New intake for crossfire = more HP!!!!

[nelson84]

There is another intake soon to be released and I am not talking about the x-ram or the sy1 or the offy. It is made by "dynamic crossfire solutions" and it is called the "renegade". They are in the final stages befor releasing it. I have seen photos of it on the crossfire injection forum. They have not yet shown pictures of the inside of the intake, but it is a true cross ram design according to this company. They just want to tweek it to squeeze maximum power out of it before they release it.

 

[VIN_#_00521__Z-51_C4]

There is another intake soon to be released and I am not talking about the x-ram or the sy1 or the offy. It is made by "dynamic crossfire solutions" and it is called the "renegade". They are in the final stages befor releasing it. I have seen photos of it on the crossfire injection forum. They have not yet shown pictures of the inside of the intake, but it is a true cross ram design according to this company. They just want to tweek it to squeeze maximum power out of it before they release it.

Hey you caught my interest here....

... Where is this article and you need to link it......link the pictures! http://www.crossfireinjection.net/DCS News.html here's the link to that site

 

[catbert]

I'd worry about being on the bleeding edge of development. Let a couple dozen other folks work through the problems that will almost certainly develop. Also remember that other factors figure into the HP equation in the early 80's, namely compression, tuning, etc. With only 205 HP, there is lots of potential in the L83, but it will take going through the whole motor to unlock it, starting with the cam, if you open up the intake. I loved the L83, but it's cheaper to replace it than modding it. . But then again, modding is what lots of us like to do.

 

[nelson84]

They dynoed this intake on a stock 82 vette. They got a 33 hp increase and 16 lbs/ft at the rear wheels, this works out to be about 50 hp at the engine. Now you have a 255 hp crossfire and add some decent heads 280 hp. K&N, pulleys, plugs, wires, headers, cam, some decent gears. It should end up being a little more respectable in the corvette hobby, no morecrossfire. You might even be able to take it to the track without hiding your time slips in your pocket.

 

[Hib Halverson]

Actually 33 at the wheels is (figuring 18% loss in the C3/C4 powertrain) 40 at the flywheel. You've spent probably a ton of money and development time for 40 horses....and at 245 you're right where a stock TPI engine can be. I think nitrous oxide would have been a lot easier.

I don't know why people keep trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip.

Any low cross ram manifold has never worked on the street. Too much plenum volume and too low intake velocity such that, sure, you get a lot of power and a sharp torque peak but lousy driveability and no low end.

At the time GM did that, it didn't have big throttle body injectors and port injection was still 2-3 years in the future so some fool, who must have been looking at old SCCA Trans-Am engines, got the hots for a 2x4 TBI on a cross ram.

Bad idea.

Once protos were running they found out what others knew back in the 60s that low-rise cross rams don't work on the street.

The solution....they made the ports freakin' tiny to get the velocity up. A pal of mine, who used to work at GM for Herb Fishel's old group told me that he knew two engineers who paid for new homes with the overtime it took to get that system to run right and pass emissions.

The smartest thing you can do is convert L83s to TPI or some of the large port/large plenum aftermarket port injection systems.

On the other hand, I well-understand the cultural attraction of having 2xTBI, 3x2bbl, 2x4bbl or two or three of anything on top of your engine (I admit to be a recovering dual-four-barrel carb addict) and, if the goal is to keep those two nasty looking throttle bodys and have horsepower, as long as your willing to give up a good torque curve, any low cross ram with big ports will make power!

 

[KANE]

...On the other hand, I well-understand the cultural attraction of having 2xTBI, 3x2bbl, 2x4bbl or two or three of anything on top of your engine (I admit to be a recovering dual-four-barrel carb addict) and, if the goal is to keep those two nasty looking throttle bodys and have horsepower, as long as your willing to give up a good torque curve, any low cross ram with big ports will make power!

Hib- cross rams and or duals/multiples (3x2, 2x4, 8x1, 4x2) are just plain cool. I'd love to have a dual plenum TPI... for the looks alone.

 

[nelson84]

Actually 33 at the wheels is (figuring 18% loss in the C3/C4 powertrain) 40 at the flywheel. You've spent probably a ton of money and development time for 40 horses....and at 245 you're right where a stock TPI engine can be. I think nitrous oxide would have been a lot easier.

