Intake Manifold Heatsoak - Aluminum (Weiand) Vs. Composite (LS6)
03-06-2007, 03:13 PM
#1
Intake Manifold Heatsoak - Aluminum (Weiand) Vs. Composite (LS6) Bottom line, is heatsoak more of an issue with the aluminum versus the composite? Let's settle it. It's not a question of whether you can do things to either one to cool them down or not. It's a very simple question, which one will be hotter under all the different types of driving (normal, spirited, track, you name it, discuss it).
03-06-2007, 03:29 PM
#3
I just could not resist .. 
.. This is back again ... 
.. the composite is cooler all the time ... for real .. now let the controversy begin, again and again and again... 
.. you can make the aluminum one nice and shinny if you are into bling bling .. 
.. This is back again ... .. the composite is cooler all the time ... for real .. now let the controversy begin, again and again and again... .. you can make the aluminum one nice and shinny if you are into bling bling ..
03-06-2007, 03:34 PM
#4
The problem is people thinking that this will ever be settled...there have been too many times where people have wanted to do the "let's settle it" thing, and it turns into a huge pissing contest, and takes up more bandwidth than the argument is worth. I still think we need an autolock feature around here..."heatsoak" would be on the top of that list.
03-06-2007, 03:56 PM
#7
Originally Posted by MeentSS02
The problem is people thinking that this will ever be settled...there have been too many times where people have wanted to do the "let's settle it" thing, and it turns into a huge pissing contest, and takes up more bandwidth than the argument is worth. I still think we need an autolock feature around here..."heatsoak" would be on the top of that list.
Well said sir ...
Trending Topics
03-06-2007, 04:04 PM
#9
12 Second Club
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: central coast, cali
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
never had a problem with my weiand manifold, wasnt that hot compared toi my composite. I always say, ask people who have actually had it, and im sure they would tell you that it isnt that bad as ppl make it come out to be. People who have never tried it on the ls1/ls6 are the ppl who are complaining, yet have never had it!!!
03-06-2007, 04:46 PM
#13
I knew this was coming ... 
.. I got ya... 
.. I told you I couldn't resist .. OK now I am comfortable with my 
and 
.. so far we have comparisons to top fuelers and if ya dont own one you dont know squat testimonials ...carry on .. this is tooooo good to be true ...
.. I got ya... .. I told you I couldn't resist .. OK now I am comfortable with my and .. so far we have comparisons to top fuelers and if ya dont own one you dont know squat testimonials ...carry on .. this is tooooo good to be true ...
03-06-2007, 04:58 PM
#14
The engines in the 350z have metal intakes. They all rave about heat soak on their forums.
The 2jz in the supras have a metal intake that thats why they only get to a measley 1500hp. lol
Damn all those guys with gen 1 sbc's running 10s and such! lol
Both GM and Ford started using composite intakes for weight and low cost of production. Thats it.
Oh and you can make better flowing intakes easier.
Other then that. I'd rather have a metal intake when it comes to blowers and Nitrous.
The 2jz in the supras have a metal intake that thats why they only get to a measley 1500hp. lol
Damn all those guys with gen 1 sbc's running 10s and such! lol
Both GM and Ford started using composite intakes for weight and low cost of production. Thats it.
Oh and you can make better flowing intakes easier.
Other then that. I'd rather have a metal intake when it comes to blowers and Nitrous.
03-06-2007, 05:26 PM
#15
I could care less if this gets locked or not, it got this whole pissing match out of the other guy's thread.
Justin, man, you really need to stop posting about this. You're reasoning is far beyond reality. Let me break this all down for you...
350z's have metal intakes. They have heatsoak. They are metal.
Supra's have metal intakes. That has absolutely nothing to do with reaching 1500hp. I have no clue on earth as to how a metal intake manifold relates to stopping them from reaching high hp, but apparently it makes sense to you. To the rest of the world, quite contrary.
One guy in the other thread said he had a 9 second sbc with a metal intake. So what? I see that you've latched on to that and would like to provide it as your own source of factual knowledge, but yet again, that means jack squat. The intake material has nothing to do with horsepower limitations. The issue is heatsoak costing horsepower, not heatsoak preventing you from reaching your hp goal.
