How would an aftermarket LT1 intake with long runners effect the performance?!
 

I am not the first person, nor shall I be the last, to inquire about a bolt-on TPI style intake for the LT1 motor. My car is a daily driver and right now I am soul searching with what I want to do with the motor. I don't need a suped up race car with 4.10 rear gears and an aggressive camshaft with ported heads and upgraded valvetrain and the whole nine yards! I do, however, want more low to mid-range torque that I can feel immediately and that gives me an enjoyable daily driver that is fun to launch from green lights or aggressively accelerate where safe to do so in the city. I have no intention of butchering my motor to try to fit and fabricate a stock L98 TPI intake. I do, however, intend to seek out a company that can make this custom intake that is a genuine bolt-on with all necessary sensor attachments and emissions controls. However, I need expert advice on whether or not a dedicated LT1 intake with long runners will be detrimental to the motor or not. I assume the CPU can handle the adjustments with the intake and as far as driving below 5000 RPM, there shouldn't be any problems but again this is an LT1 and not an L98 with a different fuel injection design. So, am I correct in my logic that this intake will give me the low to mid-range "umpf" that I am seeking, or do I have it all butt backwards?!

It might be cheaper and easier to look at cam options. The LT1 is capable of making a lot of midrange power, hell it does out of the box, you give up very little to an L98...it is noticeable but its not a lot. I'd probably look at cam options vs intake/runner custom fabrication.

Thank you for your comment and answering my question. Yes, I understand that I could be paying a pretty sum to have a legit and reputable business produce a possible one-off TPI style intake that is a direct bolt-on for the LT1 which is also low enough to clear the hood and fit any other LT1 vehicle. Then again, I stand to spend lots of money doing the other thing by focusing on increased air flow and more power production on the top end, and with the rear gear. I can always get a price quote and decide if I am willing to take that step. Who knows, this could provide a new product for the LT1 community if anyone is interested. For the driving I do which is quite tame and necessary for the unpredictable and dangerous bumper-to-bumper city driving, I really can't go all that fast so why put in a lower rear gear when my stock gear is really perfect for the driving conditions. This is why I want every bit of low end to mid-range torque that I can get, to intentionally optimize my LT1 for this power band. I may not be quick at the track but I can have my fun at the green lights.

It seems to me, the thousands you will spend to have said intake system designed and built for an otherwise stock LT1 to have "mid-range" power, that there are a dozen other ways to achieve it. Gears, cam, tuning, heck even nitrous, considering you want to "have fun at the green lights".






I'd personally look into all options before spending a dime on this intake system you're considering.

Generally long runners improve low end torque. If they are too long high rpm power is lost. Short runners are good for top end power at the expense of low end torque. Plenum size is also a factor, in some cases increasing its volume can be beneficial. The factory design is somewhere in the middle. One of the coolest intakes had individual runners that moved up and down increasing and reducing length with engine load. There was a " Super Ram" type intake for the LT1 at one time. It's being many years since I saw one. It offers longer runners and larger plenum than stock. I never saw a dyno test of it.

I know you are only wanting to change the intake but I'm going to give one more vote for a cam change instead. I purchased an entire kit from Bullet Cams (Cam, Springs, Retainers, Keepers, and lifters) for roughly $800. I then bought a used set of long tube headers ($300) , Roller Rockers ($250), Hardened push rods ($100), guide plates ($50), and a gasket set ($150). So with a total of $1650 for parts and another $200 to get it dyno tuned so $1850 total. I'm making 380fwhp at 5500. But, starting at 1700rpm I'm at 375 ft-lbs. It climbs to 420ft-lbs at 3500 (80ft-lbs over the L98 peak at 3200rpm) then tapers down to 360ft-lbs at 6000rpm where we stopped. So with just a cam, headers, and rockers It gained 80hp and 90ft-lbs of torque with a really flat torque curve from the start. It has a ton of low end drivability and honestly after the tuning was finished, it is way more drivable at lower rpm than it was stock. I can ride at 800 rpm in 6th gear all day through town. As long as I just ease into the throttle to make a change it does great. So essentially, $1850 = 80hp, 90ft-lbs. There are other cams that would've made more power but I wanted something easily streetable. Cam specs: Duration @ 0.050, 220 intake, 226 exhaust; Lift: 0.530; LSA: 113 degrees.

-Colton

Funny thread.

LPE made an SR for the LT1.

So... The LT1 intake is "almost" perfect IMO. there are better options for other engines, but you should really do some real research first before coming up with cool ideas on engine mods. The main drawback is distribution not power.

The Lt1 intake can support 600+hp If you look at the torque curve it's pretty good. It responds well to gears and other supporting mods. The best store bought bolt on is the HSR all hogged out, plenum made larger for more volume and ideally you want power more than anything so cut your hood open.

There are people here running lt1 intakes on cars running in the 9's in bad air.

go ahead and seek aftermarket intakes, OR simply realize an intake is not going to change your SOTP feel like you think a LTR intake will do.

I have owned:
MR
SR
Motown Single plane
Holley strip dominator single plane
HSR
L98 tpi stock
L98 tpi ported and siamesed.

If you were serious about getting an intake built from scratch, why not get something like an LS model that we know is killer?

or drop an L98 in and let yer neck snap off....

What year is your car?
What gear is your car?
What trans is your car?

If 92+ auto, feel free to throw in some 3.73 gears and forget this whole idea. After that it is down to money and how fast you want to go.

:iagree:
finding one of those superrams will be impossible and guys want stupid money for them, not worth it

Gears headers and a modest cam (nothing rumpity) will be more than enoguh to do what you want. Add 15 deg +- on that cam it will feel plenty torquey and not shake the car. Some headwork does wonders, even a gain of 20-30 cfm is easily done dont need big valves or tons of money to get there.

Thats a good intake hang on to it

:iagree:

Gears alone would bring the effective RWT above that a healthy stock L98 (TPI and all) will produce. AND, because the LT1 has a significantly wider torque profile, There would be NO practical loss of top end speed either.

And, the nice thing about gears, is they're passive! The rest of drive train and its reliability is untouched!

It's truly having your cake and eating it too!!:thumbs:

:iagree: With everything said above.



Stroker crank. WAY cheaper than the intake that you're fantasizing about and unlike the intake, a stroker crank will actually make the different in FEEL, that you want.

FYI, the '92 LT1 was only 10 ft lbs down on the L98 peak tq...every other year was the same....and according to GM the LT1 actually made more low RPM tq. The tq isn't all about the intake.

http://www.candent-technologies.com/images/LT1.JPG

imo the big torque debate between the two is just throttle response, theres lots of airspeed with the tpi so it may seem it has more torque than it does. Running out of air at 4500 just sucks...passing someone at 65 feels like a quick jolt then someone let off the gas. :(

you want more torque, buy a C6 with a LS3

LOL^


Totally! The other day I took the 'Vette Kart out for a spin w/my boy ('89 TPI). We got to a piece of road that was straight and clear...I was rolling about 25 mph-ish? I double clutched into 1st and hit the gas...instantly the engine was "revving high" (no tach yet) but not really accelerating much; I was thinking, "Man, maybe this thing isn't that fast". I waited a bit longer for something to happen (which didn't) and then I grabbed 2nd gear and damn the car took off! Apparently, I was already beyond 4500 in 1st and just over revving the thing. Sure didn't sound like it though. I thought it would be right in the "meat" of the power curve. I need to get a tach in that thing. :lol:


.

Now I am getting overwhelmed with the diverse opinions! I have thought about a motor swap, especially the 2014 LT1 or even the 2015 LT4. The problem is, IT WILL BE EXPENSIVE to not only buy a turn-key crate engine but the transmission to accompany it, the ECM that my car will need, the modifications required to get it to fit my car, and even to wire everything up to my stock gauge clusters. Those thousands of dollars on a mere intake, and a custom grind camshaft are far more economical by comparison! Despite the LS family of motors being the "superior" motor to get, I have grown attached to my LT1. I love the way it sounds with the Magnaflow exhaust I have on it and frankly speaking I still feel that there is more I can do to improve upon this motor. It may never compare to the newest LS or even the next gen LT motors, but my goal is to produce a torque monster for daily driving, something that will allow me to use my factory rear gear ratio for better economy and yet have enough low end grunt to throw me back in my seat during aggressive acceleration from a stop.

