Edelbrock Pro Flow xt in an F-Body
02-26-2010, 10:26 PM
#22
Staging Lane
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This looks really cool man, I just get a kick out of the way everyone says that positive dicplacement blowers don't work on our cars because they won't fit without cutting the cowl....... but if you want a long runner intake and cut your cowl people think it's great.
02-26-2010, 11:35 PM
#24
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rockland County, NY
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did a stock rebuild with some bolt ons. Trying to decide between the Edelbrock intake and the BBK intake, TSP True Dual exhaust with high flow cats, long tube headers by Pacesetter, 85mm tb (at the moment), 317 Head, Stage III puck clutch by F1 Racing. Just trying to get the most power for the money. I'm a college student so it isnt easy getting money these days.
02-27-2010, 12:21 AM
#25
Did a stock rebuild with some bolt ons. Trying to decide between the Edelbrock intake and the BBK intake, TSP True Dual exhaust with high flow cats, long tube headers by Pacesetter, 85mm tb (at the moment), 317 Head, Stage III puck clutch by F1 Racing. Just trying to get the most power for the money. I'm a college student so it isnt easy getting money these days.
Honestly without h/c i wouldn't see this intake making much more hp over an ls6. Just because an ls6 intake flows very well as is and the amount of air demand without h/c dose not justify the extra money spent on any other intake(fast,bbk or edelbrock) unless u plan on doing h/c later
also u have 317 heads?? without boost those heads are killing u (lower compression)
02-27-2010, 12:40 AM
#27
well if i were u i would wait to get an intake untill after a h/c setup, i just dont seeing any aftermarket intake benefiting u enough to make it worth your money(going to cost at least 600$ for any aftermarket intake), unless u do not plan on h/c and then i would just get a ls6
02-27-2010, 09:42 AM
#29
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rockland County, NY
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well if i were u i would wait to get an intake untill after a h/c setup, i just dont seeing any aftermarket intake benefiting u enough to make it worth your money(going to cost at least 600$ for any aftermarket intake), unless u do not plan on h/c and then i would just get a ls6
02-27-2010, 05:58 PM
#30
LS XT intake manifold dyno test I read through this thread and the other "New Edelbrock LS XT intake manifold at SEMA" thread that was 45 pages long, and still no one can come up with a side by side dyno test showing the entire power band of this manifold such as: stock LS6 vs LS6 motor with edelbrock XT intake manifold, or even a modified LS motor with the LS6 intake manifold vs edelbock XT intake vs a fast intake etc? I even tried googling from any source, magazine tests etc and got nothing on the entire internet.
To me this extremely frustrating. This XT manifold has been out since 2008 and here we are in 2010 and no one can come up with a dyno test on this LS edelbtock XT manifold showing where the power gains are (besides just at peak at 6500 RPM from edlebrock's marketing department). Are you freaking kidding me??? Distributors, engine builder shops, speed shops, drag racers, anyone??? Edelbrock where are you??? Why wont edelbrock release XT dyno tests to the public? I called them and they have nothing to release, they just refer to the marketing blurb at 6500 RPM and try to assure me its a good manifold.
I personally am brand new to LS motors but not drag racing, high performance, dyno tests and turbo boosting. And I am trying to make a buying decision here. I dont want to spend 1000+ on a fast. I just bought a used LQ4 truck motor with 317 heads and my plan is to swap in a comp cams turbo hydraulic roller cam with matching valve springs and titanium retainers, ARP rod bolts, my built powerglide dropped into my 1988 5.0 mustang hatch roller car with 3.73 gears and go 1/8th mile drag racing. Its a drag only budget 1/8th mile drag car ala tire fryin S10's and Dman's (turbo boosted LS motors in fox body mustangs). My desired power band is launching on the 2 step at about 3800and shifting at about 6000.
I read & own a fantastic book (5.0L dyno tests by George Holdener" that has over 2000 dyno pulls on the ford 5.0 302, 351W, including stock stroke motors and strokers. They did extensive testing of intake manifolds on fuel injected engines. Basically the longer runners such as the LS6 manifold style of manifold had a LOT more low and mid range torque and horsepower than the short runner length or box style upper intake manifolds or any carbed set ups. With fuel injectors right on the intake ports you can make the intake runners very long adding tons of low and mid range torque to the motor. If the manifold is designed right (aftermarket) it will be much stronger with gobs of low and midrange torque all the way to 6500, or 7000 RPM.