Composite intakes were started for cheapness, weight, AND resistance to heat. I know you'd like to omit that part for your argument's sake, but I'd like to reintroduce it.
Flow in an intake has absolutely nothing to do with its material (for this argument's purpose).
I know you'd like to have a metal intake. The whole world knows you would. (Please get reference from Old School)
Now, do you have any factual information you would like to contribute that would actually make sense, as well as have anything to do with the issue at hand?
To those who say heatsoak is an overplayed issue. Precisely. It is. No one ever said it wasn't. Regardless, it IS still an issue. No one said it would rob you of 100hp, but this little thing called physics proves it can and will rob you of at least some hp (since metal gets hotter than composite, hotter air = less dense = less power... this is in ever horsepower book ever written). There is no solid number attached to this claim, but that does not disprove it. I've yet to see something disprove the heatsoak issue. I only see a lot of "so what's" and "but you can do this to help it..." which doesn't prove anything.
Justin, man, you really need to stop posting about this. You're reasoning is far beyond reality. Let me break this all down for you...
350z's have metal intakes. They have heatsoak. They are metal.
Supra's have metal intakes. That has absolutely nothing to do with reaching 1500hp. I have no clue on earth as to how a metal intake manifold relates to stopping them from reaching high hp, but apparently it makes sense to you. To the rest of the world, quite contrary.
One guy in the other thread said he had a 9 second sbc with a metal intake. So what? I see that you've latched on to that and would like to provide it as your own source of factual knowledge, but yet again, that means jack squat. The intake material has nothing to do with horsepower limitations. The issue is heatsoak costing horsepower, not heatsoak preventing you from reaching your hp goal.
Composite intakes were started for cheapness, weight, AND resistance to heat. I know you'd like to omit that part for your argument's sake, but I'd like to reintroduce it.
Flow in an intake has absolutely nothing to do with its material (for this argument's purpose).
I know you'd like to have a metal intake. The whole world knows you would. (Please get reference from Old School)
Now, do you have any factual information you would like to contribute that would actually make sense, as well as have anything to do with the issue at hand?
To those who say heatsoak is an overplayed issue. Precisely. It is. No one ever said it wasn't. Regardless, it IS still an issue. No one said it would rob you of 100hp, but this little thing called physics proves it can and will rob you of at least some hp (since metal gets hotter than composite, hotter air = less dense = less power... this is in ever horsepower book ever written). There is no solid number attached to this claim, but that does not disprove it. I've yet to see something disprove the heatsoak issue. I only see a lot of "so what's" and "but you can do this to help it..." which doesn't prove anything.
03-06-2007, 05:35 PM
#17
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Watertown, NY
Posts: 8,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is retarded. Obviously just due to the properties of metal compared to plastic you should know that metal will absorb more heat than plastic. Now whether or not how much of an affect this has on HP on an LS1 is up for debate and pissing matches.
I think my plastic FAST is lighter than a metal intake so ill stick with it
I think my plastic FAST is lighter than a metal intake so ill stick with it
03-06-2007, 05:51 PM
#18
Originally Posted by Justin00SS
Its a non issue.
The whole point of these engines is to create hp.
Why mention heat soak if you didn't think it was hindering hp output?
The whole point of these engines is to create hp.
Why mention heat soak if you didn't think it was hindering hp output?
03-06-2007, 05:53 PM
#19
Originally Posted by brad8266
This thread is retarded. Obviously just due to the properties of metal compared to plastic you should know that metal will absorb more heat than plastic. Now whether or not how much of an affect this has on HP on an LS1 is up for debate and pissing matches.
I think my plastic FAST is lighter than a metal intake so ill stick with it
I think my plastic FAST is lighter than a metal intake so ill stick with it
Metal intake > physics.
That about wraps it up.
03-06-2007, 05:53 PM
#20
Originally Posted by brad8266
This thread is retarded. Obviously just due to the properties of metal compared to plastic you should know that metal will absorb more heat than plastic. Now whether or not how much of an affect this has on HP on an LS1 is up for debate and pissing matches.
I think my plastic FAST is lighter than a metal intake so ill stick with it
I think my plastic FAST is lighter than a metal intake so ill stick with it
Apparently... metal intake > physics.
That about wraps it up.