five7kid

iTrader: (14)

I don't know of anyone who has done this in a 3rd gen, because hood clearance could be a problem:




This is for the stroked 6.0 L92-headed, LS3 intake swap in my '57. No problem with hood clearance in it, of course, but curious how much difference it'll make vs. the factory plastic intake. It dyno'd 417 RWHP with the LS3 intake last year, with what was admittedly a "safe" tune.

Data logging at the track showed quite a bit of spark retard on 91 pump gas, which I'm sure didn't help performance. So, it's not going to be a complete apples-to-apples comparison, since I'll also be converting to E85 while I'm at it. That means my 3/8" fuel line system is marginal, so it'll be upgraded to 1/2" as well.

The dyno session should be in 2-3 weeks, so I'll let you know how it goes.

In similar news, my son's S10 Blazer with 5.7 swap (shaved 317 heads, LS6 cam) has been an underachiever. It had an LS1 intake on it when he got it, he found a BBK intake that made decent power, but was horribly inconsistent at the track. I had an LS2 intake laying around, so we put that on it with a 92mm TB, that hurt power but consistency got better. Now he's going with a Holley 300-137 single-plane squarebore port injection manifold with an Edelbrock elbow on it, reusing the 92mm TB. That combo isn't nearly as tall. We'll see how it does, but we expect it'll regain the high-RPM power the LS2 intake was lacking.

Lonnie P

One thing as far as consistency goes... the plastic intake does not suffer from heat soak problems like the aluminum ones do. The BBK can vary probably 15hp due to heat.

As far as the hi-ram, it is a good intake, but I would say it is more geared toward a high HP, big cube build over a stock cam only application. I haven't personally dyno tested one, but I have seen impressive gains (40+hp) over an LS3 in 6000+rpm, 400+CI applications.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

Yes, hear that all the time. The car was all over the place until I started spraying it down between runs, and gained a lot when I put a towel on top of it and keep it moist throughout the race day. My son's BBK for sure picked up a lot of heat, but any intake that sits on that valley is going to pick up heat.

In both cases, having air flow around the runners and plenum should help keep the intake at a more consistent temp.

The Hi-Ram is going on a stroked 6.0, .005"-over, so 403 CID. It's hardly a "stock cam":

86lg4qjetBird

Five7kid, you are completely right about it not being a stock cam, but why convert to e85? Do you plan on running an insanely high compression ratio, or boosting it or both?You gain a lil bit because of the octane bump, and cooler intake charge but burn a lot more fuel and have to reevaluate your entire fuel system. e85 for N.A. cars never seemed practical.

Your sons setup with the low profile elbow has been proven many times to make good power but, if your going for high rpm stability a normal elbow would deliver a much less turbulent charge making for and easier and more consistent tune.

Lonnie P

That's a decent size cam, so I would figure you are turning it well above 6500.
Do you have aftermarket heads also?


That intake may still be a little excessive unless its a loose converter & steep gears to keep it in the 6000+ range the whole track.


Most people I see using these are the 427+cube or forced induction applications.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

With 91 pump gas, it was in knock retard most of the way down the track, with only 23 degrees timing. 100 octane race gas is $10/gal - E85 is $3.50/gal. Even with the higher volume required, E85 is still cheaper.

I'm running 11.3:1 CR. I ran E85 in the carb'd 396 that was in the car before, with only 10:1 CR. I understand the fuel system requirements. With pump gas, the injectors were running 55% duty cycle max, so I've got plenty of injector size for E85 (I actually sized them assuming they were rated at 58 psi - turns out the advertized rating was at 43 psi, so they were much larger than I thought I was getting). I'm upping the fuel line from 3/8" to 1/2", just to make sure (3/8" is on the ragged edge for E85 and this combo - I'll be reusing the 3/8" line for the return). I chose the pump to make sure it had more than enough capacity.

It's not the low-low profile elbow, more of a mid (Edelbrock 3848 if you want to look it up). He probably could have run the "normal" elbow, but this should be fine.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

The tune was only to 6000 the first time around. Will be stretching it with the new intake.

Converter is 4000 stall, gears 3.89. It'll be running up in the RPM range most of the track.

It is probably more intake than really required. It seems more low-RPM friendly than the single plane carb-mount-type intakes, so that's why I went with it. The tuner keeps bringing up "Procharger", but that's taking me in a direction I'm not ready to go.

86lg4qjetBird

I didn't realize that's what you guys get at the pump out there, e85 makes a lot of sense. And nice get with the injectors.
Go turbo if anything, then you can really make that intake and e85 work for ya.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

91 octane includes 10% ethanol to boot.

I'm just not into power adders. I'm going fast enough as it is. Any more and it starts getting expensive (and turbos aren't exactly known for their consistency in bracket racing).

cosmick

Valid points, but the boost being cheaper than the intake manifold, and making more power to boot, is going to decide some guys the other way.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

Can't imagine how boost would cost less than a <$700 intake manifold.

Lonnie P

Just to tempt you... that manifold loves boost. lol.

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

Not the least bit tempted.

My son had the day off and got busy:




Also did the LS6 valley cover swap while he was at it.

On our normal "test drive loop", seemed pretty happy. Guess we'll see next month when the track opens.

cosmick

Brand new, as in not used / reman, CXRacing T70 with 0.81 A/R hot side, is only $255. Then I discovered that Squires Turbo Systems, source of the rear-turbo kits in place of the muffler, have pushed a stock 4.8L LR4 like one of my 2, to 5.6 PSI on a stock tune, stock injectors, and found 77 RWHP. They tried it in a C1500 with a 4L60E, ( I'm also 4L60E for now ) and that meant 303 RWHP, IIRC. That's only as much as a stock LS1, but less cost and the potential for more MPG, with cleaner emissions, and should also work on a stock LQ4.
So, 77 RWHP for $ 255, or $700 for what, 15 RWHP?
That's how I see it.
What I don't understand is you not wanting the power of turbocharging. Maybe because I've yet to drive more than 472 RWHP, someone else's modded Shelby, I don't think there's such a thing as too much. Maybe I'll feel differently once I make much more than that. But are you making more than that? Or am I missing something? If so, what?

five7kid

iTrader: (14)

"For only $255, you can turbo your LS! But, wait, there's more! For only an additional $255, we'll throw in this fine bridge!"

So, that "brand new, as in not used / reman, CXRacing T70 with 0.81 A/R hot side", or "Squires Turbo Systems rear-turbo-in-place-of-muffler" are bolt-on to a LQ4 for only $255. Wow, who would have thunk?

Other than the claim being totally absurd, you seem to be missing a defining point in what I'm doing - bracket racing, where consistency is king. Every once in awhile you'll see a ProCharger or nitrous car win a race in the classes I run, but it just doesn't happen with a turbo car. Maybe the turbo guys here aren't as smart as you - well, come on up and we'll see.

By the way, 2-steps and tranny brakes aren't allowed in most of my classes. You up for that?