Here are 2 neat websites. It doesn't have much to do with cars, but it is still cool.
If you are having trouble with the first link, don't blame me or your PC; it is kinda restricted to Air Force computers. Check under Aircrafts the awsomw C-5 cargo plane. It can carry 6 Grayhound buses and are beautiful when the do a fly by (and very loud). We have about 13-15 of them here in Kelly AFB, San Antonio and just to see them flying is an experince like no other. By the way, it is the 3rd largest plane in the world. Number 1 and 2 are Russian (actually made by the former Soviet Union)

http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Projects/SR71/home.html

Rick

[This message has been edited by F22Raptor (edited April 11, 2001).]

 

Guido, your a cool guy with a fast car, but your also a little bit of a "Dolt." The reason is this...

Car-Pro.com
Accel base -$375
Plenum/runners - $679

total: 1054....


Yes it does look like you paid more for your intake

 

Hey slow, only a "Dolt" would actually think a Superram will magically propell you down the track faster than a Miniram equiped car. And if you think a SR will give you the same torque as a big block in comparison to a MR having to only a Smallblock, your way off base.




[This message has been edited by Kevin G (edited April 11, 2001).]

 

Well, ive barely got over that in my mini ram slow. I didnt buy the f-body fuel rail kit because it really isnt needed. In retrospect I would have tried to purchase ONLY the fuel rails and none of the other ger which adds on. I felt the extra $150 over what you listed there that I spent was well worth it. Performance, appearance, and ease of installation and maintenance.

I had a choice of cams when I purchased so it didnt matter that I was slapping it on something that already had a cam in it.

It performs superbly. So far it has not let me down.

So the taller price tag is worth it to me.
And I dont have $$ to throw around either. I put myself through college currently so money is always tight.

 

You guys really know how to beat the crap out of a dead horse.

I have a superram, and the only way to get it to flow like the miniram is to port it and have it extrude honed. I just talked to Cartek, and they have an 85 vette with a 406, AFR 190's and superram that runs 10.60's at 125 mph. I'm having them port and extrude hone mine along with my heads.
It is a pain in the *** to take off, but all you guys who are crying about it need to stop it and buy a miniram. Once you've done it a couple of times, you know how to go after each bolt, and it only takes me 1/2 hour to bolt/unbolt the plenum box to the runners now.

Please stop beating this poor horse.

 

But nonetheless it is a different engine, with a RADICALLY different head design and different bore/stroke/rod ratio. These characteristics are very important when it comes to how an engine makes it's torque and hence it's power. GM engineers didn't say, well, even though the LT1 is a great running engine with short runners, the TPI cars had great torque. Lets go back to the long runners so we can make torque on our new engine design.
Much more likely that they spent YEARS in computer modeling, and working with prototypes to come to an intake design that made most effective use of the COMPLETELY NEW engine in every sense of the word.
Yes it's still an IC engine, and thus obeys the same principles that would govern how other IC engines make their power.
It's not correct to say they 'increased' the runner length b/c before they released the engine there was nothing. Therefore we can't comment on why they used 14" runners as opposed to 3" runners or 7" runners. maybe the 3" runners didn't make good power or torque b/c of reversion issues. Maybe the 7" runners had very similar hp/torque characteristics as the 14" runner design, but wasn't as aesthetically pleasing or was harder to produce.

Basically, i was nit-picking his use of the word 'increased', since it is used in a relative sense, which is quite out of context as i illustrated.
...ed

 

98-00 LS1 F-Body 2.73 1/4mile 13.6@104
with P.I.,Yank,or Protorque 9 1/2 3600 conv.
13.1@107
Wheres he hiding the NOS?
BTW,If I could find one I'd rather have an SLP T-Ram on my car otherwise give me a 406,MiniRam,4.10's,and a 226/230 cam,and I guarantee a Superram 406 owner would be seeing my tailights

 

"driving a LT1 is like driving a 4 cylinder turbo compared to an L98." Hehe!!

https://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/tech/mods2.shtml

------------------
Looking For:

87 IROC-Z28 350 TPI
The car I want.

84 TRANS AM 305 H.O.
Another car that would be OK to own while I still look for the IROC-Z!!

[This message has been edited by IROCZTWENTYGR8 (edited April 11, 2001).]

