bluethunder364

iTrader: (5)

Just spoke to Holley Tech and there LS3/L92 Dual plane is just around he corner for release. It can be ordered directly from them now. (part #300-129) Suggested price is $249.95. I have to call back Monday for more current info, but looks like we now have an alternative to the pricey GMPP DP. No disrespect to that quality part....just to darn expensive.

speedtigger

iTrader: (16)

That is really great news. NewSchool has had great success with his GMPP dual plane. A big thanx to Holley for bringing this to the table. I would bet Edelbrock will not be far behind.

ZONES89RS

iTrader: (25)

Wonder what takes the other companies so long to jump on board?

newschool72

iTrader: (12)

The old catch 22! If the GMPP dual plane isn't selling, why would Holley or eddy want to go through the trouble to design one? At the same time, us gear heads didn't want to pay GMPP prices for theirs. I wouldn't have paid GMPP price for one. The one I bought was NIB for 375.00 shipped from some one that bought it, then changed their mind. Im looking forward to seeing what can be done with the dual/rec head combo, now that more people will be trying it. I took a shot in the dark, based on D&As 408 build, with a cam profile and it is a true daily driver quality ground to ground missile !
Ive dropped almost 80lbs off the car so far since my last track trip, and have it set up for better weight transfer to hopefully drop the 60fts. A UDP for another 10 or so HP at the wheels and I will be all set to give it another try.
Anyone that's not looking to spin their LS3 headed, under 400cid engine above 7K rpms, I highly recommend a look at a dual plane setup.

bitterman

I did a little search and found this

http://www.holley.com/assets/images/...tml/page5.html

Would be nice for sure. I have the l92 Victor JR.. I bet for the street this would have nicer low end but I bet the track the single plane will win.

Bruce

newschool72

iTrader: (12)

That would depend on how you had the rest of the setup put together. Im confident mine would be slower in every way ,if I still had the Vic Jr on mine. It doesn't lay over all the way to 7K, but has plentiful low end torque to work with my 2800 stall and 3.42 gears. With a fat cam, low gears, and loose converter, the dual plane would be at a disadvantage because you would blow right by a lot of useable power before the converter would tighten up. Its all about the combo of parts, but very low 11s, possibly a 10.9x with a street converter and road gears is plenty of grunt for me, on top of great street manners. Even with the mild parts, it will embarrass a lot of cars that have the track goodies and terrible drive ability and mileage.

bitterman

Newschool been watching your ride ... nice work. I am hoping for low 11's also. I know for me the victor is better but if this dual plane was an option back when I started might have went with it to avoid the cowl hood. My EPS cam is 222/234 also so very mild...

Bruce

newschool72

iTrader: (12)

It wouldn't help, at least on the GMPP dualplane. Its only about a 1/4" shorter than the Vic Jr. Im running a 1/2" wood spacer too, so my intake setup is actually taller with the dual plane than it was with my Vic without a spacer. I looked at the link you posted, but didn't see where it said rectangular port intake. I doubt the dual plane for the LS3 heads will be shorter than a JR from any source. There is only so much you can do with ports that tall, when you stack them on top of each other, like a dual is configured. My low ports are flat ( maybe a 1/4" above the valley cover) and the high ports lay right on top of them. I don't see a way to make the intake lower than the GMPP design, unless the port size is compromised to bring the top ports down some. Its just a huge intake by necessity .

speedtigger

iTrader: (16)

Looks like there is a single plane and dual plane coming for both cathedral and square ports.

http://www.holley.com/assets/images/...ublication.pdf

newschool72

iTrader: (12)

From what I can tell from the link you put up ,Tigg, they must have taken a lot of metal out and tightened up the cross section of the LS3 intake. With a 5" and 6" ( front to rear) it should be a good 1" shorter than the GM design. A good thing for fitment, but I wonder at what price from a performance stand point. Maybe if Eddy and Holley get in the mix, Car Craft or someone will do a real comparison and show some #s. Andy at D&A has the only thing Ive seen, still. When the money starts flowing around this place after my back surgery, I am hoping to get some dyno #s on mine. The torque curve feels very flat and long, it will be nice to see it on paper ! LOL

topbrent

iTrader: (1)

Here is some of the info on the new Holley Dual Plane Intakes.
Nice to see some additional LS1/2/6 Cathedral and L92/LS3 Rectangle intake choices in the marketplace.

http://www.holley.com/assets/images/...s/page0005.pdf
http://www.holley.com/data/Products/...9R10689rev.pdf

