Once again you quieted the nay sayers. Pick your operating range. Both perform as you showed. Thanks for sharing. The more I watch your videos the more I learn. Your a great teacher.
I would like to see a ported MSD intake comparison. I am actually starting to like the raver intro music ... well, I am starting to associate it with a pleasant anticipation of good things to come.
CFM is part of it, velocity is also part of it. This effect is well known in the Pontiac community, because we can put the same heads on any block, which means a 326 can have the same head as a 540 cube aftermarket block. We compare 400, 455, 474, 489, and over 500ci (up to 540 with the standard deck height) in deciding what we want to do, and where we want to make the power. You can easily see the difference displacement has on CFM and velocity, and what happens with the single plane or dual plane intakes. The main reason a Pontiac makes a lot more torque than a similar sized LS, and with a flat torque curve, is velocity. The Pontiac ports are longer, have a venturi shape, and that makes for high velocity intake tracts. The longer the runner is, the more velocity you get, to a certain point. Its a lot more than just CFM.
Great test! This may be entirley impossible, but you know what'd be interesting.. Testing oversquare vs undersquare. With the same displacement, same cam, intake etc.. Destroked big bore vs Stroker See if the longer stroke does much to improve bottom end torque.
Something like a 5.3 stroked to 6.0 liters, then compare it to an OEM 6.0. Then maybe even add an LS7 destroked to 6.0 liters. I predict that the long stroke would not improve low end torque.
@@andyharman3022 I reckon it would improve torque at the expense of Maximum RPM. If I recall correctly you need a larger crank pin offset to account for the longer stroke. Larger offset, more leverage to turn the crank.
Big bore...can use bigger intake valve which is most influential to power production. Defeats the purpose to make all the bottom end geometry changes only to use same heads and cam.
If I were racing and intended to keep RPMs high, the trade off might be worth it, but it is interesting to think about the area under the curve through the intended operating rage and for the bigger displacements (say 5,000 through 7,000 rpm), with the cross over shifting lower, you might have more area on average under the short runner version, it is less clear that the area under the curve on a smaller displacement given you a better average power through the range. Might be the basis the the "flawed common logic". The gain in effective performance at the wheels is more pronounced in that rpm range for the larger displacement with differing runner sizes. So my take-away is --- more cubes is more better!!!!
Hi Richard.... in my opinion, the LS3 intake manifold makes the best power under the curve. Also economically the best choice for the money. If someone with deep pockets wants to spend over $1000.00 on a intake manifold like the cross ram style with two throttle bodies.... to make 20 hp more just to find out.... oh no my alternator is in the way of the driver side throttle body opening. What did I get my$elf into lol. Keep up the cool videos! Cheers
From the data if you rev it out to 7,500 or above the carb style or shorter runner intakes make sense. For up to 6,500 the long runner intakes make sense.
Optimization has about five variables: displacement (for most people this is fixed), compression ratio, cam timing, intake runner tuning and exhaust runner tuning. Playing with displacement and intake runner tuning is leaving three of the variables unexplored. It's probably impractical from a time and budget perspective to do an exhaustive test on four variables but if you have an optimized combination, one change is going to bump you off of optimized, you need at least two changes to get back to an optimized state. That 468 lost a bunch of torque and the shape of the curve went from rounded on top to a plateau. To me, that suggests the cam tuning is off with the single plane. A smaller cam might restore that shape without losing too much top end. Just try one with an intake valve closing 5° earlier. Worst case it will lose power everywhere but I'll shut up about it. Best case, you might keep a bunch of cams and some adjustable length dyno headers to fine tune your combos after you make a change you are testing.
So Ford's engineers stated that the 7.3 liter size was the best compromise between fuel mileage and power. I wonder if the power crossover placement was why it was decided for their new engine to displace 7.3 liters or 445 cubic inches or just usable torque in the bottom of the powerband. They also stated they intended to take on the LS platform with the new design (engine swap popularity) specifically stating they intended the block to handle 1500 + hp and an excellent candidate for boost applications. Hoping richard puts one on the dyno for a Big Bang motor soon.
