Edelbrock intake...
10-19-2007, 06:10 PM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edelbrock intake... hey boys and girls!
I've got my LT1 at one of the best machine shops (by reputation) and he recomended I buy the Edelbrock 7107 intake for my Vet LT1 383. He got the heads to flow 270 and thinks if I buy the 7107, and he does some work to it, I will get some pretty sick results. I called one of the companies and guy told me to think about the 7109 intake (LT4) because it will flow a little better. I have already sunk a rediculous amount of money into this car so the price difference doesn't scare me, I just want to know if
A. Did the guy know what he was talking about? Will the Edelbrock LT4 intake machined give me better results than the Edelbrock LT1 intake machined?
B. How significant of a difference is there? If I will have a gain, but by .01% then its not worth it to me.
- Mike
I've got my LT1 at one of the best machine shops (by reputation) and he recomended I buy the Edelbrock 7107 intake for my Vet LT1 383. He got the heads to flow 270 and thinks if I buy the 7107, and he does some work to it, I will get some pretty sick results. I called one of the companies and guy told me to think about the 7109 intake (LT4) because it will flow a little better. I have already sunk a rediculous amount of money into this car so the price difference doesn't scare me, I just want to know if
A. Did the guy know what he was talking about? Will the Edelbrock LT4 intake machined give me better results than the Edelbrock LT1 intake machined?
B. How significant of a difference is there? If I will have a gain, but by .01% then its not worth it to me.
- Mike
10-19-2007, 06:37 PM
#4
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well my engine guy straight up told me he has never used one but has heard good things about them. What should I recommened to him? Port the stock one or "get a single plane" (don't have any idea what that means).
- Mike
- Mike
10-19-2007, 07:52 PM
#7
Just use the stocker, have him port it if you want but do not even consider a single plane and the Edelbrock from the little testing we have seen is a disappointment.
A lot of people say a lot of things and many of them rely on marketing to get that info.
A lot of people say a lot of things and many of them rely on marketing to get that info.
Trending Topics
10-19-2007, 07:57 PM
#8
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all MR. 96 Carpicemgr You drive my 2 favorite cars! haha I have always wanted to tub out a 96 wagon. Anyways, thats a pretty straight forward answer you gave me, and from the sounds of it, everyone thinks to 4-500 dollar price tag on it is over priced by 4-500 $. haha Thanks everyone
10-19-2007, 08:05 PM
#9
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Decatur, TN (N-W of Athens)
Posts: 7,564
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
NO one knows about how the Edel performs, so that's why everyone says it's junk. I still have an open mind about it. I say go for it, and let us know. The testing we have seen, is thrown out the window due to being done improperly.
I won't deny that a single plane intake is a nice way to go, but it'll probably be more
Just like running a sheet metal is awesome, but pricey.
I won't deny that a single plane intake is a nice way to go, but it'll probably be more
Just like running a sheet metal is awesome, but pricey.
10-19-2007, 09:43 PM
#11
Banned
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 1,292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That Edelbrock LT1 Performer intake was tested against a stock intake with back to back dyno runs on a 380rwhp car, and it make 5rwhp and 12wtq over the stocker.
I wouldn't pay more then $150 for one of those.
10-19-2007, 10:14 PM
#12
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Decatur, TN (N-W of Athens)
Posts: 7,564
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Well, you keep you open mind about it and I will stick with what I saw, and the facts.
That Edelbrock LT1 Performer intake was tested against a stock intake with back to back dyno runs on a 380rwhp car, and it make 5rwhp and 12wtq over the stocker.
I wouldn't pay more then $150 for one of those.
That Edelbrock LT1 Performer intake was tested against a stock intake with back to back dyno runs on a 380rwhp car, and it make 5rwhp and 12wtq over the stocker.
I wouldn't pay more then $150 for one of those.
Originally Posted by 96capricemgr
The one admittedly less then perfect test we have found 5rwhp on a 370rwhp car. Take the $400+ and sink it into a stock manifold and you would be further ahead.
10-19-2007, 10:15 PM
#13
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im interested in seeing how an edel that is ported performs side by side with a ported stocker
for what we know the stock edel is better albeit for 5hp than the non ported stocker
for what we know the stock edel is better albeit for 5hp than the non ported stocker
10-19-2007, 10:42 PM
#15
You mean the one where he posted it only gained 5rwhp on back to back dyno runs? If you think this intake is so good why don't you spend $400 on it and run it on the dyno with back to back runs. Hell when I put on my ported LE intake manifold I lost 9rwhp on one dyno and 4rwhp on another dyno over the stocker so I'm not even convinced the stock one is that restrictive. There's an AI car that trapped 125mph with a stock unported intake manifold in a 3660 lb hydrolic roller 355.
