Holley Sniper intake review
04-14-2017, 02:54 AM
#81
9 Second Club
The Plenum on this ( and more so the bolt on lid version ) looks to be larger than the ProFlo and it always seems to produce good results up top. I always thought the ProFlo was tiny but it seemed to work well
04-14-2017, 08:59 AM
#82
I'm just happy it won't blow apart under boost like the fast and don't gotta cut up my cowl, I don't car about looks as much as function just don't want to cut up my car more then I got to for the turbo lol but as the only time my car will see street action is occasional cruises so living above 5k+ is okay with me. I'm just happy we're still getting new options on intake and parts in general that are still directed toward the 4th gen.
04-15-2017, 09:21 PM
#83
One thing that I would like to know is in the description on the intake it states that for use with stock ls heads aftermarket may result in port mis alignment, so I wonder if porting would be in order for this intake for someone using say AFR/TFS heads?
04-18-2017, 11:08 AM
#86
The mod motor seems to work very well with it since it is only 300" and doesn't need a lot of cross section. Larger engines such as the LS need more cross section if you really want max effort power production.
Of course anything will work, just how well is another story...
04-21-2017, 10:20 AM
#87
It does look to be larger in the plenum. Both IMO are inadequate for making 1000+rwhp in terms of runner cross section unless the engine is under 350" cubic inches. Are there people making more than 1000rwhp with the Pro Flo and this intake? I'm sure there are, and I don't want my post to come across that way. I feel there are better intakes out there though.
The mod motor seems to work very well with it since it is only 300" and doesn't need a lot of cross section. Larger engines such as the LS need more cross section if you really want max effort power production.
Of course anything will work, just how well is another story...
The mod motor seems to work very well with it since it is only 300" and doesn't need a lot of cross section. Larger engines such as the LS need more cross section if you really want max effort power production.
Of course anything will work, just how well is another story...
04-21-2017, 11:37 AM
#88
9 Second Club
It does look to be larger in the plenum. Both IMO are inadequate for making 1000+rwhp in terms of runner cross section unless the engine is under 350" cubic inches. Are there people making more than 1000rwhp with the Pro Flo and this intake? I'm sure there are, and I don't want my post to come across that way. I feel there are better intakes out there though.
The mod motor seems to work very well with it since it is only 300" and doesn't need a lot of cross section. Larger engines such as the LS need more cross section if you really want max effort power production.
Of course anything will work, just how well is another story...
The mod motor seems to work very well with it since it is only 300" and doesn't need a lot of cross section. Larger engines such as the LS need more cross section if you really want max effort power production.
Of course anything will work, just how well is another story...
04-21-2017, 11:52 AM
#89
If he ran a 5 all that it tells you is the intake can go that fast. It doesn't tell you what you could pick up with a better Intake. If you had billet block, a Marcella intake or a billet one is probably in your budget. If you are using a bunch of stock parts and street drive the proflow will do anything you want.
04-21-2017, 02:36 PM
#90
9 Second Club
Point is, Martin saying both the intakes are inadequate for 1000+....but clearly Andreas was making substantially more than that.
So just how inadequate is it really ?
I dont know about runner size, but to me the plenum on the ProFlo is tiny, but then I'd assume Edelbrock did do testing of some description before coming to the size they used, as lets face it they could have made it any size.
The Chinese intakes are slightly different as you can be damn sure there was no testing. That said, they're making them a height that is more car friendly than the ProFlo or indeed the HiRam. So most wont care simply because it fits.
And as Alchemist alludes...although yes some of these intakes offer terrible results at the lower rpm's and mid range, simply because the engines already make a shitload, is it really an issue ? Probably not. Especially with a blower that is always forcing air in regardless.
Perhaps slightly more concern to those with turbos, as off boost performance is bound to be more noticeable, and perhaps it can even affect boost thresholds. Enough to really worry ? Again probably not.
Although another thread on this forum recently did seem to suggest the Sniper intakes do not use factory o-rings, and they use some shitty round ones which do not seal well.
Now that IS an issue.
So just how inadequate is it really ?
I dont know about runner size, but to me the plenum on the ProFlo is tiny, but then I'd assume Edelbrock did do testing of some description before coming to the size they used, as lets face it they could have made it any size.
The Chinese intakes are slightly different as you can be damn sure there was no testing. That said, they're making them a height that is more car friendly than the ProFlo or indeed the HiRam. So most wont care simply because it fits.
And as Alchemist alludes...although yes some of these intakes offer terrible results at the lower rpm's and mid range, simply because the engines already make a shitload, is it really an issue ? Probably not. Especially with a blower that is always forcing air in regardless.
Perhaps slightly more concern to those with turbos, as off boost performance is bound to be more noticeable, and perhaps it can even affect boost thresholds. Enough to really worry ? Again probably not.
Although another thread on this forum recently did seem to suggest the Sniper intakes do not use factory o-rings, and they use some shitty round ones which do not seal well.
Now that IS an issue.
04-21-2017, 05:08 PM
#91
Anything will work, how well it works is another story.
