FORCED INDUCTION Turbos | Superchargers | Intercoolers | H2O/Meth Injection

Turbo Intake Manifold options

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-07-2012 | 09:35 PM
  #21  
02'Z71ONDUBZ''s Avatar
TECH Resident
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
From: Tahlequah/Norman, OK
Default

You could just unhook your boost controller and run off the spring with each intake to measure airflow/boost loss. Then hook it back up to test at an even boost level. I think it would be interesting to compare the results from each set of data.
Old 05-07-2012 | 10:19 PM
  #22  
foose04's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,560
Likes: 3
From: Charleston, SC
Default

I got a mustang dyno locked in for this testing, but like I said it will take some time to do these swaps...time is limited. I may have to take a spring out of my gate to go as low as 10, but I can work it out.

Just need a fast manifold now.. Who's going to step up?
I got dibs on
Fast makes best power..
Pro-flow close second, maybe same peaks or more, but not best curve)
NNBS
NBS
Old 05-08-2012 | 12:55 AM
  #23  
383vert's Avatar
On The Tree
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
From: hillsboro, mo
Default

I'm in for the sults...
Old 05-08-2012 | 12:38 PM
  #24  
black00chev's Avatar
Slowest turbo build ever!
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,905
Likes: 1
From: Warrenton, VA
Default

I think the Holley Hi-ram would be right up there in the top 3 as well.
Old 05-08-2012 | 05:44 PM
  #25  
02'Z71ONDUBZ''s Avatar
TECH Resident
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
From: Tahlequah/Norman, OK
Default

Originally Posted by black00chev
I think the Holley Hi-ram would be right up there in the top 3 as well.
I agree and like it better than the Edelbrock pro-flow, but I don't think they make it for cathedral port heads yet? I honestly don't see either outperforming the Fast under the curve where it matters for our trucks though.

Last edited by 02'Z71ONDUBZ'; 05-08-2012 at 05:50 PM.
Old 05-12-2012 | 06:45 AM
  #26  
TimDave217's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
From: Manhattan. Ks
Default

Alright so another issue im thinking of is, the size of the motor itself. 4.8's , & 5.3's are the small motors so would these intakes FAST, Vic jr., the Holley Hi-Ram, and what other intakes people are using still make decent numbers on these motors as the bigger cubed motors?
Old 05-12-2012 | 09:33 AM
  #27  
lglowe's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 640
Likes: 0
From: Monticello,MS
Default

In my mind I would think it would help even more with bigger cubes because of the higher demand of air in the first place.
Old 05-12-2012 | 05:25 PM
  #28  
TimDave217's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
From: Manhattan. Ks
Default

well thats what im saying i guess. The bigger motors gain more than a 4.8 and 5.3 would most likely so would one of these intake listed actually be worth the money switching to???
Old 05-13-2012 | 12:20 AM
  #29  
TurboBerserker's Avatar
I AM A MOTHERF*CKER
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,132
Likes: 1
Default

IMO the holley will be in the same range as the PRO FLO XT. FAST > vic jr... A fully ported single plane MAST (which is light and day better than a Vic Jr) was < 30 hp ahead of a FAST 102 (test mule was a 468ci IIRC).

If I am ever able to get back in the shop and put BRT back together, I'll likely be running a ported FAST (but maybe a non-ported one too), unless I can't move some parts and budget decides me...
Old 11-03-2012 | 02:44 PM
  #30  
TURBHOE's Avatar
12 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,318
Likes: 2
From: Jacksonville FL.
Default

i wanna see this the holley on a boosted set up. short fat runners would be king for a turbo setup.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:54 AM.