10-20-2007, 12:56 AM
#16
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Decatur, TN (N-W of Athens)
Posts: 7,564
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
You mean the one where he posted it only gained 5rwhp on back to back dyno runs? If you think this intake is so good why don't you spend $400 on it and run it on the dyno with back to back runs. Hell when I put on my ported LE intake manifold I lost 9rwhp on one dyno and 4rwhp on another dyno over the stocker so I'm not even convinced the stock one is that restrictive. There's an AI car that trapped 125mph with a stock unported intake manifold in a 3660 lb hydrolic roller 355.
You can always go fast if the rest of the components are there to do it. I bet if he got his stuff ported and a bitter TB he'd go even faster.
10-20-2007, 01:05 AM
#18
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Decatur, TN (N-W of Athens)
Posts: 7,564
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
If you know this person in real life then, get a copy of his slips.
I don't mean to come across like an ***, but everyone's shooting something down that hasn't even gotten a fair chance to prove itself. And I think it's because Edel makes it.
10-20-2007, 08:03 AM
#19
The fact that Edelbrock's heads and cam package with a swap to 1 3/4" headers noted in the fine print gains only 76rwhp according to their own marketing department making it 396FWhp is another strong case for why we should not trust in them based solely on name like you and so many other want too.
Remember too that a decade ago they tried and admitted failure on developing an LT1 intake as did Lingenfelter.
My opinion and I think most objective people will see a good bit of logic in it is that Edelbrock made very nice stuff when OEMs made crap(performance wise) with the LT1 and newer stuff OEMs have left substantially less room for simple as cast improvement. A decade ago Edelbrock had the integrity to admit failure, but then as the LT4 intakes were discontinued and the old carbed stuff they have good products for is a smaller and smaller part of the market they trade a little integrity for some sales.
Bet for the price of the Edelbrock you could get a LT1 intake welded and machined so it could be ported out like an LT4 intake has material for. Meaning there is not so much of a "need" even for the LT4 intake. Then again there would have been plenty of LT4 intakes if people weren't so stupid as to ASSume it was better and wack the material off them to fit LT4 heads.
Remember too that a decade ago they tried and admitted failure on developing an LT1 intake as did Lingenfelter.
My opinion and I think most objective people will see a good bit of logic in it is that Edelbrock made very nice stuff when OEMs made crap(performance wise) with the LT1 and newer stuff OEMs have left substantially less room for simple as cast improvement. A decade ago Edelbrock had the integrity to admit failure, but then as the LT4 intakes were discontinued and the old carbed stuff they have good products for is a smaller and smaller part of the market they trade a little integrity for some sales.
Bet for the price of the Edelbrock you could get a LT1 intake welded and machined so it could be ported out like an LT4 intake has material for. Meaning there is not so much of a "need" even for the LT4 intake. Then again there would have been plenty of LT4 intakes if people weren't so stupid as to ASSume it was better and wack the material off them to fit LT4 heads.
10-20-2007, 08:37 AM
#20
Seems I need to clear some things up since I was the guy who posted the 5rwhp & 12rwtq guy and some of the "facts" I am hearing are wrong.
I knew what I was doing was not a perfect test by any means but I posted the results regardless just because I have seen nothing else to date.
The car was dyno'd on two different days with two different dyno's. NOT BACK TO BACK. The "Baseline" dyno was Cartek's dynojet and the final was at Harris Speed Works dyno.
I also forgot to mention that the one other major change to the car was the addition of my heavier 18" Chrome TT's over my stock chrome 16's. Engine wise, the motor only had the intake swapped but I would imagine that the greater weight of the new wheels certainly hurt my power numbers. I wouldn't be surprised if I threw the stock 16's back on that my power numbers would improve.
So again, in my original post, I explained everything that I was doing and admitted the test wasn't perfect but as we see here, my numbers may still be on the conservative side .
All I know is my intake manifold leak is gone, I got a few more HP & TQ and it's something I can always have ported along with my heads to exceed the ported flow of a LT4 intake.
-Brian
I knew what I was doing was not a perfect test by any means but I posted the results regardless just because I have seen nothing else to date.
The car was dyno'd on two different days with two different dyno's. NOT BACK TO BACK. The "Baseline" dyno was Cartek's dynojet and the final was at Harris Speed Works dyno.
I also forgot to mention that the one other major change to the car was the addition of my heavier 18" Chrome TT's over my stock chrome 16's. Engine wise, the motor only had the intake swapped but I would imagine that the greater weight of the new wheels certainly hurt my power numbers. I wouldn't be surprised if I threw the stock 16's back on that my power numbers would improve.
So again, in my original post, I explained everything that I was doing and admitted the test wasn't perfect but as we see here, my numbers may still be on the conservative side .
All I know is my intake manifold leak is gone, I got a few more HP & TQ and it's something I can always have ported along with my heads to exceed the ported flow of a LT4 intake.
-Brian