 

All I have to say is that both those intake systems are waaaayyyyy-a$$ed expensive and I think most people put them on before they even try using their stock intake setup with some porting. A set of SLP siamesed runners port matched to a stock ported plenum and stock intake flows better than most people think!!!!!

Laterzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

I wonder why spend so much money on either when you can have a single plane allready set up for port injection for 250 bux?

 

I know Pablo, look at the ZL1 Camaro. Single plane intake drilled for port injection with a 4 barrel TB. Broad torque curve, nice top end. Half the price all said and done. Tuned runners are great, but if you're not at all worried about low end torque (a big cube engine has enough to get our cars moving even with a huge cam), why not go the single plane route? I know they're ugly, but you can make them look OK. LS1s are ugly too, but tell the guy his intake is ugly when he dusts your *** down the 1/4. SR and MR aren't your only intake choices.

------------------
-Jason M. 1991 Camaro Z28

 

Okay, so A- who makes an intake that will provide air up to 7k RPM? Also, who makes a 1500+ CFM throttle body? Lastly, who makes a good fuel rail kit for this application?

Thanks

 

Whoa is it just me or am I sensing a little animocity to those with differing ideas? Why are you talking about an intake that needs to rev to 7k? Werent you praising the superram earlier?
The miniram is essentially a singleplane anyways in fact i think the runners are shorter than most single planes.

a short search and i came up with this:


probably very comparable airflowwise to a miniram if it doesnt flow more
as for rails, id bet the stock ones would fit n/p with a few mods.
for a throttle body, just pick up a used bbc TBI throttle body sans injector pod.. a dime a dozen and they have 52mm blades which is what i believe most SR and MR guys are running. A 1500 cfm throttle body would be overkill IMHO and driveability would suffer. Youll need an adapter plate. for the tbi unit and a small peice of aluminum to cover the hole where the injector pod once sat.


Its not all posuered down in a "kit". But then again real hot rodders dont buy "kits"

it will definately be cheaper though, just as easy to remove as a MR, and I think it would probably outperform one. All the superfast efi cars are running converted single planes.

 

I.M.H.O. the SLP T-RAM was the best all around intake for third-gens.
1. emissions legal
2. dosn't sacrafice bottom end torque
3. capable of producing good H.P. above 6500 rpm
4. easy to install
5. fuel rails are cast into the upper plenum
6. direct access to the intake runners for porting
7. fuel injector changes take less than 15 minutes
8. you don't have to deal with T.P.I.S.!
Just a couple of reasons why I feel that the T-RAM is the best intake.

------------------
87 IROC -
ZZ4 350
SLP T-Ram,1"3/4 SLP headers, Cat back, Hotch-kis, MSD, Iebach etc.

 

Okay, so how did you get your hands on one, and at what cost? Any clues on where I could find one?

 

The SLP T-Ram is plagued with vacuum leak problems and doesn't have a lot of extra material for porting. Furthermore, it is out of production and nobody makes the gaskets and supporting accessories anymore.

Tim

------------------
TRAXION's 1990 IROC-Z
Best Time = 12.244 @ 112.51mph (1.778 60' / 7.819@88.32mph in the 1/8)
All Natural. No Force. No Drugs. Stock Bottom End. Stock Body Panels.
Gunning for NA 11's with bigger cam, bigger stall, and bigger exhaust.
-=ICON Motorsports=-
Moderator: PROM board at thirdgen.org

 

let's keep in mind that the fastest tuner car made had a tpi setup(corvette calloway sledgehammer).Why not have the best of both worlds and turbocharge the tpi unit everyone knows turbo engines always pull higher than supercharger or naturally aspirated due to a thing called linear boost.turbocharging a hiflow tpi would make up for the loss in rpm band due to the excessive length runners giive me a tpi system and a 3rd gen computer anyday screw obdII and soon to be obdIII soon you wont be able to hop up your new cars just as the tpi cars become classics.