I don't know why people keep trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip.

Any low cross ram manifold has never worked on the street. Too much plenum volume and too low intake velocity such that, sure, you get a lot of power and a sharp torque peak but lousy driveability and no low end.

At the time GM did that, it didn't have big throttle body injectors and port injection was still 2-3 years in the future so some fool, who must have been looking at old SCCA Trans-Am engines, got the hots for a 2x4 TBI on a cross ram.

Bad idea.

Once protos were running they found out what others knew back in the 60s that low-rise cross rams don't work on the street.

The solution....they made the ports freakin' tiny to get the velocity up. A pal of mine, who used to work at GM for Herb Fishel's old group told me that he knew two engineers who paid for new homes with the overtime it took to get that system to run right and pass emissions.

The smartest thing you can do is convert L83s to TPI or some of the large port/large plenum aftermarket port injection systems.

On the other hand, I well-understand the cultural attraction of having 2xTBI, 3x2bbl, 2x4bbl or two or three of anything on top of your engine (I admit to be a recovering dual-four-barrel carb addict) and, if the goal is to keep those two nasty looking throttle bodys and have horsepower, as long as your willing to give up a good torque curve, any low cross ram with big ports will make power!

No low end??????????? Have you ever looked at a dyno sheet from a crossfire???????? The torque peaks at 2100 rpm and continues to taper off because GM filled the ports in with metal and made them smaller to reduce power to make the TPI look more impressive. This new intake solves the problems that GM screwed up on purpose. I wouldn't convert to TPI it costs to much. Besides I own a TPI as well as my crossfire. The TPI setup isn't exactly impressive.

 

[Hib Halverson]

No low end??????????? Have you ever looked at a dyno sheet from a crossfire???????? The torque peaks at 2100 rpm and continues to taper off (snip)

I never said that a torque curve from a stock or near stock L83 is reasonably flat. I was talking about what happes when you go to an intake with larger port volume.

because GM filled the ports in with metal and made them smaller to reduce power to make the TPI look more impressive.

Come on "Nelson84"...what you smoking, dude? To "make TPI look more impressive" is not why the L83 intake manifold is restrictive.

This new intake solves the problems that GM screwed up on purpose.

First, it was not a case of GM having screwed up
"on purpose." It was a case of that the early prototypes, which flowed more air and made more power, ran poorly on the street--lousy driveability, flacid throttle response, poor economy and exhaust emissions troubles. To eliminate those issues, GM had to decrease the port volume by a bunch.

As for this new intake "solving" those "problems"---if we look at those "problems" in the narrow focus of maximum power, then you are correct. In fact, I'll bet once the engine begins to turn some rpm and the flow velocity gets up there, if you can get enough fuel through those TBIs, the increase will be substantial!

The TPI setup isn't exactly impressive.

Ok...for the sake of discussion, let's say that's true. Then--why didn't tens of thousands of people who owned 85-91 Corvettes, Camaros and Firebirds, convert them to 2xTBIs on modified L83 intake manifolds rather than retaining those unimpressive TPI units, then modifying them?

My point here is that, yes, you can go to an intake manifold with greater port volume and, yes, that can increase airflow into the engine. Add more fuel with different injectors and/or a calibration change and you will have an engine that produces more power...perhaps even a lot more power.

But...you still can't violate the laws of physics and the principles by which intake systems work.

Cross-ram intake manifolds don't work very well on engines which need to have broad torque curves, snappy throttle response and good low speed performance. This is why they've been very rare on road cars.

Admittedly, my diatribe on this ain't going to get me on any 82 or 84 owner's Christmas Card list, but so it goes...:eyerole

 

[catbert]

Christmas lists are over-rated.

 

[killain]

I never said that a torque curve from a stock or near stock L83 is reasonably flat. I was talking about what happes when you go to an intake with larger port volume.



Come on "Nelson84"...what you smoking, dude? To "make TPI look more impressive" is not why the L83 intake manifold is restrictive.

First, it was not a case of GM having screwed up
"on purpose." It was a case of that the early prototypes, which flowed more air and made more power, ran poorly on the street--lousy driveability, flacid throttle response, poor economy and exhaust emissions troubles. To eliminate those issues, GM had to decrease the port volume by a bunch.

