How come nobody has attempted
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
From: Missouri
Car: 1986 IROC-Z28
Engine: 305 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
How come nobody has attempted
an LS1 type intake? I mean, we have two like the LT1's have, why not try making one like an LS1? I can understand a few reasons for not making one, but I think if done right it could be a really good intake. Any thoughts?
Supreme Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,428
Likes: 2
From: Fairview Heights Illinois
Car: 1986 Irocz
Engine: 305 TPI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.25:1
Back in 1991 a company made colored plastic TPI intakes, but the company didn't last or soon dropped the products.
TGO Supporter
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 13,579
Likes: 9
From: Readsboro, VT
Car: 85 IROC-Z / 88 GTA
Engine: 403 LSx (Pending) / 355 Tuned Port
Transmission: T56 Magnum (Pending) / T5
Axle/Gears: 3.42 / ?
Nobody attempted it because the intake port configuration more or less makes it impossible on a normal SBC. The LS1 intake can lay flat and use a plenum "under" the runners because the ports alternate in a way that you can put all 8 runners in a row. You can't do that with the SBC port configuration.
On this FAST prototype, you can see each of the 8 runners.

On the underside, you can see that the ports are evenly spaced:

On this conventional SBC intake, you can see the port arrangement pretty clearly:

Granted this is a carburated intake and the TPI intake is completely different looking, but it still drives home the point that the port location would make it impossible to do an LS1 style intake because you'd wind up needing the same space for opposing ports. If you arranged them at enough of an angle, you may get them to fit, but that may cause some odd kind of airflow issues and may not be able to distribute air evenly to all 8 cylinders. Plus... there's no benefit to it, other than possibly a lower manifold height. Using a conventional arrangement makes it possible to use the same runner lengths, and to keep them relatively smooth without many changes in direction.
On this FAST prototype, you can see each of the 8 runners.

On the underside, you can see that the ports are evenly spaced:

On this conventional SBC intake, you can see the port arrangement pretty clearly:

Granted this is a carburated intake and the TPI intake is completely different looking, but it still drives home the point that the port location would make it impossible to do an LS1 style intake because you'd wind up needing the same space for opposing ports. If you arranged them at enough of an angle, you may get them to fit, but that may cause some odd kind of airflow issues and may not be able to distribute air evenly to all 8 cylinders. Plus... there's no benefit to it, other than possibly a lower manifold height. Using a conventional arrangement makes it possible to use the same runner lengths, and to keep them relatively smooth without many changes in direction.
Last edited by Jim85IROC; Aug 17, 2003 at 08:14 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Elephantismo
Electronics
14
Feb 13, 2019 12:51 AM