I like watching this and precision transmissions because a good motor needs a great transmission to put the power down also the cam used first has high lift how often should you change valve springs
Rich, while I appreciate ALL of your hard work and research on so many different types of engines, after seeing your work on the B16, I'd really like to see you do some Honda J series V6 builds. I'd just really like to see you do a few different versions of the J series engine. Say a J32A2 NA build, a J32A2 turbo build, and then move on to the same with a J35 and J37. I know that many people would watch it and be interested.
Great test. Now I have an idea of how much a factory style intake manifold is holding back a LSX454r or similar build for us guys that want to keep their stock hoods.
I would say the change in operating RPM for the manifolds of the same general design is a function of the different airflow requirements for the different dyno tests. (i.e. power numbers) As you approach the airflow efficiency limit of the manifold design it will limit airflow potential. Different engines when measured at the same airflow should produce similar power numbers if the engines are close in volumetric efficiency. Result; as the power level increased the manifolds upper rpm "limit" decreased.
I'm the kind that would pick a long runner. So far, the TPI holds the most fascination for me, just wish it could have flowed a bit more. or the First Technologies group TPI was about half the price. I'm just a broke old man. A broke old man with a small block full of metal.
This shows that the fuel injection has it down with the stock style intake manifold also comes down to how your car is set up you want less down low for more traction for street and make it pull harder up top or do you have a car or Utah lots of traction and want to take use of it
Do something like the neon did with the 01-04 RT neons. They have a dual runner intake manifold. Long thin manifolds for mid range lower and short fat runners for top end power.
I bet a smaller cam in that 468 would have made pretty savage mid-range torque with the FAST intake. Between 232 and 242. -- If you have a 1.3 3rd gear and a 1.0 4th gear, shifting at 6600 RPM, you're going to grab 5000. It's just not worth it unless you're on a salt flat. -- On my LS3, I'm looking at basic cams like the ASA. Shifting at 6200, I land around 4300 RPM in every gear, and grab 3000 if I skip 2nd. Merging with traffic is effectively a short shifted 2-3 pull.
Also Rich, how about an Olds 260 build? I had one in my 76 Buick Skylark and it was a turd with the 2 bbl Rochester, but it ALWAYS fired up on the first 2 revolutions even in the winter when it was -10 with a foot of snow covering it. That was almost 20 years ago and I've never seen anyone do anything interesting with one. I would say that's a perfect example of "the other guy's" engine.
Richard, how about a test of the Borla fuel injection individual runner and individual throttle body intake system. This has adjustable length runners and actually should produce serious power
It would have to be tested for the short runner to work the stall converter would probably need to be higher with more gearing and it may workout well in a lighter car like 3200 pounds or less trying to keep the engine in the 5000rpm to 7000rpm range l think the fuel injection would be better for the street with more torque down lower in the rpm range making plenty of torque from 2500rpm to 5000rpm without revving the engine real hard and in something 3800 pounds or more the fuel injection would move it much easier than the single plane would my favorite is the 415ci with the single plane intake in a old chevy 2 or nova fox body g-body 32-34 ford coupe
I didn't check to make sure but the big cube motor moves the cross over down but also the peak hp came down the same revs, would it have gone better with a different short runner intake
Dude, can you do something with a ford boss 6.2L gas motor? I’ve a 2018 that would be cool to swap into my old 2wd bull nose pickup with a crown Vic front end swap :)
I'm sure you have done this, however I don't remember, but how does the cam size change the RPM crossover point which allows the short runner to make more power?
Richard, I have a question involving your vast knowledge of engine modification and their expected results. What effect does advancing or retarding the camshaft timing have on horsepower and torque production for both dual plane and single plane manifolds?
advancing and retarding the cam has shown the same effect on both manifolds-advancing tends to help low speed, retarding can help top end, sometimes advancing and retarding cam timing does nothing but hurt power
Hey Richard I have a question. Would you call a gen 4 ls engine a built or modified engine if the crank, rods, and pistons was the only things reused, BUT everything else was replaced with better then stock stuff??
