Famine67

iTrader: (3)

I am trying to decide between porting my L92 and selling it and getting a stock LS3 intake.

I read Richard's thread about the L92 intake's flow numbers, but I've also heard that Mast motorsports prefers the ported L92 for some applications and I've seen this dyno comparison. Could the increased power in this test be due to the low compression ratio?

Both intakes fit in my car and I don't care about how ugly the L92 intake is. I'm running a 10.7:1 compression ratio, a cam lift of .620" with no forced induction. According to Richard's thread there isn't much flow on the stock L92 at high lift.

I can't seem to find consistent info on whether or not the L92 flows better or worse than the LS3 and if it responds well to porting.

dr_whigham

iTrader: (49)

Curious as well, since the wife's Escalade is due for some extra "umph" so to speak. Under the curve though...

low2001gmc

iTrader: (148)

Flow doesnt always equate more horespower. Its been proven on heads so why not intakes too.

Consider:

* Mast preference in some cases and dynos;
* Alvin of PCM dyno test where l92 intake made like 13hp/10tq more than ls3;
* Thread on silveradoss.com that has found its way to ptnet on ported l92 outflowing fast ls3;
* Note Fast dont make truck rectangular port intake;

I run a ls2portworks ported l92 on an lq9 with ls3s and love it. Outran truck with almost identical mods except it had 4400 to my 3800 stall, ls3 intake to my ported l92, he had higher .015 cam lift but stock heads to my lesser lift cam on my self ported exhaust only heads, and he had 6.2, 14 more cubes, on my 6.0. i dont care about looks either, i prefer performance