GGPC

Yes, just as long its in stock form(hasn't been cut up already).

GGPC

No extra charge. Thats included in the process.

ckpLT

iTrader: (1)

noob to the board. I've been reading this thread and you said there will not be any provisions for EGR. Will there be anyplace to machine the provisions or have them done as an option? It took me a good bit of time to figure out how to put those tubes on my Hooker Headers. I hate to put a plug in them. 1995 Corvette. Since my heads flow 273/212 @.600, I guess I would be getting the base model. If you need some money to get started, let me know. My only other choice is a SuperRam that is near impossible or made of solid gold for the LT. I hope you make a good bit of profit, seeing all the interest. Maybe Holley will buy your idea from you and you'll be zillionaires!!!!!!!!

Thanks

hempkat94z

How close is it to being avaliable?

GGPC

A super ram would look interesting on a LT1. They flow very well. There a PITA on gen Is, cant imagine what it would take to get it on an LT1. A EGR provision could be made for the HSR, question is where do we put it. The provisions for the vacuum lines are on the back of the plenum. It can be done though. If emissions are a problem, just stick your stocker back on when it comes time.

I think you would be happier with a stage II. The runners are stock on the stage I, no porting or polishing. If you have aftermarket heads or have had your stockers ported flowing up to about 285cfm, a stage II would be more beneficial. You always want your intake to flow more than your heads(or at least come close if you can help it).

GGPC

Pretty close. Im guessing late Feb(couple of weeks). We're still trying to find a way to use the stock LT fuel rails on this thing. Some fabbing for you guys may be required if that route is taken as it stands now. But it keeps you from having to spend an additional $250.00 for Holley's.

Puck

iTrader: (17)

Would that also be an issue for 92-93 fuel rails with the crossover in the back?

GGPC

Actually, the crossover in the back would be the way to go. You will need a crossover several inches longer thats on the stockers.

The injectors come off the Holley rails at a 'T' angle. The LT1s would have to be turned around backwards to fit.

GrnDragon

iTrader: (4)

I have been wanting this for my car for some time now, but after buying all the other parts for my car my wallet is hurting so I am wondering how much this will actually help my engine.

Will this flow a considerable amount more air on a 385 LT4 with 10-12 psi from a F-1A over a Lingenfelter ported LT4 intake?

I have been wanting this just for the visual upgrade over the LT4 intake, but now I need more justification since I am low on funds.

T/A KID

iTrader: (12)

Grndragon your boosted, I wouldn't worry about the intake as much as a N/A guy would. That of course is just my opinion

Not to take anything away from GGPC, but I think if someone took a Factory manifold and cut the top off with a vertical mill (this would add quite a bit of plenum volume) and cut the runners at an angle were roughly 3-4inches of material could be added (raise runner length to around 7inches over the factory 3) they would have something.
In fact basically just that has been done before by a guy name steve quinn who had a naturally aspirated LTX motor running 9.7's using LT1 heads in a 370CI motor. Take a look http://home.wideopenwest.com/~squinn0039/ltx.html he just modified the upper portion of the manifold (along with the insides) and he didn't even touch the runners length, he converted to a single plane later and didn't pick up anything from what I have been told. Ed wright modded the top of his LT4 intake (slightly I may add) and on a modest 355 picked up 12rwhp

Modifing an edelbrock intake would be even easier since the runners visually easier too see and work with. By cutting the top off, one could port the entire intake. I have a stock LT1 intake laying around with excess to aluminum sheets and a tig guy, if I ever do a N/A build I might just make me one, lol

GGCP have you guys ever thought about doing this as well?? You couldn't use the factory crossover with it but that can easily be fixed (can't with the Holley stealthram either). You guys could build a template and modify LTx intakes using some aluminum and some welding?

ckpLT

iTrader: (1)

I'm not worried about emissons. My car is exempt in Missouri....only OBDII cars 1996 and up. Mine is a '95 Y body. I would just rather keep it or I would not have put Cats back on it. Did you have to shorten it as much for the L98 Vette guys you have done? Do you think your modded intake will equal or outperform the SuperRam? If I'm not mistaken, you are trying to have the torque of the L98 without sacrificing HP of the LT1, but make it better all around. Can the vacuum lines be put on the side like the stocker? Lingenfelter CNC'd my heads, so that's what I've got with 2.00 and 1.56 valves.