Now, I am not expecting to make breakneck low end to mid-range torque from this intake alone. I realize I will need the necessary custom grind camshaft to do this. However, I won't need to go into mild porting my heads or concerning myself with more air flow from my motor so this build should be comparable to what I would spend to make myself a decent track car. Again, for any company to take on this task of developing the right long runner intake for my car, some research and development is going to be required. However, this is where I am hoping that the company which produced the FIRST aftermarket TPI intake can also make a bolt-on version for the LT1. If this can not be done, then I may be crazy enough to find a company to fabricate me a cross-ram stack EFT throttle body intake which will have the necessary plumbing to my factory air box and which must have the same emissions control attachments and PCV system as the LT1 intake. There was one company that expressed interest a way back when I was asking around about such an intake before. The cross-ram EFI throttle body intake produces instant low end to mid-range power but starts to fall behind when compared to the LS intake at high RPM. Even so, such an intake is ideal for my build.

Anything is possible if you put enough dollars in it. The Super Ram l98 intake can be modified to fit the LT1 BY a competent machine/fab shop. You may have 2 k in it between buying and modifying intake. I'm thinking you want it to look good, not cobbled up. A factory TPI maybe half with stock runners and plenum. The problem with TPi is manifold is in pieces, and it all needs tweaked together to accomplish your goal. You will need a new tune also.

Pologreen above asked the following:
What year is your car?
What gear is your car?
What trans is your car?

That's important stuff...

Also, do you just want to be different? If that's the case do what you want its your car and sometimes being different is fun. If it's just torque you're after you can make plenty of it on the LT1 intake without the TPI compromises. I would focus on building the LT1, for relatively little money you can make serious power and torque over a stock LT1.

Well, I really have my heart set on the FIRST TPI intake. The Super Ram is more focused on higher end power production with increased flow necessary for it. The FIRST TPI intake is a happy compromise, it offers more air flow over the stock TPI but it doesn't sacrifice much of the low end torque, starting at 2000 RPM, so other forums have claimed from user experience. However, I am not against using the factory TPI intake. Again, I don't have many opportunities to go fast when traffic is light and no one is in the lane I am in. Also, I don't rev past 5000, if I can't pass a car before then, I need more power production in the low to mid-range, this is how I see it. I hate hearing what sounds like my engine straining when I am near the factory rev limiter anyways!

Year: 1997
Rear Gear Ratio: 3.42:1 stock
Transmission: 6 speed manual

Well, I already am different granted my build plans for this car which has nothing to do with strip performance and is even seen as performance degradation. I want to build this car the right way but with emphasis on maximum torque production from idle to 5000 RPM, I don't even want to bother with high revving as this car is a daily driver. This is where my "crazy" logic comes in to swap out the higher flowing LT1 intake for a TPI style intake OR if I am unable to do this, find someone to custom build an electronic fuel injection cross-ram stack throttle body intake that bolts on directly to the LT1. There needs to be the mandate that it have a PCV system and hook ups for emissions control devices. The company that expressed interest initially never mentioned these crucial systems on their intake system. So, it may not happen!

So, what do you recommend on how to build this motor without requiring a higher gear ratio?

You have a C5 which should have a LS 1 not compatible with earlier gen I or II engines. C5 guys may have ideas

1997 is an LS1 car, that's the first year of the C5. Completely different animal and as mentioned above not compatible with prior SBC parts.

I do not have a C5 and the motor in my car is definitely the LT1. There is a reason I am here, for better opinions and technical know-how instead of trash talking posts about how "dumb" my planned build is. Not everyone wants to make their car a certified strip race car. I just want more go power from stops without killing my factory rated fuel economy, performance I can feel during a tame aggressive launch from a green light for some thrills.

Yes the TPI intake is "old technology" but I now have an "old motor" that has been replaced by the LS family and even the new LT family. For lack of being a rich guy, and having a car in dire need of tear down restoration and modification, I am best salvaging the motor and transmission I have but finding out a way to make it more "fun" to drive in terms of what I feel is "fun".

I am very interested to see what comes next...


So if you are just new to cars or something I don't know but here are the main principals to building an engine to your style.

Extreme intake runner lengths create extreme peaks and limits.

Do you know the runner length of the TPI torque monster compared to the LT1 intake?

Do you see the nice torque curve considering all the other options for the motor?

A crosssram has never been the greatest intake. EVER. 60's and up people still tinker in hopes and come up short.

Now if you like a crossram that much user c409 here has made some old ones EFI and maybe he can make you an LT1 version or have it made.

So far other than custom one off purpose built intakes to fit the exact desires and needs of cam and heads etc the LS platform just works.

You can look at the lt1 2 ways. It is either about as good as it can get from the factory so build off it, or it really has it's limits of options compared to gen1 SBC.

If it's not trolling here, I advise you to ride in some different cars. You have some major misconceptions and exceptions f what performance parts do to cars.

You say you are not expecting break neck, but you don't understand you will not likely feel much difference at all except a wallet 2k light for a custom intake, that compared to an lt1 will either be built to rev to the moon and your motor can't or will make all low end barely more than lt1 and be out of breath as the other honda civic blows by you.

Plain and simple your looking in the wrong place to improve your performance and taste.

Post your intake fabricator if you do this and keep us posted.

If I were you and had your hard on for mid range I'd get a IDF crossram intake fabbed to fit the lt1. Then the heads and cam and exhaust become the limits. Oh yeah and your gears will be wrong too if most likely.

It's been done on l98. I wanted it, nobody would tune it. Ended up half car half fuel injection.


https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.cor...4df872543d.png

call ken at FIRST maybe he can find a way to make one work for your car
with a small cam and just some porting your car will really wake up. Know its not what you want but as long as someone doesnt overdo it youll like the results. Too many are after some big # and the head gets too big in the meantime thats not what you really want. Just a thought.

Please check the year of your car again. 1997 they no longer put the LT1 in the Corvette. They still put it in the F Bodies but not the Corvette. The last year for the Corvette was 1996, but only in automatic trim. 6 Speed cars in 1996 were LT4 cars. Any chance you can post a picture of your car and a picture of the engine for us? That might help.

The LT4 and LT1 physically look the same other than some minor cosmetic badging changes.

This project won't be happening anytime soon. I am just seeing what options I have, seeing what others think of my proposals, and trying to figure what I will be able to do and how best to achieve the performance that I am seeking.

Yes, I am naive about cars and what I know is what I have read. I do know that I don't want to build a track car, I think I am trying to build a performance daily driver using the knowledge that I have to try to get there, wrong as it is or not. I just feel that my LT1 is lacking in torque from idle to my limit of 5000 RPM. So, again, I need to figure out what I can do to build this motor the right way and achieve my goal.

I wonder what car you have based on your profile name. I can assure you, I do not have a C5 and the motor in my car is an LT1. Based on the propositions, what logical conclusion can you draw? It's no different than what I am reading for your profile name.

Also, I'll add, I have extensive experience with TPI cars and LT1 cars and LSx cars. I've owned all of the above...and have had extensive experience with various mods on various cars through local car groups and friends over the years.

I like the L98 because of its nostalgia and it looks super cool. But for drivability INCLUDING torque I prefer the LT1. Throttle response on the L98 I always felt was impressive, that was already mentioned inn this thread, but beyond just barely tipping into the throttle at MOST engine speeds the LT1 is a better engine. It breathes better across the rev range EVEN down low. There's a brief period where the L98 makes more power but its pretty narrow. Additionally there are MANY options for making an LT1 erase any positives an L98 had in terms of performance.