Excellent video.. do you think my 427 LY6 stroker can hit 700? If not how close? I’m thinking 690-708 depending on tune 🤔 13:1 compression comp 54-474-11 @50 251 int./267 exh, advertised duration 301 int./317 exh. 624 int/624 exh, 115 lsa LS3 heads PAC 660 dual springs, fast lsxR intake. E85 fuel
Is it possible, that crossover point came down with bigger motors, due long runner intake came closer to its flow limits and short runner had more head room?
Interesting supposition but that’s just growing the plenum volume and Engine Masters Season 4 (Episode 51) pretty much said nah. There are so many factors at work that you can’t make any generalizations about plenum volume. This was Richard’s test. 👍🏻
He said Fast is an over all & biggest improvement on cathedral port. & absoulutely NO gains on rectangular ports meaning factory OEM intake is already maxed out. Your wasting your money on aftermarket rectangular intakes.
@@408SPLKINGS The Edelbrock X-ram was slightly better than the factory LS3, but much more expensive because of the dual throttle bodies that you would have to buy. Watch his LS3 intake manifold shootout video. It's awesome.
@@richardholdener1727 HI Richard, I was just saying that it's stressful trying to justify a single plane is better then a ls3 or fast in this configuration even for all out racing when it's obvious the long ls3 or fast l is a clear winner when it come to actual usable power vs peak and trying to put that across someone is where I'd lose my hair. My comment was ultimately a joke 😃
Same here.I had a '77 Camaro with a .40 over 350 back in the late 80's with a 600 Holley vacuum secondaries, Edelbrock performer dual plane intake, flat top pistons, RV cam, roller rockers, stock cast iron exhaust manifolds, 3:08 rear gears, stock HEI, and put some cheap rebuit 305 2 barrel heads on it the compression was pretty high (don't know the exact numbers) and had to watch the timing and fuel quality but it pulled pretty hard and averaged around 18 MPG on the highway, it was my daily driver for a few years, never went above 5500 RPM's (would probably quit breathing above that with the small valves, intake ports, cam and exhaust manifolds) or took it to a dragstrip or dyno (I did street race a guy in a late 60's Mustang, he asked me what I had and I said a 305 and he said he had a 302 so we lined them up and ran and I barely beat him by a bumper length and when we met back up he said you have more than a 305 and I told him that you have more than a 302, we both laughed and went our own way) but it was fun to drive and overall pretty reliable when I sold it which I regret doing along with the many other old cars I used to have but would be curious to know some sort of ballpark TQ/HP it made.
![Stromae, Pomme - “Ma Meilleure Ennemie” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1F3OGIFnW1k/mqdefault.jpg)
Richard you sure are a blessing with these videos especially when I'm stuck at home alot during these times. Keep up the good work.
Man you are a machine pumping out videos at 35psi
Once again you quieted the nay sayers. Pick your operating range. Both perform as you showed. Thanks for sharing. The more I watch your videos the more I learn. Your a great teacher.
lloyd holt : So true. The testing does the teaching with some lovely, simple explainations from Richard. Does it every time!
thnx-I love all this stuff
always cool to see the clean, and strong incline on the graph.
I would like to see a ported MSD intake comparison.
I am actually starting to like the raver intro music ... well, I am starting to associate it with a pleasant anticipation of good things to come.
The reason the rpm crossover is lower when when displacement increases is CFM is the same at those RPMs
CFM is part of it, velocity is also part of it. This effect is well known in the Pontiac community, because we can put the same heads on any block, which means a 326 can have the same head as a 540 cube aftermarket block. We compare 400, 455, 474, 489, and over 500ci (up to 540 with the standard deck height) in deciding what we want to do, and where we want to make the power. You can easily see the difference displacement has on CFM and velocity, and what happens with the single plane or dual plane intakes.
