Ken Lanham

I have been seeing the Edelbrock lower intake around lately. Not sure how long it has been out. But I was wondering if anyone had an opinion on this piece. How does it compare to the Accel/Lingenfelter, or TPIS bigmouth? Also, doesn't Scoggin Dickie have a lower intake? The Edelbrock part seems to be pretty competitively priced. $365 at Summit Racing. $689 with the runners to match.

-Ken

chucks88

I have the Edelbrock base supporting SuperRam runners and plenum. I've heard TPIS has their own label on the Edelbrock built units. I've only had it on for a couple of weeks with no real results to post. Anything is better than the stock base however.

pablocruise

I had replaced my stock intake w/ the Ed. It gave me another 400 useable RPM. A Superram came up for sale and I bought it. Swapped out the Ed. So I had the stock, the Ed and the Accel/Ling intakes next to each other on the table. The Ed's ports are ever so slightly larger than the stock. I sold the Ed to Kamaross Rick. I think he installed it on a Vette(?) maybe he can give additional feedback.

Ken Lanham

The accel/Lingenfelter base had the largest ports of the 3 then?

LD85

INFO COPIED FROM MY NOTEPAD

QUOTE:"
Runners (measured individually)
Stock....................203.17 cfm
ACCEL................242.02 cfm
Extrude/ACCEL...275.83 cfm
Super Ram............289.18 cfm
Intake manifold with 3/8 inch radiused intlet
.............................222.45 cfm

Stock intake manifold with runner
Stock....................198.72 cfm
ACCEL................213.52 cfm
Extrude/ACCEL....217.11 cfm
Super Ram............220.67 cfm

ACCEL Hi-Flow intake manifold with 3/8 inch
radiused inlet.........251.51 cfm

ACCEL Hi-Flow intake manifold with runner
Stock....................215.83 cfm
ACCEL................232.53 cfm
Extrude/ACCEL....243.21 cfm
Super Ram............240.24 cfm

Extrude-Honed ACCEL Hi-Flow intake
manifold with 3/8 inch radiused inlet
............................275.83 cfm

Extrude-Honed ACCEL Hi-Flow intake
manifold with ACCEL runner
............................266.94 cfm

Edelbrock Performer RPM manifold
(Stock)..................286.51 cfm

Edelbrock Victor Jr.
.............................275.24 cfm


My guess is that the Scoggin Dickey Vortec TPI base will flow the same as a edelbrock once it has been de-burred (alot)

END QUOTE:

Phobos84

Your right, The Edelbrock intake is the same as the TPIS. They are made in the same factory they just put different tags on them.

If you look through that book "Insider tricks" from TPIS they flow tested and dyno tested all of the current intakes and runners. The TPIS/Edelbrock didn't do bad but was not the best stock. However there is a lot of room for porting in one and fully ported was by far the best of all the stock style intakes for upper rpm. Of course things like the mini-ram blew it away in upper rpm but thats why I said stock style. The unit from Edelbrock is the best bang for your buck as far as intakes go. As far as there runners go. Again not bad but there are better out there.

The runners that Edelbrock sells are not the same as TPIS. No tests of the Edelbrock runners in the book but the guy from Edelbrock told me the inner diasmiter is 1.71. My micromitor says the same. Most other high flow runners are only 1.68.

The reason I say that Edelbrock runners are not the best is they are still cast runners. Tube style runners of the same size will always outperforme cast. Not saying not to use the Edelbrock runners. I'm going to use them in spring. It just depends on how much money you want to spend for a ferw extra hp.

I would advise you to go with the entire Edelbrock setup. Very well made and most of the time you can find them on ebay. I bought mine new in the box for $430 on ebay.

Sorry this is so long :sleep:

Aaron's 87

Now for the real story, read my product review. I have the Edeljunk manifold and runners. After a lot of port matching and porting, the Edelbrock flowed 8% better than a fully ported stock unit. Fully ported does not mean hogged out, it means shaped correctly by someone who knows what they are doing. The lack of increase in flow is not due to casting, but rather due to the shape of the TPI. Considering the high cost and the fact that nothing fits right, I would not buy the Edelbrock again. When I say nothing fit, I mean PCV tubes, EGR, AIR tubes in front, injectors bottoming and hitting runners. Everybody with a mild motor worried about airflow needs to worry about cam, heads, exhaust & headers, and porting what you've got.

Phobos84

I have had only one fitting problem with mine and that was the water neck. It needed a little bit filed off of it. And saying that it only flows 8% more? TPIS and every other company or shop that has spent the time and reserch to find out will argue with you. It is also found that an unmodified Edelbrock intake and runners will make 19-22 more horse power then stock. A fully ported stock will make about 4-9 more horse power with port matched stock runners. I can't speek for the fitting of the EGR or AIR stuff because I'm not using any of it. If you want the "REAL STORY" read TPIS's insider tips. It lays it all out in black and white with real dyno numbers not speculation.

Aaron's 87

You expect to get the real story from the company that sells what it's writing about?

Do the porting, look at the flow bench (like I did), then get back to us.

Phobos84

Thats the funny thing, they did say in the book that some other companies stuff was better. For example the dyno numbers they got for the runners made by ASM flowed way better then the ones that TPIS offeres. They also tested the Accel Superram with the Accel base intake and found that is was the best in high rpm power out of any stock style base setup ever. It also said that porting the Accel base with the super ram would result in an overall loss of low end torque and not much gain in upper rpm.

