Giant LS3 Intake Manifold Dyno Shootout!
#21
When power is falling off, torque already falling off, often considerably.....what exactly would be the point in revving it far higher ?
There's only a couple that are still hanging on at 7k so even then still not much point in taking them higher as they've already peaked.
There's only a couple that are still hanging on at 7k so even then still not much point in taking them higher as they've already peaked.
#22
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
When power is falling off, torque already falling off, often considerably.....what exactly would be the point in revving it far higher ?
There's only a couple that are still hanging on at 7k so even then still not much point in taking them higher as they've already peaked.
There's only a couple that are still hanging on at 7k so even then still not much point in taking them higher as they've already peaked.
Some of them have pretty substantial gains at 7k......and I'm not talking about stopping there. They shoulda ran that test to 7500 and used a cam that would run to that with shift point at 7800ish. That would've been a good intake test. You would've likely seen 100hp difference in the ls3 intake vs the others then.....maybe more.
#23
10 Second Club
As i have already said if you're camming it and not extending your rpm range then you're doin it wrong.
Some of them have pretty substantial gains at 7k......and I'm not talking about stopping there. They shoulda ran that test to 7500 and used a cam that would run to that with shift point at 7800ish. That would've been a good intake test. You would've likely seen 100hp difference in the ls3 intake vs the others then.....maybe more.
Some of them have pretty substantial gains at 7k......and I'm not talking about stopping there. They shoulda ran that test to 7500 and used a cam that would run to that with shift point at 7800ish. That would've been a good intake test. You would've likely seen 100hp difference in the ls3 intake vs the others then.....maybe more.
The following users liked this post:
AINT SKEERED (12-06-2019)
#24
9 Second Club
But only if you're revving high enough to drop where it is making more power....and lets face it, on most of them none of them were excelling in that respect.
The only one you might want to rev harder on that combo is the HiRam.
The stroker engine is harder to tell, as both the ProFlo and Carbon intake seemed to work well up top.
But with torque taking a huge dive....is there really any point taking it to 8k to shift ?
The only one you might want to rev harder on that combo is the HiRam.
The stroker engine is harder to tell, as both the ProFlo and Carbon intake seemed to work well up top.
But with torque taking a huge dive....is there really any point taking it to 8k to shift ?
#25
9 Second Club
As i have already said if you're camming it and not extending your rpm range then you're doin it wrong.
Some of them have pretty substantial gains at 7k......and I'm not talking about stopping there. They shoulda ran that test to 7500 and used a cam that would run to that with shift point at 7800ish. That would've been a good intake test. You would've likely seen 100hp difference in the ls3 intake vs the others then.....maybe more.
Some of them have pretty substantial gains at 7k......and I'm not talking about stopping there. They shoulda ran that test to 7500 and used a cam that would run to that with shift point at 7800ish. That would've been a good intake test. You would've likely seen 100hp difference in the ls3 intake vs the others then.....maybe more.
It's certainly a better test than any intake manufacturers have ever offered !!
#26
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
The article did say they reved the thing out once and tagged some intake valves...so they were wise to keep the revs where they were at for most of the test.
I keep going back to on older test Tony did on the LS7 MSD vs the stock LS7 intake, and it made more torque all RPM's. the entire curve was higher. So, I tend to think longer strokes can use the shorter runners better vs shorter strokes. And since the LS7 is a 4" factory stroke, that data has relevance to a decent sized group. ANyone know the stock LS3 runner length? Stock LS7 intake runner length is only 6.875" long on the short side radius.
This test in a way shows that. When you look at the 415CI test results, the torque curves match up better shorter runner vs stock. That could be a function of the intake OR it could be a function of the longer stroke, OR it could be the combination. Problem with confounding data is it's harder to draw conclusions. ****, overlay the 425 and LS3 results on the LS3 intake, and the HP peal is lower by 200-300 RPM.
This test in a way shows that. When you look at the 415CI test results, the torque curves match up better shorter runner vs stock. That could be a function of the intake OR it could be a function of the longer stroke, OR it could be the combination. Problem with confounding data is it's harder to draw conclusions. ****, overlay the 425 and LS3 results on the LS3 intake, and the HP peal is lower by 200-300 RPM.
Runner length on the FAST 102 is 8", 6.25" and 3.5". I don't know factory runner length. Volume is 680cc, 460cc, and 300cc. What's interesting there is that the "cc per inch" is 85, 76, and 85. A victor Jr. has an average runner length of about 6.25" as well.
It is definitely interesting to think about. The 4" stroke will put more demand on the intake with ~10% higher piston speed, but the runner tuning is dependent only on RPM and the timing of the pressure wave in the intake tract. If the short runner intakes are designed around a 6000+ rpm harmonic, that tuning point won't change with stroke.
I think the main contributing factor when thinking about long vs short stroke is that a longer stroke engine will more quickly reach the point where outright maximum flow is the most important factor in cylinder fill. The shorter and straighter intake runners will be better for performance as they're less restrictive and the air column has less intertia. At lower engine speeds the short runners will not offer any harmonic tuning, risk pushing the intake charge back out the intake valve after BDC, and won't have the velocity needed for good cylinder fill. All this is seen as a loss of torque in the midrange.
