View Poll Results: Do you Believe me or Disagree
Voters: 9. You may not vote on this poll
Single Plane Intakes... Loss of Torque?
03-20-2009, 03:58 PM
#33
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SC
Posts: 2,401
They are myths.... if you take them one by one, literally, their "general applicability" is false.
"any TB larger than 70-75mm will cause a tq. loss"
In what type of setup?...... that is a false generic statement. Or are the OEM's going against that "rule of thumb"?
All the facts below are OEM: (Bore ID - TB blade area ID)
2005 Dodge Dakota 3.9L(238 CID) V6 TB = 65-65mm
2007 Ford Explorer 4.0L(244 CID) V6 TB = 70-63mm
2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee 4.7L(287 CID) V8 TB = 65-68mm
1995 Mercedes C280 2.8L(171 CID) I6 TB = 75-70mm
2005 Lincoln LS 3.9L(238 CID) V8 TB = 82-70mm
Are the above made up figures?..... Nope...... checked and measured each one of the above myself.
"exhaust larger than 2.5in will cause tq loss"
When nothing is done on the intake side to provide for the new exhaust..... sure. The intake of the A/F needs to match the better exhaust. Does this mean zoomies are better then?......
... it has to match, but going smaller (aka restricting the exhaust) and getting better performance = crutch deficiencies/hide problems elsewhere in the combo.
"huge SP intakes under 4k and they make no power"
When the valve events used are not the correct ones, more restrictions on the intake will crutch/alleviate the mismatch. Why were I able to use a SP intake with a 700 cfm Holley, 2.73 gears and DN 4+1 transmission as a daily driver? Why is a 302/302 with Holley lower/CarTech box upper + 70mm TB + 195cc heads and 3" exhaust performs better than the previous Edelbrock Performers, Cobra Intake, 65mm and 2.5" exhaust system? Did he have to increase injectors?..... sure, but the NX system has been on vacation since. Still a daily driver, all accessories functional, A/C inclusive.
Does it have to rev past 4000 RPM's all the way to 7000 RPM's to make some power?....... Nope. Does it have a custom cam?..... not yet.
"any TB larger than 70-75mm will cause a tq. loss"
In what type of setup?...... that is a false generic statement. Or are the OEM's going against that "rule of thumb"?
All the facts below are OEM: (Bore ID - TB blade area ID)
2005 Dodge Dakota 3.9L(238 CID) V6 TB = 65-65mm
2007 Ford Explorer 4.0L(244 CID) V6 TB = 70-63mm
2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee 4.7L(287 CID) V8 TB = 65-68mm
1995 Mercedes C280 2.8L(171 CID) I6 TB = 75-70mm
2005 Lincoln LS 3.9L(238 CID) V8 TB = 82-70mm
Are the above made up figures?..... Nope...... checked and measured each one of the above myself.
"exhaust larger than 2.5in will cause tq loss"
When nothing is done on the intake side to provide for the new exhaust..... sure. The intake of the A/F needs to match the better exhaust. Does this mean zoomies are better then?......
... it has to match, but going smaller (aka restricting the exhaust) and getting better performance = crutch deficiencies/hide problems elsewhere in the combo."huge SP intakes under 4k and they make no power"
When the valve events used are not the correct ones, more restrictions on the intake will crutch/alleviate the mismatch. Why were I able to use a SP intake with a 700 cfm Holley, 2.73 gears and DN 4+1 transmission as a daily driver? Why is a 302/302 with Holley lower/CarTech box upper + 70mm TB + 195cc heads and 3" exhaust performs better than the previous Edelbrock Performers, Cobra Intake, 65mm and 2.5" exhaust system? Did he have to increase injectors?..... sure, but the NX system has been on vacation since. Still a daily driver, all accessories functional, A/C inclusive.
Does it have to rev past 4000 RPM's all the way to 7000 RPM's to make some power?....... Nope. Does it have a custom cam?..... not yet.
You fail to realize that what you find acceptable isn't acceptable for everyone. Every build id differant and should be approched in that manner.People with an automatic transmission and stock converter isn't going to like a wide open single plane intake like the spyder. What you show is like the Comp plastic box intake and is much smaller that the TrickFlow R. What you have is similar in design to a LTI chevy intake with the throttle body relocated.