From someone who has owned and modded numerous cars and has been around this hobby for a long time now, I would advise against a custom intake. Finding something off the shelf thats different or working with what you have makes the most sense for the goals you've expressed.

If you just want something super different, again that's a an altogether different agenda then drivability and low/midrange performance. I know you said you don't like revving your motor much and if that's the case buy a cam that suits the profile for the LT1 that you have.

But try to get us some pics of the car perhaps we can help with the confusion.

Sure it may be an LT1 but then its not a 1997. If it's a 1996 and a 6MT then that means you have an LT4. I can't recall all the differences between the LT4 and LT1 in terms of power off the top of my head. I do remember thinking driving a couple of them that they felt a touch down on the low-end vs the LT1 but made up for it above 4000 rpm. If you have an LT4 car that could explain why you may feel a bit more of a difference below 4000rpm? I'm shooting in the dark here...

I registered this name more than ten years ago when I had an LT1 Trans Am. I no longer have that vehicle and am hoping to jump back into the C4 market soon.

The motor is definitely an LT1. I was hoping that an intake specially made for the LT1 with longer runners would help increase torque, for a start to this build. Now, I don't know based on what I am reading. In theory the long runners should, but in real practice on an LT1, I don't know. I hate to think that a mere camshaft swap will suffice.

IDK 97 should be a LS. Either way the skip shift should be disabled. The 1st to 4th in town would be miserable.

I already have the skip shift disabled. It was driving me nuts and I fail to see how it is an "improvement" when it sounds like you are lugging and grinding the motor in fourth at 30 mph!

Where do you live?

I HIGHLY suggest that you use this forum to find an owner, local to you who has an LT1 w/gears or a stroker/383 LT1...go drive it. Then you'll know that you can save several thousands on a custom intake that won't do what several hundred on gears or stroker kit will. :yesnod:

:cool::yesnod:

How long have you owned it?
What gears?
What trans?
Coupe or vert?

I ask, because of gear ratios that matter even stock. Also idle to limit is 6k. It might not be healthy from what you describe.

Also you might want to check compression etc or race someone at a track, sounds like a beat dog from what you describe.

Unless you have a real hunger for power and don't know it...

Now for the race car talk you keep mentioning... Gears and mods don't mean race cars, it means performance improvement.

People these last few generations like to pretend they have race cars. They don't. They just race them or just throw money at them.

Nothing wrong with mods, that is what you want to do too.

Mods make better performance not race cars.

many 10s of thousands of dollars make race cars. Any schmuck can throw parts at a regular car and pretend. Any schmuck with cash can run 11's these days. Those are not race cars.

Now for the mods, it's not like the old days with a 3speed auto having 4.56 gears in them and a quadrapuke or whatever on it people were driving around to be cool.

You have a geared trans, EFI, computer tunability, and should be able to be very streetable with mods.

Now what is your goal?
hp?
tq? (not going to make a big difference on a 350)
Stop light times / drag times?

Options
1. heads, cam, intake porting, rr's, headers, gears,
2. n20, s/c, turbo
3. Drive it or sell it
4.post pics of ground breaking technology intake that came 20 years too late

He's mentioned the FIRST, and he's mentioned "mid length" runner intakes.

Although I don't advocate going this route (I advocate a stroker), HERE is a cheapy mid-length runner intake.

http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/zfQAAO...A2/s-l1600.jpg

Well, how would the stroker/383 do as a daily driver and will it destroy fuel economy? Yes, I want more torque but this is within the parameters of keeping this car within it's fuel economy rating and keeping it emissions compliant for daily driving. I really don't think I am asking for the world in trying to maximize torque production from idle to as far as 5000 RPM. From my research, I need a long runner intake paired to the right custom grind camshaft. I am not even sure if mild porting my heads would benefit any more. I have consigned myself to the notion that I won't have a very powerful motor in my car when I have her totally restored and modified to like new. However, for the daily driving that I am doing, the only thrills I get are the brief launches I can make within the speed limits of that road I am on, often 45 mph. So, I need to be mindful of how fast I reach 50 mph, which is why my stock gear ratio is perfect for aggressive acceleration/launch speed control. Also, this motor is to remain naturally aspirated! I am not fooling around with cramming dual turbos into this car or adding nitrous oxide, lets be real!

I have owned my car now for 10-solid years.
Rear Gear Ratio: 3.42:1 stock
Transmission: 6 speed manual
Coupe

First off, how is it not healthy to produce power from idle to 5000 RPM? This is well below the computer RPM limit and furthermore lower RPM won't wear down the valve-train with constant high rev driving.

Second, I don't have the money to oblige the notion of racing in my car with a 20 year old transmission that is showing signs that it needs to be replaced along with a recent replacement of my stock rear gears. My girl is a daily driver and if I do take her to the track in the future, she is going to run nearly stock with the modifications I have outlined.

My goal? I care not for horsepower because I don't do a lot of high rev driving which is where HP numbers are produced. Since my daily driving is within the operating range of idle to 5000 RPM, I best focus on the torque production of my car at this power band.

Modifications? Again, I have a nagging feeling that I should keep persistent in the long runner intake because it is optimized for the power band that I am focused on, and per my research, long runners on an intake improve torque production despite suffering from lack of air flow at higher RPM usually beyond 4500 RPM but if I limit myself to 5000 RPM anyways for my daily driving, this is no major loss! So, I am focused on the intake, I need a custom grind camshaft emphasizing torque production from idle to 5000 RPM, and in some respects this would also qualify as a "fuel economy cam" which is all the more better for my notion of "street performance". If the heads could benefit from mild porting, then sure, lets tack that on! All that is left is the exhaust which my motor is currently using aftermarket short tube hooker headers with emissions hook-ups. The short headers are supposed to be good for low end torque production and while I do notice a slight umpf after their install, I want more torque umpf to get me going from a stop.

I have no intention of selling my car, I am too in love with the styling and frankly, I can improve upon her with all around LED lighting both exterior and interior.

https://www.nookandtranny.com/Info_LT1.html

http://www.hpsalvage.com/lt1.htm

1997 Corvettes did not have an LT1 engine. Camaros/Firebirds yes, Corvettes, no. From the factory, a 1997 Corvette had an LS engine. Putting a LT1 in a C5 would entail as much changes as putting a LS based engine in a C4. Changes to the motor mounts, C-beam, torque tube, transaxle etc etc etc.

In theory it should hurt fuel economy slightly. In reality the affect to economy will be minimal and dominated by how you drive it. I had a Trans Am once, like most TA's it had a 305 in it and would get about 24 mpg. Later, I installed a 400, and got....~24 mpg out of it. Mileage around town went down noticeably...but that was b/c fun went way up.



You're not...and that is precisely why I'm recommending a stoker crank (and nothing else) as it will accomplish exactly what you're looking for. It will slightly lower your power band or "tq curve", and I will increase tq at all RPM from 0- ~4500 or so.

You hadn't mentioned fuel economy as a criteria earlier (or I hadn't seen it) so that is new news. But I would not hesitate on a stroker (or gears) for a second, if I had your goals. Look at the power curves graph I posted earlier; what is the long runner intake getting you? 10 lbs of tq...at most. For thousands?

What's a stroker kit going to get you? 30 lbs? (way more if you add a little cam) For hundreds. So which is the more sensible direction?



I agree. Spending what you will have to spend for a long runner intake to gain 10 or so lobs is not really "being real"...IMO. Especially when:
1. You can spend way less to get way more gain in tq
2. I've already posted a graph showing how the short runner LT1 makes more low RPM tq than the LTR, L98. The LTR intake only works good in the narrow RPM range for which it's tuned; in the L98's case, the MID RANGE (not low end) of ~3200 RPM. At 3200 RPM and in the looks department, it's a winner. Everywhere else, it's a loser.

This concern is not legitimate. With proper basic maintenance, your valve train should go right on by 300,000 miles...even with "constant high rev driving".



I's suggest that you should put your $$$ into some basic maintenance then, rather than some big dollar intake.



