Is the truck intake really that bad? Discussion.
Apr 22, 2004 | 12:00 PM
#11
TECH Resident
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
From: Wayne Mi
Originally Posted by vanillagorilla
That sounds REALLY interesting. Will they be running an article on that? I've read in another mag. that the LSX intake is an awesome design. It also allows pretty extensive porting, which would help bigger displacement applications and high reving engines.
Does anyone actually know the real runner lengths for any of these manifolds? If we have that, we can use one of those runner length equations to see if the truck manifold is actually adequate above a given RPM.
I feel that any intake where you gain hp, and don't lose any tq is a win-win situation. But if you lose tq and gain hp, you lose, especially with a heavy truck. Rarely will you gain in both areas though. Just my thoughts.
Does anyone actually know the real runner lengths for any of these manifolds? If we have that, we can use one of those runner length equations to see if the truck manifold is actually adequate above a given RPM.
I feel that any intake where you gain hp, and don't lose any tq is a win-win situation. But if you lose tq and gain hp, you lose, especially with a heavy truck. Rarely will you gain in both areas though. Just my thoughts.
I have a ls1 book that says ls1 & ls6 intakes have a runner of 262mm and the truck one is 263mm
Apr 22, 2004 | 12:59 PM
#12
Like I said earlier, runner length isn't the issue. I think the open plenum design of the LS1/LS6/Holley/LSX will provide better distribution and all out flow compared to the center inlet of the trucks intake.
Here is something that hasn't been mentioned before:
How does the intakes's actual runner path effects engine power? The truck intake has air starting from the top then going around the bottom then into the cylinder head. The LS16X intakes have the air starting from the open center then going over the top then down into the head. Depending on the flow path of the intake, incoming air is going to merge with a different area of the heads port surface. Which intake design places the air on the best path to take advantage of the cylinder head's port shape and valve location?
I think the intake that best compliments the cylinder heads design would be the best choice.
Here is something that hasn't been mentioned before:
How does the intakes's actual runner path effects engine power? The truck intake has air starting from the top then going around the bottom then into the cylinder head. The LS16X intakes have the air starting from the open center then going over the top then down into the head. Depending on the flow path of the intake, incoming air is going to merge with a different area of the heads port surface. Which intake design places the air on the best path to take advantage of the cylinder head's port shape and valve location?
I think the intake that best compliments the cylinder heads design would be the best choice.
Apr 22, 2004 | 06:29 PM
#14
Thread Starter
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
From: Fort Worth
I think the intake that best compliments the cylinder heads design would be the best choice.
I was wrong about the runner length, which is why I started the thread. To learn. The air path is different and that may be the only thing that really seperates the two.
I don't think you will find a magic truck cam that will make 400 rwhp at 5500 rpms.
Apr 22, 2004 | 08:44 PM
#15
man i am glad someone answered all this. just when i was going to think about a swap to. heck farmtruc is using a truck intake on his ls1 and is spinning it to 6300 rpm's and it is still making good power.
Apr 23, 2004 | 10:09 PM
#16
Farmtruc has the truck intake, and I have the LS6 intake. I'm pretty sure both trucks are matched for HP. His is a 2001 LS1 and mine is a 2002 LS1, same heads, cam ect. Maybe he will chime in on this.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