You can keep building that off the wall "one size fits all" stuff if you like and if your customers are happy with it thats fine. Weve tested this stuff over and over. It always comes down to the same thing. Dual Planes build better torque and single planes build better top end power. The only reason my car has a single plane intake was to make power above 5000rpm. I'm also using a 3500 stall converter so low end torque isn't a big deal. It's all about matching up the parts. Sometimes you get lucky but then sometimes you have to install a Nitrous kit, lol
03-20-2009, 04:41 PM
#34
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: cape giradeau,mo
Posts: 8,872
ever thought the reason the rpm air gap made more tq over the victor might be that the cam used was wrong? were the cam events required for the air gap or the victor?
you are so quick to rebutt and argue,but are so blind to see that even one intake was being used to crutch or slow down the engine speed...which does what?.offsets the rpm creating the hp which results into your famous higher tq numbers.
how is not acceptable when even a 4.6 crown/marq/mustang use a short runner style TOO BIG heads for a 281,but all have different driving chararistics..hmm computer control,and different cam timing/events,but it's the same freak'n engine isn't it?
pretty funny we can pick one intake one head,and have three different cams to compensate an individuals taste of driving on the street..wonder why they have different gear ratio's too? gearing has to be right too.
nothing is set in stone as fact...there are four sides to a box...pick a side
you are so quick to rebutt and argue,but are so blind to see that even one intake was being used to crutch or slow down the engine speed...which does what?.offsets the rpm creating the hp which results into your famous higher tq numbers.
how is not acceptable when even a 4.6 crown/marq/mustang use a short runner style TOO BIG heads for a 281,but all have different driving chararistics..hmm computer control,and different cam timing/events,but it's the same freak'n engine isn't it?
pretty funny we can pick one intake one head,and have three different cams to compensate an individuals taste of driving on the street..wonder why they have different gear ratio's too? gearing has to be right too.
nothing is set in stone as fact...there are four sides to a box...pick a side
03-20-2009, 07:47 PM
#35
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 3,926
Pre-post disclosure......
The following reply is in no way derogatory, ill intended or insulting..... I REALLY mean this. I do this, so it is in no way misinterpreted. The REAL intention for this reply, is to REALLY spark a discussion regarding all the mythological concepts out there, that are usually shot down elsewhere, when personality conflicts are given more importance over REAL data and experiences. BTW.... no sarcasm is intended.
That said.........
___________________________________
Intakes do not make torque or horsepower on their own...... like it has been mentioned, yourself included, it's the combination as a whole that matters. I have not mentioned that one specific intake makes more power over the other.... Holley, CarTech, Victor Jr., Offenhauser 360 Port-O-Sonic yet, I always see the RPM Air Gap. 
Regarding those results...... was the cam changed, valve train?...... you cannot evaluate one single component based on the rest of the combo "set" to make one fail over the other.
It's a short runner EFI intake nonetheless, not plastic. Again.... the intake is just one single component in a combo. You can make a short runner EFI intake or SP carburetor intake perform better, overall, not focused on one performance metric (torque or HP) if the rest of the components are set accordingly. IOW...... a short runner EFI intake can pull from 2000 RPM's IF the rest of the setup is set for it + benefit from its obvious breathability benefits mid-range + (meaning 3500 RPM's +). There are other cases were the Super Victor + spyder have worked on daily driver setups 92mm TB included. Did the EEC require tuning?..... yep. But the gains in acceleration were worth it, w/out affecting fuel consumption. Did it have to rev up to 8000 RPM's to perform?.....NO. Same case for SP carburetor intakes, no brand or model mentioned.
Now... if you limit yourself with one component (camshaft, heads, valve train, etc).... you need to "crutch" the intake in order to compensate for those other limitations...... or combine around those handicaps.... which is what those test results really ID.
I have NOT expressed that "one size fits all", have I mentioned just one type of intake (brand, size, model)?....... NO. Do I set, or prefer components that do not represent a bottleneck in the engine's breathability?......YES. A lot of tests provide/produce "biased" results. If you have a test that shows a DP intake makes more torque over a SP intake..... and the possibility of changing the valve events favoring the SP intake, based on its flow characteristics over the DP intake, is not performed, and the DP intake re-evaluated with such setup not performed...... the test is not complete, nor results are representative.
If 9"-12" of intake tract affects torque that much on a V8, why was I able to daily drive an I4 setup with two(2) side-draft Weber carburetors on ~3" individual intake runners? Was it a dog "down low"?..... nope. How is that considered "off the wall"?