As for this new intake "solving" those "problems"---if we look at those "problems" in the narrow focus of maximum power, then you are correct. In fact, I'll bet once the engine begins to turn some rpm and the flow velocity gets up there, if you can get enough fuel through those TBIs, the increase will be substantial!



Ok...for the sake of discussion, let's say that's true. Then--why didn't tens of thousands of people who owned 85-91 Corvettes, Camaros and Firebirds, convert them to 2xTBIs on modified L83 intake manifolds rather than retaining those unimpressive TPI units, then modifying them?

My point here is that, yes, you can go to an intake manifold with greater port volume and, yes, that can increase airflow into the engine. Add more fuel with different injectors and/or a calibration change and you will have an engine that produces more power...perhaps even a lot more power.

But...you still can't violate the laws of physics and the principles by which intake systems work.

Cross-ram intake manifolds don't work very well on engines which need to have broad torque curves, snappy throttle response and good low speed performance. This is why they've been very rare on road cars.

Admittedly, my diatribe on this ain't going to get me on any 82 or 84 owner's Christmas Card list, but so it goes...:eyerole

I just am about finishing a price list on parts and labor to do some real upgrade work on my 84. Problem is once you total it all up, I've got 245 HP, maybe and I've spent enough to buy a 1992 to 94 Corvette in decent condition and with maybe only a polish job or new paint to deal with. And no, I don't want to reinvent the wheel with this project, but that is about what it amounts to. Converting to TPI isn't exactly cheap route to go either. Merry Christmas everyone !

 

[nelson84]

Happy holidays, I have to be politically correct or its banned camp for me.;help

The whole point of this thread is to let 82 and 84 owners know about this new intake and sorry for adding in the power improvements. The more people interested, the cheap they will price it. Any purists out there and anti-crossfire people cover your eyes.

Direct replacement and 33 rear wheel HP.

Please don't pick on mehnoes

 

[CorvetteArchives]

Ha! If you're satisfied with TPI like performance (actually a little more) for LESS money that switching to TPI then it seems to be a bargain.
I'm wondering if Dave Emmanuel was ghost writing that bit for Hib?
People claim the CFI cant possibly be improved to be a performer BUT Vette Magazine ran one article in June 1997 proving Emmanuel and Hib wrong. Almost 400hp and 12.76 at 109.9 mph with stock CFI.
Anything CAN be done...its just how much $ you want to spend.
This new intake seems promising in that its a low cost solution for more power.

BTW, didnt physicists originally claim a helicopter couldnt fly, or that the A Bomb would ignite the atmosphere and destroy the world? So much for science, eh?

 

[82ColEd]

snip

I don't know why people keep trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip.

snip

I have no dog in this discussion, i am planning to stay with my L-83, but i didnt know i was riding a turnip.. Thanks for the laugh Hib, yer still on my Christmas List..


-Stefan

 

[KANE]

... Converting to TPI isn't exactly cheap route to go either...

Well, it can be done relatively easy with the help of ebay. I pieced my TPI together for around < $1300 and that includes SLP runners. With the economy in the tubes right now, this may be the best time to acquire parts from ebay because they will be cheap- no one is bidding!

Really, the Ram Jet is the best bang for the buck. 350hp out of the box. What you spend in dollars you make up in time-it is complete down to the harness and ECM.

 

[CorvetteArchives]

Well, it can be done relatively easy with the help of ebay. I pieced my TPI together for around < $1300 and that includes SLP runners. With the economy in the tubes right now, this may be the best time to acquire parts from ebay because they will be cheap- no one is bidding!

Really, the Ram Jet is the best bang for the buck. 350hp out of the box. What you spend in dollars you make up in time-it is complete down to the harness and ECM.

Yeah but thats STILL more $ for the same performance....IF the new dynamic solutions manifold is reasonably priced...say $500-700. Thats reasonable for picking up 50 HP.
Granted, like you said TPI can be enhanced further than CFI at a good value but it all depends how much power you do want and the $,effort and skill involved.

 

[ZumZum]

There are some deals out there. I recently purchased an Accel Superram base, SLP runners and a ported plenum for $580. They're used of course. Going to get them off to the powdercoaters next week.