Point is, Martin saying both the intakes are inadequate for 1000+....but clearly Andreas was making substantially more than that.
So just how inadequate is it really ?
I dont know about runner size, but to me the plenum on the ProFlo is tiny, but then I'd assume Edelbrock did do testing of some description before coming to the size they used, as lets face it they could have made it any size.
The Chinese intakes are slightly different as you can be damn sure there was no testing. That said, they're making them a height that is more car friendly than the ProFlo or indeed the HiRam. So most wont care simply because it fits.
And as Alchemist alludes...although yes some of these intakes offer terrible results at the lower rpm's and mid range, simply because the engines already make a shitload, is it really an issue ? Probably not. Especially with a blower that is always forcing air in regardless.
Perhaps slightly more concern to those with turbos, as off boost performance is bound to be more noticeable, and perhaps it can even affect boost thresholds. Enough to really worry ? Again probably not.
Although another thread on this forum recently did seem to suggest the Sniper intakes do not use factory o-rings, and they use some shitty round ones which do not seal well.
Now that IS an issue.
So just how inadequate is it really ?
I dont know about runner size, but to me the plenum on the ProFlo is tiny, but then I'd assume Edelbrock did do testing of some description before coming to the size they used, as lets face it they could have made it any size.
The Chinese intakes are slightly different as you can be damn sure there was no testing. That said, they're making them a height that is more car friendly than the ProFlo or indeed the HiRam. So most wont care simply because it fits.
And as Alchemist alludes...although yes some of these intakes offer terrible results at the lower rpm's and mid range, simply because the engines already make a shitload, is it really an issue ? Probably not. Especially with a blower that is always forcing air in regardless.
Perhaps slightly more concern to those with turbos, as off boost performance is bound to be more noticeable, and perhaps it can even affect boost thresholds. Enough to really worry ? Again probably not.
Although another thread on this forum recently did seem to suggest the Sniper intakes do not use factory o-rings, and they use some shitty round ones which do not seal well.
Now that IS an issue.
What I'm getting at is that an engine that makes a lot of power needs enough cross sectional area to make the most power possible. If you're using a manifold like a Pro Flo you're leaving easy power on the table.
04-21-2017, 06:16 PM
#92
9 Second Club
Is the size of the tubes heading into the ports on some of the intakes really that small or bad ?
Lets face it, surely the intake valve/throat is still the main restriction ?
Lets face it, surely the intake valve/throat is still the main restriction ?
04-21-2017, 09:36 PM
#93
MCSA in the head is certainly a limiting factor, you're correct.
When you have the proper area at the plenum, and at the MCSA is when the magic really starts to happen.
I used to have plenum entrance CSA and runner exit CSA on a lot of different intake manifolds where I used to work, but no longer have access to that information anymore.
I believe the exit CSA on the Pro Flow was like 2.6 in^2 IIRC. I couldn't get a snap gauge into the plenum to measure the entry unfortunately. Not only that, a lot of the manifolds out there don't have a continuous taper from plenum entry to runner exit. No bueno if you want to squeeze everything you can out of it.
When you have the proper area at the plenum, and at the MCSA is when the magic really starts to happen.
I used to have plenum entrance CSA and runner exit CSA on a lot of different intake manifolds where I used to work, but no longer have access to that information anymore.
I believe the exit CSA on the Pro Flow was like 2.6 in^2 IIRC. I couldn't get a snap gauge into the plenum to measure the entry unfortunately. Not only that, a lot of the manifolds out there don't have a continuous taper from plenum entry to runner exit. No bueno if you want to squeeze everything you can out of it.
Last edited by Martin Smallwood; 04-21-2017 at 09:45 PM.
04-25-2017, 11:24 AM
#94
Staging Lane
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Martin,
Seems your not very hot on the Sniper. Do you have a favorite "budget" intake manifold for a relatively high RPM forced induction LS? I think I've seen you use single plane carb style intakes on a lot of builds?
Seems your not very hot on the Sniper. Do you have a favorite "budget" intake manifold for a relatively high RPM forced induction LS? I think I've seen you use single plane carb style intakes on a lot of builds?
04-25-2017, 07:50 PM
#95
I have been working very closely with John@CID in the real world R&D testing of his new BE LS single plane intake manifold and soon to be starting on real world R&D on his new power adder inline heads. I've probably sold more and cammed more of the BE intakes than anyone as of yet.
04-26-2017, 09:15 PM
#97
I'm not very hot on anything that will limit the potential of a customer's engine if they're trying to maximize their combination to its fullest potential.
I have been working very closely with John@CID in the real world R&D testing of his new BE LS single plane intake manifold and soon to be starting on real world R&D on his new power adder inline heads. I've probably sold more and cammed more of the BE intakes than anyone as of yet.
I have been working very closely with John@CID in the real world R&D testing of his new BE LS single plane intake manifold and soon to be starting on real world R&D on his new power adder inline heads. I've probably sold more and cammed more of the BE intakes than anyone as of yet.
The following users liked this post:
CPFIREBIRD74 (04-28-2020)