bigdsz

iTrader: (1)

CHP ran controlled tests on the following intakes with HP and TQ results. LS1 HP 419.7 TQ 416, LS6 HP 425.5 TQ 421, FAST LSX HP 426.2 TQ 427, Weiand HP 411.2 TQ 408.6. This was with a stock engine with Hooker headers on an engine dyno. Perhaps heads and a cam will give much different results, but I'm very surprised the Weiand performed so poorly. Has anyone else read the article?

Danny2tek

iTrader: (1)

You forgot the one that had the best #'s the truck intake!!!!

bigdsz

iTrader: (1)

I left it out because I was under the impression that it wouldn't fit under our hoods. 6.9L truck HP 427.9 TQ 419. Funny thing is that it's low on torque.

Danny2tek

iTrader: (1)

yep its pretty low TQ numbers

SSDude

Was the car tuned after each intake swap otherwise this means nothing.

EvilRed98

I read that same thing, and I was very surprised about the truck intake, I had read before that the truck intake did not flow nearly as well as a stock LS1 intake.....I guess they did not do their homework. I am planning on putting an LS1 in my 69 chevy c-10, and that truck intake looks like a great deal at this point

Kevin Winstead

It looks like CHP messed up there numbers on this test. If you'll notice the peak HP numbers are listed around 4700 rpm and the peak Torque numbers are listed around 5800-5900...just backwards from what they should be. You don't produce peak hp below your torque peak. It looks like the hp and T numbers have been transposed.

I think that the 6L intake actually produced around 419 hp and 427.9 T. The LS6 should be 421 hp and 425.5 T and the FAST intake should be 427 hp and 426.2 T.

It would also make more sense that the 6L intake would produce more T than the other intakes since that is what it was designed for. The FAST intake seems to be fairly consistent in producing a 6-8 hp gain over the LS6 intake in most dyno tests.

Kevin

jimmyblue

iTrader: (11)

Supposedly an infinite number of monkeys with
typewriters will eventually get you the collected
works of Shakespeare, but it only takes four with
word processing to turn out a car mag.

I have this article sitting here. When it's full of
lead-in cereal filler like

"What had already been done to this engine is
inconsequential for the test session. Our concern
was, as yours should be, about the numbers each
manifold generated in a controlled environment"

you know that they don't have a clue about the
motor. In fact it's a stock cam motor with headers.
The stock cam limits the intake flow and does not
challenge these intakes the way a big-cam, better
cylinder heads car would. This they mention in a
dismissive way later. But, that being the case,
why **** over it for 6 pages of non-info?

BigTex

iTrader: (16)

Good point Kevin, the numbers make more sense when reversed. I would also like to know if they did any tuning to get peak gains from each intake.

For those who are interested, I recently cut the top off a truck intake to get a better idea about its airflow path. Air enters the center round chamber then flows up through the oval hole in the top. At this point, air flows around under the center chamber to the opposite side head. PIC 1 PIC 2

crainholio

iTrader: (2)

I got the impression they were going to throw some mods at the engine and re-test for next month...

BigTex

iTrader: (16)

I just took a look at that article for the first time. They show pictures of the truck intake and the #5 picture is supposed to be looking down the neck of a truck intake. Thats an LS1/LS6 in the picture, as the truck looks nothing like that. The truck has no open plenum design like those intakes, it has a center tube that dumps out into the runners on the top, allowing air to flow around the sides then into the head from the bottom. Thats opposite of the LS1 style that have air flowing over the top then down into the head.

Here are a couple of pics of a truck intake I cut open. You can see that they aren't anything like the LS style internally.