How different would you think the performance change would be between the SR and your intake SStrokerAce? Seems like they were both designed to do relatively the same thing... Bring more torque into a more useful range of rpms.

 

Honestly I would have to measure the SR cross section and tapper in the ports, and the total lengths. I'm guessing that they are longer and that's not always a bad thing. I.E. LS1's

Bret

 

Since I haven't noticed the answer, will this fit A) under the cowl, and B) under the hood.

How does the S/R compare to the height of the regular old TPI intakes? And how if at all does the throttle body location differ from the standard TPI intakes?

Would a standard TPI intake system fit under the hood/cowl of a 4th gen Camaro?

 

The S/R for our cars carries a different part number than others as it is slightly smaller to fit under our hoods. I have a picture of one on a 1995 Firebird from a Car Craft article from 1995. It was an option from LPE when ordering the 383 package...It also included a slightly bigger cam which was matched to the S/R.

As far as height compared to the old TPI set up, I don't know....
--Alan

 

Posted by SStrokerAce
In an ideal world, that would be true. I do know that the LT1 intake is not _that_ good. I am just not looking to spend that kind of money on my car. I don't race either on the street or at the track. Many people here are obviously different. The problem is the slippery slope. The more you get, the more you want. The added cost for that last little bit of power can be astronomical. I can afford it, I just choose not to...

I am usually a lurker. It's like the proverb that it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. There's much more to be learned here by listening to people in the know. Thanks for your opinion.

BRAD

 

No Problem man.....

I just think and talk to the guys that want the little bit extra all the time and if you are at 400rwhp on a 350, you gotta start hitting the next bang for the buck places, intake being the main one for a NA motor.

Bret

 

Maybe I can offer an opinion based on my facts... I have had two different cars and both were setup with SR intakes.

First off the stock base has to be hogged out to match the runner size of the SR. By the time you find a decent stock base, You can buy the Accel one that is already larger and open it up even more for a better top end response.

Let me address some of the negatives of the intake. Its dimensions are a pain in the ****. Getting the tiny screws in from underneath was a nightmare, so I quickly modified my base by drilling out the runners, tapping threads and using stainless inserts held in by Hysol. I then bolted the top plenum to the runners using aircraft fasteners with .020 stainless safety wire. I never had a lid warpage problem because I bought the machined finish lids not the smooth billet ones.

The throttle body is also moved forward 3/4" and the rear dimension is a bit longer too.

Both 3rd gens had 355 four bolt main short blocks. One had TFS TW heads and a 4.10 gear with the Haltech Stand Alone. Its best time on all motor was an 11.45@117 and could be easily street driven.

The other Camaro was a road race setup with Dart Sportsmans heads and a Vortech S-trim blower. This car was a monster at TWS and could easily pull 180 mph on the front straight, lap after lap.

I had tried siamesed runners, bigger runners and all that other junk and nothing worked as well as the SR. I guess its all a matter of preference. If you want to run a low gear and turn the motor to the moon, then the SR is not for you. However I could push mine well over 6500 with no loss of power at all. I think a combo for my 1995 LT1 Convertible would be to lose the 3.73 gears, put on a SR and a T63 turbo. I could easily make 500hp and still have a very torquey convertible to drive daily.