The following users liked this post:
AINT SKEERED (12-06-2019)
#28
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Good post spank. Intake harmonics are intriguing. I'm very surprised there are no variable length runners out there.
Yea most of those stage blah cams are poop and only good for sound. When your cammed ls3 only makes 460whp and 430wtq you did it wrong.....because a ls3 is capable of 470whp/470wtq. I see way to many stage blah cam swaps with **** results.
Yea most of those stage blah cams are poop and only good for sound. When your cammed ls3 only makes 460whp and 430wtq you did it wrong.....because a ls3 is capable of 470whp/470wtq. I see way to many stage blah cam swaps with **** results.
#29
TECH Senior Member
True, but the article was ALSO about proving how good the OEM LS3 manifold is. There are MANY who run mildly cammed LS3's, who might be wondering if it's worth upgrading the intake manifold alone. This article proved it is not necessary, though no harm would be done if one chooses to do so.
#30
10 Second Club
True, but the article was ALSO about proving how good the OEM LS3 manifold is. There are MANY who run mildly cammed LS3's, who might be wondering if it's worth upgrading the intake manifold alone. This article proved it is not necessary, though no harm would be done if one chooses to do so.
#31
10 Second Club
If you’re just running the hip new shelf Cam, a BobbyDean stage 4 CAI, 22” torque thrust 2’s and a hypertech I doubt a manifold upgrade is going to help you
#32
TECH Senior Member
#33
9 Second Club
Although it basically shows the same thing as the cathedral test.....
below 6k, there's little out there to outperform a stock intake, value for money. The aftermarkets are a little better than LS6 etc, but still not huge.
With the LS3 it's even less pronounced
below 6k, there's little out there to outperform a stock intake, value for money. The aftermarkets are a little better than LS6 etc, but still not huge.
With the LS3 it's even less pronounced
#34
9 Second Club
Have you graphs to show where the LS3 intake is restricting an engine vs other intakes on the engines you describe ?
Does the crossover point differ ?
#35
10 Second Club
If you’re peaking before 6500 your engine is built bad and you should feel bad. Stock ls3 intake flows the same as Stock ls3 heads. So if you put that intake on better flowing heads then guess what it’s a restriction. Also the runners are tuned for 6000-6500 so once you start revving to 7000-7500 like you should be then it’s even more of a restriction again. A Stock ls3 intake on my ls3 would probably drop me 50-60 hp
#36
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
I bet it would drop you more.
A ls3 intake is good for a ls3 cam run in the oe operating range. That's about it. Once you start camming it and dealing with reversion it's tq production goes to **** pretty fast.
A ls3 intake is good for a ls3 cam run in the oe operating range. That's about it. Once you start camming it and dealing with reversion it's tq production goes to **** pretty fast.
#37
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,446
Received 1,838 Likes
on
1,146 Posts
Imo it has to do with power past peak. You can gear reduce to gain torque but if you can carry it longer in the lower gear before uoshifting, you lose way less tq on the upshift. Shifting at 6500 you lose a ton. Autos may be different because the stall can smear the gears a bit but manual needs that past peak power
#38
9 Second Club
If you’re peaking before 6500 your engine is built bad and you should feel bad. Stock ls3 intake flows the same as Stock ls3 heads. So if you put that intake on better flowing heads then guess what it’s a restriction. Also the runners are tuned for 6000-6500 so once you start revving to 7000-7500 like you should be then it’s even more of a restriction again. A Stock ls3 intake on my ls3 would probably drop me 50-60 hp
Yet almost every graph there aside from those "bigger" intakes they're peaking a little before 6500 in that test.
And torque has already nose dived long before.
So lets see these graphs of yours and your intake excelling all the way to 7500 ? Maybe if you could prove it to people more would try ?
What cam etc ?
#39
Yet almost every graph there aside from those "bigger" intakes they're peaking a little before 6500 in that test.
And torque has already nose dived long before.
So lets see these graphs of yours and your intake excelling all the way to 7500 ? Maybe if you could prove it to people more would try ?
What cam etc ?
And torque has already nose dived long before.
So lets see these graphs of yours and your intake excelling all the way to 7500 ? Maybe if you could prove it to people more would try ?
What cam etc ?
#40
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Yet almost every graph there aside from those "bigger" intakes they're peaking a little before 6500 in that test.
And torque has already nose dived long before.
So lets see these graphs of yours and your intake excelling all the way to 7500 ? Maybe if you could prove it to people more would try ?
What cam etc ?
And torque has already nose dived long before.
So lets see these graphs of yours and your intake excelling all the way to 7500 ? Maybe if you could prove it to people more would try ?
What cam etc ?
This goes on to what i said before. The ls3 intake is a great match to the ls3 cam. It seems to fight larger cams and is not efficient with them.