Thanks

Puck

iTrader: (17)

How long would the crossover need to be? Do you think someone could remove the rear crossover from a 93 fuel rail and weld on some NPT fittings and run a section of braided fuel line of the correct length? Basically just replace the crossover with a longer, flexible one.

I'm just having a hard time visualizing what needs to be done, and trying to see if I can save any cash by modifying my rails to work with it. Little things like brackets and stuff are easy to make, but if it just wont work fundamentally I don't want to waste my time.

Of course if its not feasable I'll cough up the extra cash for the right stuff, but if I could save a couple hundred I would.

GGPC

Depends how much your heads flow. Several years ago I sent an LT1 intake to them to be ported out. They gutted it pretty good. I spent a month e-mailing then and asking what it flows. They tried to ignore me I guess but finally somebody got back to me with 260...ish.

So if your heads flow up to 260..ish, and were to compare your LT4 to a HSR stage II, you would see great low-mid range torque increases. You would get moderate power increases up to 6600-6700rpm.But no where close to the increase in torque you would see.Now if your heads flowed 270 and up, you would see good power increases along with great torque increases. The more your heads flow over 260ish, the better power #s you will see.

If your heads are flowing 280cfm and up, I think it would be worth it.If not and your short on money, I'd say your LT4 will be sufficient. I know i'm not helping myself out from the business end but just being honest.

taner

iTrader: (6)

8 inches from top surface on block where intake sits up leaves me about 1/2 - 3/4 inch clearance.

GGPC

Wow, that intake is pricey. Just goes to show welding isn't cheap.We're using the HSR cause we're familiar with it. We know what it flows and the hp/trq it puts down. We can work with it without altering the integrity of the runners increasing torque . When you start taking away or adding material to the runners, you really have to be careful not to have one runner flow more/less than the others. A few cfm is acceptable but you have to watch what your doing.

Peak hp is great to pick up but I wonder how it compared throughout the rpm range.

GGPC

The L98 vettes, we had to shorten it a little more than we wanted to. They didnt have much room. Plus, all of the HSRs had to be air gaps so they could use their stock distributors. That was one of the selling points.

The super ram flows very well out of the box. 280s I believe. A small amount of porting to the HSR will surpass that. We thought about the super ram but I think we would of hung ourselves at the end of it.
We're trying to give guys with better flowing heads more hp/trq where the LT1 fails to do so. The Lt1 intake is a very small intake compared to the intakes they have for gen 1s. If they,GM, could have made the LT1 intake like the mini ram, then they would of had something. Shoot, you can port the mini ram up to 300cfm. Their runners are a half inch longer than the LT1 with more of a plenum area. Edelbrock had a good shot at it,possibly the best shot, but didnt do so either. Besides the quarter inch longer runners and that small air gap, I still dont see that much of a benefit or difference.

Vacuum lines on the side of the plenum can be done. We can try and make it close to the stocker as possible.

GGPC

The crossover would have to be 7-8 inches across I believe. I'll have to measure tomorrow. I do think your solution would work.

We dont have any lt1 fuel rails on us but when I was checking it out, It seemed the lt1s would make contact with the manifold to the point where the injector would not seat properly.I'll give you my half *** diagram:
__
manifold \
it would need to be this way:
__
manifold \
The manifold is the manifold. The horizontal lines are the fuel rails and the slash is the injector. I REALLY hope that helps.

Ok, it wouldnt show it like I wanted. The fuel rail would have to be on the outside of the injector and not in between the injector and manifold.

manifold ---\ this wont work
manifold \--- this will

GGPC

Yeah, that wont be a problem. Do you still have the cowl under the windshield in tact?

AChotrod

iTrader: (17)

If this fits under a stock cowl?? Ill bolt one on and dyno it for you, if I get to keep it, if I lose HP/TQ its my loss, If it gains its your and everyone on the internets gain!!! Just a thought

GGPC

We have a good amount of #s from all types of setups. This intake has been around and tested since 2002. Not just by us, but tons of other gen1 guys. Our test at the beginning of the thread has been the first compared to an LT1 intake that we know of. Dont know many gen1 guys using them. Most of the testing recently was for fitment and production. How to weld it, cut it, port it ext. and have it work smoothly under an LT1 hood.

If we needed to send one out, whether it worked or not, we would of needed it back as a template for others though. Thanks anyway.

And yes, it fits under a stock cowl.