What heads are you using??

People ASSume the LT4 intake is better but the GM one it is internally the same as the LT1, just has more material above the runner which could be used to port match to heads IF the heads have ports a lot taller the LT1 ports.

 

I was once told assume makes an *** out of you and me. ***-u-me

 

I ordered LE2 H/C package

 

What a shocker, given that the Edelbrock is machined for a 58mm throttle body. Granted, I'm not expecting huge gains out of mine or anything, but let's have some common sense here.

 

Yes let's have some common sense. You sound as if you believe being ported for 58mm was a hinderance with a stock TB . that would be no problem, heck it would even give it a couple extra CCs of plenum volume.

 

I'm kind of ashamed to call you a Firebird brethren after you having just said that O_O

Cap's right, wth are you talking about? OK Stock TB for example is 'o' and the intake's TB holes are 'O'. Common sense tells me that there isn't going to be any power loss by putting a smaller hole up to a bigger hole, when the direction of air flow is from smaller to larger. Now, flip that around, by having a 58mm on a stock 54mm opening, and there's some turbulence to be made from that 2mm lip.

 

HUH?!?! The Edelbroke LOSES hp to the stock manifold. Period, end of story. Sorry you wasted $400. My common sense says your above statement makes no sense.

 

if anyone on here asked around before hand they woulda known...ive known for 2 years now they were junk...the problem is simply plenum volume...asl lloyd...maybe he will chime in on ported ones.....

 

The Edelbroke intake is very small, that is for sure.

I prefer the stock LT1/4 intakes for the larger plenum volume and the way they runners reach the plenum are over the way the Edelbrocks are angked towards the TB.

Only advantage of the Edelbroke intake (other than having an "air gap" and being pretty and red) will be it starts off with a larger cross section through the runner at injector ski slope so you are gonna be limited less by THIS area than a stock LT1/4 intake but a ported LT1/4 intake can be opened just as large in this area AND the port can be made to steadily get wider as it tapers back to the plenum area resulting in a much larger cross section at this point where the air has to make a 90 degree turn to enter the port.

The way the Edelbroke intake runners are shaped, you can't do this to the runners since they all have alot of turn in them.

If they tried the test on a head that had a larger cross section at the pushrod pinch, maybe the Edlbroke intake would ahve done a lil better (in comparison to a stock LT1/4 intake) but it still has that small plenum that would suck dry even sooner with a better set of heads so who knows.

All being equal, a ported LT1/4 would have been better reghardless.

Lloyd

 

Stick with the stock intake forsure.

 

Updated results in the new GMHTP today (my issue is dated Feb 2009, for some reason)

Ported Edelbrock Heads/Intake w/52mm VS Ported Edelbrock Heads/Intake w/58mm VS Ported Edelbrock Heads + Ported stock intake w/58mm
Peak HP 406.5 416.1 422.7
Peak TQ 402.0 409.4 414.3

A net loss using the Edelbrock intake VS a stocker, even with the Edelbrock heads.

 

I'm curious, since I don't have that GMHTP issue yet, was the Edelbrock intake ported in any of the tests? Also, did they run a test of the stock intake "as cast"?

 

Looks like they cleaned the casting up and did some port matching, but not a full port job.
It's frustrating sometimes trying to get an apples to apples comparison *sigh*

 

I went with a LE3 ported stock Lt1 Intake! All goes i next week!!

 

On the 17th. I'm watching you buddy!!