Do I prefer SP carburetor intakes, short runner EFI intakes, big heads and big throttle bodies?.... yep... I always set for breathability.... more air in = more power = more refuse out..... effectively, that is... under any required RPM range..... otherwise, I still have work do, but that does not mean I have to choke the lung (engine) knowingly.
The following reply is in no way derogatory, ill intended or insulting..... I REALLY mean this. I do this, so it is in no way misinterpreted. The REAL intention for this reply, is to REALLY spark a discussion regarding all the mythological concepts out there, that are usually shot down elsewhere, when personality conflicts are given more importance over REAL data and experiences. BTW.... no sarcasm is intended.
That said.........
___________________________________
Like I've said there is no intake that is best for everything. Thats a fact. It may be acceptable for you to run a single plane that starts making power at 3000 rpm but it's not for everyone and it been proven over and over that single plane intakes make great top end power and Dual Plane intake rule for torque. I've seen a RPM air Gap make 25 more lbsft of torque over a Victor Jr on the same 347. The Victor edged it out at 5000+ but not by about 7hp. Both intakes were drivable on the street with decent manners. The dual plane on this engine (and just about any true street engine) is that a good dual plane outperforms a single plane intake. You can use a less than optimal car for street duty.
Regarding those results...... was the cam changed, valve train?...... you cannot evaluate one single component based on the rest of the combo "set" to make one fail over the other.
You fail to realize that what you find acceptable isn't acceptable for everyone. Every build id differant and should be approched in that manner.People with an automatic transmission and stock converter isn't going to like a wide open single plane intake like the spyder. What you show is like the Comp plastic box intake and is much smaller that the TrickFlow R. What you have is similar in design to a LTI chevy intake with the throttle body relocated.
Now... if you limit yourself with one component (camshaft, heads, valve train, etc).... you need to "crutch" the intake in order to compensate for those other limitations...... or combine around those handicaps.... which is what those test results really ID.
You can keep building that off the wall "one size fits all" stuff if you like and if your customers are happy with it thats fine. Weve tested this stuff over and over. It always comes down to the same thing. Dual Planes build better torque and single planes build better top end power. The only reason my car has a single plane intake was to make power above 5000rpm. I'm also using a 3500 stall converter so low end torque isn't a big deal. It's all about matching up the parts. Sometimes you get lucky but then sometimes you have to install a Nitrous kit, lol
If 9"-12" of intake tract affects torque that much on a V8, why was I able to daily drive an I4 setup with two(2) side-draft Weber carburetors on ~3" individual intake runners? Was it a dog "down low"?..... nope. How is that considered "off the wall"?
Do I prefer SP carburetor intakes, short runner EFI intakes, big heads and big throttle bodies?.... yep... I always set for breathability.... more air in = more power = more refuse out..... effectively, that is... under any required RPM range..... otherwise, I still have work do, but that does not mean I have to choke the lung (engine) knowingly.
03-20-2009, 08:05 PM
#36
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SC
Posts: 2,401
ever thought the reason the rpm air gap made more tq over the victor might be that the cam used was wrong? were the cam events required for the air gap or the victor?
you are so quick to rebutt and argue,but are so blind to see that even one intake was being used to crutch or slow down the engine speed...which does what?.offsets the rpm creating the hp which results into your famous higher tq numbers.
how is not acceptable when even a 4.6 crown/marq/mustang use a short runner style TOO BIG heads for a 281,but all have different driving chararistics..hmm computer control,and different cam timing/events,but it's the same freak'n engine isn't it?
pretty funny we can pick one intake one head,and have three different cams to compensate an individuals taste of driving on the street..wonder why they have different gear ratio's too? gearing has to be right too.
nothing is set in stone as fact...there are four sides to a box...pick a side
you are so quick to rebutt and argue,but are so blind to see that even one intake was being used to crutch or slow down the engine speed...which does what?.offsets the rpm creating the hp which results into your famous higher tq numbers.
how is not acceptable when even a 4.6 crown/marq/mustang use a short runner style TOO BIG heads for a 281,but all have different driving chararistics..hmm computer control,and different cam timing/events,but it's the same freak'n engine isn't it?
pretty funny we can pick one intake one head,and have three different cams to compensate an individuals taste of driving on the street..wonder why they have different gear ratio's too? gearing has to be right too.
nothing is set in stone as fact...there are four sides to a box...pick a side
03-20-2009, 08:20 PM
#37
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SC
Posts: 2,401
Pre-post disclosure......