 

Ooo time for me to add to this, although not like anyone gonna see it here waaaaaaaaay at the bottom, I went with the LT1 engine for my 3rd gen since its basically same as miniram and i got a whole engine complete for 1600 rather than a $1200 intake, as far as the LS1 goes yes it has good heads and intake stock and hey any other sbc can have good heads added to it, so i'd like to be there when the LS1 guys realize that they only have 346 ci and that you can only flow X amount of air into an X ci. engine and thats all there is to it, when forcing almost same goes you can only flow soo much air before detonation happens.

 

They can also use the 6.0L truck block and stroke to 420+cubes. They can also re-sleeve the existing blocks.
MTI is making sick h.p. out of their LS1 stroker setups.

http://www.corvetteforum.com/ubb/For...ML/038862.html


[This message has been edited by Kevin G (edited April 13, 2001).]

 

THERE'S NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT!

 

I purchased my T-Ram from Summit six years ago for $1,200. Contrary to popular belief SLP still has the tooling to make the T-Ram if there is enough interest.($)
By the way you can make your own gaskets.

I thought the real point of this on going feud was which intake would give you the best of both worlds not which one was still in production.

I am more concerned with the structural integrity of my cylinder heads after port matching to the T-Ram than with the T-Ram itself.

The way I see it is long intake runners make torque, short runners make horsepower. The T-Ram is in between the Super-Ram and Mini-Ram.

If the T-Ram was still available it would be hands down the best dollar for dollar modification available. You don't need a high stall converter or deep rear end gears to make a very broad torque and horsepower curve. Like I said before, injectors can be changed in 15 minutes - can't do that with a Mini-Ram!!




------------------
87 IROC -
ZZ4 350
SLP T-Ram,1"3/4 SLP headers, Cat back, Hotch-kis, MSD, Iebach etc.

 

IIRC the tooling went with the fire. They'd have to redo all that first, which is why they need lots of interest in it, and dont think there will be any.

 

Yes but again that still an X sized cylinder and you can make a 420 + ci sbc.

 

Nope, it only takes 10 minutes with a Miniram.. Expect an hour or more with a SR.
I have only seen one T -Ram which was at Carlisle before. I liked the looks of that thing. The guy sold it for 2k.

????

 

I dont see how you cant change injectors on a mini ram quicker than a T-Ram. You have to take things off to get to the injectors on a t-ram. You take 4 bolts off the mini ram and your rails are off.

Granted Ive never owned a t-ram but everything to me indicates its easier with a mini ram.

------------------
-86 IROC
-406 EFI
-=ICON Motorsports=-
-Waiting on Speed Pro Wide Band EFI then putting Vortech S-Trim back on
-T76 turbo: In Engineering/Parts gathering stage

 

Kevin basically im responding to how they have such a great thing and the LS1 is god when all they really have is an engine that chevy put high flowing heads and intake on stock and you can get the same for the standard 55-?? SBC and they have nothing special, their high flow stock heads arent going to help them get any more air into the same sized reg. sbc with a good set of heads.

 

This thread hardly need another long-winded post but,.... there seems to be something overlooked,...

Since the basic object of any intake manifold design is similiar, i.e., getting air from outside the engine into the engine, I thought Sir Isaac's thoughts might bear some relevance:

"An object at rest tends to stay at rest and an object in motion tends to stay in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force."

