Mini ram or super ram
Safety Car
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 4,724
Likes: 16
From: Little Elm TX
Originally Posted by hookedup
Beach,
Nice comparo analysis, you are right on with those suggestions.
Catch ya' later,
Dave
Nice comparo analysis, you are right on with those suggestions.
Catch ya' later,
Dave
How's Phil C. doing ? Is he in the 8's yet ? Last time I talked to him he was knocking at the door....
later
Beach
Melting Slicks
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,627
Likes: 8
From: Drag racing junkie Va.
WOW, stock runners, why didn't I ever think of that 
Both our cars went under the knife lately, mainly safety upgrades, etc.
I'll likely pull my engine for a freshenup when it gets back from the chassis shop.
Phil sat out most of last year and still has to get his engine back together.
Haven't heard much from you lately, figured you'd be getting some track time in since moving. Whats the matter, is your job interfering with your racing habit?
Good to hear something out of you again,
Dave
Both our cars went under the knife lately, mainly safety upgrades, etc.
I'll likely pull my engine for a freshenup when it gets back from the chassis shop.
Phil sat out most of last year and still has to get his engine back together.
Haven't heard much from you lately, figured you'd be getting some track time in since moving. Whats the matter, is your job interfering with your racing habit?
Good to hear something out of you again,
Dave
Le Mans Master
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 7,033
Likes: 12
There was that other mag article where they swapped the SR with a converted LT1 intake and the SR was around .4 mph and a couple tenths. For those kinda numbers I sure wouldn't subject myself to the agony of another multi piece intake install. 
Safety Car
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 4,724
Likes: 16
From: Little Elm TX
Originally Posted by hippy
There was that other mag article where they swapped the SR with a converted LT1 intake and the SR was around .4 mph and a couple tenths. For those kinda numbers I sure wouldn't subject myself to the agony of another multi piece intake install.
Look at it this way, lets say you take off your intake once a year. (Most don't)..... and it takes 2 hours longer than the other intake system, but you say the heck with that... I'll go with the easy to install intake, even though it makes 48 ftlbs less torque...... so basically what you're doing, is sacraficing 48 ftlbs of torque 364 days of the year, so that on "one" day you didn't have to spend 2 extra hours putting on the right part in the first place..... mystifies me... but to each their own.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,426
Likes: 4
From: Heidelberg PA
Cruise-In V Veteran
Originally Posted by Beach Bum
Thats one thing I have never understood.... people will sacrafice power because the performance part takes longer to put on.....
Look at it this way, lets say you take off your intake once a year. (Most don't)..... and it takes 2 hours longer than the other intake system, but you say the heck with that... I'll go with the easy to install intake, even though it makes 48 ftlbs less torque...... so basically what you're doing, is sacraficing 48 ftlbs of torque 364 days of the year, so that on "one" day you didn't have to spend 2 extra hours putting on the right part in the first place..... mystifies me... but to each their own.
Look at it this way, lets say you take off your intake once a year. (Most don't)..... and it takes 2 hours longer than the other intake system, but you say the heck with that... I'll go with the easy to install intake, even though it makes 48 ftlbs less torque...... so basically what you're doing, is sacraficing 48 ftlbs of torque 364 days of the year, so that on "one" day you didn't have to spend 2 extra hours putting on the right part in the first place..... mystifies me... but to each their own.
I am going to post your quote for the day up in my garage and every time I get frustrated I will read it to clarify my mind as to WHY I am doing it in the first place.
PS. We(Cork & I) have a few minor adjustments in process to try to hit that 10.9999999 elusive ET.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,146
Likes: 3
From: The Motor City
Well since it's getting beat in the ground (MR vs SR), here is my take.
My reasoning was not just ease (good one, not only one) but by the time the set-up is making some real power I would have to get into the trans. and rear end. I also considered future reasonable goals bigger inches, I felt without having track only car/set-up a MR could meet that goal.
I am not for the record disputing torque here and am looking at the entire picture. I am only saying that at a point if you hitting the trans /rear end with say 400+tq. other issues will arise, so if I have to get in there anyways there is no difference, to me at least. (Thoughts here are the d36 can/will break if you are hooked, so either way a 44 would be in order. Just the stock components in a 700r cast rings, shell, etc. aren't going to last long, a conv. is ness. either way.)