Are you aware that the stock LT1 already focuses tq production at that power band? Did you look at the tq curves I posted? LT1 makes 300 tq at 1000 RPM, and peak hp at 5000....that is literally, directly aligned with your criteria! Let's just look at that graph one more time...

http://www.candent-technologies.com/images/LT1.JPG




Short headers give away low end tq, for high RPM tq (HP). You've got that part backward. Long tube headers benefit lower RPM (mid range, actually).



It really sounds to ME, like you're not really looking for advice....you're looking for validation. It seems like your mind is made up on the LTR intake. :yesnod:

The post about the extra stroke will give you what you want, 383, 396 take your pick;dont need expensive stuff to run up to 5500 either

you can run a small HR cam that will act stock (even a GM hotcam will do), little bit of headwork youre there. Id get the idea of a high $ intake out of the program and you definitely do not need a custom cam plenty of off the shelf stuff out there that works just fine.
The piston going up/down a little more doesnt sound like much but it pulls harder on the intake tract pulling more air in/out.

Doubt your mileage will change much at all if you keep it mild, you can daily drive it forver with good manners. Torque never gets old and is cheap..rpm is what costs $

Yrs ago when I was still naieve about strokers got a ride in someones 93 ruby that did exactly what you wanted. mild 383...but sounded stock...it would have made mince meat out of my overcammed 350 at the time he drove it 60 mi round trip to work

1996 6spd Lt1????

It's bad my car makes 525rwt at 1800rpm?

Your hung up on this TQ thing. You need both to make power. do you make more torque by choking it out? Sure, is it effective or efficient. No. The L98 is a perfect example of that if you stick it on a large Ci engine.

Your car your build, clearly you know the car and what you want.

you have been told a 383 wll help with torque, and BTW 6spd 4.11 are the answer as well in this case which is why I asked miles back about your car specs.

None of those were ground breaking even back then. Custom is the only way to make something really work. off the shelf means anybody has a chance with almost any cam and heads selection with in reason.

He also mentioned he has a 96 Lt 6pd. Probably LT4 right?

He mentioned all l98 intakes for an lt platform. None of them on a 350 make so much more torque than the lt intake is my point. On a chart with a proper dyno guy tuning sure it will show. On a track or in driving experience I doubt it.

The difference I feel between and lt1 and l98 is it keeps pulling steady. The l98 first stuff is not pulling that much harder.

If anything and lt1 intake opened up with a larger plenum would make more sense to me, especially if he went with lower gears to feed it.

My whole point to all this is none of it makes sense, and no intake is like slapping on 100ft of tq and not losing a bunch somewhere else. A 350 is also not a tq monster no matter what nonsense people want to feel or believe.

So i agree with you there. I think this is trolling and I have enjoyed it so far, but I'm out if others are supporting this.

LOL yep keep a stock 3.42 with a 6spd and talk custom intake but no gears.

This can't be real.

If you're making more midrange power and using that power your mileage will go down, it takes fuel and air to make power. So if you produce more of it when being utilized mileage will drop off. Again things point to a cam as solving the problem not an LTR intake.

He said it was a 97, has he changed it to 96? If it's a 96 and a 6MT it's an LT4 not an LT1 but he insists on an LT1 but refuses to post pics so that we can help or further validate. I'm thinking perhaps we have a troll who's just trying to have a bit of fun.

There is a factor not being considered here, lower RPM to produce this power as opposed to higher RPM to produce this power! More torque at a lower RPM means better fuel efficiency! Also, there is more going to my motor than just the intake. The intake is a means to optimize the motor for torque production versus the short runner factory LT1.

:iagree::troll:yesnod:

The chart you are citing is torque production contrast between the L98 and the LT1. These are two different motors, naturally, and the LT1 has higher compression than the L98 and a slightly better fuel injection system. So, this probably explains why the torque numbers are higher for the LT1 with it's short runner intake. However, what projected torque curve of this graph would represent this same LT1 with a TPI style intake?! The torque curve, in theory, should shift and peak higher in the mid-RPM range. This is why I am inquiring about this intake for my build, to intentionally optimize the LT1 motor for low to mid-range torque production.

As far as maintenance is concerned, the car gets me from point A to point B right now while I attend college. The transmission works but it will need replacement down the road which I am saving that for the day I have the car torn down and restored-modified to like new. This is years away and after I pay off my college loan with double payments. This is why I am researching what I need to do for the motor work.

Lastly, I was told short headers are for low RPM torque while long headers are for high RPM torque, the source was Summit Racing, so who is telling the truth?

Does anyone not understand what it means when someone says they don't own a C5 and their car does indeed have an LT1? Some people stated what cars had LT1 motors in the year 1997. Look at my profile name. It doesn't get anymore evident!

Well, you have me interested in the mild stroker. I just need verification that it won't kill fuel economy much. I can have the shop reprogram and dynotune my car with the built motor to adjust it as necessary.

All things being equal if power goes up at a given RPM so does fuel consumption. You make power by burning fuel, whether thats at 2000rpm or 10000rpm. Does fuel burn change based on RPM sure...but you make 200ft lbs at 2000 rpm vs 250 you'll burn more gas at 250

So, lets look at it this way, which is more fuel efficient? 250 ft lbs at 2000 rpm or 250 ft lbs at 4000 rpm? The way I see it, more squirts of fuel are entering the combustion chamber at 4000 rpm when the same power can be had at 2000 rpm. Then, lets not factor out a professional tune to ensure fuel economy. This build is intended to strike the best possible balance. I want more torque but the car needs to get the same mileage around town and that is not highway but city! Can a stroker set-up meet this criteria and pass emissions? Otherwise the camshaft will be a custom grind, mild, but emphasizing torque from idle up to 5000 RPM. The intake is still a matter I am trying to figure out but for optimization and it's sake, long runners are meant for torque production, not short runners. GM built the LT1 with short runners but for my needs as a daily driver, it should have a TPI version for itself.

So if you have a firebird/trans am why not just say that?

I give up.

Guys both of the posts are irrelevant. ^Speed TA, you're right that making more power requires more fuel...but the car doesn't require more power to go a given speed down the highway, b/c of upgrades. It takes about 20 hp to push a 'Vette down the road at 70 mph no matter what engine is in it.

Now, it's more efficient to get those 20hp at the lowest RPM possible, and/or the smallest engine possible -which ever can do it with the most efficient combustion and least friction.

And now we're into the realm of splitting hairs. In the real world, gas mileage probably won't change by a meaningful amount.

OP. I posted earlier about my gas mileage going from a 305 to a 400. I was also the first to talk about stroker cranks. Are you even reading any of my posts?

I am reading every post and digesting the information as best as I can with some degree of criticism here and there. This is an educational experience so forgive where I am clearly naive. I have a clear goal for this build with the amount of understanding and previous knowledge that I have thus far. With this said, would a stroker crank set-up suffer from poor city mileage and falling out of emissions compliance. From information I have looked it, depending upon the owner's set-up, the stroker cranks hardly seem to meet my build criteria. Am I missing something?

Yes.
1. a stroker MOST DIRECTLY meets your criteria. I already typed it above, so I'll just cop and paste rather than typing it again:
2. The stroker crank increases displacement so you should get more air/fuel in each combustion cycle (for a given throttle angle) and it increases the lever arm of the crank. Longer arm=more torque.

3. City mileage is 99% based on how you drive it. If you drive it like grandma and short shift every gear, you could get better mileage than you do now (what ever that is). If you exploit the fun that it can provide at every stop light...well...it's making more power, so it's going to use more fuel. You're not going to avoid that regardless of engine mod choices. Only way to make the car more FUN in city driving and maintain economy is to reduce weight.

I don't think "city mileage" is a criteria that you should weigh very heavily. If you do, get a Prius and save the 'Vette/fun driving for the weekends.