The following reply is in no way derogatory, ill intended or insulting..... I REALLY mean this. I do this, so it is in no way misinterpreted. The REAL intention for this reply, is to REALLY spark a discussion regarding all the mythological concepts out there, that are usually shot down elsewhere, when personality conflicts are given more importance over REAL data and experiences. BTW.... no sarcasm is intended.
That said.........
___________________________________
Intakes do not make torque or horsepower on their own...... like it has been mentioned, yourself included, it's the combination as a whole that matters. I have not mentioned that one specific intake makes more power over the other.... Holley, CarTech, Victor Jr., Offenhauser 360 Port-O-Sonic yet, I always see the RPM Air Gap.
Regarding those results...... was the cam changed, valve train?...... you cannot evaluate one single component based on the rest of the combo "set" to make one fail over the other.
It's a short runner EFI intake nonetheless, not plastic. Again.... the intake is just one single component in a combo. You can make a short runner EFI intake or SP carburetor intake perform better, overall, not focused on one performance metric (torque or HP) if the rest of the components are set accordingly. IOW...... a short runner EFI intake can pull from 2000 RPM's IF the rest of the setup is set for it + benefit from its obvious breathability benefits mid-range + (meaning 3500 RPM's +). There are other cases were the Super Victor + spyder have worked on daily driver setups 92mm TB included. Did the EEC require tuning?..... yep. But the gains in acceleration were worth it, w/out affecting fuel consumption. Did it have to rev up to 8000 RPM's to perform?.....NO. Same case for SP carburetor intakes, no brand or model mentioned.
Now... if you limit yourself with one component (camshaft, heads, valve train, etc).... you need to "crutch" the intake in order to compensate for those other limitations...... or combine around those handicaps.... which is what those test results really ID.
I have NOT expressed that "one size fits all", have I mentioned just one type of intake (brand, size, model)?....... NO. Do I set, or prefer components that do not represent a bottleneck in the engine's breathability?......YES. A lot of tests provide/produce "biased" results. If you have a test that shows a DP intake makes more torque over a SP intake..... and the possibility of changing the valve events favoring the SP intake, based on its flow characteristics over the DP intake, is not performed, and the DP intake re-evaluated with such setup not performed...... the test is not complete, nor results are representative.
If 9"-12" of intake tract affects torque that much on a V8, why was I able to daily drive an I4 setup with two(2) side-draft Weber carburetors on ~3" individual intake runners? Was it a dog "down low"?..... nope. How is that considered "off the wall"?
Do I prefer SP carburetor intakes, short runner EFI intakes, big heads and big throttle bodies?.... yep... I always set for breathability.... more air in = more power = more refuse out..... effectively, that is... under any required RPM range..... otherwise, I still have work do, but that does not mean I have to choke the lung (engine) knowingly.
The following reply is in no way derogatory, ill intended or insulting..... I REALLY mean this. I do this, so it is in no way misinterpreted. The REAL intention for this reply, is to REALLY spark a discussion regarding all the mythological concepts out there, that are usually shot down elsewhere, when personality conflicts are given more importance over REAL data and experiences. BTW.... no sarcasm is intended.
That said.........
___________________________________
Intakes do not make torque or horsepower on their own...... like it has been mentioned, yourself included, it's the combination as a whole that matters. I have not mentioned that one specific intake makes more power over the other.... Holley, CarTech, Victor Jr., Offenhauser 360 Port-O-Sonic yet, I always see the RPM Air Gap.
Regarding those results...... was the cam changed, valve train?...... you cannot evaluate one single component based on the rest of the combo "set" to make one fail over the other.
It's a short runner EFI intake nonetheless, not plastic. Again.... the intake is just one single component in a combo. You can make a short runner EFI intake or SP carburetor intake perform better, overall, not focused on one performance metric (torque or HP) if the rest of the components are set accordingly. IOW...... a short runner EFI intake can pull from 2000 RPM's IF the rest of the setup is set for it + benefit from its obvious breathability benefits mid-range + (meaning 3500 RPM's +). There are other cases were the Super Victor + spyder have worked on daily driver setups 92mm TB included. Did the EEC require tuning?..... yep. But the gains in acceleration were worth it, w/out affecting fuel consumption. Did it have to rev up to 8000 RPM's to perform?.....NO. Same case for SP carburetor intakes, no brand or model mentioned.
Now... if you limit yourself with one component (camshaft, heads, valve train, etc).... you need to "crutch" the intake in order to compensate for those other limitations...... or combine around those handicaps.... which is what those test results really ID.