The only thing I would think becomes speculative is the size of conv. and cam that others have stated becomes nessessary, to me that would depend on how fast do you want to go to begin with. (a side note the 1.4 range 60's mentioned earlier is great, I would think any set-up regardless, is going to need some work to achieve those numbers, please correct me if I am wrong here).
As many have said, it is about the entire set-up, and I definetly agree with that statement, and believe there are just alot of ways to get there. By the way I also think at a point (again set-up realated ) the single plane is a nice set-up, and at that level probably the better option. As one member had stated, that for 90% of the forum members the sr overall would be better suited, and meant as just a motor upgrade only, that would satisfy there desire at better performance without other upgrades, that might be all most are willing to do.....I guess it all depends, as I see several here who have very fast cars and it didn't stop there. another .02
My reasoning was not just ease (good one, not only one) but by the time the set-up is making some real power I would have to get into the trans. and rear end. I also considered future reasonable goals bigger inches, I felt without having track only car/set-up a MR could meet that goal.
I am not for the record disputing torque here and am looking at the entire picture. I am only saying that at a point if you hitting the trans /rear end with say 400+tq. other issues will arise, so if I have to get in there anyways there is no difference, to me at least. (Thoughts here are the d36 can/will break if you are hooked, so either way a 44 would be in order. Just the stock components in a 700r cast rings, shell, etc. aren't going to last long, a conv. is ness. either way.)
The only thing I would think becomes speculative is the size of conv. and cam that others have stated becomes nessessary, to me that would depend on how fast do you want to go to begin with. (a side note the 1.4 range 60's mentioned earlier is great, I would think any set-up regardless, is going to need some work to achieve those numbers, please correct me if I am wrong here).
As many have said, it is about the entire set-up, and I definetly agree with that statement, and believe there are just alot of ways to get there. By the way I also think at a point (again set-up realated ) the single plane is a nice set-up, and at that level probably the better option. As one member had stated, that for 90% of the forum members the sr overall would be better suited, and meant as just a motor upgrade only, that would satisfy there desire at better performance without other upgrades, that might be all most are willing to do.....I guess it all depends, as I see several here who have very fast cars and it didn't stop there. another .02
Last edited by mseven; Jan 5, 2006 at 08:09 AM.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvette Engines RANKED by Peak Torque (70+ Years of Muscle!)
Joe Kucinski
Corvette ZR1X Will Be Pacing the Indy 500, And Could Probably Race, Too!
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvettes Coming to Mecum Indy 2026!
Brett Foote
Top 10 C9 Corvette MUST-HAVES to Fix These C8 Generation Flaws!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Revolutionary 'Corvette Firsts' Most People Don't Know
Joe Kucinski
Le Mans Master
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 6,172
Likes: 11
From: somers, ny
Beach, at first i had to reset the lash like every week. It appeared that the polylocks on the rockers were taking shape... 
But once it settled down, the lash rarely moves and i have't checked it since around June.......so i'm due. I will say my valve train is very noisy, especially before it reaches temperature. Sounds like a can of screws 
Maybe it's just because my exhaust is too quiet...LOL.
ta, that's a good running combo. You probably have me by about 1-2 tenths and 3-4 mph. At 1700ft, i'm usually in the 30s with full exhaust. Assuming 2-3 for the exhaust, i'd be 11.ohs @ 123/4. You're short timing a full tenth quicker than me. I've got a tight converter, and as Beach said, it would surely be quicker with a looser converter, but i dont want to put more pressure on the rear. Did you say you were running a lock up??? What is your ICL on the cam??? I've got mine advanced 8 deg since i set it up for the superram. Was thinking of setting it straight up, but i'm afraid i'll hurt my short times with this tight converter. Have you had your heads flowed??? Those comp ported 195s are working well. I couldn't deal with AFRs 4 month lead time, so i went with the track 1s. They out flow the AFRs, but are a little larger. Are you still using the stock ECM? Who did your tuning???