The main reason a Pontiac makes a lot more torque than a similar sized LS, and with a flat torque curve, is velocity. The Pontiac ports are longer, have a venturi shape, and that makes for high velocity intake tracts. The longer the runner is, the more velocity you get, to a certain point. Its a lot more than just CFM.
PAPOW ya what he said.
Another highly interesting comparison video, thanks for your hard work!
First 👍's up guys thanks again for taking us all along with you
What injectors did you use on the 415 cubic inch LS motor
42 lb
Great test!
This may be entirley impossible, but you know what'd be interesting.. Testing oversquare vs undersquare.
With the same displacement, same cam, intake etc..
Destroked big bore vs Stroker
See if the longer stroke does much to improve bottom end torque.
Something like a 5.3 stroked to 6.0 liters, then compare it to an OEM 6.0. Then maybe even add an LS7 destroked to 6.0 liters.
I predict that the long stroke would not improve low end torque.
@@andyharman3022
I reckon it would improve torque at the expense of Maximum RPM.
If I recall correctly you need a larger crank pin offset to account for the longer stroke. Larger offset, more leverage to turn the crank.
@@jaydnisevil But total displacement remains the same. Smaller bore, smaller area for cylinder pressure to work on the piston.
Big bore...can use bigger intake valve which is most influential to power production. Defeats the purpose to make all the bottom end geometry changes only to use same heads and cam.
@@HerrPoopschitz
Which would effect top end horsepower more than anything else.
If I were racing and intended to keep RPMs high, the trade off might be worth it, but it is interesting to think about the area under the curve through the intended operating rage and for the bigger displacements (say 5,000 through 7,000 rpm), with the cross over shifting lower, you might have more area on average under the short runner version, it is less clear that the area under the curve on a smaller displacement given you a better average power through the range. Might be the basis the the "flawed common logic". The gain in effective performance at the wheels is more pronounced in that rpm range for the larger displacement with differing runner sizes.
So my take-away is --- more cubes is more better!!!!
Hi Richard.... in my opinion, the LS3 intake manifold makes the best power under the curve. Also economically the best choice for the money. If someone with deep pockets wants to spend over $1000.00 on a intake manifold like the cross ram style with two throttle bodies.... to make 20 hp more just to find out.... oh no my alternator is in the way of the driver side throttle body opening. What did I get my$elf into lol.
Keep up the cool videos!
Cheers
From the data if you rev it out to 7,500 or above the carb style or shorter runner intakes make sense. For up to 6,500 the long runner intakes make sense.
Optimization has about five variables: displacement (for most people this is fixed), compression ratio, cam timing, intake runner tuning and exhaust runner tuning.
Playing with displacement and intake runner tuning is leaving three of the variables unexplored.
It's probably impractical from a time and budget perspective to do an exhaustive test on four variables but if you have an optimized combination, one change is going to bump you off of optimized, you need at least two changes to get back to an optimized state.
That 468 lost a bunch of torque and the shape of the curve went from rounded on top to a plateau. To me, that suggests the cam tuning is off with the single plane. A smaller cam might restore that shape without losing too much top end. Just try one with an intake valve closing 5° earlier.
Worst case it will lose power everywhere but I'll shut up about it.
Best case, you might keep a bunch of cams and some adjustable length dyno headers to fine tune your combos after you make a change you are testing.
$$$$$
I love watching his videos. I think it would be cool to watch build a flat plane crank Ls
So Ford's engineers stated that the 7.3 liter size was the best compromise between fuel mileage and power. I wonder if the power crossover placement was why it was decided for their new engine to displace 7.3 liters or 445 cubic inches or just usable torque in the bottom of the powerband. They also stated they intended to take on the LS platform with the new design (engine swap popularity) specifically stating they intended the block to handle 1500 + hp and an excellent candidate for boost applications. Hoping richard puts one on the dyno for a Big Bang motor soon.
