Fiber Tuned Flow Bench Test Results
11-19-2008, 01:07 AM
#1
Fiber Tuned Flow Bench Test Results Recently we were contacted by Vinny (860 Performance) to conduct an independent flow bench test on one of their newly built Fiber Tuned L92 intake manifolds.
We performed a baseline test using one of our current production CNC Stage 2 L92 heads. Then we bolted up the Fiber Tuned intake and tested it after blocking off all openings except the throttle body flange. The first two tests in the graph show the baseline test and Fiber Tuned intake runner. The second two tests show a relative comparison to an unported L76 and L92 manifold. The baseline port in tests 3&4 were within 2% +or- of the current base port. All tests were performed on a 4.155" test bore. The results are posted in both a graph and data format.
Follow up:
I like the modular design. It allows for some customizing. The build quality on the sample intake is very professional. "O" rings seal the aluminum flanges to the fiber runners and the aluminum flanges utilize the factory "O" rings to seal to the heads. As of now the Fiber Tuned L92 intakes have shown the best flow bench results so far.
Nice job fellas!
Richard
We performed a baseline test using one of our current production CNC Stage 2 L92 heads. Then we bolted up the Fiber Tuned intake and tested it after blocking off all openings except the throttle body flange. The first two tests in the graph show the baseline test and Fiber Tuned intake runner. The second two tests show a relative comparison to an unported L76 and L92 manifold. The baseline port in tests 3&4 were within 2% +or- of the current base port. All tests were performed on a 4.155" test bore. The results are posted in both a graph and data format.
Follow up:
I like the modular design. It allows for some customizing. The build quality on the sample intake is very professional. "O" rings seal the aluminum flanges to the fiber runners and the aluminum flanges utilize the factory "O" rings to seal to the heads. As of now the Fiber Tuned L92 intakes have shown the best flow bench results so far.
Nice job fellas!
Richard
11-19-2008, 08:33 AM
#6
TECH Regular
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Alpharetta, Ga
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trending Topics
11-19-2008, 09:09 AM
#9
Richard
11-19-2008, 12:02 PM
#12
To create as large a draw of air as possible. This is a static airflow test.
Flow restrictions begin to show with greater volumes of air movement so the idea here is to pull on the intake tract as hard as possible to see if any restrictions exist. And if they do exist, quantify the differences.
Richard
Flow restrictions begin to show with greater volumes of air movement so the idea here is to pull on the intake tract as hard as possible to see if any restrictions exist. And if they do exist, quantify the differences.
Richard
11-19-2008, 12:57 PM
#13
Nearly 24cfm is huge. The fiber tuned intake also carries more CFM through out the entire test range. Did the L76 intake go static at .700?
EDIT: Richard, aren't you coming out with a new product that could use this intake manifold soon? When can we expect some testing / product previews out of that?
EDIT: Richard, aren't you coming out with a new product that could use this intake manifold soon? When can we expect some testing / product previews out of that?
11-19-2008, 03:34 PM
#15
I've got several things in the works. Mostly around LS7 spec.
I noticed Edelbrock is coming out with a LS7/L92 Pro Port casting. They'll have dual intake manifold bolt patterns machined in them. Since it's a Pro Port casting there will be a variety af applications the heads could be prepped for.
Richard
11-19-2008, 04:02 PM
#16
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes. The L76 quit at .675" lift.
I've got several things in the works. Mostly around LS7 spec.
I noticed Edelbrock is coming out with a LS7/L92 Pro Port casting. They'll have dual intake manifold bolt patterns machined in them. Since it's a Pro Port casting there will be a variety af applications the heads could be prepped for.
Richard
I've got several things in the works. Mostly around LS7 spec.
I noticed Edelbrock is coming out with a LS7/L92 Pro Port casting. They'll have dual intake manifold bolt patterns machined in them. Since it's a Pro Port casting there will be a variety af applications the heads could be prepped for.
Richard
Thanks
Nick--
11-19-2008, 07:22 PM
#17
Yes. The L76 quit at .675" lift.
I've got several things in the works. Mostly around LS7 spec.
I noticed Edelbrock is coming out with a LS7/L92 Pro Port casting. They'll have dual intake manifold bolt patterns machined in them. Since it's a Pro Port casting there will be a variety af applications the heads could be prepped for.
Richard
I've got several things in the works. Mostly around LS7 spec.
I noticed Edelbrock is coming out with a LS7/L92 Pro Port casting. They'll have dual intake manifold bolt patterns machined in them. Since it's a Pro Port casting there will be a variety af applications the heads could be prepped for.
Richard
I remember you mentioning something about a small bore L92 casting...
This thread got me thinking. Intake manifold, small bore, LS1 in my 93... 1+1=2. 
11-20-2008, 04:37 PM
#20
Is 22cfm a big difference in hp? I am looking at the flow numbers at 600, around where my cam is, and wondering if that is going to make a big difference. My intake started choking the engine at 6k in my 415, and i am wondering how much rwhp i will gain up top with this intake. The gains were pretty substantial on the gto, but i couldnt tell much about the rpm band with that mph crap instead of rpms. I already cant use first and second so a little loss down low shouldnt hurt too much.