But once it settled down, the lash rarely moves and i have't checked it since around June.......so i'm due. I will say my valve train is very noisy, especially before it reaches temperature. Sounds like a can of screws Maybe it's just because my exhaust is too quiet...LOL. ta, that's a good running combo. You probably have me by about 1-2 tenths and 3-4 mph. At 1700ft, i'm usually in the 30s with full exhaust. Assuming 2-3 for the exhaust, i'd be 11.ohs @ 123/4. You're short timing a full tenth quicker than me. I've got a tight converter, and as Beach said, it would surely be quicker with a looser converter, but i dont want to put more pressure on the rear. Did you say you were running a lock up??? What is your ICL on the cam??? I've got mine advanced 8 deg since i set it up for the superram. Was thinking of setting it straight up, but i'm afraid i'll hurt my short times with this tight converter. Have you had your heads flowed??? Those comp ported 195s are working well. I couldn't deal with AFRs 4 month lead time, so i went with the track 1s. They out flow the AFRs, but are a little larger. Are you still using the stock ECM? Who did your tuning???
Last edited by ralph; Jan 5, 2006 at 08:37 AM.
Le Mans Master
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 7,033
Likes: 12
Originally Posted by Beach Bum
Thats one thing I have never understood.... people will sacrafice power because the performance part takes longer to put on.....
Look at it this way, lets say you take off your intake once a year. (Most don't)..... and it takes 2 hours longer than the other intake system, but you say the heck with that... I'll go with the easy to install intake, even though it makes 48 ftlbs less torque...... so basically what you're doing, is sacraficing 48 ftlbs of torque 364 days of the year, so that on "one" day you didn't have to spend 2 extra hours putting on the right part in the first place..... mystifies me... but to each their own.
Look at it this way, lets say you take off your intake once a year. (Most don't)..... and it takes 2 hours longer than the other intake system, but you say the heck with that... I'll go with the easy to install intake, even though it makes 48 ftlbs less torque...... so basically what you're doing, is sacraficing 48 ftlbs of torque 364 days of the year, so that on "one" day you didn't have to spend 2 extra hours putting on the right part in the first place..... mystifies me... but to each their own.
Plus those numbers I listed are so close from each other I know for a fact I am not that dedicated of a race car driver to achieve repeatability close to that.
And for me it would only get worse with more low end tq on the low end. So, if I can have a car that close for a lot less aggravation I will definitely take the less aggravating setup.The Mini gets a bad rap as far as losing so much TQ, I lost 4 lb ft on the dyno when compared to my LTR bigmouth/bigtube setup. I don't think that is substantial.
Once I get my rear end gears taken care of I am shooting for Bjankski's 114 he got out of his SR car, or close to it.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 9,715
Likes: 27
From: Kempner Texas
Originally Posted by bowtie350_428
I know I am opening a can of worms with this one but...
Does anyone know why Grumpyvette's Smaller HSR plenum design fell out of favor?
Did the smaller HSR plenum hurt performance? Is there Proof?
And finally, does anyone know who makes a modded plenum that allows the HSR fit under our C4 hoods?
Does anyone know why Grumpyvette's Smaller HSR plenum design fell out of favor?
Did the smaller HSR plenum hurt performance? Is there Proof?
And finally, does anyone know who makes a modded plenum that allows the HSR fit under our C4 hoods?
There was not data listed as to how the airflow was effected by modding the HSR to fit.
Unfortunately I believe I lost the link, but I'll look further on my hard drive. If I come up with it I'll post or prehaps someone else has it and will do the same.
Jake
Le Mans Master
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 9,715
Likes: 27
From: Kempner Texas
Intermediate
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
From: pa
Originally Posted by ralph
Beach, at first i had to reset the lash like every week. It appeared that the polylocks on the rockers were taking shape... But once it settled down, the lash rarely moves and i have't checked it since around June.......so i'm due. I will say my valve train is very noisy, especially before it reaches temperature. Sounds like a can of screws Maybe it's just because my exhaust is too quiet...LOL.
ta, that's a good running combo. You probably have me by about 1-2 tenths and 3-4 mph. At 1700ft, i'm usually in the 30s with full exhaust. Assuming 2-3 for the exhaust, i'd be 11.ohs @ 123/4. You're short timing a full tenth quicker than me. I've got a tight converter, and as Beach said, it would surely be quicker with a looser converter, but i dont want to put more pressure on the rear. Did you say you were running a lock up??? What is your ICL on the cam??? I've got mine advanced 8 deg since i set it up for the superram. Was thinking of setting it straight up, but i'm afraid i'll hurt my short times with this tight converter. Have you had your heads flowed??? Those comp ported 195s are working well. I couldn't deal with AFRs 4 month lead time, so i went with the track 1s. They out flow the AFRs, but are a little larger. Are you still using the stock ECM? Who did your tuning???