I like watching this and precision transmissions because a good motor needs a great transmission to put the power down also the cam used first has high lift how often should you change valve springs
Great vid, Richard, glad it wasn’t a Caddy motor.
Rich, while I appreciate ALL of your hard work and research on so many different types of engines, after seeing your work on the B16, I'd really like to see you do some Honda J series V6 builds. I'd just really like to see you do a few different versions of the J series engine. Say a J32A2 NA build, a J32A2 turbo build, and then move on to the same with a J35 and J37. I know that many people would watch it and be interested.
Great test. Now I have an idea of how much a factory style intake manifold is holding back a LSX454r or similar build for us guys that want to keep their stock hoods.
I would say the change in operating RPM for the manifolds of the same general design is a function of the different airflow requirements for the different dyno tests. (i.e. power numbers) As you approach the airflow efficiency limit of the manifold design it will limit airflow potential. Different engines when measured at the same airflow should produce similar power numbers if the engines are close in volumetric efficiency. Result; as the power level increased the manifolds upper rpm "limit" decreased.
the change in power production between the two is primarily runner length (we see the same thing on every test)
I'm the kind that would pick a long runner. So far, the TPI holds the most fascination for me, just wish it could have flowed a bit more. or the First Technologies group TPI was about half the price. I'm just a broke old man. A broke old man with a small block full of metal.
Nice work! Thinking of building my 4.6 3v. Would love to see some boosted combinations. Especially tvs supercharged as I have a Saleen blower.
What is the ls3 runner length???????
This shows that the fuel injection has it down with the stock style intake manifold also comes down to how your car is set up you want less down low for more traction for street and make it pull harder up top or do you have a car or Utah lots of traction and want to take use of it
Do something like the neon did with the 01-04 RT neons. They have a dual runner intake manifold. Long thin manifolds for mid range lower and short fat runners for top end power.
Acura Intergra GSR also-others as well
I bet a smaller cam in that 468 would have made pretty savage mid-range torque with the FAST intake. Between 232 and 242.
-- If you have a 1.3 3rd gear and a 1.0 4th gear, shifting at 6600 RPM, you're going to grab 5000. It's just not worth it unless you're on a salt flat.
-- On my LS3, I'm looking at basic cams like the ASA. Shifting at 6200, I land around 4300 RPM in every gear, and grab 3000 if I skip 2nd. Merging with traffic is effectively a short shifted 2-3 pull.
Where’s the tunnel ram when we need it? JK, really excellent work as usual!
Thanks Richard!
Also Rich, how about an Olds 260 build? I had one in my 76 Buick Skylark and it was a turd with the 2 bbl Rochester, but it ALWAYS fired up on the first 2 revolutions even in the winter when it was -10 with a foot of snow covering it. That was almost 20 years ago and I've never seen anyone do anything interesting with one. I would say that's a perfect example of "the other guy's" engine.
That 468 in a 2300 pounder in an all motor shootout would be fun
Amazing work!!!💯💯💯💯
Would be interesting to see where the long v short runner power crossover falls on a curve over a bunch of combinations with similar redlines.
I just showed that
@@richardholdener1727 sorry. I meant an overlayed curve of the crossover points. I did get somewhat of an idea of the shape of it from this video.
If you test a ported oem LS3 intake, get a rod-modded version from Rick Crawford or Gwatney Performance.
Richard, how about a test of the Borla fuel injection individual runner and individual throttle body intake system. This has adjustable length runners and actually should produce serious power
I have stack injection videos up already
Right on
You would need a pretty big stall to take advantage of that short runner intake manifold.
Unless your gear sweep is like 800-900 rpm or the motor is in a landspeed car, I cant see how the short runner would be the better choice.
Area under the curve. It's obvious.
5500 stall converter
@@deek431 yeah, you would need a pretty big stall to take full advantage.