I have NOT expressed that "one size fits all", have I mentioned just one type of intake (brand, size, model)?....... NO. Do I set, or prefer components that do not represent a bottleneck in the engine's breathability?......YES. A lot of tests provide/produce "biased" results. If you have a test that shows a DP intake makes more torque over a SP intake..... and the possibility of changing the valve events favoring the SP intake, based on its flow characteristics over the DP intake, is not performed, and the DP intake re-evaluated with such setup not performed...... the test is not complete, nor results are representative.
If 9"-12" of intake tract affects torque that much on a V8, why was I able to daily drive an I4 setup with two(2) side-draft Weber carburetors on ~3" individual intake runners? Was it a dog "down low"?..... nope. How is that considered "off the wall"?
Do I prefer SP carburetor intakes, short runner EFI intakes, big heads and big throttle bodies?.... yep... I always set for breathability.... more air in = more power = more refuse out..... effectively, that is... under any required RPM range..... otherwise, I still have work do, but that does not mean I have to choke the lung (engine) knowingly.
03-20-2009, 08:48 PM
#38
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 3,926
Have I not said that I agree?
Yet that is a specific case, that doesn't mean it applies to everything in a general fashion. Would I use a single plane on a truck?...... NO.... and who would build a combo around an intake?
Hey.... I'm old..... 
... and that intake has been there since 1989 (not my "choosing" BTW). Weiand Xcelerator is a better alternative.
But an engine built around a Super Victor intake will not respond well to to a high rpm cam in a heavy vehicle with a tall gear. For that car a high torque engine with a Dual plane is the ticket. It's not only that an engine makes better power than the other but where it makes it thats the power.
... and that intake has been there since 1989 (not my "choosing" BTW). Weiand Xcelerator is a better alternative.
03-21-2009, 07:34 AM
#39
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SC
Posts: 2,401
Have I not said that I agree?
Yet that is a specific case, that doesn't mean it applies to everything in a general fashion. Would I use a single plane on a truck?...... NO.... and who would build a combo around an intake?
Hey.... I'm old........ and that intake has been there since 1989 (not my "choosing" BTW). Weiand Xcelerator is a better alternative.
Yet that is a specific case, that doesn't mean it applies to everything in a general fashion. Would I use a single plane on a truck?...... NO.... and who would build a combo around an intake?
Hey.... I'm old.....
... and that intake has been there since 1989 (not my "choosing" BTW). Weiand Xcelerator is a better alternative.Nobody in their right mind builds an engine around the intake but I thought you were smart enough to grasp what I was saying. I guess I was wrong about that also.
As far as the Weiand Xcelerator goes it's a good wheel chock. Weiand was so far behind they had to hire one of edelbrocks lead designers to come in and build some real intakes. The only decent intake they have had in the last 15 years was the Team G. The stealth was a good attemp but won't hold a candle to an AirGap. With an edelbrock designer on board here comes the Weiand Air Strike.
03-21-2009, 08:45 AM
#40
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: cape giradeau,mo
Posts: 8,872
joel you better qoute me in what i told you..lol
"nobody in there right mind put's one part on there car(sp/dp wtfever)and just stops there and calls it a day....... we ALL have said it's the combomation of said parts so don't back pedal this...this is not an aguement....it's a debate
low speed tq results from what? where? piston speed rings a bell now what intake values from when a piston reaches the top? then the bottom?
now take the base 5.0 what was the initial crutch used on that motor to create decent "stock" torque?..the intake? cam? exhaust? gears?heads? hmm ford had a guidelines to follow just like us average builders do,but they had to crutch everything to get through the red tape. so what happened to the cobra in 93?..and it was still streetable everyday car,but had "bigger" parts on the same freak'n short block...
"nobody in there right mind put's one part on there car(sp/dp wtfever)and just stops there and calls it a day....... we ALL have said it's the combomation of said parts so don't back pedal this...this is not an aguement....it's a debate
low speed tq results from what? where? piston speed rings a bell now what intake values from when a piston reaches the top? then the bottom?
now take the base 5.0 what was the initial crutch used on that motor to create decent "stock" torque?..the intake? cam? exhaust? gears?heads? hmm ford had a guidelines to follow just like us average builders do,but they had to crutch everything to get through the red tape. so what happened to the cobra in 93?..and it was still streetable everyday car,but had "bigger" parts on the same freak'n short block...