Since we are trying to move gazillions of objects(air molecules) from outside to inside, it would seem the straightest path would provide the most benefit. In this respect all modern Chevy EFI motors seem to have a disadvantage right away. A front-mounted TB(kinda necessary for low hoodlines) means the air molecules must turn through at least 90°'s just to get from the TB to the runners. We'll have to accept this compromise though, as even a carb-type manifold is saddled with this limitation(there is a 90° bend from the air cleaner to the carb throat). Also, as most of us thirdgenner's will be running conventional sbc heads, we will have to accept the limitation(in terms of runner design and bends) of the 23° valve angle(the smaller valve angle of the LS1/LS6 heads is one of the main reasons these heads flow so much better than all but the most radical 23° heads).

So what we are left with, as far as an area that could benefit from practical improvement, it that portion of the intake between the plenum and the cylinder head. It would seem then the best flow would come from the manifold that had the straightest path. Yes, tuning the runners to achieve resonance will improve the mass and velocity of the intake charge, but this necessitates longer runners that must be 'bent' to match packaging constraints(pesky low hood lines again). Therefore, the unwillingness of those air molecules to change direction will cause losses to the mass and velocity of the intake air charge. It should also be noted(at least by me) that while the tuned runner improves the mass and velocity of the intake charge when the rpm is reached at which resonance occurs, the improvement is felt only within a very small band(near the point of resonance). Outside of this narrow band, the tuned port is not very effective at promoting the mass and velocity of the air charge, leading to poor cylinder filling below and above(especially) the point of resonance.

Been doin' a bit of reading lately, on flow characteristics of tubes. On thing that is repeatedly mentioned is: the greatest amount of flow is always at the center of the tube, which is because the walls of the tubes pose a number of restrictions(which I won't get into here). Any amount of bend in the tube, will effectively restrict(narrow?) flow through the center of the tube and thus decrease overall flow. Bend the tube past 90° and the center of the tube almost disappears and flow is almost all near the walls(the low flow area) or constrained by flow near the walls. Now look at your stock TPI runners(with their tight, high-angle bends) and imagine how much of a restriction they are posing at all rpms. Now imagine how much breathing would be improved(at all rpms) if those runners were straight(this would require one funky hood, or no hood at all). Long runners can flow well at very high rpms(Pro-Stock sheet-metal intakes for an example), if the amount of, and degrees of , the bends are kept to a minimum.

 

one additional thought,...

peak accelleration does not occur at the point of peak horsepower, nor does it occur at the torque peak. the highest rate of accelleration occurs from 400 - 500 rpm below the torque peak, until peak torque is reached. beyond the torque peak, cylinder filling efficiency falls off and the rate of acceleration decreases. while horsepower will continue to rise beyond peak torque, this is due to the fact that horsepower is a function of torque and rpm. as long the rpm value continues to increase at a faster relative rate than the torque value, the value of horsepower will continue to increase.

now from little i understand, it would seem the object of drag racing is: to achieve the highest tire speed in the shortest amount of time while covering a finite distance. in this respect it would seem that the vehicle with the higher torque peak would have a definite advantage, as it's rate of peak acceleration would occur at a higher engine and tire speed. this of course assume's the vehicle is launched at a high enough engine speed to prevent bogging and that the high engine speed does not cause excessive tire spin(i've always thought some amount of tire spin is beneficial).

 

btw, someone a few thousand posts ago mentioned that turbo's produce linear boost. this is incorrect. belt-driven superchargers(blowers) produce linear boost in direct relation to engine speed(i.e., a blower that makes 4 psi @ 2000 rpm will produce 8 psi @ 4000 rpm). turbo's produce exponential boost in relation to the amount of pressure produced by the exhaust gases( a turbo that can produce 4 psi @ 2000 rpm can produce 16 psi @ 4000 rpm - though design limitations will usually allow less). it should also be noted that while a blower can usually make more boost 'down low', the parasitic losses(caused by the belt driven arrangement) become progressively greater as rpms increase, whereas the turbo suffers less from frictional losses as rpms increase.

 

I guess the diesel's high torque number must account for them being the drag strip terrors that they are.

 

Since it seems most of the superram owners are keeping their mouths shut, I guess I'll put in my $.02. Yes, it's a ***** the first time you install it, but after that you learn to tap the inside runners to drop in bolts from the top & R&R after that is a breeze (no harder than a stock tpi).