You're right about compression and low end tq. My take away from those charts is that equal compression, they'd both make equal low RPM tq. The LTR intake isn't helping the low rpm tq... -it works at and around one RPM; 3200. Fuel injection system on the LT1 is not meaningfully better. They're both batch fired, speed density systems with junky multec injectors for each port. The LT1 does have better timing control and cooling though I feel that the benefits of those things are for the OEM (emissions certs) and not so much the user.



Then get a stroker crank. Why would putting a TPI intake on an LT1 "shift and peak higher"?? It would peak at the same RPM is does on a TPI motor. It would likely peak ~10 ft-lb higher than an LT1 intake...but then plummet like a rock above 3500, just like it does on the L98 engine.


Not Summit. Longer primary exhaust tubes function similarly to longer intake tubes; they move their contribution to tq, DOWN the RPM range. Shorter primary exhaust tubes function similarly to shorter intake tubes; they move their contribution to tq, UP the RPM range.

There are tons of dyne test, articles and expert experience on this topic. I'd submit that you misunderstood Summit...or they simply made a typo. HERE IS SOME READING for you. Scroll down to the section labelled "What Primary Pipes Do".

For your goals, you want LONG tube headers and LONG collector (mid pipe) before expanding into any chamber (cats, muffs, X or H pipes, etc.).

http://st.hotrod.com/uploads/sites/2...nd%7C596%3A373

There's a accell lt1 super ram base that maybe available in the parts wtd/ fs section. There is no mention if it sold 6sspd is seller. The runners and plenum are more easily found. Search it.

Theres also a brand new never used superram for sale on LA craiglist maybe david frederick here on the forum can make it work for you hes good with them.

OP check your pm box

Not interested. Furthermore the intake won't clear the cowl portion of the engine bay, even if it could be specially modified for a slight reduction in height. The FIRST TPI intake has more promise to fit, but it can't be more than eight inches tall so either the runners are shortened or the runners are compressed more, which it may hurt performance.

This is the video I referenced:

The chart you provided, where did it come from? It looks like it is home made.

I am still not so sure about the stroker kit. If the displacement is increased then surely it is burning more fuel, even at idle. Yes, I want more torque, but I am willing to live with myself if it must lie with a mild "RV" camshaft.

Then there is the intake issue... I need more graphs and more personal experience. If long runners are intended for more low to mid-range torque and the limit is usually 4500 RPM, it won't be a problem for me as I have no desire to rev past 5000, it makes my shifting easier.

That video is bunk. He's wrong. His attempt to compare the shorty to as stock exhaust manifold as a reason why it makes more low end tq is wrong.


Came from the article that is linked in the same post I made, as the graph. Did you read it? There's tons more like them.



They're not. They're intended for MID RANGE tq. That is obvious as hell if you look at the tq graph that I provided for you.


*I* think you want from this thread is your LTR idea validated. I'm not going to do that for you. You're message is very conflicting -like you have no idea what you really want (or you want everything, which you can't have), or you're just here to argue. For example:
Ya tell us that you're happy to sacrifice power/performance for low and mid tq...but then you tell cuisinartvette that you're concerned about "hurt performance" with the FIRST from shortened runners?? Which is it?
And that was after you said that the Superram won't fit under the hood or cooler or whatever.... The Superram will fit. It was designed specifically FOR F-bodies and Y-bodies (Corvette).

Ya want more tq...but you're afraid of gas mileage (even after I gave you an example of a 100 CID increase where there was no increase in fuel consumption). But seriously, here...if you're going to increase acceleration...you're gonna burn more fuel! Intake or stroker...how ever you accomplish it, if you exploit whatever change you make, THAT is going to burn fuel. If you're concerned about fuel, you might have the wrong car/hobby.

Let me ask you this: What intake do YOU want on your car?

Wrong. A SuperRam will work under the stock hood of a Corvette. I ran one for years. It's by far the best street/performance manifold around in my opinion. Huge flat torque curve from just off idle and mine pulled to 6200 rpm. I launched at 1900 rpm, shifted at 6200 and ran low elevens. I'm not sure why you place such an emphasis in fuel mileage. If you're willing to spend a thousand or two to upgrade your motor or intake, what difference does a mile or two mpg make? Less than a hundred dollars a year.

I agree with everything you've stated here.

From searching the internet I am getting two very conflicting statements on which is better. The first opinion states that the shorty header is ideal for low RPM torque, it sure as heck can not be used for high RPM torque, which the long header is better for. The other statement claims the long tube header outperforms the shorty even at low RPM, which I find hard to believe if the exhaust system has too much scavenging going on. Again, this is where I need more information on how to build my set-up.

I left a different forum because they were getting too hostile and not respecting my curiosity on how to produce better low end torque. I understand if you are frustrated by my challenging your knowledge, however, I am frustrated that no one seems to understand what my goal is when I state DAILY DRIVER performance. The car spends most of it's time at 1000 to 3000 RPM which is where she cruises and shifts. My complaint is high way cruising when I enter a steep incline, the car starts slowing down indicating to me that it requires more low end torque. I don't need mid-range torque as in a stroker because I am not driving most of my time beyond 3000 RPM, where it would make a difference! I have to be mindful of fuel economy, I can't take a loss on the bottom end to gain mid-range power when really I need to bump up the bottom end torque, understand? This car is going to remain pretty much stock with the exception of building the motor to have low end torque and sputter out around 5000 RPM with a necessary "RV" camshaft which this only lends more credibility to having a TPI style intake on my car, to force the torque curve of the LT1 to behave like the L98. As I said, I am trying to squeeze out as much low end torque as I possibly can and this is the best way to do it, in my mind.

I have a 1997 WS6 Trans Am 6-speed with the LT1 motor, I do not have a corvette. The SuperRam WILL NOT clear the overhead cowl of the engine bay in my F-body. The most I can fit is an eight inch tall intake modeled after the TPI intake that I am likely going to ask FFI to custom fabricate for me. The runners will likely be a tad smaller than those for the L98 but it should translate into a slight increase in RPM airflow. With the necessary research and development, maybe the LT1 will require slightly shorter long runners anyways.

FWHP? What kind of car did you do all this to?

To the OP: for the results you say you want, I'd go to 4.11 gears. Cheaper. Fewer headaches. Immediate, noticeable performance.

the bigger motor will give you more torque everywhere period

67 posts later, what a bunch of folks have been saying regarding an LT1 in a '97

while there are probably corvette owners on here that have had the same platform you do AND motor building is motor building, here is another forum that can help you do research as regarding the LT1 motor in a non-Corvette

http://www.ls1lt1.com/

Hence why I refrained from admitting what car I have until I had to. Even so, the comments are more polite on this forum than the previous LS site I was on. If I am not considered a troll of some sort I would like to remain for the duration of this post while I gather necessary opinions and information.

Yes, I understand, lower rear gear ratio and I have a more peppy motor. The downside though, I lose highway mileage and now I am accelerating too fast in city traffic and spending more time in higher RPM ranges. This all equates to less fuel mileage from the average I am now getting. Increased low end torque would offer some more acceleration but hardly that offered by a lower rear gear. For my build, and with my experience daily driving, my stock gear ratio strikes a perfect balance between fuel economy and acceleration. I just need more low end torque. Yes, I realize my proposed mods to the LT1 will be pricey but again, this paves the way for a new product for the LT1 market and adds a new dynamic for those who can try to strike their own balance if trying out a TPI style intake for the LT1.