It would have to be tested for the short runner to work the stall converter would probably need to be higher with more gearing and it may workout well in a lighter car like 3200 pounds or less trying to keep the engine in the 5000rpm to 7000rpm range l think the fuel injection would be better for the street with more torque down lower in the rpm range making plenty of torque from 2500rpm to 5000rpm without revving the engine real hard and in something 3800 pounds or more the fuel injection would move it much easier than the single plane would my favorite is the 415ci with the single plane intake in a old chevy 2 or nova fox body g-body 32-34 ford coupe
Patiently waiting for the buick to come back
What about the same test but with boost? Are the effects still the same? Or can you manipulate the curve enough with boost?
Can u do low compression and high compression under boost ?
That 416 would’ve loved some nitrous! A whole lot like a 400 shot
I didn't check to make sure but the big cube motor moves the cross over down but also the peak hp came down the same revs, would it have gone better with a different short runner intake
dont skip the adds worst case just browse fb with mute for a few moments
Ya its a lot of work but he has nice equipment looks like your still really busy most of the time for
👍
Sure
Dude, can you do something with a ford boss 6.2L gas motor? I’ve a 2018 that would be cool to swap into my old 2wd bull nose pickup with a crown Vic front end swap :)
I run the KEGLADON intake!!!!
I'm sure you have done this, however I don't remember, but how does the cam size change the RPM crossover point which allows the short runner to make more power?
pick the cam timing to work with the effective rpm of the intake-short runner = high rpm
Why not the best of both intakes. Modify the LS3 manifold with some individual short runners that open at the higher RPMs.
Richard, I have a question involving your vast knowledge of engine modification and their expected results. What effect does advancing or retarding the camshaft timing have on horsepower and torque production for both dual plane and single plane manifolds?
advancing and retarding the cam has shown the same effect on both manifolds-advancing tends to help low speed, retarding can help top end, sometimes advancing and retarding cam timing does nothing but hurt power
Thank you very much for your knowledge.
Would like to see the single plane at 8-9k.
If you put spacer plates under the carb/throttle body on the single plane manifold does that work like increased runner length and give more power??
that would not add runner length-just ads plenum volume and changes signal to carb
@@richardholdener1727 do spacers offer any benefits to power? How does changing the signal to the carb effect how it operates?
I want to run a carbureted ly6 in my 85 K10 4 wheel drive what All Electronics do I have to have and do I put O2 sensors in the exhaust
You don’t need O2 sensors on a carburetor engine. Unless you wanna run a stand along AFR gauge
@@sstevocamaro thank you very much for your help I'm new to all this fuel injection but I definitely see the major benefits
@@sstevocamaro I mean LS vs. Small block Chevy
Hey Richard I have a question. Would you call a gen 4 ls engine a built or modified engine if the crank, rods, and pistons was the only things reused, BUT everything else was replaced with better then stock stuff??
sounds like a stock bottom end
@@richardholdener1727 yeah so not even modified
What are your thoughts on FI TECH fuel injection? I have a 600hp Power Adder model still in the box.
not a lot of experience testing that
Excellent video.. do you think my 427 LY6 stroker can hit 700? If not how close? I’m thinking 690-708 depending on tune 🤔
13:1 compression
comp 54-474-11 @50 251 int./267 exh, advertised duration 301 int./317 exh. 624 int/624 exh, 115 lsa
LS3 heads PAC 660 dual springs, fast lsxR intake.
E85 fuel
not with stock LS3 heads (427 LY6-is it a 4.1 stroke?)
Richard Holdener thanks I know what to do next 😈
Richard Holdener and yes 4.100
Is it possible, that crossover point came down with bigger motors, due long runner intake came closer to its flow limits and short runner had more head room?
this isn't a flow limit-it's runner length
Richard, try the new Ford 7.3 pushrod motor on boost
Another LS video. Richard, we want the other guys!
How does these findings hold up on a boosted setup? Does it make a bigger or smaller impact?
same
@@richardholdener1727 Interesting; there is so many opinions out there so I really like your input backed up by tests!
Average hp/Average torq.... Please 🙂Keep up your good work👍
👐
When you gonna run some ls stuff out to 8000 Richard?
