That company reminds me of Walmart. I don't crap from companys like this. It's all about volume and less about quality with them. Look at their torque arms for example. Junk, junk, junk. It just like C. Shelby doing ZMax commercials. I wouldn't own GT500 after that. Junk.

 

Oh Edelbrock, you've done it again. Those guys come nowhere close to measuring up to their hype. They charge too much, you're paying for the name.

 

^ I think a lot of people are missing that point.

Look at what happens when you port the intake on a stock NA LT1...next to nothing. Why should replacing it in a similar scenario be any better?

Not to defend anything from "Edlebroke", but it would only make sense to test a new and supposedly superior intake design on a potent stroker build or something...you know, something where the intake is actually a restriction maybe? .

Not sure if they were expecting it to all of a sudden snap the dyno straps and break loose on the rollers one the intake was torqued down, but I could have saved them a lot of money and guessed that outcome if they told me the equipment being used before hand...

 

I wished they would have come out with a thermoplastic intake. The LT1 intake really heat soaks when hot lapping at the track. I'd have bought that just for the idea of a cooler intake charge when hot lapping.

 

I run Edelbrock adjustable torque arm, sub-frame connectors, adjustable panhard bar and lower control arms. They all fit perfect and the quality is plenty good enough for 99% of the consumers out there. I've tested with about everybodies components and they've (edelbrock) met or exceeded my performance expectations. This last weekend with my weak-knee'd bolt-on only LT1 I went 1.40x 60-foot on the hose.

We've ran the edelbrock lt1 and lt4 intakes and we had had mixed results with both of them on certain combinations they have been worth the money but on a few the money could have been spent elsewhere better. I don't see how anyone can draw a conclusion about a part based on this type of test and information.

 

There are a lot of people who come on here, running basically stock heads, and minor bolt-ons and ask if they will get a significant boost by installing the Edelbrock LT1 manifold. This test accurately answers that question.

 

Magazines are usually very poor sources, but shockingly this one seems to have a little integrity. Results are believable if they backup what knowledgable folks are already saying. The few results we had seen pretty much foretold this result, putting it in print like that just forces a few more of the blind believers to realize the truth.

 

Still not seeing that from one magazine article and one combination. But we are all entitled to our own opinions and conclusions...

 

They plan to expand the testing to more variations in engine setups, including ported heads that more closely match the manifold dimensions.

There have been numerous "opinions" offered on the Edelbrock LT1 manifold, that have not been backed up by any sort of testing at all. Just getting the measurements on the plenum volume and runner length is breakthrough, in that respect. Many are concerned about the stock manifold's short supply of plenum volume, from a theoretical point of view. Several of us asked if the "air gap" concept was going to eat into plenum volume. These measurements, if you chose to believe them, confirm those concerns. Whether the reduced plenum volume will limit the versatility of the intake for higher HP applications remains to be seen.

You may view it as unimportant, and that's your perogative. I though that presenting some supposed "facts" would be better than the mindless speculation that has surrounded the Edelbrock intake. I will continue to offer material I find interesting and thought provoking, trusting that more than a few people here have the intelligence to evaluate the testing methods and results with regard to validity, and form their own opinions.

Note that I simply offered the data, without endorsing it, or condeming it. I was hoping that it would be met with open and inquisitive minds. Perhaps I wasted my time.

 

Thump, thump...

 

I appreciate the info Fred.I also look forward to further testing....so thanks.

 

Amazing comment Tom. You're on a roll......... again.

 

I don't think you wasted your time, everyone had an opinion on it before it even came out( after they waited 2 years or more)

Its good to know. A for effort?

 

Thanks for the post Fred. It was a good read.

 

Well, I guess this data furthers the general idea that on most applications, the stock/ported LT1 intake is adequate. For the more extreme setups, stroker, larger port, long duration cam, etc. The need for single planes is the obvious choice. And really that seem to be what has been proven time and time again.
Maybe if it was a good bit cheaper then it wouldnt seem so bad. But for now that money is better spent elsewhere.