But once it settled down, the lash rarely moves and i have't checked it since around June.......so i'm due. I will say my valve train is very noisy, especially before it reaches temperature. Sounds like a can of screws Maybe it's just because my exhaust is too quiet...LOL. ta, that's a good running combo. You probably have me by about 1-2 tenths and 3-4 mph. At 1700ft, i'm usually in the 30s with full exhaust. Assuming 2-3 for the exhaust, i'd be 11.ohs @ 123/4. You're short timing a full tenth quicker than me. I've got a tight converter, and as Beach said, it would surely be quicker with a looser converter, but i dont want to put more pressure on the rear. Did you say you were running a lock up??? What is your ICL on the cam??? I've got mine advanced 8 deg since i set it up for the superram. Was thinking of setting it straight up, but i'm afraid i'll hurt my short times with this tight converter. Have you had your heads flowed??? Those comp ported 195s are working well. I couldn't deal with AFRs 4 month lead time, so i went with the track 1s. They out flow the AFRs, but are a little larger. Are you still using the stock ECM? Who did your tuning???
Thanks! Yes my converter has a lock clutch, and it 12" but is currently not working... Its a 10" converter with a ridge welded around it for the larger 12" clutch.. ads about 12 lbs over a non lock
the cam is advanced 4 degrees, and as mentioned earlier I do my own tuning..
I agree with the AFR 4 month lead! it sux..
We should swap heads, it will help your 60ft
Safety Car
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 4,724
Likes: 16
From: Little Elm TX
Originally Posted by hookedup
WOW, stock runners, why didn't I ever think of that
Both our cars went under the knife lately, mainly safety upgrades, etc.
I'll likely pull my engine for a freshenup when it gets back from the chassis shop.
Phil sat out most of last year and still has to get his engine back together.
Haven't heard much from you lately, figured you'd be getting some track time in since moving. Whats the matter, is your job interfering with your racing habit?
Good to hear something out of you again,
Dave
Both our cars went under the knife lately, mainly safety upgrades, etc.
I'll likely pull my engine for a freshenup when it gets back from the chassis shop.
Phil sat out most of last year and still has to get his engine back together.
Haven't heard much from you lately, figured you'd be getting some track time in since moving. Whats the matter, is your job interfering with your racing habit?
Good to hear something out of you again,
Dave
My job has me running across the country most weeks.... and my wife monopolizes any remaining time left.... very little time for fun stuff nowadays including surfing the forum like I used too.... oh well, whadda ya gonna do.
I know how Phil C must feel, I sat out most of last year too.... tore it apart, and just haven't had two minutes to finish anything since... oh well, maybe this year.
later
Beach
Safety Car
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 4,724
Likes: 16
From: Little Elm TX
Originally Posted by ralph
Beach, at first i had to reset the lash like every week. It appeared that the polylocks on the rockers were taking shape... But once it settled down, the lash rarely moves and i have't checked it since around June.......so i'm due. I will say my valve train is very noisy, especially before it reaches temperature. Sounds like a can of screws Maybe it's just because my exhaust is too quiet...LOL.
ta, that's a good running combo. You probably have me by about 1-2 tenths and 3-4 mph. At 1700ft, i'm usually in the 30s with full exhaust. Assuming 2-3 for the exhaust, i'd be 11.ohs @ 123/4. You're short timing a full tenth quicker than me. I've got a tight converter, and as Beach said, it would surely be quicker with a looser converter, but i dont want to put more pressure on the rear. Did you say you were running a lock up??? What is your ICL on the cam??? I've got mine advanced 8 deg since i set it up for the superram. Was thinking of setting it straight up, but i'm afraid i'll hurt my short times with this tight converter. Have you had your heads flowed??? Those comp ported 195s are working well. I couldn't deal with AFRs 4 month lead time, so i went with the track 1s. They out flow the AFRs, but are a little larger. Are you still using the stock ECM? Who did your tuning???