Yes but if I have to trade off some lost low end torque and a loss in city fuel mileage, I should probably avoid trying to increase the displacement of my motor, despite how tempting it is. Seriously, with a stroker kit, I would find myself then trying to limit airflow in an attempt to make up for the loss of fuel economy, which would encourage me to keep the LT1 intake simply because of this in terms of low rpm airflow. Forget any notions of mild porting my heads and then I would bug the tuning shop to set my air-fuel ratio as lean as could safely be done. I have carefully considered what I would have to do if I decide to go the stroked route. With a mild RV camshaft and a TPI style intake paired with my shorty headers and a true dual exhaust linked by an H pipe and using my stock rear gear ratio, I stand to gain some slight acceleration with more low end torque, better highway passing power, and I can now remain in sixth gear for the minor inclines I encounter that force me to keep downshifting currently. I can probably achieve the same result with a stroker kit, but I really don't want to drastically alter my car's idle and drive ability with a lopping stroker kit.

the stroker wont make it lope at all in fact it will tame what would be a lopey cam for a 350. You want the best flowing head possible that way you can run a small cam so its efficient...with a poor head youll need more cam for the same power result. No free lunch..once it strays from stock youre going to lose something somewhere
noone really makes aftermarket intakes for C4s the market isnt there. As the cars get cheaper the owners are less likely to spend $500 or more for an intake

edit the larger motor will have you opening the throttle less to get up to the same speed

That is why I posted a link to a decent article...which you obviously didn't read. If you HAD read it, you'd have clarity on the header issue, and you wouldn't say things like the bold, above.




That's not true at all. The vast majority in this thread have heard and acknowledged and accepted your (unusual) criteria!....and then have gone on to give you the best advice they can. And mostly, it's damned good advice. As good as you'll get. The REAL problem here is that...




Say...WHAT!??? Who said that? When? Where? I don't believe that has been said at all. IN FACT, that was said, about your pipe-dream (and the TPI) intakes. I even posted a tq graph that literally highlights that ~3000 RPM tq bump that the intake creates.

No, No one said that the stroker crank works at 3000 RPM. No one said a stroker crank works in the "mid range". IN FACT, here is what *I* said about stroker cranks...



*I* understand. Stroker.



Then why have you wasted good people's time seeking there valuable knowledge...when you already know what is the "best way to do it"??? You've already got it all figured out...why waste our time? Just go do it. Spend 1000's on an intake and gain 10 ft lbs at 3000 rpm! Do it! :crazy2:

I believe that I even suggested what is REALLY going on in post #40:
..and post #63
There are WAY too many inconsistencies, things you say that don't "jibe"...yep. I'm smelling something. It smells a lot like another new member, Ian.g who also registered the same day you did, asked for help...then didn't listen. Very similar.




THAT is how you get the label, ":troll", on this forum and others. Sorry, but it's true. :yesnod:

Also...I can't help myself....is this shit FOR REAL???
Yikes.

FYI, there is no market for the product that you're proposing. You are the only guy who wants to spend $$$ to decrease hp. :yesnod:

You drive a m6 if you feel engine bogging down you down shift. If you had an automatic transmission the pcm would sense the load and turn off converter clutch. If load was still too high, pcm would command downshift to 3rd. You somewhat Trolled this forum. You could have started this thread in the F body or other car sections. Worrying about fuel economy and driving a WS6 Trans Am is somewhat of a oxymoron. For the LT1 Corvette shorty headers biggest benefit is there lighter than cast iron. The f body exhaust is completely different than the Corvette. Intake wise you are very limited because most of the engine is under the windshield. If you were straight up about what you had; you likely still would have replies that more applied to your car. The Super Ram might fit, but you would have to drop the engine out of the car to install it. Then raise it back in.
93 -02 f bodies is not designed for engine to be removed through hood opening.

I was an 18-wheeler truck driver, I know something about downshifting when I feel the motor losing power. The problem is, I am not driving a rig hauling 80,000 lbs of freight, I have a sports car that slows down on minor inclines on the throughway. The car should stay in 6th gear and cruise ahead without speed loss. If my car is doing this, it is also struggling driving around uneven city roads at low RPM. I want more low end torque and I aim to fix it.

Well, I wouldn't say I "trolled", I just don't have a corvette and frankly speaking I was betting on the corvette guys being more informative and polite versus the F-body and LS1/LT1 crowd who literally gave me a lashing for posting this topic. Apparently I am headed into another one judging from your comment. Oh well!

Trying to make a sports car more fuel efficient is not as much an "oxymoron" as you think. Some of us guys want powerful cars to take to the track, and others want to show off on the street for questionable reasons, I am trying to salvage my motor by giving it more power down below. This is not only great for fuel efficiency but it is something I can feel during hard acceleration, for fun. I don't aim to race anyone, but I do want to be pushed back into my seat. Now, am I going about this the right way with wanting a TPI intake? Well, if I imagine the L98 having the same starting torque as an LT1 while keeping it's torque curve, so you shift it up 40 lbs ft, I start thinking the TPI intake is a smart move. I am not the only guy who has asked about a TPI intake on the LT1 and to have been shot down by those who care only for high RPM performance. My gift will be the option for daily drivers of LT1s to have a bolt-on TPI style intake that will fit under the tight engine bay of our F-bodies, and FFI will be the place to get it from. Yes, it's a lot of money but so too is a brand new car, especially a brand new top of the line Corvette.

Damn good looking car. :thumbs:

I find it odd that your car can't climb hills on the highway. My car will climb all/any highway hills around here in 6th gear, same rear gear, same 6th gear, and similar weight. But here's the catch; I'm at 4500-8000' elevation in the rocky mtns; my daily commute requires me to climb ~3000' over 13 miles...6th gear easy. Going the other direction, I climb ~3000' over 6 miles. That's not a highway and I use 5th for that. Anyway, like you, I would expect that car to be able to go on any interstate highway and stay in 6th gear. LT1 intake or otherwise, it ought to be able to do it -especially at lower elevations. So my big question is: why won't your car do it? Have you ever dyne'ed or drag tracked it to see if it's..."all there"?




:crazy2:

Well, the car is using the stock camshaft and parts of the car are 20 years old, like the transmission. She isn't a garage queen and I DO drive her in the winter. So, I really, REALLY, need to be careful with which modifications I do!

You guys can joke all you want and insult me with crazy emojis, but I do appreciate the ideas thus far and I will be considering them from the long tube headers which must have emissions hook-ups and those for the oxygen sensors, and California catalytic converters right behind them, to the stroker proposal. There is always someone who is made fun of, might as well be me. This is why we are having this discussion for others like me to find this post.

You don't want to give up fuel mileage (because of increased costs, I presume), yet you'd pay a professional to fabricate a one-off, custom intake? Illogical, Spock.

Also, you can keep from "accelerating too fast" by modulating the throttle with, like, your right foot...and can avoid "spending more time in the higher RPM ranges" by the simple expedience of upshifting.

I fail to follow your line of reasoning. After all, your search for more low-end torque is to provide faster acceleration (which would put you in a state of higher rpm sooner, usually)....is it not??

Sir, you misquote me and you misunderstand my intentions. The goal is not "more acceleration". More torque can help accelerate the car a little bit to get it going from a stop but I never said it would compare to a 4.10 rear gear ratio. I am keeping my stock gear ratio as it is more than adequate for the daily driving I am doing and I wish to preserve my average fuel economy rating. Now, I did read the link about long tube headers and I will finally admit I stand corrected. However, I need them specially modified to produce the torque spike low enough where I need it and to produce a broad torque curve. I looked into the stroker kit and frankly it is dangerous and it runs the risk of wearing out the motor too fast, and idle will be a problem as well. I am stuck using a custom grind "RV" camshaft for this build. So, we are back to the intake. In theory, long runners increase low end torque which is what I want. In order to fit in my engine bay, a hypothetical FIRST TPI intake will have to likely have shortened runners from that of the L98 version. This may bump up RPM power production while losing some low end torque unless it can be designed to still perform true with shortened runners. I am still left with how to optimize my planned exhaust system using California catalytic converters with a true dual exhaust linked by an H-pipe.

I thank you all for your comments and having this discussion.

What happens if your new intake isn't a good fit for your cam, you gonna go do a custom grind anyway?

^This is a disaster. At least you learned something though (about headers). After 4 pages, it's about time that you read and comprehended something. Sorry, but that's true too.

