New Holley LS Mini Ram Intake
#21
FormerVendor
iTrader: (64)
Spoke to Robin Lawerence and several other Holley reps regarding the shorter version of the HiRam. They stated on the engine dyno it made the same horsepower in testing as a LS2 intake manifold. Sad part is they sounded excited about that? But it didnt feel like the Holley guys there had any 1st hand experience yet because they said it was just tested the week before and they were rushing to get it to SEMA and only knew what they had been repeated from whoever 1st hand tested it.
LS2 intake manifolds in our experience are quite terrible compared to most other better options. So it will take some independent testing to see how well it really works.
LS2 intake manifolds in our experience are quite terrible compared to most other better options. So it will take some independent testing to see how well it really works.
#23
Teching In
iTrader: (29)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those curious I took a few measurements, 2000 trans am stock k member, stock valley cover.
Valley cover to bulge under cowl=7 5/8
Cylinder head mounting point/bottom of intake port to that same bulge= 7 3/4.
Valley cover to top of wiper area(assuming you cut the bottom of cowl area)=8 3/4 or add another 1/4 for the valley cover and your around 9 inches.
So your basically around 9 inches before you start having series problems. I dont think it will fit without some sort of trimming to the cowl area not to mention the bottom side of hood in that same spot would need some grinding off. The big question is the rear of that intake, how far does it go forward before it reaches the 10 inches in height..looks like it goes from under 9 then slopes up to 10..would def be close on the fitment.
Valley cover to bulge under cowl=7 5/8
Cylinder head mounting point/bottom of intake port to that same bulge= 7 3/4.
Valley cover to top of wiper area(assuming you cut the bottom of cowl area)=8 3/4 or add another 1/4 for the valley cover and your around 9 inches.
So your basically around 9 inches before you start having series problems. I dont think it will fit without some sort of trimming to the cowl area not to mention the bottom side of hood in that same spot would need some grinding off. The big question is the rear of that intake, how far does it go forward before it reaches the 10 inches in height..looks like it goes from under 9 then slopes up to 10..would def be close on the fitment.
#28
Does anyone make a shorter motor mount? If some how it fits,makes good power and the price stays under $700 I'm selling the fast 90 sitting in my closet and the bbk that's on my car now.
#29
UNDER PRESSURE MOD
iTrader: (19)
Good question. Be careful lowering the motor too much though, because then the oil pan gets below the kmember and you may have ground clearance issues.
I like the looks of the intake, but looks alone aren't worth hacking up the car to make it fit.
If it performs better, and can fit, I'm all for it. I'll sell my FAST 90 in a heartbeat and get it.
#31
Old School Heavy
iTrader: (16)
It looks like the base is a version of their 2 - 4 barrel carburetor intake. If I am correct, that is a "dual plane" design. Most dyno tests I have seen on LS engines with the dual plane intakes show a nice gain in torque below 4000 RPM over the LS6 type manifolds but less peak horsepower and RPM ability.
I must note, the tests I have seen were based on the Edelbrock manifold.
I must note, the tests I have seen were based on the Edelbrock manifold.
#32
12 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Old Bridge, NJ/Corpus Christi, TX
Posts: 1,215
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
It looks like the base is a version of their 2 - 4 barrel carburetor intake. If I am correct, that is a "dual plane" design. Most dyno tests I have seen on LS engines with the dual plane intakes show a nice gain in torque below 4000 RPM over the LS6 type manifolds but less peak horsepower and RPM ability.
I must note, the tests I have seen were based on the Edelbrock manifold.
I must note, the tests I have seen were based on the Edelbrock manifold.
#33
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (21)
Yes boost does change everything but if the intake sucks, it's still going to suck under boost. The LS2 intake is horrible and if this performs anything like the LS2 its not worth the money. I would love to sell my LS6 intake and buy the Holley but as it stands its the best bang per buck. Looks great though.
#34
UNDER PRESSURE MOD
iTrader: (19)
One option to lower the motor would be to use the 1/4" k-member spacers used on the Maggie MP112 kits.
Yes boost does change everything but if the intake sucks, it's still going to suck under boost. The LS2 intake is horrible and if this performs anything like the LS2 its not worth the money. I would love to sell my LS6 intake and buy the Holley but as it stands its the best bang per buck. Looks great though.
Yes boost does change everything but if the intake sucks, it's still going to suck under boost. The LS2 intake is horrible and if this performs anything like the LS2 its not worth the money. I would love to sell my LS6 intake and buy the Holley but as it stands its the best bang per buck. Looks great though.
#36
FormerVendor
Having seen the base of this intake (dual plane dual 4bbl) I think it's unlikely that it will outperform any stock intake. Just the opposite is what I would expect. Lots of sharp 90deg angles and ports that appear to taper from small to large makes for a torturous air path.
#39
UNDER PRESSURE MOD
iTrader: (19)
I saw that it's on Summit's site. http://www.summitracing.com/parts/hly-300-126
Is it worth taking a risk on, who knows. I'm running 15psi of boost, so I'm sure my original FAST 90 is leaking like a bitch under boost, so who knows, I may try it.
Is it worth taking a risk on, who knows. I'm running 15psi of boost, so I'm sure my original FAST 90 is leaking like a bitch under boost, so who knows, I may try it.