But once it settled down, the lash rarely moves and i have't checked it since around June.......so i'm due. I will say my valve train is very noisy, especially before it reaches temperature. Sounds like a can of screws Maybe it's just because my exhaust is too quiet...LOL. ta, that's a good running combo. You probably have me by about 1-2 tenths and 3-4 mph. At 1700ft, i'm usually in the 30s with full exhaust. Assuming 2-3 for the exhaust, i'd be 11.ohs @ 123/4. You're short timing a full tenth quicker than me. I've got a tight converter, and as Beach said, it would surely be quicker with a looser converter, but i dont want to put more pressure on the rear. Did you say you were running a lock up??? What is your ICL on the cam??? I've got mine advanced 8 deg since i set it up for the superram. Was thinking of setting it straight up, but i'm afraid i'll hurt my short times with this tight converter. Have you had your heads flowed??? Those comp ported 195s are working well. I couldn't deal with AFRs 4 month lead time, so i went with the track 1s. They out flow the AFRs, but are a little larger. Are you still using the stock ECM? Who did your tuning???
Instructor
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
From: Toronto Ontario
Originally Posted by hookedup
Beach,
I love my Mini-Ram !
Still the same engine just a different cam & manifold
Dave
I love my Mini-Ram
! Still the same engine just a different cam & manifold
Dave
We use a Mini Ram on our 86 Corvette, and it works great!434 SB, TPIS Mini Ram, Brodix Track 1X's, Bowtie Block, 680 solid roller 114 center line, 4" Callais crank, Gen 7+ (DFI), 55 lbs injectors, NOS Fogger (250-300), tight 4500 nitrous convertor, 400 turbo trans, stock style IRS, 3.73 gears, Weld wheels, 325 M/T Drag radials, and 3.5" exhaust. The car weighs 3450 lbs and the best ET NA is 10.48 @ 132 mph, and the best NOS is 9.107 @ 151.73 mph with a 1.35 60'
P.S: Dave that car of yours leaves nice! You can see pics of our car at www.racesupercars.com Steve
Instructor
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
From: Toronto Ontario
Originally Posted by Beach Bum
Thats one thing I have never understood.... people will sacrafice power because the performance part takes longer to put on.....
Look at it this way, lets say you take off your intake once a year. (Most don't)..... and it takes 2 hours longer than the other intake system, but you say the heck with that... I'll go with the easy to install intake, even though it makes 48 ftlbs less torque...... so basically what you're doing, is sacraficing 48 ftlbs of torque 364 days of the year, so that on "one" day you didn't have to spend 2 extra hours putting on the right part in the first place..... mystifies me... but to each their own.
Look at it this way, lets say you take off your intake once a year. (Most don't)..... and it takes 2 hours longer than the other intake system, but you say the heck with that... I'll go with the easy to install intake, even though it makes 48 ftlbs less torque...... so basically what you're doing, is sacraficing 48 ftlbs of torque 364 days of the year, so that on "one" day you didn't have to spend 2 extra hours putting on the right part in the first place..... mystifies me... but to each their own.
Very good point!
Pro
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
From: San Antonio TX
Originally Posted by JAKE
I wonder if they just realized their design is flawed or they just have no funds to go into production. Guess we'll just have to wait.
But hey... thanks anyway Jake.
Pro
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 658
Likes: 7
From: Perth Amboy New Jersey
Originally Posted by importkiller92
I am looking to build a supercharged 391, and I can't decide which to use. I have read some people having issues with using a mini ram on a forced induction set up and I am looking for some input from someone with first hand experience. Also does anyone know the intake port size of the mini ram?
http://www.vetteexplorer.com/cgi-bin/mv.pl
http://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/show...oto=nextoldest
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/7610/drivetr.htm
Hope this helps
Race Director
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 10,749
Likes: 41
there are many things to consider when comparing these intake, and one is rear gear ratio. for instance guys with 3.07's, and dont want to change there gears then the SR is the right intake, etc....
many variables, i didnt buy it because i heard that its a pain in the *** to install, and the MR is cleaner looking and more refined.
many variables, i didnt buy it because i heard that its a pain in the *** to install, and the MR is cleaner looking and more refined.