A stroker crank won't wear out your engine faster. In fact, it could help your engine last longer since it's can run at a lower RPM (don't need to down shift on hills!). Second, a stroker crank will not hurt idle one iota. Cuisinartvette already told you that and explained why....did you even read his post?? IDK where you came up with those gems...but they are totally WRONG. Totally wrong.
Do you realize that the "stroker crank" is essentially a small block chevy 400 crank...in a 350? So if GM sold "stroker cranks" (sbc 400's) in cars and trucks for a decade...how could they do that if the crank created wear and idle issues? They couldn't. The crank doesn't do that. That statement is dead wrong.

Longer runners contribute to low end tq but won't make the difference that you're looking for. Did you see the tq graph that I posted? The long runners help tq in the 3000 RPM range. I've said that like 3 or 4 times now in this thread. READ IT. COMPREHEND IT.

Finally, you can get long tube headers and they'll help...a little bit. Just like the intake. What you really need is a long collector but you can't have that in Cali w/catalytic converters.


.

Is it just me...or is this a '98^, LS1 Trans Am?? I've never seen that hood on a '97 or earlier car...

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...-000_08151.jpg


EDIT: Someone must have put on a later hood. Fenders and bumper look like '97.


.

This is what I need to find out before hand. It is hard to prove a hypothesis when no actual intake exists to verify what I think it will do with an appropriate custom grind "RV" camshaft. If GM engineers had experimented with long runners on the test versions of the LT1, I sure wish that data existed somewhere. I am under the strong impression that the LT1 was merely an experiment to test reverse flow cooling and the short runner intake while GM was focused on whether to carry on development of the LT5 or focus on the LS1. I finally found an article by an engineer explaining why the LS1 won out, but GM may crank out a new LT5 anyways for the new corvette. History does repeat itself oddly enough.

Op has heard or read bad info somewhere & doesnt want to let go of what sounds like some wivestails. These guys for pages have been trying to help you, they have done it aleady some numerous times not just read about it.

-some AFR heads are 50 state legal
-Dougs I believe makes a 50 state legal shortie
-Cams doesnt matter just dont go big on overlap or duration
-Car would idle like a kitten and pull hard;gains will be huge
So you drop a mpg or 2 big deal.

This article at it's end is what scared me about the stroker kit. https://www.carthrottle.com/post/wha...crease-torque/

Quote: " Obvious dangers come with the smaller tolerances introduced with a longer stroke. Although the precautions mentioned earlier can be undertaken, the risk of collisions within the engine are inherently increased. A common issue is the crank journals contacting oil rails lying between the crankshaft and the oil pan. To counteract this, many stroker kits will provide modified sumps/pans to allow for a smidgen more clearance."

This is going to incur more money to get the kit to work right on my car...

Yeah but do you also notice the spike in torque to 3000 RPM before it drops for the L98? If this behavior holds true for the LT1, the LT1 stands to gain a hefty torque curve at the RPM ranges I am driving in! Shift that L98 torque curve up to where the LT1 starts and you will see how this intake is perfect for my driving and RPM range. Even when it would start to drop off at 3000 RPM, it is still higher than the stock LT1, assuming the same behavior holds true for the LT1 TPI set-up.

I need to talk to the shop and an engine builder on how best to manage the exhaust flow from my set-up. Yes, the correct length and diameter and collector size long tube header will help a little in torque production for my RPM range and the TPI style intake shall make it's small contribution. The goal here is to optimize my LT1 for torque production at the low end, so the intake and header combination may be necessary for what I am trying to achieve.

We are sifting through proposals and studying them as we go. This topic is very irritating for many people so forgive me. This project of mine is a couple of YEARS away! Funding for it will be in the form of a personal car loan after I have paid off my student loan for college, which I am still attending! I have plenty of time to figure out if I should also fund this intake for the LT1 or not and assuming if the company can and is willing to make it for me.

What you are seeing is an actual LT1 1997 Trans Am WS6 with an aftermarket LS1 styled Trans Am WS6 hood. I bought this in 2006 when I was a lowly furniture delivery guy for my then 1997 automatic Firebird 6-cylinder. The hood would later go into storage and I upgraded to the V-8 LT1, but the hood would not work with my factory ram air box! The fiberglass piece of junk that was made for this hood was nothing more than a rain collector so I had to put the hood back into storage until the day came when my factory air box started to peel apart allowing outside unfiltered air into the motor. I have since replaced my factory LT1 ram air box with a Camaro LS1 factory air box. This required me to cut up the hood from inside and fabricate it "poor man style" to duct the air into the small inlet. This is far more better than my factory LT1 air box and my mileage actually improved!

This "problem" is extremely easily delt with...and for FAR less money than you're proposed intake.



Whoa whoa WHOA! Now, earlier, you (incorrectly) said that you didn't want a stroker crank b/c it only helped in the mid range. You said that you wanted to improve LOW end tq...not just mid range.

As I said earlier ^That is incorrect; the stroker will increase tq at ALL RPM. It's a longer lever arm. Conversely, the intake will only help from about 2600 RPM to about 3600 RPM. Anyway, you went on to clarify just how important LOW RPM tq is to you...
So which is it? Are you looking do drive around from idle to 3000 RPM? Or are you going to drive around at 3200 RPM all day/everyday, reveling in the TOWQAK MONSTAH TPI intake's narrow RPM range "glory", from ~2600-3500...

http://www.candent-technologies.com/images/LT1.JPG

I think what you really need is a nice little diesel in there. I'm not kidding.


.

:lol::lol::lol:
that needs to be trademarked or something^^maybe an new LT1 intake?
(I can see the windshield decals now)
1st to 30mph or 30 ft

Log onto speedtalk.com and ask away
Also Pipemax software by Larry Meaux

Find a used runner off a FAST 102 that will give you some insight

Could you elaborate then? What would I need to configure my LT1 safely and cheaply as you so ardently claim? You have plenty of jokes but where is that configuration?



Do you understand what daily driving entails or shall I safely assume you are high revving everywhere you go from point A to point B? You have jokes but where is your configuration for me? The car needs to get up and go from stop and go traffic, hence why I see the value in a mild "RV" camshaft customized for better performance over something on a store shelf. The TPI intake serves the RPM range I will be driving my car in from idle to aggressive at most 5000 RPM. Why is this so funny?



Are you going to offer meaningful suggestions and technical information or are you just going to trash talk for a lack of anything worthwhile to contribute? I don't want a race car and I don't want a high performance high horsepower car. I am building a daily driver with the goal of maximizing torque on the bottom end to mid range. What solutions do you have?

You can clearance the block w/a die grinder
You can use different connecting rods that have a smaller "big end" (while being stronger) and eliminate the clearance issue altogether.





I've given you my opinion for a configuration. Pages ago. A STROKER CRANK. I wouldn't change the cam, the intake, the shorty headers that you have. None of it. I'd spend <$1000 on a "Stroker rotating assembly", I'd install it in my engine, and I'd go burn some rubber and love the "push me back in the seat/whiplash" experience that it would provide. From idle to 3000 RPM (and beyond). I'd love the 25+ mpg on the highway, and I'd use the money that I saved by NOT buying a custom intake, to buy shit-box 4 cylinder beater for my city driving. There is my "configuration". For like the what, 4th? 5th time in this thread?



Because it's so wrong, and you're SO SLOW to "get it". The TPI DOES NOT serve the RPM range you will be driving your car in...oh wait! You just moved you're claimed "RPM RANGE in which you drive", up to 5000?? We can't help you with moving targets. I asked above. What do you want?

What ever it is, the TPI intake isn't going to help from idle to ~2600 RPM. Look at the graphs. LOOK at them.





STROKER CRANK.
Or a diesel. That is not trash talk. A diesel will provide WAY more tq from idle to mid range, than any intake ever would or could. Literally a what you're describing is a diesel.





Finally...I have given you TONS of good information in this thread. Are you f'n kidding us here? I've posted graphs, links, articles....all to back up, just to convince you or 'prove to you' that which I already know. Then you have the gall to come on here and bust MY balls with;
WTF.


.

Yes I have the gall, insults don't get anyone anywhere especially when this is an honest question. Now that I have your configuration with regards to the stroker kit, I will have to research it some more on my own time. We are done talking about the intake. I need more technical information on exactly why it would be of no use for my application. Thank you. This thread should be locked down now.