Pricewise, the superram is $300 cheaper than a miniram. There may not be many DIY prom burners around (I'm about to be one of them) for the superram, but $300 will buy a real nice chip.

I thought we were talking about street cars here. Sure you can build an all-out race car that will run faster w/ a miniram, but at what rpm are you shifting it? A superram is the best intake for a STREET car where you don't have to wind it to 5 grand to get anything out of it. The superram is just gas&go right off the line.

Plus, I'd rather run mid 12s (where most of the miniram cars are running, BTW) shifting at 5500 w/ my superram than at 6500 or higher with a miniram...but then again I like my engines to last 100,000 miles or more w/o a rebuild.

You can get a car with a matched camshaft running mid to low 12s with either intake, what it comes down to is streetability. How many of you have run on the street for a full 1/4 mile? Sure a miniram car running high 11s will blow my doors off in the big end, but stoplight to stoplight the superram will get you every time.

There really isn't any need for everyone to get pissy about it...especially the moderators who are supposed to moderate & not join in the fracas (right guys?). Whichever intake you run, the goal is to smoke MUSTANGS & OTHER NON-THIRDGENS.



------------------
87 IROC-Z, 5.7, auto, 3.27, leather, !cat, Holley fpr, K&N'S, SLP 1-3/4" Jet-Hot coated headers, SLP .218/.224 .495/.502 cam, Comp 1.5 roller tip rockers, $uperPITAram, Edelbrock lower intake, Holley 52mm tb, Dynomax\Flowmaster catback. Coming Soon(?)- Fasttrack/Accell DFI

1989 Pontiac 20th Anniversary Turbo Trans Am - 161,000 miles, !cat, 9" K&N

 

I wasn't aware that there were many diesel's with tranmitions that keep them in their power ranges...

I guess we can just forget comparing the time slips between the turbo Diesel bug and the stardard gas engine bug...despite the fact that the gas engine makes much more horsepower and a high range. Well by your train of logic, that should dictate that the gas bug would be faster. This is sadly not the case however. This is just one example of a "torque motor" going faster then a snot nose rev'ing beast.

Something else that was negelcted to be mentioned as of yet....the reason that torque based cars don't ET lower is mostly due to the stiff suspension most of our cars have. In a HP based vehicle this is less important. However, if you can hook up the torque and keep the power too the pavement...

Oh **** I won't even finish it, it's piontless because so many of you are afraid to give in to the short comings of the ****tyram....eeeer miniram, sorry.

 

Actually, the transmissions purpose-built for diesels have a huge number of gears, which is necessary to keep the average diesel in it's 'powerband'(by powerband I'm assuming you are referring to the rpm range between peak torque and peak horsepower). If you look at the peak values for diesel engines you'll usually see peak torque at 1500 - 2000 rpm and peak hp around 2500 rpm. So to keep the engine in that very narrow band you need a lot of gears to get you to highway speeds. Another example is the current Allison auto tranny in GM's new diesels, said tranny having more gears than any current slushbox GM builds for North American passenger cars(ironically, GM has been building a 5-speed auto for BMW for a number of years, but hasn't seen fit to do the same for the last of it's rear-drive passenger cars).

 

As the former owner of a Super Rammed L98, I strongly recommend the Miniram. I won't go into the details since pretty much everything has been covered already. I'll just say that the super ram is a PITA any way you look at it, the 2 things I hated the most about it were the R&R and the Vac. leaks. Even the guy I sold my car to is planning on ripping it off in favor of a MR. I say screw em both and buy an LS1.

------------------
Black 99 T/A M6

 

ROFLMFAO .... Bwahahahha .... classic 'Newbie' thinking ..... LOL.