After lots of dyno testing it was concluded in that book that the intake runner lengths on fuel injected motors had WAY more impact determining the motors power band than even the cam! On carbed manifolds you cant have very long intake runners do to fuel puddling and lowered fuel velocity. Boosting does NOT fundementally change the designed operating power band of a fuel injected motors intake manifold. It may extend the power band on a long runner intake, but will not make up for loss of low and midrange torque on a short runner or box style intake.
The only exception funny enough was by edelbrock. The victor 5.0 beating out the cobra manifold from 4000 to 6000 RPM. The victor 5.0 was expected to lose down low and midrange and come on like bang busters at 5500+ because its intake runners are bit shorter than the cobras. And the box style upper intakes (before hand conventional wisdom was with boost, long intake runners arnt needed) even under boost they lost lots of low and mid range torque but came on above 5500 rpm strong.
My conclusion after writing this book lol (didnt mean to have such a long thread reply). Is that most likely Edelbrocks own dyno tests show the manifold only superior to the LS6 at higher RPM levels. Otherwise what are they hiding???
Wouldnt even a speed parts seller who comes on this site want to show a dyno test with the XT vs LS6 being superior at low and mid range RPM'S too? If they did their XT manifold sales would explode overnight with mega orders so whats holding them back???
My only hesitation at jumping to the conclusion that the XT loses low and midrange torque is that edelbrock did somehow make the 5.0 victor manifold work with shorter intake runners.
Will this be this site's forever unanswered question??? Will we ever have a real dyno test comparison for all to see instead of endless speculation and maybe another 50 pages???
lol
Hpbob
To me this extremely frustrating. This XT manifold has been out since 2008 and here we are in 2010 and no one can come up with a dyno test on this LS edelbtock XT manifold showing where the power gains are (besides just at peak at 6500 RPM from edlebrock's marketing department). Are you freaking kidding me??? Distributors, engine builder shops, speed shops, drag racers, anyone??? Edelbrock where are you??? Why wont edelbrock release XT dyno tests to the public? I called them and they have nothing to release, they just refer to the marketing blurb at 6500 RPM and try to assure me its a good manifold.
I personally am brand new to LS motors but not drag racing, high performance, dyno tests and turbo boosting. And I am trying to make a buying decision here. I dont want to spend 1000+ on a fast. I just bought a used LQ4 truck motor with 317 heads and my plan is to swap in a comp cams turbo hydraulic roller cam with matching valve springs and titanium retainers, ARP rod bolts, my built powerglide dropped into my 1988 5.0 mustang hatch roller car with 3.73 gears and go 1/8th mile drag racing. Its a drag only budget 1/8th mile drag car ala tire fryin S10's and Dman's (turbo boosted LS motors in fox body mustangs). My desired power band is launching on the 2 step at about 3800and shifting at about 6000.
I read & own a fantastic book (5.0L dyno tests by George Holdener" that has over 2000 dyno pulls on the ford 5.0 302, 351W, including stock stroke motors and strokers. They did extensive testing of intake manifolds on fuel injected engines. Basically the longer runners such as the LS6 manifold style of manifold had a LOT more low and mid range torque and horsepower than the short runner length or box style upper intake manifolds or any carbed set ups. With fuel injectors right on the intake ports you can make the intake runners very long adding tons of low and mid range torque to the motor. If the manifold is designed right (aftermarket) it will be much stronger with gobs of low and midrange torque all the way to 6500, or 7000 RPM.
After lots of dyno testing it was concluded in that book that the intake runner lengths on fuel injected motors had WAY more impact determining the motors power band than even the cam! On carbed manifolds you cant have very long intake runners do to fuel puddling and lowered fuel velocity. Boosting does NOT fundementally change the designed operating power band of a fuel injected motors intake manifold. It may extend the power band on a long runner intake, but will not make up for loss of low and midrange torque on a short runner or box style intake.
The only exception funny enough was by edelbrock. The victor 5.0 beating out the cobra manifold from 4000 to 6000 RPM. The victor 5.0 was expected to lose down low and midrange and come on like bang busters at 5500+ because its intake runners are bit shorter than the cobras. And the box style upper intakes (before hand conventional wisdom was with boost, long intake runners arnt needed) even under boost they lost lots of low and mid range torque but came on above 5500 rpm strong.
My conclusion after writing this book lol (didnt mean to have such a long thread reply). Is that most likely Edelbrocks own dyno tests show the manifold only superior to the LS6 at higher RPM levels. Otherwise what are they hiding???