 

[GO_VETTE]

if you saw Jonad Bylunds 84 CFI supercharged. You would be like
WTF

 

[nelson84]

I want to keep my crossfire and add parts to improve it, if I want to switch to TPI, I will just grab my other set of keys and drive my slightly modded 85 vette.

And by the way "Dave Emanuel" is a tool, he modded a TPI and went a high 14 second 1/4 mile and thought that was good. Why have a vette if you don't even know how to drive it?

 

[Hib Halverson]

This thread is getting to be pretty interesting.

First, I'd like to request that "nelson84" do more than post the improvment at peak power with no other info. There's zero street cred in that.

"nelson84" if you could post the full A-B test data, that'd be useful. That is, post the full torque and power curves before the intake manifold change and the full torque curve after the intake manifold change. In addtion, post what chassis dyno was used. And, please post the dyno correction used, ie: "observed", "standard" or "SAE". A little about the testing procedure, ie: was it three passes for each, with A-and-B averaged or was it just one for each? Lastly, was any change made to the ECM calibration before the test of the new intake manifold? And were there any other mods to the powertrain done along with the intake?

As to "CorvetteArchives" comment:

I'm wondering if Dave Emmanuel was ghost writing that bit for Hib?

We're two different peope

People claim the CFI cant possibly be improved to be a performer BUT Vette Magazine ran one article in June 1997 proving Emmanuel and Hib wrong. Almost 400hp and 12.76 at 109.9 mph with stock CFI.

Respectfully submitted...that don't mean s**t.

First, it's impossible to run that hard with *stock" CFI in a stock 84.

Secondly, with a modified "Crossfire Injection", other mods, the right gearing and good driving, mid-12s would be easy.

Thirdly, ya all are missing the point. Again...I don't dispute that a 2xTBI system can be mod'ed to the 400 even the 450 hp level. What I'm disputing is that with peak power at that level, the rest of the torque curve, driveability, fuel economy and emissions might not be what some people expect.

I'll challenge you guys...bring me a crossfire injected 82 or 84 that makes 330 at the wheels SAE-corrected. If I can duplicate that performance on the chassis dyno I use and then I road test the car and find it's nice to drive, passes a smog check and gets reasonable mileage, I'll write an article about it and try and get it published.

In that story, I'll eat crow on my belief that high-powered crossfire engines come at the expense of torque and driveabiilty.

 

[nelson84]

This thread is getting to be pretty interesting.

First, I'd like to request that "nelson84" do more than post the improvment at peak power with no other info. There's zero street cred in that.

"nelson84" if you could post the full A-B test data, that'd be useful. That is, post the full torque and power curves before the intake manifold change and the full torque curve after the intake manifold change. In addtion, post what chassis dyno was used. And, please post the dyno correction used, ie: "observed", "standard" or "SAE". A little about the testing procedure, ie: was it three passes for each, with A-and-B averaged or was it just one for each? Lastly, was any change made to the ECM calibration before the test of the new intake manifold? And were there any other mods to the powertrain done along with the intake?

As to "CorvetteArchives" comment:
We're two different peope


Respectfully submitted...that don't mean s**t.

First, it's impossible to run that hard with *stock" CFI in a stock 84.

Secondly, with a modified "Crossfire Injection", other mods, the right gearing and good driving, mid-12s would be easy.

Thirdly, ya all are missing the point. Again...I don't dispute that a 2xTBI system can be mod'ed to the 400 even the 450 hp level. What I'm disputing is that with peak power at that level, the rest of the torque curve, driveability, fuel economy and emissions might not be what some people expect.

I'll challenge you guys...bring me a crossfire injected 82 or 84 that makes 330 at the wheels SAE-corrected. If I can duplicate that performance on the chassis dyno I use and then I road test the car and find it's nice to drive, passes a smog check and gets reasonable mileage, I'll write an article about it and try and get it published.

In that story, I'll eat crow on my belief that high-powered crossfire engines come at the expense of torque and driveabiilty.

Thanks Captain Bring down, not one useful bit of knowledge or imput to this thread. If you don't know anything about crossfire why comment. It is clear you don't like crossfires and don't have a clue about them, and you are the last person I would want writing a tech article on crossfires, your ideas and automotive savy is lacking thanks anyways:eyerole.