Tim

------------------
TRAXION's 1990 IROC-Z
Best Time = 12.244 @ 112.51mph (1.778 60' / 7.819@88.32mph in the 1/8)
All Natural. No Force. No Drugs. Stock Bottom End. Stock Body Panels.
Gunning for NA 11's with bigger cam, bigger stall, and bigger exhaust.
-=ICON Motorsports=-
Moderator: PROM board at thirdgen.org

 

Sorry, not all of us are chip gurus who would rather spend hundreds of hours f*cking around w/ a prom burner for that extra tenth than dropping a little change & having someone do it for you. $300 may not buy a perfect chip, but it will be close enough for 9/10th of the world.

Personally, I don't mind spending the extra time, but I'm just glad that I've found out who the real stuck up a$$holes are on here before I asked any questions.



------------------
87 IROC-Z, 5.7, auto, 3.27, leather, !cat, Holley fpr, K&N'S, SLP 1-3/4" Jet-Hot coated headers, SLP .218/.224 .495/.502 cam, Comp 1.5 roller tip rockers, $uperPITAram, Edelbrock lower intake, Holley 52mm tb, Dynomax\Flowmaster catback. Coming Soon(?)- Fasttrack/Accell DFI

1989 Pontiac 20th Anniversary Turbo Trans Am - 161,000 miles, !cat, 9" K&N

 

I don't get the attitude some of you all have on this board,, especially the moderators. Wasn't there an old post where someone took off a killer LTR set up and swap to a miniram, 30# injectors, and spend a lot of time "tuning it" only to pick up .06 seconds over the LTR set-up? I think the miniram slowed him down at first. Man,, I bet that guy was glad he was not dependent on someone else to dial it that new miniram in for him. He might not have been any quicker,, maybe even slower - YIKES!!!!!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by irocz:
Sorry, not all of us are chip gurus
To me a chip guru would be someone who could make one pass while recording data and then 'divine' the perfect cal on the first try. I don't see anyone here, or at the PROM forum who is that good(yet). There are however several people who've made the investment in time and effort, such that they've become very adept a making the right changes toward the 'perfect' cal. If you don't want to make the effort to learn how it's done, don't expect to be as good as those who have. But you don't need to criticize someone who has made the effort.

who would rather spend hundreds of hours f*cking around w/ a prom burner for that extra tenth than dropping a little change & having someone do it for you.
Funny, I thought the purpose of "Thirdgen.org" was, to be a meeting place for people who liked doing things themselves. People here spend thousands of hours messing around with their cars for that extra tenth. Most of us do it simply for the enjoyment of doing things ourselves. If you don't feel comfortable doing things yourself, or simply don't want to, that's fine, and no-one should criticize you for that. But if that is the case, why would you participate in a public forum devoted to automotive "Do-It-Yourselfers"?

$300 may not buy a perfect chip, but it will be close enough for 9/10th of the world.
Prom 'tuning' is at best an incremental affair. You make small changes in one area, until you nail the cal for one part of the engine's operation. Then you do the same for another part of the engine's operation. Eventually you get most of the engine's operation tuned for the best result. But more often than not, changes in one area affect operation in another area(s), which means you go back and forth trying to find the best compromise for all affected areas(in my brief experience). Even the engineers at Chevy took hundred's of hours to write a production PROM, and they had a heck of a lot more data to help them than the average PROM DIYer.

Yes there are a few commercial PROM burner's who can burn a fairly good PROM on the first try(Ed Wright and Performance Resource come to mind). But to think that their first effort will do much more than get you in the ballpark is unrealistic. Even they will tell you that it will take several burns(using data collected after each revision) before they can give you a PROM that is very close.

Personally, I don't mind spending the extra time, but I'm just glad that I've found out who the real stuck up a$$holes are on here before I asked any questions.
I don't see anyone here who deserves the title you mentioned. There are some oldtimers who see the same questions asked, and the same mistakes made, repeatedly. Small wonder they tire of responding to those who refuse to use the archives to find answers to problems that have already been solved. the next time you have a question that needs to be answered right now, try searching the archives first. You'll see that there are very few subjects that haven't been covered in a lot of detail.


