So do you think this video is BS?

No, but how does it perform? It's nice to know that it can withstand boost but can it generate any more power or will it lose power? Does it fit under a C5 cowl?

Don't know if it's been said yet, but the BTR manifold doesn't fit on the c5. Brian told me he fit it on his c5 and it needs trimming to fit.

Strange they do not show the intake whilst filling or fully releasing pressure...and a static camera would fair better than a handheld.

They also released the pressure very slowly....and for this application that does not happen. Pressure will rise/fall thru vacuum very fast with throttle movements etc and one cycle does not cover the fatigue aspect.
Now perhaps the ICT is not the same Chinese intake everyone else sells...although it does look like it. Others have burst similar intakes. I had to cut the front off mine to lower the angle of the TB flange for it to fit my application, and the metal is not 1/8" as claimed. I didnt measure, but I do know that 1/8th sheet is pretty thick in your hand. At a guess I'd say closer to 2.5mm or so vs 3.125mm.

And then there is this....and I only came across it after I already had my Holley intake. Mine makes a similar irritating noise !! Cheap thin metal. Inside the car it's not so much of an issue, but when I'm outside or the hood is open and engine running it is bloody annoying.

https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...noise-wtf.html

And then there were the fuel rails....where the one end of each was not machined correctly for the o-ring fittings that were supplied....and the o-ring would get destroyed on tightening. Using a 1.5mm cross section o-ring instead of the "correct" 2.0mm CS did resolve that though.....

Port alignment with my 225TFS cathedrals was bloody terrible too.

I do have a lot of bad to say about my Holley intake, largely quality related. But I do still have it on my car after remedying things as best I could. It looks like a much more expensive intake and looks good on the motor. It would also be nice to see these intakes run the correctly angled injector bosses too though instead of the straight down they do. Straight down is not correctly angled towards the valve. A minor point perhaps.

But again....it was cheap. I liked that bit lol.

TBH I wish I'd bought a ProFlo although I'm damn sure it wouldnt have fitted height wise, another reason to try the Holley first to get an accurate picture of what room I had.

And it still goes to show...if you mostly operate below 6k....factory style intakes always win ! Still some decent gains above 6k though

So, below 5k RPM it's down almost 100HP to the LS6? Yikes.

Interesting that the BTR with just a smaller throttle body made more HP below 5800 or so than it did with a 102. What's up with that?

Only idiots oversize their TB....

Really, a better test would be with the typical 92mm as per most DBW vehicles. But larger blades can affect airflow, slow down airflow etc etc which will have a negative effect.

But it still goes to show how bloody good the factory style intakes are. LS engines clearly love those long runners in the operating range most people do use them at. Really, any "new" intake would need a compromise of those long runners and with a large plenum. I'd say around 8-9" long runners would be nice to see on a test...AND with a good angle where the pair with the head.

That's another very bad aspect about the likes of the Holley sheet metal, and I'd have to assume ProFlo and HiRam too. Given the shape of the ports on an LS and the angle of entry to them, a runner with a similarly shallow entry would make far more sense than the downwards runs of the aftermarket intakes

Of all the intakes around so far...I liked the idea of this one James/G1Pro drew up. Plus he was suggesting he could offer various bolt on runner lengths. Not sure overall what sort of height it could be though.

I'm about as far from an engineer as it gets, but why doesn't someone just copy the factory ls manifold design and make it out of cast aluminum?

Sounds like you're describing something like the Edelbrock cross-ram.

Like the already mentioned BBK and Weiand did ?

Plastic forming etc will give more freedom in terms of shape and manufacture vs cast alloy.

Nothing of the sort. It has something like 13" runners and the dual plenum. Visually it is impressive...but as with all of these, it seemed to fail miserably in testing, probably why it has never really seen the light of day for sales.

Keep it simple....8-9" runners, and a large single plenum.

BBK intake....very similar to the LS6 inside, and the runners hit the head at a nice straight angle too...again as per OEM.

https://i.postimg.cc/MGWJn5fp/IMAG0853_Large.jpg

https://i.postimg.cc/ZY9nYYhD/IMAG0856_Large.jpg

Although there'd be room for some porting and smoothing with the BBK, as supplied it is fairly rough. Still a decent sized plenum underneath the runners though.

But the runner openings are fairly shrouded. LS6 factory might be better in that respect

Correct. Except I have square port heads and they dont make them for it, at least yet

Probably never will if not done by now.

LS3 intake has proven itself so well already, it'd be doubtful a similar cast alloy version could improve on it, simply from manufacturing limitations.

https://www.lsxmag.com/tech-stories/...ake-manifolds/

https://www.hotrod.com/articles/gian...dyno-shootout/

I don't need it to be improved, the same but bulletproof PSI wise would be great (i.e. cast aluminum copy).. doesnt look like that will happen anytime soon however.

This intake is garbage. All that hype for nothing. All the BTR fan boys will buy it and go slower. It just gets its ass kicked under 6k. If your drag racing to 8k its a good intake.

It is only one test they've released, and yes it is certainly disappointing. Time will tell if they can produce a better combo.

Although even shifting at 7500rpm, should see you above 6k most of the time so still somewhere with gains..and boost proof you're after. A Nice billet CNC'd lid without the logo would look a bit better too, although visually it is quiet nice as it is.

Again...the bottom line is it needs longer runners. Or perhaps smaller port runners at current length to increase airspeed in the ports.