The goal is not more acceleration. THE GOAL IS NOT MORE ACCELERATION. WTF?

Dude...you are now hearing from one of this forum's "original" torque-wanna-be's. I built a stroker still using a longtube setup BECAUSE I wanted more power, wanted better power in 3rd, and I didn't want to lose much MPGs...when not nailing it. To say the goal is not better acceleration (even in that narrow sub 3k rpm range you're talking about) is FOOLING yourself.

You want a more fun TOY without hurting it's MPG. Listen...technology has been chasing that for several generations...and made some headway with the LTx (vs L98), then the LSx motors, now newer ones with direct injection. Your problem is you can't afford to upgrade AND you live in Californicatia. You get to look at a higher average of big boobs but you don't get to alter what's under your right foot....at least not without staying "clean". And, there's some good reasons for people feeling that way.

I see some of the thinking I started out with...in the way you present arguments AND what you hope to gain. My VERY FIRST PM in this forum stated I was searching for reasonable cost power gains in the idle-4500rpm range. MOST of the reason for that is I'm an urban driver and KNOW that revving beyond that attracts attention and tickets. Also, that a short burst pretty much accomplishes any functional traffic maneuvers you need. But...there IS irony in looking to SPEND money for more torque w/o wanting to spend it under your right foot. There IS flaw in your thinking!!!

Consider alternatives to wake yourself up: How would you feel if you had a 454 under the hood? How would you feel if you had a 3.0L direct injection with more torque and better mileage? What if it was a 6-cylinder and didn't SOUND like a V8?

From 2007 to 2010, I lived in this forum and learned A LOT from it. There were a few (very knowledgeable) guys that gave me a hard time and deservedly so. Answers to your questions aren't necessarily black and white. What you read about strokers is "theory". Longer stroke motors can have more clearance and side-loading issues BUT built correctly, they can live as long (or longer) than your OEM setup. AND...they make more power everywhere.

While it's true that long-runner intakes make more TORQUE in a specific HARMONIC range, they don't make more power. Lower gears have more torque multiplication which makes even MORE "power" than a long-runner setup. With YOUR worries about clearance, I think gears ARE your best option. And the mpg's aren't going to be THAT much worse...as a result of final drive ratios. Plus, MOST people don't know that a long-runner intake has someone worse "tip-in" and doesn't move air quite as quickly. In short, it's somewhat less responsive off-idle because it doesn't have to MOVE a long column of air. Air has weight AND it comes into play with intake dynamics.

The REASON you THINK you want a longrunner intake is that shorter RPM "distance" before you hit the peak harmonic of the pressure in the intake. There's a MILD compression of air that gets more IN the motor at the specific harmonic peak of the intake. (BTW...any intake has a peak point...and you are correct that a long-runner setup peaks earlier). Besides not knowing long-runners are less responsive off-idle, they create negative pressure at higher rpms. They HOLD BACK pistons and put pressure on the piston's/wrist pins. If/when you do need more power (not torque), there's some theoretical "wear" created by the limitation of that top-end-inhibiting (TPI) intake.

So get OFF the notion that stroking isn't going to help. Built correctly with 6" rods and a smaller ring set (than you currently have), you'd likely end up with less wear than you're getting now. (That's assuming they weren't running 3mm rings by '97...which I don't know.)

If you have a custom FFI intake built by Ken, you'd be better off with a cam AND headers. If you are going to tear it apart for a cam, stroking is almost a waste NOT to do while it's apart. I didn't see your currently mileage but you'd be starting over...as a new motor. SUBTRACT your current mileage from what you HOPE to get out of the car you have now. Ask owners of strokers in any forum and see what they are getting from their setups. I found several members in THIS forum well beyond 100k miles on a well-built setup. Not that many have talked about 200k miles but that's true for factory cars...and the difference is attributable in the ratio of each (stroker vs 350) out there.

Now...back to the REAL issue. You should not be building a motor with the intent to retain mileage and/or NOT spend more money. Either spend it, run it, and enjoy it, or quit whining about that part. FWIW, I'm getting about 15mpg city and 28mpg hwy with a 383. At most, I lost 10% .... BUT .... I've NEVER tried to get maximum MPG for comparison. It's TOO EASY to jump on the power of a stroker vs the original motor! It's TOO EASY NOT to enjoy the extra power/torque you get...no matter where you put it.

ICE's are inherently inefficient anyway. More compression typically results in better mileage. That's probably why I can get the same (or near the same) MPG even with 100rwtq/100rwhp more than I had before. When I'm not "asking" for it, the car is still using the same amount of power: Getting to speed AND staying at speed ... as it took before. This point was presented to you already (though in slightly different words).

With a longtube "big-mouth" stroker setup, I have about all the torque I can use. In 1st/2nd, I have MORE than I need. Waaaay more. In YOUR eyes, you THINK you need more torque for daily driving but I had way more torque (in terms of traction) in 1st/2nd BEFORE my build. What you can gain is responsiveness/torque in 3rd gear on up.

In EVERYONE'S driving technique, 3rd gear is a hwy passing gear. You don't NEED more torque for daily urban driving. If you don't need more acceleration, it SOUNDS like you want the damn thing to be more responsive and that's about it.

With a 6-spd, I'd think you have all that you can get.....especially since revving the motor before dropping the clutch controls HOW MUCH responsiveness you get here/there. The ONLY thing left if how responsive it is when you are motoring along and press the pedal.

People have already said AND I WILL ADD that gears will provide more noticeable TORQUE than an intake targeted to specific rpms. Gears work in all rpms. PLUS, gears aren't going to be ANY risk in the California regime. Anything else is going to have risk, require LOTS more money than you think and (potentionally) require rework until you finally THINK you have it right. My guess is...if/when that time comes, you'll wish you'd built the stroker...or bought a newer car...or installed gears.

Modification isn't about improving the efficiency of an ICE....at least not with what you've posted here. Just wake up and realize you do want better acceleration. You're not looking for efficiency and the responsiveness of your right pinky toe.

:smash:

Well good f'n luck then. I'm sorry that I wasted my valuable timing with you. I wonder why things didn't work out for you on that other forum? Can't you YOU, right?


First intelligent thing you've published on this forum.

Good read.

OP... now that the real identity of the car has been released days later I'm wondering if you looked in to the Tram? Will that fit? I'm not familiar with F bodies, plus I once bought an intake from a guy on here that claimed it fit and I ended up cutting my hood, so who knows until they try it.


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.cor...e1c3f11cd2.png

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.cor...876ef1be96.png

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.cor...4ecbb3ddb3.png

First off, thank you for your response. Second, I don't have a problem with my driving foot, that was when I had a 6-cylinder Firebird trying to show off for a lack of a powerful motor and I learned a lot by spinning out in traffic from loss of traction on the rear tires in that car. I got my V-8 and I soon gained a respect for the motor. After being an 18-wheeler truck driver, my driving has since tamed even more further. I have no desire to swap out rear gears when I am happy with the current acceleration of my car for the daily driving I encounter. With this said, I want more lower end torque without screwing with the gearing on my car too much and if anything, I would go higher in gear not lower, I would take better cruising performance over more acceleration at higher RPMs!

I took the time to read this website and I need to know if there is such a thing as having too small of a camshaft for a stroker kit.
http://www.hughesengines.com/TechArt...oosingacam.php

So, if I have a choice on what camshaft to use with a stroker kit, what problems do I get into by choosing a very mild camshaft as opposed to one that should be larger for the stroker kit? As per the website, quote, "Strokers increase the displacement of an engine which in turn makes the cam act smaller."

I am really having a bad feeling that the stroker kit is NOT what I am looking for.

maybe because you don't know what you are looking for...

A supercharger might do the trick. And you wouldn't be giving up the LT1s higher rpm potential. The only issue is Kaliforny compliance. But, done right, engineered right, emissions could be contained to spec. The question is what will CARB allow? Just a thought...