96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

DisasterFormula
We have already established the Edelbrock intake is junk, to use an LT1 intake on LT4 heads requires a little material be added above the ports, then the flanges reground. Seriously doubt that cost the $500 that the Edelbrock LT4 manifold costs. Given the LT1 Edelbrock results, and the fact the whole Edelbrock LT4 kit is only rated at 406flywheel HP and that is with heads 20-25cc bigger in the intake port and with bigger valves. Pretty strong suggestion that their LT4 parts are not any good either.

If insisting on LT4 would mod the stock intake or find an original LT4. Then again when you look at results the LT4 stuff isn't really all that, if looking to spend that kind of money just go aftermarket.

Adam1203

iTrader: (5)

Honestly You have done nothing of the sort. All you have proven is that the lt1 intake is on par with the edelbrock intake. at best. you are picking and choosing data that backs up your argument and not even looking at the data as a whole.

http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...ttle_body.html
In this article when you compare the lt1 to the airgap with stock throttle body peeked higher But averaged better numbers then the stock intake.

But here is the big thing you are missing. The airgap was not designed around the stock throttle body it was designed to work with a 52 and 58 throttle body which edelbrock recomends.. second as stated by edelbrock you are supposed to port match this intake. which i question if any of the article actually did as it was not stated in any of them. So if you dont properly install a product then it is junk?

even though on stock tb there is a 4 hp difference when you include multiple variable which could account for the 4 hp .I would hardly call that JUNK as much as i would say an expensive stock intake.

fex77k

iTrader: (2)

Go spend the money on it then, nobody here is telling you that you can't run the edebrock. They are just suggesting that you spend the money elsewhere, when the stock manifold will do.

Adam1203

iTrader: (5)

You people on here pick and chose WHAT you want to read. If you continue on i say its nothing more then a expensive stock replacement. but you quoted that because you want to attack me and make me look bad obviously. Thats why the majority of the intellectual people are no longer partaking in this forum any more. Because who wants to discuses stuff with people who pick and chose what they read and want to acknowledge.

But hey im done with this discussion. he kept trying to get people to discuss the mater if you went back and read all his post i merely did what HE asked. No one wanted to talk to him because no matter how knowledgeable he was A) he is a dck and b) everyone knows how biased he is.

Like i said Im done with this. because obviously a discussion cant be had.

SS RRR

iTrader: (2)

Lots of soarness going on in here.
You two should put money on this. Make it interesting.

fex77k

iTrader: (2)

Oh boy, I really wasn't attacking you. I've heard that this internet is serious business.


In other news, you can buy anything you want and run whatever. Nobody can make you do something you don't want to. If a few people on the internet have a different opinion, it doesn't mean they are attacking you.

There is many different routes to take on an intake manifold for an LT1. Very little in the way of bolt on, after running a stock piece it comes down to how deep your pockets are.

ZFreie

Straight up gangsta **** son!

No but seriously, its the internet guys. Get over it lol. **** I'm 23 and I act better then most of you guys which, I'm going to guess are older then me.

And people wonder why threads get locked....

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

Adam1203
The link you posted you apparently just looked at the "conclusion" not the actual results, the result is $800 worth of intake and TB for 2.5hp average gain but they never tested the 52mm on the stock intake which does work fine.

Far as the port matching excuse and it is purely an excuse look at the link I provided with the full edelbrock heads/cam/intake/TB that is a 10hp average gain for heads/intake/TB and larger cam. Those are NOT good numbers.
They test of stock intake/TB vs. Edelbrock pieces with the Edelbrock heads nets a 2hp average gain with the heads that are supposed to match the intake and again they did not test the 52mm TB with the stock intake.

You are reading exactly what they say rather than the test results. They have to be nice to advertisers. If their drive was 100% for the reader they would have tested the 52mm TB on the stock intake as it would have worked fine.

Your suggestion that the Edelbrock was hurt by not being port matched is a joke, so you are suggesting the Edelbrock should have been ported but that the stock intake should be as cast with a 48mm TB? You should work for one of the other less honest magazines that very deliberately stack "tests" in advertiser's favor, they would love you.

strokeme

iTrader: (1)

To the OP, I didn't even bother reading all the pages on this thread because honestly I'm tired of these pissing matches people make of this. I have three different engine dyno pulls, 1 being with the edelbrock intake. Now mine is a 383 not a stock engine. With the edelbrock and my holley 58mm tb my engine made peak tq of 476.3 and hp 527.8. Next was a GM intake(ported) and tpis 58mm. Peak tq of 483.4 and hp 543.1. And lastly was with tpis mini-ram intake and their 58mm tb. Peak tq of 479.0 and hp 555.6. So money wise, go with a gm intake. I do run the edelbrock for the simple fact that I got it off a guy who never actually ran it. So it was pretty cheap. I can deal with having 15 horse less cuz I like the look better. For the love of god people supply the guy with good info and let him decide!

AChotrod

iTrader: (17)

Those are nice numbers^^^^ That FWHP or RWHP???

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

strokeme thank you very much for posting more independent results.

muddyjimmy

iTrader: (15)

Was that Edelbrock intake ported also or run as cast? Not stirring here but looking for the full details.

Rob94hawk

iTrader: (1)

Whether FWHP or not the results of the TPIS miniram is no surprise with it's shorter than stock intake runners. If it weren't so damn expensive I would swap it out in a hearbeat.

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

The extent of the GM intake porting should be discussed. I have seen people call opening up the TB bores for a 58mm TB "porting". I would not call that porting.