Keep in mind too that, often times it is not enough to ask the question, you need to show folks you want the answer. State that you've done some investigation(legwork) on your own. And treat people with the same level of respect you expect for yourself. If your question shows you haven't made an effort to find the answer, don't expect others to make an effort for you. And if you act like a spoiled brat(and that is not pointed at anyone in particular, so save your flames) who expects everyone to do things for them, don't be surprised if folks ignore you or try to put you in your place. The vast majority of us come here to learn from others, and to exchange and share information and ideas with others.

 

[quote]<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by 88IROCs:

Quote:

Originally posted by irocz:

who would rather spend hundreds of hours f*cking around w/ a prom burner for that extra tenth than dropping a little change & having someone do it for you.
Funny, I thought the purpose of "Thirdgen.org" was, to be a meeting place for people who liked doing things themselves. People here spend thousands of hours messing around with their cars for that extra tenth. Most of us do it simply for the enjoyment of doing things ourselves. If you don't feel comfortable doing things yourself, or simply don't want to, that's fine, and no-one should criticize you for that. But if that is the case, why would you participate in a public forum devoted to automotive "Do-It-Yourselfers"?

Oh ****, well that solves it ladies and gentleman! He has just answered the questions to the intake wars with one foul swoop! See, who cares that Lingefelter's design team spent months in developement on the super ram, who cars that GM spent many years developing the LS1 intake, and just screw over the fact that TPIS continually changes the ****tyRam's design (fuel injector possitions-Vortec intake...what's next?) in an effort to find what they call "power." And why should we throw all of this too the wind? Well if you follow his plain of logic to it's practical end, we shoud all be making custom sheet metal intakes, and spending hours at the track swapping the intakes with curved runners, straight runners, long runners, short runners, Large diameter runners, and small diameter runners. I suppose, we should also fabricate all of these intakes, for personal enjoyment mind you, in different length changes in the 1/8 inch, in curve angles of 1 degree or less, and in diameter sizes of a tenth of an inch......out of the enjoyment of trying to extract that last tenth out of the motor because it is obvious that unless you enjoying doing everything there is to do, by yourself, you shouldn't be here....and intake design is just as subject to this as anything else. Is prom burning different because it has it's own forum? NO! There simply aren't *******s like you walking around preaching about his work effort and how we should all live up to it....they realize DIY can only be taken to a practical limit, and someone with the slightest amount of computer knowledge can find their way here, but do you think they will be able to logically modify fuel and spark ratio's? NO! In fact, Mr. Self Righteous, if you were a "Serious" EFI guy, you wouldn't still be messing around with these EProms, but you would be sitting at the track every day, or at the dyno, search for that last tenth from an Accel DFI system....however, I think you realize that there is a partical limit to how far things should be taken in x amount of time, yet you won't think that others should be subject to that, just you.

As I read down this post, I see many posts by you that a arguementative, and ****y. Well now here's one for you to swallow 88Iroc's.....and from now leave anyone like IROCZ alone, whom realize that practical limits to their abilities or willingness to go to the extreme. See, this board isn't JUST for people who want to squeeze the last tenth of a second out of their DD. People come to this board for repair questions, styling and appearance questions, and yes, some come to learn purely how to be the SUPREME car nut and get everything out of their ride....which is fine for them, but the dosen't mean everyone has to be like them, or they are the reason the board exists.

88IROCs, the GM PCM found in our cars, particularly the 85's and lower, are PATHETIC! They are nowhere close to their Ford equivalents....so why are you still demanding to try to get everything out of an instantly inferior system? Do what you say, go to DFI, spend months playing with it, then brag about your great work ethic for the "Enjoyment" of it...

-Shortened for content-

[This message has been edited by Slow Iroc (edited April 15, 2001).]

 

Now you understand why my posts aren't usually so long. I spend my time teaching others or else working on my car.