Wouldnt even a speed parts seller who comes on this site want to show a dyno test with the XT vs LS6 being superior at low and mid range RPM'S too? If they did their XT manifold sales would explode overnight with mega orders so whats holding them back???
My only hesitation at jumping to the conclusion that the XT loses low and midrange torque is that edelbrock did somehow make the 5.0 victor manifold work with shorter intake runners.
Will this be this site's forever unanswered question??? Will we ever have a real dyno test comparison for all to see instead of endless speculation and maybe another 50 pages???
lolHpbob
02-28-2010, 11:47 PM
#31
On The Tree
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rockland County, NY
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tripblack...could you post some close up pics of your tb area? I wana see what you did about the hoses and sensors. Also, what did you do about the break booster hose in the back? I was looking over everything today and think I figured out a way to keep both wipers, gona take some serious fabricating though
Last edited by kobraa; 03-01-2010 at 12:54 AM.
03-02-2010, 07:09 AM
#32
Edelbrocks own dyno tests show the manifold only superior to the LS6 at higher RPM levels. Otherwise what are they hiding???
My only hesitation at jumping to the conclusion that the XT loses low and midrange torque.
Will this be this site's forever unanswered question??? Will we ever have a real dyno test comparison for all to see instead of endless speculation and maybe another 50 pages??? lol
My only hesitation at jumping to the conclusion that the XT loses low and midrange torque.
Will this be this site's forever unanswered question??? Will we ever have a real dyno test comparison for all to see instead of endless speculation and maybe another 50 pages???
lolYour exactly right, look at it. Its a high RPM tunnel ram/sheet metal intake thats been cast to make it cheap. By design it loses TQ and gains HP at very high RPM. A guy put it in his silverado and lost a second in the 1/8th! If you have a drag car and live your life at 5500+ RPM, then this would be a very good option!
03-02-2010, 06:26 PM
#34
I found that thread too.
Well I just confirmed my thoughts with Richard @ WCCH , this intake gives up way too much bottom end for my application. I'm almost a second slower at the 1/8th mi strip and throttle responce is a little lazy.
Richard says they act a lot like the victor (3500-7000 rpm) but shorter runners, so it would have to be for a lighter vehicle, looser converter and lower gear or something that can afford to give up so much bottom.
I'm running a 4L80E, 3000 stall with 3.73's and don't want to change and give up driveability. The fact is there is nothing out there currently for most of our trucks. FAST is supposily working on a truck only intake but sure it will be big $ when and if.
So I'm going back to the LS6 intake, it falls off some at the top but I was in the high 7's at the 1/8th with it so not too bad.
My only regret.........I sold my LS6 intake.................................
Richard says they act a lot like the victor (3500-7000 rpm) but shorter runners, so it would have to be for a lighter vehicle, looser converter and lower gear or something that can afford to give up so much bottom.
I'm running a 4L80E, 3000 stall with 3.73's and don't want to change and give up driveability. The fact is there is nothing out there currently for most of our trucks. FAST is supposily working on a truck only intake but sure it will be big $ when and if.
So I'm going back to the LS6 intake, it falls off some at the top but I was in the high 7's at the 1/8th with it so not too bad.
My only regret.........I sold my LS6 intake.................................
04-15-2011, 08:22 PM
#36
Same intake, same results.
1. 30-40lbft lost below 4500ish (large loses)
2. Starting to slowly catch up after 4500ish(still loses)
3. Finally catches up at 6500ish (even)
4. Gain at 6500ish (how much depends on your setup)
If you drive on the street get a plastic intake, if you drag race only and never see below 5500 get the Proflow.
Each intake has their place, everyone takes forever picking out the right cam, and even their oil to match their combination as well as they can. Intakes a much simpler than cams but no one grasps how to choose the correct intake for some reason??????
1. 30-40lbft lost below 4500ish (large loses)
2. Starting to slowly catch up after 4500ish(still loses)
3. Finally catches up at 6500ish (even)
4. Gain at 6500ish (how much depends on your setup)
If you drive on the street get a plastic intake, if you drag race only and never see below 5500 get the Proflow.
Each intake has their place, everyone takes forever picking out the right cam, and even their oil to match their combination as well as they can. Intakes a much simpler than cams but no one grasps how to choose the correct intake for some reason??????
Last edited by SweetS10V8; 04-16-2011 at 07:33 AM.