They said the reason the ASM runners would outperform the TPIS runners is because the ASM runners are tube style and not cast or molded. Not only does that give a smother inner surface but it will conduct less heat and thus more power.

So in short no there tests didn't just boost there own products. They only told the truth. You will also find other sources that say the same thing. The F-body forums have all done the same tests. I might have this title wrong but I think it's "Understanding Camaros" or something like that. I borrowed it a while back so I don't remember the exact title, said almost the exact same thing as the TPIS book did. The only difference is they used a 305 for a base engine not a 350. This did make a difference in the horse power gains but it still said what was good and what wasn't.

Sorry to say it but you don't know what your talking about.

Aaron's 87

TPIS sells AS&M runners.

How do they compare the SuperRam to their MiniRam, I'll bet they like their MiniRam better.

If their idea of porting is just hogging the runners out, then it would result in a loss of low end torque. True porting gains flow and power everywhere.

Smooth surfaces are not as good for flow as slightly roughened surfaces. Smooth surfaces actually foul up the boundry layer. Look it up.

Your opinion is I don't know what I'm talking about. Mine is that you only know what you read in a book that I consider mostly advertising.

More importantly, my opinion on the Edelbrock base and runners is posted above.

gtsyellow

i was wondering that also, we all know a MR will blow away a SR over 5000-5500rpms but they made the miniram look pretty good under 5000 also. that's a bit of a stretch as the SR always makes more power under 5000 on a 350-383 than a miniram will. if i remember right, the mini looked a little stronger than usual down there in the book.

Phobos84

The stuff I have been talking about is all stock style base intakes not minirams. The miniram did way better then everything in the 5000+rpm range.

TPIS sells ASM runners? Thats a new one to me. I can admit when some one knows more about something then me. When shops with 20+ years expierence with automotive performance say it is this way I tend to bielieve them. As far as smooth surfaces in the air flow, your right, if we where talking about cylender heads or the base intake. The stock runners are smooth and they seem to work fine. The truth of the matter is I'm sure we could find people that would say one thing or another. As far as the Edelbrock intake goes it is a fact, it has more room for porting then any other tpi intake, It will add arround 20 horse power over a stock tpi intake, and it is the most inexpensive. Why don't you ask arround the forum or look in the search for people who are using the TPIS big mouth intakes. Ask them what they think.

As far as me only knowing things I read in a book, is reading bad? Your trying to insult me by telling me I read? Can you read?

I only have one real question for you... How many engines have you built? I have quite a few under my belt. I make my own EPROM chips and do my own valve jobs. I even put in my own cam bearings and hone my own blocks. I got all this great info from books.

What can you do?

Aggravated4life

Dont take the insiders hints as gospel...this topic has come up several time in the last few years and its always the same...the book has what many people believe to be is alot of :bs

For starters,its amazing that the TPI's tested can flow to 5500 rpms and higher.Most TPI's will not make power over 5000 rpms and many have reported seeing 4500-4800 rpms where peak HP occurs and it falls off after.How theyre getting HP at 5500 rpms or more on a long runnered TPI is beyond me.
The book is overall pretty good and tells things like it is,but some of those graphs and HP charts really dont fit the TPi's rpm range.Tpis was also a supporting vendor here but seems to have left.Anyone know what happened?
It would be good to hear what they had to say.Also,Beach Bum,if he chimes in will tell you his testing and info.Just dont believe everything you read because it has graphs and charts.Anyone can fudge the numbers on paper a little bit.Just dont turn this into a pizzing contest of who knows better.We're here to share info.
:)

Aaron's 87

I'm just trying to increase the signal versus noise. I spent the money on the Edelbrock because everyone said it was sooo much better, ported what I could, had someone much better than me finish it and flow it, and it didn't give enough improvement over a ported stock unit for the money, especially considering the fit problems. That is what I observed, your results may vary. Don't tell me what I saw is impossible because a book (advertisement) said so.

I've only built one motor from from the bottom up. What book gives instructions on EPROM tuning, because I learned on forums on mailing lists?

Godspeed Oakland

Hello,

What is the flow numbers for the stock intake manifold manifold, runners, plenum and throttle body versus that of a complete extrude honed Edelbrock High Flow Manifold, Runners, Plenum and, (un-extruded) 58mm TB. Would also need the flow chart of the TPIS Mini Ram System to compare.

I would also need to know what the flow numbers of a stock 1990 L98 Aluminum Head are versus the same L98 head after being Extrude Honed Ported with Biggest Valves that properly fit in that head.

I have seen various charts with flow numbers on this forum, but they were with the Accel Super Ram, which is no longer available. I am trying to decide on a high torque motor with the modified stock heads and TPI manifold versus aftermarket heads (AFR 210cc Comp. CNC Heads) with the TPIS Mini Ram.

Thanks in advance for the info!

GREGGPENN

You posted in a nine-year-old thread to ask for one of the things in post #3?

Stock 113's are in the 185-190cfm range. I've never seen EHoned 113's posted though the best ported CNC'd 113's are in the 250cfm range. As such, EHoned should be considered about the same as an AFR180 head. (though I'm scared to hear the price for ehoned heads!)

AFR195's (or bigger) will beat a ported 113. I'm sure they'll beat ehoned as well. Seems like max valve size is 2.02" IIRC -- but don't hold me to it.

Lastly, expect this thread to be closed. They don't like you to raise ancient threads from the grave. They'd rather you start a new one and link to any reference threads. I suspect it has to do with server performance.