lawrenq

iTrader: (2)

This intake looks familiar. Haven't seen this posted here yet.
https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/p...ld-first-look/

blackbyrd

iTrader: (14)

I was wondering when this thing would make it on to hear, saw that article earlier this week.

Seems promising, I like the new approach and thinking outside the box............ Now I just want to see it on an engine. Hope this doesnt turn into another vararam dual inlet intake thing though

LaBLKv6Z

iTrader: (13)

Interested to see how it would stack up against a rod modded LS3 manifold. Interesting design.

Ls7colorado

iTrader: (3)

If anything... it looks good and will clean up the injectors and injector wiring...

With coils relocated and some nice valve covers this would REALLY clean up the engine bay....

pdxmotorhead

I could see it being interesting if you got a fuel rail leak. and electrical enclosed in side.
Definitely thinking out of the box,,

G Atsma

A potentially explosive situation, for sure.....

NicD

iTrader: (7)

I would assume it would be similar to a fuel pump being in a fuel tank.

LaBLKv6Z

iTrader: (13)

I don't know, it's some what similar to the Vortec intakes with the spider injection.

LS1Formulation

iTrader: (13)

If it works as well as they say, I'll be buying one this summer for my SS. Be interesting to see if the gains they stated while using it on a stock LS3 will carry over to one with mods. I'd like to see some more mid-range torque to get my heavy pig moving!

MuhThugga

It is an interesting design. I will look forward to seeing test results. I second wanting a comparison to a ported stock intake with the rod mod.

DualQuadDave

iTrader: (6)

The different runner lengths bother me. So how do you tune it, have individual EGT's and figure it out? It's interesting, but I wouldn't buy one. At this point, I doubt there is more more power to be had in plastic unless they can get a plastic tunnel ram to work as well as the Hi Ram. Just my observation, but every time I see a runner entry floating in free air in a sealed plenum, I know it's not going to make the max power. The Hi Ram and CID intakes share a common trait in that the runner entry point is smooth to the base of plenum. The exception I have seen so far to this is the Lo Ram, but I wonder how well it would do with the same basic architecture. The Edelbrock LS3 Cross Ram hardly ever gets mentioned, but that thing makes insane torque across a range. The lack of easy support for the dual throttle bodies is a shame.

LS1Formulation

iTrader: (13)

I agree, if it was easy to swap to dual TBs, I'd be all over that Edelbrock intake. Power AND good looks to match. And I don't think the XS intake was meant to produce max power, I think it was supposed to boost torque through the whole rev range. Which is what I'd be after. Power above 6500 RPM is pretty useless to me, since my SS is 99% street.

jasons69chevelle

Good to see someone still pushing the envelope.

JimMueller

iTrader: (9)

That's my concern as well... can it be properly tuned with OEM PCMs if the PCM only supports per-bank fueling. If there are aftermarket solutions that support per-cylinder fueling, then it's possible but a big hassle to implement. Personally, I don't care for the extra weight and heat sink design of the Cross Ram, nor the ease to implement the dual throttle bodies without aftermarket PCMs.

Project GatTagO

iTrader: (7)

"In developing the XS intake, Performance Design tested three different runner lengths ("A," "B," and "C") and discovered that using all three mixed between the cylinders offered the best overall performance. "

JimMueller

iTrader: (9)

Similar email reply from them below. If the runner lengths are different, wouldn't it cause different cylinder fill rates, and thus different fueling demand per runner length? If yes, how do you tune around that?

-----
At this time we are not offering different runner length options for the XS. The different runner lengths that are in there now are the front/rear for clearance and the center ones are mixed to maximize torque/power balance.
-----

LS1Formulation

iTrader: (13)

I ordered a ported rod mod intake from GPI recently, so I'll see if I can swing buying one of these mid summer so I can do back to back testing.

JimMueller

iTrader: (9)

More feedback from sales:

-----
Sorry for the delayed response. I wanted some input from engineering before responding. The choice of runner length and location were a general optimization of the performance, ideally each cylinder being filled the best possible for the location and firing order. Being an optimization, theoretically they are going to be closer to the same oxygen per cylinder and perform better. The reality is that the tuning changes with engine RPM and load across all cylinders and further interacts with exhaust tuning and cam specifications. In reality the differences are small and should not require individual cylinder tuning. For those developing the ultimate performance and with the ability to tune individual cylinders, they will be able to optimize further, but is not a requirement to run. In our testing we did not see appreciable AFR differences but did arrive at this combination of runners to achieve the best overall performance in power and total area under the curve.
-----
We have not solidified the ship date due to some production items that are still being ironed out. Fuel rails are being machined by an outside supplier so there are some aspects that are out of our control. We are still projecting for early May first shipments but that is subject to change. We will be shipping pre-orders in the order received.
-----

Elkch58

Great to see!

MuhThugga

Have they posted the results of their comparison test against some other intakes to back up their claims?

Quote:

After testing all the mainstream manifolds available, our manifold has done what no other did…make horsepower and torque gains on a stock engine with gains increasing as the engine got more aggressive with cam and exhaust upgrades. All other manifolds lost on HP or Torque to make the gain on the other.