300rwhp, then I think it is a pretty slick choice given the absurd price of LS6 intakes these days.

stevieturbo

In general it does look quite nice, but those fuel rail brackets look like dangerous pieces of ****.

TrendSetter

they are ok with loctite