Sometimes you need to read between the lines ... or actually read the lines. Both the SuperRam and MiniRam each make killer power in the right context. I never doubted or stated that the SuperRam can't make good power. I just stated that in comparison to the MR that the SR is a PITA to install and won't make as much topend power. Each of these is true. However, that doesn't negate that the SuperRam makes some killer power ... it can and it does as long as the components are matched to it.

I once had a killer LTR setup. I swapped to a MR and went slower. I determined my injectors were maxed out on DC and installed a set of 30s and did some minor tuning. My first time to the track the MR kicked the LTR setup in the buttocks with more than 2mph difference ... and this was with a setup that was balanced toward the LTRs and not the MR. Get the facts right.

Regarding chips ... burn your own. Period. If you think that anyone is going to get you a chip that will match your setup then think again. The chances are very slim and it is a huge gamble that you are taking. Seriously, buy your own equipment and learn to program your own PROMs. I was once in the same boat and spend $500 on a TPIS level V chip. It was a piece of crap. I learned to burn my own because of that HUGE loss. If the tuner is not working on your car when designing the calibration then it is a huge shot in the dark. Ed Wright is a good programmer but in most custom cases where the customer is intent on the correct calibration they have to send the chips/ECMs back to him several times in order to get the calibration close.

The reason that this topic has lasted so long is because in lots of ways its fun. Some of us old timers get a kick out of crap like this .... seeing people get all up in a hissy over nothing. Its just the internet

Simply put .....
MiniRam and SuperRam both make good power.
MiniRam makes more horsepower on the topend.
SuperRam makes more torque on the lowend.
MiniRam is easier for maintenance.

What else really needs to be said? Just pick your poison and go with it. In any case - learn to burn your own chips because it will save you A LOT of headaches in the future.

Tim

------------------
TRAXION's 1990 IROC-Z
Best Time = 12.244 @ 112.51mph (1.778 60' / 7.819@88.32mph in the 1/8)
All Natural. No Force. No Drugs. Stock Bottom End. Stock Body Panels.
Gunning for NA 11's with bigger cam, bigger stall, and bigger exhaust.
-=ICON Motorsports=-
Moderator: PROM board at thirdgen.org

 

Slow,

I think I have gone out of my way in this thread to avoid starting or getting involved inb a flame war. You on the other hand, seem to look for a fight at every turn. Small wonder people ignore you when you ask a question.

Reading the posts you have made in this thread, I doubt your experience with engine modifications extends even to changing air filters. I have avoided commenting on that, until now. Re-read the entire content of my last post, not just the part you feel qualified(barely) to criticize. I did not berate anyone who doesn't want to work on their own engine(or any other part of their vehicle). I did criticize those who expect results, but expect they don't have to do anything to achieve those results. You'll understand what this means in a few years,... somewhere after you've reached your 16th birthday.

Some of us see an older system(such as an ECM) as a challenge, not as an insurmountable obstacle. No-one said it would be easy, but I pity your lack of initiative and drive. However, when someone makes an affordable($1000 or less) aftermarket EFI, that can work with a digital MAF, a broadband O2 sensor, etc., I'll give it a serious look. Until then I'll save my pennies for where they can do more good.

I have four running Chevy's at the moment(2 L98 IROC's, an LB9 Jimmy, and a TBI C1500), which is probably more vehicles than you've owned(if I am to guess by the tone and content of your previous comments). All have been modified by me, and all will be modified by me in the future, because I enjoy working on my own vehicles. And based on the experience I've had working on other people's Fords and looking at Ford service manual, the Ford ECM's require a lot more knowledge and effort to tune/modify. That's my own observation and I'm sure someone who has more experience with Ford's would have good reason to disagree.

The next time you feel qualified to criticize someone else's comments, at least make the effort to read and understand their comments.
The vast majority of us come here to learn from others, and to exchange and share information and ideas with others.

Care to join the group?

 

I ORDER YOU TO KISS MY A$$!


SOMEONE DELETE THIS POST PLEASE, THE HORSIE IS ALREADY DEAD, IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED!