When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Thx guys for the feedback.
I'm leaning towards the FIRST to keep the stock look.
so which combination would be best for it?
The 350WHP is the minimum for now, might go up later
350rw is not 350bhp.
FIRST, AFR 180, aggressive cam, headers, tune, I could see 400ish crank and close to 350 wheel or just under. Getting much beyond that, enough to justify the expense, I don't. Would be easier to get 350rw with the MR and an appropriate H/C choice.
Still requires the TC change.
The intake will still fall on its face at about 5000-5500rpm, therefore putting 195s on it wouldn't really be helping you that much, regardless of displacement underneath. The engine couldn't inhale enough.
I've seen this written on forums many-a-time. And for the most part, I've believed it, but at this point, I'm going to say, "No way".
My '92 did 279 RWHP with a K&N air filter, for it's "mods".
My '89 did 258 RWHP with a Mini Ram intake, 52mm TB, no air filter, advanced timing, dual exhaust, H-Pipe w/no cats, 160 stat, no smog pump/AC, Underdrive pullies.
So, no, an L98 w/a MiniRam is not an LT1. Not even close, really.
Fair enough, I still stand by the statement. Heads flow very similar, cams are nearly the same, fuel/timing tables are obviously different when stock. MR and LT1 flow similarly and peak at similar RPM bands.
Until we start nitpicking combinations, I think its easier to describe to people that a MR turns an L98 into something like an LT1 car.
FIRST, AFR 180, aggressive cam, headers, tune, I could see 400ish crank and close to 350 wheel or just under. Getting much beyond that, enough to justify the expense, I don't. Would be easier to get 350rw with the MR and an appropriate H/C choice.
Still requires the TC change.
The intake will still fall on its face at about 5000-5500rpm, therefore putting 195s on it wouldn't really be helping you that much, regardless of displacement underneath. The engine couldn't inhale enough.
yep I'm aware of the difference.
if the combination with the FIRST you mentioned above gets me near the 350rw i'll be happy, adding the 1.6RR and Stall... that would be fun to drive with a smile...
Well, you can. I won't. I'm seeing a ~40 hp deficit in a L98 with a MIni Ram. I probably won't be "putting that out there" to the unwitting, since for ME...it's way too far off to be a thing that is "truth".
Something mild like a hot cam would probably hit 350 hp. With heads and a intake it doesnt take that much cam to do it. I wouldn't run a hot cam but thats the range I'd be looking to hit those numbers. But a 350 crank vs wheel is a big difference. You want 350 wheel, you're gonna need a bigger cam. The one Joe reccomended will get you there with some room to spare depending on how everything is matched.
Based on flow bench and dyno testing, SuperFlow developed a power coefficient based on airflow.
For a V-8 ( Test Cfm of any head or manifold ) X ( 2.06 ) = (Max HP potential)
The stock L-98 head flows 196 Cfm @ 0.5 inch lift, so the most it could support would be about 403 horse power, and that's before adding in the flow loss from a manifold and throttle.
The famous Richard Holdener "Ten Times the TPI test" we all know and love is very interesting to look at this way.
The 383 with big heads was designed to tax all the manifolds to the limit.
The article says it's used TFS 195 heads, but he says AFR 195 heads in the YouTube video.
Either way the heads support more horsepower than all the combinations make, so you could say the intake manifolds are the limiting factors.
With all that in mind, here are the calculated flow rates from max HP, for the different manifolds.
Doesn't matter that the test is a 383, could be any engine, the chart shows roughly the maximum Cfm & horse power the different manifolds can support.
Pick your horsepower, than pick a manifold accordingly.
Obviously the engine, cam and head combination you pick need to flow more than the manifold.
Based on flow bench and dyno testing, SuperFlow developed a power coefficient based on airflow.
For a V-8 ( Test Cfm of any head or manifold ) X ( 2.06 ) = (Max HP potential)
The stock L-98 head flows 196 Cfm @ 0.5 inch lift, so the most it could support would be about 403 horse power, and that's before adding in the flow loss from a manifold and throttle.
The famous Richard Holdener "Ten Times the TPI test" we all know and love is very interesting to look at this way.
The 383 with big heads was designed to tax all the manifolds to the limit.
The article says it's used TFS 195 heads, but he says AFR 195 heads in the YouTube video.
Either way the heads support more horsepower than all the combinations make, so you could say the intake manifolds are the limiting factors.
With all that in mind, here are the calculated flow rates from max HP, for the different manifolds.
Doesn't matter that the test is a 383, could be any engine, the chart shows roughly the maximum Cfm & horse power the different manifolds can support.
Pick your horsepower, than pick a manifold accordingly.
Obviously the engine, cam and head combination you pick need to flow more than the manifold.
interesting…
but why the FIRST not included? I wonder where would it go in the list ..
interesting…
but why the FIRST not included? I wonder where would it go in the list ..
I seem to recall someone asking in the comments and if I remember right it may not have existed or was new when the test was originally done as it's pretty old data now. But stock it's been reported they flow in the 230 range so... about 480hp as the results there are bang on to the cfm correlation.
I did look around for comparable dyno tests using the First Intake, but information is scarce.
Lot of talk ... but not much data.
Most discussions refer to Precision Race Engines building crate engines with the First Intake.
Claimed numbers are 425 hp for either a 350 or 383 and one reference to a 434 that makes 450 hp ... which is the highest claim I can find for the First.
There is one YouTube video posted by Precision of a 383 making 404 hp @ 4500 rpm.
Keep in mind the "STOCK" First runners are only 1.75 inches in diameter.
Also, before the Mini Ram faithful chime in ...
If the TFS head was actually the one used, the Mini Ram and Stealth Ram are close enough to the head flow number it's possible they may have made more power with a bigger head.
The famous Richard Holdener "Ten Times the TPI test" we all know and love is very interesting to look at this way.
The 383 with big heads was designed to tax all the manifolds to the limit.
Actually, I don't think it was by design....and I feel it's misleading to the lay person (me, when the article first came out). Their original engine, what I'd call a "mild to medium" 350, **** the bed before the testing, so they moved the test on to the the 383 in the article.
While the article does a great job of showing the MAX potential for most of the intakes (especially the smaller ones), it misleads as to how they'd all rank on a stock or stockish engine as replacement/upgrades. We know that on a stock/mild 350, the Mini Ram wouldn't be the best performer at all. IOW, you can't simply translate the "Ranking" of the the intakes in this test onto a milder engine and expect the same (but lesser/lower) results. The results would be a lot different.
Actually, I don't think it was by design....and I feel it's misleading to the lay person (me, when the article first came out). Their original engine, what I'd call a "mild to medium" 350, **** the bed before the testing, so they moved the test on to the the 383 in the article.
While the article does a great job of showing the MAX potential for most of the intakes (especially the smaller ones), it misleads as to how they'd all rank on a stock or stockish engine as replacement/upgrades. We know that on a stock/mild 350, the Mini Ram wouldn't be the best performer at all. IOW, you can't simply translate the "Ranking" of the the intakes in this test onto a milder engine and expect the same (but lesser/lower) results. The results would be a lot different.
On a mild engine I probably wouldn't even be looking at the short runner stuff if I'm being honest. But I agree the correlation could be a little misleading to the average person. Any one of those selections is setup dependent imo.
Actually, I don't think it was by design....and I feel it's misleading to the lay person (me, when the article first came out). Their original engine, what I'd call a "mild to medium" 350, **** the bed before the testing, so they moved the test on to the the 383 in the article.
While the article does a great job of showing the MAX potential for most of the intakes (especially the smaller ones), it misleads as to how they'd all rank on a stock or stockish engine as replacement/upgrades. We know that on a stock/mild 350, the Mini Ram wouldn't be the best performer at all. IOW, you can't simply translate the "Ranking" of the the intakes in this test onto a milder engine and expect the same (but lesser/lower) results. The results would be a lot different.
Tom … I don’t disagree
Just repeating what Richard says in the YouTube video about this test.
Based on flow bench and dyno testing, SuperFlow developed a power coefficient based on airflow.
For a V-8 ( Test Cfm of any head or manifold ) X ( 2.06 ) = (Max HP potential)
The stock L-98 head flows 196 Cfm @ 0.5 inch lift, so the most it could support would be about 403 horse power, and that's before adding in the flow loss from a manifold and throttle.
The famous Richard Holdener "Ten Times the TPI test" we all know and love is very interesting to look at this way.
The 383 with big heads was designed to tax all the manifolds to the limit.
The article says it's used TFS 195 heads, but he says AFR 195 heads in the YouTube video.
Either way the heads support more horsepower than all the combinations make, so you could say the intake manifolds are the limiting factors.
With all that in mind, here are the calculated flow rates from max HP, for the different manifolds.
Doesn't matter that the test is a 383, could be any engine, the chart shows roughly the maximum Cfm & horse power the different manifolds can support.
Pick your horsepower, than pick a manifold accordingly.
Obviously the engine, cam and head combination you pick need to flow more than the manifold.
- FIRST intake kit
- Cam (which?)
- AFR 195/180?
- 1.6 RR non self aligning (brand?)
how does that sound? And if in the future I went for 383 upgrade will it be ok?
thx
The 195 will be fine for a street 383. For the price difference just do the 195. It's a better head imo.
I like the comp magnum full rollers. Others have their preferences I'm sure but I like those. They aren't cheap.
If you're doing the first, I'd stick with a cam in the 218/224 range. It will make for a fun car that won't have to be wound out. Go for higher lift to take advantage of your heads. And a cam in that range will drive fantastic with proper tuning
The 195 will be fine for a street 383. For the price difference just do the 195. It's a better head imo.
I like the comp magnum full rollers. Others have their preferences I'm sure but I like those. They aren't cheap.
If you're doing the first, I'd stick with a cam in the 218/224 range. It will make for a fun car that won't have to be wound out. Go for higher lift to take advantage of your heads. And a cam in that range will drive fantastic with proper tuning
I've seen this written on forums many-a-time. And for the most part, I've believed it, but at this point, I'm going to say, "No way".
My '92 did 279 RWHP with a K&N air filter, for it's "mods".
My '89 did 258 RWHP with a Mini Ram intake, 52mm TB, no air filter, advanced timing, dual exhaust, H-Pipe w/no cats, 160 stat, no smog pump/AC, Underdrive pullies.
So, no, an L98 w/a MiniRam is not an LT1. Not even close, really.
