LS-1 w/ Holly Sniper aluminum manifold

[Straversi]

Is anyone running a LS-1 with a Holly Sniper aluminum manifold? Curious if it will fit under the stock hood
-Steve.

[tcollins]

Steve, if you are planning to swap from the stock intake, I suggest researching tuning and other performance characteristics, if you're not familiar. This is a good comparisons for LS1. http://www.hotrod.com/articles/20-ls...ifolds-tested/
The Holley Sniper intake has shorter runners, which in general means, the torque is shifted to a higher RPM range. This could be significant if the runners are also larger diameter. In addition, charge air temp negatively affects performance, so aluminum intakes have measureable performance loss over anything that does not transfer heat, like nylon or carbon fiber intakes (everything else being equal).

If you are like me, I understand why you wouldn't want to use a stock intake in a Roadster or open engine hot rod...looks? I'm using the CJ, which also gives up a little low torque comparted to the stock GT, but not much, and certainly not noticeable with a 500HP engine in a 2300lbs car. If you are interested, my company is currently tooling a carbon high ram intake (image was from our booth at SEMA last November) We often find a few target customers to give feedback on the early production validation parts in exchange for an intake.

left side engine.JPG pHR.JPG

[Straversi]

I wish I was at a stage where I could consider that option. Right now just in the long term planning stages. Closer to day dreaming than planning.

I am aware of the performance trade offs you mentions and came to the same conclusion with the Coyote in my MK-IV, the minimal performance drop off wont be noticed in a ridiculously overpowered car.



-Steve

[Straversi]

By the way, that carbon intake is awesome. Will that be for LS, Coyote, both?

[q4stix]

If you are interested, my company is currently tooling a carbon high ram intake (image was from our booth at SEMA last November) We often find a few target customers to give feedback on the early production validation parts in exchange for an intake.
pHR.JPG

Wow, that intake and its internal design (looking at the PD website) is beautiful! If you happen to want a 8000-8500 rpm Coyote with GT350 heads to donate a blemished or prototype manifold to, I'm open I'll just need to get my build done that much quicker

[tcollins]

Yes we are also making a new intake for the Coyote. This one is still in the development phase, but one of our dyno intakes was also on display at SEMA last November. Here are some images of the prototype. The different between this and the CJ intake is that this will fit under a 2015 stock Mustang GT hood, with work with both GT and GT350 throttle bodies and there will be an upgrade option for carbon fiber plenum caps. Maybe also polycarbonate caps with carbon fiber velocity stacks, for easy swap at car shows. Currently we are tweaking to out perform the 2018 GT intake, which just came out and has been improved relative to previous intakes. Two or 3 runner lengths will be offered. The short will be higher RPM for max power (CJ) and the long will outperform 2018 GT intake (target).

Thoughts?

Carbon Coyote intake on chassis dyno.JPG PD010 2016 Mustang GT.jpg PD010 intake in FFR hot rod.JPG

[q4stix]

I realize this is now starting to deviate from Straversi's original thread, but I hope he doesn't mind...

It's interesting to me to see the variations here between the different intake manifolds (Ford's production ones, other aftermarket, and yours). I see you are using a similar molded runner system to get everything compact and maintain the lengths of the runners. It also makes sense moving the plenum volumes to the side instead of on top in one larger plenum to keep the height down. Any concerns with the forward pair of runners being a little shorter than the aft four? Not sure if that would affect cylinder fuel trims, and not to say even stock or other aftermarket intakes don't have these concerns too.

Final thought for now, any reason for the divergence from the Carbon TR design here? Just height, longer runners, already have plans to release a TR for the Coyote as well?

Keep up the good work, the nerd/engineer/designer in me loves this kind of stuff

[tcollins]

Any concerns with the forward pair of runners being a little shorter than the aft four?

All the runners are the same length. Currently we are tuning and calibrating with 3 different length, the shortest being the the current CJ, the longest similar to the GT350 intake. In the picture above, you just see the different stacks stuck in their for whatever reason during a packaging check on a Mustang. But we don't run the engine like this.

Final thought for now, any reason for the divergence from the Carbon TR design here? Just height, longer runners, already have plans to release a TR for the Coyote as well?

No plans yet but as these Coyote crate motors become more popular, may consider. The problem with the aftermarket Coyote market, compared to GM LS, it's very small. The LS engines have one cam (vs 4) and are larger displacement. The LS engines respond more to intake changes, especially when combined with a cam. The smaller displacement OHC Ford mod motors seem to favor power adders, such as superchargers or turbos.