Like this-ruclips.net/video/CW36v9QcOnI/видео.html
@@richardholdener1727 more of that please😁
Would a single plane make more low end power with a very high carb spacer,like 6'' or better?
Interesting supposition but that’s just growing the plenum volume and Engine Masters Season 4 (Episode 51) pretty much said nah. There are so many factors at work that you can’t make any generalizations about plenum volume. This was Richard’s test. 👍🏻
carb spacers (especially run with carburetors) don't usually have that effect
Like like like.
What happened to the "Other Guys" 455 Buick motor?
more of that coming
I think you're always supposed to chose the tunnel ram
Nope, 8 stack is what you want
Someone will come out with an adjustable intake! Just a matter of time.
Hey Richard if you hook me up with a used holley efi so I can run a turbo on my stealth ram I'll give you a connecting rod out of swamp rat 34
I'll also have it signed by Richard langson and Don if he ever comes back into town
Did you say the Mast or the Fast intake was best on the cathedral port heads?
He said Fast is an over all & biggest improvement on cathedral port.
& absoulutely NO gains on rectangular ports meaning factory OEM intake is already maxed out.
Your wasting your money on aftermarket rectangular intakes.
@@408SPLKINGS The Edelbrock X-ram was slightly better than the factory LS3, but much more expensive because of the dual throttle bodies that you would have to buy. Watch his LS3 intake manifold shootout video. It's awesome.
@@408SPLKINGS Thanks for your feed back.
@@andyharman3022 I agree! I need to watch again.
The fast is better than all the stock cath intakes-the Mast single plane still does the same thing compared to the Fast cath (only helps at the top)
Where are all the LS fan boys saying an LS with big cubes would destroy a big block? They do the same thing with the same cubes.
The only advantage LS has is the footprint of the engine is much smaller
@@dilsher12 yep
Tunnel Ram intake on a ls please!!! Lol
run lots of Hi Ram tests
I bet thats how you got bold by trying to explain whats really practical in race and street
unclear about the bold part
@@richardholdener1727 HI Richard, I was just saying that it's stressful trying to justify a single plane is better then a ls3 or fast in this configuration even for all out racing when it's obvious the long ls3 or fast l is a clear winner when it come to actual usable power vs peak and trying to put that across someone is where I'd lose my hair.
My comment was ultimately a joke 😃
I will take the mast fast.
It’s not worth the loss of torque for such a narrow peak of power
Needs a 4500
thumbed
8.1 ??????lol
Personally I blame squirrels
Dave M 🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿😀
@@unclesquirrel6951 When a squirrel runs into the road while I'm driving. My wife is like OMG look out for the squirrel: as I'm accelerating.
GreenTea :( lol
DropDstar 🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿
Squirrels are agents of the deep state 🤫
Love to see you do a 305 cylinder head shoot out on a your crate 350...
Same here.I had a '77 Camaro with a .40 over 350 back in the late 80's with a 600 Holley vacuum secondaries, Edelbrock performer dual plane intake, flat top pistons, RV cam, roller rockers, stock cast iron exhaust manifolds, 3:08 rear gears, stock HEI, and put some cheap rebuit 305 2 barrel heads on it the compression was pretty high (don't know the exact numbers) and had to watch the timing and fuel quality but it pulled pretty hard and averaged around 18 MPG on the highway, it was my daily driver for a few years, never went above 5500 RPM's (would probably quit breathing above that with the small valves, intake ports, cam and exhaust manifolds) or took it to a dragstrip or dyno (I did street race a guy in a late 60's Mustang, he asked me what I had and I said a 305 and he said he had a 302 so we lined them up and ran and I barely beat him by a bumper length and when we met back up he said you have more than a 305 and I told him that you have more than a 302, we both laughed and went our own way) but it was fun to drive and overall pretty reliable when I sold it which I regret doing along with the many other old cars I used to have but would be curious to know some sort of ballpark TQ/HP it made.