The excuse the magazines had for the poor Edelbrock intake results on stock heads was the ports were already bigger than the heads. Then when they tested the full package they got 4hp from the Edelbrock intake and TB. I think most of us would expect more than 4hp from the TB alone.

People are desperate to believe the Edelbrock stuff is good.

The Edelbrock made 527hp 476tq
"ported" stock made 543hp 483tq

How much less would a stock intake have to make for you to say the $450-500 pricetag on the Edelbrock is worthwhile?

What if porting only allows the Edelbrock to equal the ported stocker?

The TPIS miniram is almost $900 with a 12hp gain over a $200???? ported stocker on a decent stroker setup not a stock shortblock.

There are guys who will consider $700 for a 12hp gain especially since the more power you make the harder and more expensive it is to gain a little bit more. Even at that though it is a really good argument for ported stock being a really good option for most heads/cam setups.


I understand people want good aftermarket parts for the LT1, our aftermarket is really small compared to other engines but pretending not so good parts are good is not going to force companies to make something worthwhile. If they can spend $10K on R&D and sell junk why would they spend any more on R&D to make something better? It would just cut into profits IF they sold enough to make profit.

muddyjimmy

iTrader: (15)

I am not saying one product is better than any other product or trying to justify weather the Edelbrock intake is worth the $400-500 it costs. I have read the GMHTP and I understand that the the gain, if any, is not worth the investment at that price. I just wanted to know the details of his results. People can post dyno numbers all day long but the results do not matter if all the details are not given. I just thought that it would be interesting to know if the Edlebrock and for that matter, the TPIS were ported like the stock intake was. Would either of them made more power if they were?

Is either one of those intakes junk? They may not be worth the dollar amount they are asking for them but that may be subjective to the person buying one.

Z28Camaro30Ann

iTrader: (15)

Edelbrock Intake Manifold - $450-$500
Additional Porting - $150-$250
Total Cost - $600-$750

TPIS Mini-Ram Intake - $900
Additional Porting - $150-$250
Total Cost - $1050-$1150

Stock Intake Manifold - FREE
Additional Porting - $150-$250
Total Cost - $150-$250

I am not looking at horsepower numbers right now I am looking at cost using strokeme's example.

REGARDLESS of what porting was or was not done to the Edelbrock or TPiS Miniram manifolds, the STOCK intake manifold AFTER porting made more power than the Edelbrock in whatever condition it was in and it cost AT LEAST HALF of the price. The TPiS Miniram made good torque but is ungodly expensive.

Therefore look at the facts! The ported stock intake manifold has been proven to be PLENTY for stock builds, H/C/I builds, AND stroker builds, and for the cost you CAN NOT beat it. Hence why noone has. If you have to port the Edelbrock intake manifold to get it to beat a ported stock manifold, then your price just went up.

Like 96capricemgr said, there are people out there who are willing to pay that much for a little more HP, but that is because their options are now SEVERELY limited and if they can even gain ONE RWHP from something they will probably take it, but guys like that are turning to sheetmetal intakes and other drastic measures that make even more power than the Edelbrock or the TPiS or the Stock manifolds are capable of.

Bottom line is, whether we are comparing as-cast for as-cast, ported for ported, or whatever, the stock ported manifold is STILL the best way to go because with the $250 to $450 you just saved, you can go out and buy your cam, or rockers, or your 52-58mm Throttle Body, or whatever else you can think of to add some more power.

That is ALL we are trying to say. If you have unlimited cash and want to give it a shot then go for it! Not everyone has that kind of money though and they are looking for an easy way to get HP...on other engines an intake manifold upgrade may be the way to go and that is the mentality some people use, but for an LT1 that is NOT the case. You can make more power in other areas before you ever even need to worry about your manifold.

For example, I had 411 RWHP and 390 RWTQ on the STOCK, UNPORTED Intake Manifold. Now I am doing a 383 Stroker with 220cc TrickFlow Heads and I will be using the STOCK, PORTED Intake Manifold.

I also will be getting flow numbers of my new heads, THEN getting flow numbers of my heads WITH the intake manifold so that I can see whether or not the intake manifold is restricting the heads or not. I will post results when I get them!

BIGCAT7274

any one know what the csa is for all three of those intakes?

Puck

iTrader: (17)

Stock intake ported flows 275 cfm IIRC. Good for plenty of power, but there are surely gains to be had for those in the small percent with big headed high rpm strokers looking for over 450rwhp.

On a hydrualic roller with a 420rwhp goal, save your money. Porting the stocker is more then enough.

96capricemgr

iTrader: (1)

http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...g/viewall.html

I don't know which LT1 intake they used though, there are at least three distinctively different versions, the early with no fuel rail crossover and rectangular ports, the middle years with the crossover and rectangular ports and the late with crossover and trapezoidal ports(same internal as LT4).

Besides the CSA though the plenum volume is a concern 28% reduction is not really the right way to go.

I like how they say the Edelbrock intake is too big at the gasket and that is why it made less power on stock heads but the CSA is .05 bigger than stock at that point? As I have said I think their "conclusions" are more about keeping an advertiser happy than really wrapping up the data.

muddyjimmy

iTrader: (15)

I would still be interested to know from Strokeme if either aftermarket intake was ported. As I said, I understand the price per hp concern, but would like to know the technical details of the dyno testing.

I do have an Edelbrock LT1 AirGap intake on my car. I paid nowhere near what they go for new and mine was BNIB. I am interested in knowing if the AirGap can be ported to equal or out perform the ported stock intake. I would prefer to run the Edelbrock as long as it is not a huge performance disadvantage to a ported stock intake. This may be something I have to test myself but an answer to my previous question would help.