GM LS Gen III & IV Dual-Plane Intake Manifold Kits
-#300-129 LS3 Dual-Plane Intake Manifold, Carbureted
-#300-130 LS1/2/6 Dual-Plane Intake Manifold, Carbureted
A-B Height (Carbureted or EFI): Same for both. All heights measure to the lifter valley cover flange on the engine block.
- LS3: #300-129 – A - 5.07” (front), B - 6.14” (rear).
- LS1/2/6: #300-130 – A - 5.07” (front), B - 6.14” (rear).
Port Size:
- LS3:#300-129 – 2.44” Height x 1.12” Wide
- LS1/2/6:#300-130 – 2.72” Height x 1.00” Wide
As-Cast Runner Cross-Sectional area
- Constant, 2.60 in².
– 3/32” Round Viton O-Rings (mounting gasket o-rings included with the intake manifold):
– Standard 4150 Carb Flangefor up to 1-3/4” diameter throttle bores

speedtigger

iTrader: (16)

The key thing in the ad for me is where it says: "Optimized runner layout for constant cross sectional area". That is where the Performer RPM falls short. If they get that right, it just may outperform the Victor Jr. cathedral port all the way to 6500.

newschool72

iTrader: (12)

I agree 100%. IMO, a properly built dual plane will out perform a single "in average power" in 9 out of 10 street combos. The added HP at the very top of the rev range a single plane gives is way out weighed by the added torque the dual will give. Like I said in a post above, a high stall (4000+) will need a single to give a useable power band up top, well, because you by pass thousands of useable rpms with the loose converter. An extra 30 ft lbs or more in the mid range will give up very little in actual strip performance to the extra 15-20HP the single gives. The kicker for me is the fun of pulling through the low and middle of a gear in part throttle cruising, vrs the sloppy reving of a loose converter. If you drive your car to amount to anything on the street, its worth the fun of a torque engine and a tight converter to give up "maybe" 2 or 3 tenths at the track to a car with a loose converter and an extra 10-15* of cam duration. I also think the rec port heads, because of the port size, needs the extra runner length to work well in all but WOT track duty. A big open plenum and a fat cam takes too much fun out of 80% of the driving you do with a street car. A 370-408 cid will run better all around with the added runner length, when using a head with huge 260+cc intake runners, IMO. On the smaller cubes, it takes a ton of RPM( and all the stuff that goes with that .. stall, gears) to really make the single shine with the LS3 heads.

bitterman

The more I look at it that Holley dual plain might fit my build better than the Victor Jr... Time will tell.... Mind you I have a 3400-3600 stall and 4.10 gears.. but the dual plane might move my torque down and launch the car even better.... hmmmmmmm and also accelerate better...

Going to keep an eye out on reports and testing on this intake!!!!

Bruce

The stunningman

iTrader: (47)

Having a part number and all, it seems this MAY hit the shelves before the edelbrock victor L92.

No really comparing the two but damn edelbrock is dragging there a$$ if holley beats them to the shelves with this.

bluethunder364

iTrader: (5)

I agree with your statement Newschool, as with most of us who did the earlier carb builds, the single GMMP intake was the only option...take it or leave it ....the good with the bad. My motor is only 370 cubes, and in my opinion has cylinder heads that are a little large for my displacement. But I chose them with the intent someday to continue with maybe more displacement. My other issue is having a street/street car that cracks the scales at 2900lbs. So with a 3600 converter and the single plane I can get a reasonable 60 ft time. As much as I want the dual plane to benefit from some low end grunt I am concerned now that I may have trouble hooking up at the track. (I just track for fun...no competition). I'm sure the car will run a little smoother with the dual plane....track another issue. Your thoughts....

MikeFSKSpeed

iTrader: (37)

Got a few of these on order!

newschool72

iTrader: (12)

With that much converter, the single might be a better choice, but IMO you are right on the edge with the 3600. I think a dual on LS3 headed, small cube engines will make as good or better power up to 6K, maybe further compared to a single plane. I don't think that's the case with the smaller volume cathedral port heads, that ,I believe will show the normal classic differences between the 2 intake styles ( stronger low end vrs upper rpm power). I have no doubt you will make a noticeable difference in torque at your stall speed with the dual, and should make it tougher to hook up. I don't know, 364, your stall might be better off with the single plane. It doesn't make any difference how much torque you make , if you cant hook it up.
I think the dual plane /smaller cube LS3 headed engines are a great setup, and are crazy fast for the mild drive train, IF you think mild on the converter and gears. If you are running a high stall, IMO, you are missing out on one of the main things that make the combo work so good in a driver. With deep gears and a loose stall, you have already kinda bought into the classic single plane setup "street/strip" build.

bluethunder364

iTrader: (5)

Thanks for your thoughts. I agree that this could end up with little or no benefit. Forgot to mention the 4.10 gears and my set-up spins to 7000+ rpm without a wimper.I think the new found low end torque will be nice on the street, but could be a problem at the track. I run 1.60 Ft times now (not great) with my GMPP single plane and current set-up. I am still on the fence and if the price comes in @$259.00 I may give it s try anyway. Only one way to find out

snook

iTrader: (1)

Chinese intakes are made much faster than american ones lol. You rike single or dual prane? Raughing out roud