Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

Indy Intake Manifold power bands and availability.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 10:30 AM
  #1  
David Buschur's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (53)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Likes: 32
Indy Intake Manifold power bands and availability.

I have been working on the data I have collected over the last few months of testing and wanted to get some of it out there.

Before I start, I want to make this as clear as possible. STOP CONTACTING INDY EVO ABOUT INTAKE MANIFOLDS. HE IS NOT SELLING THEM, HE DOES NOT WISH TO BE BOTHERED, HE WILL NOT RESPOND TO YOUR PM and quite frankly after I have asked this 3-4 times it is flat out pissing him off that nobody listens to the request. Now if you want the production of new cool stuff to stop go ahead and send him more PM's that he doesn't want, I have the feeling he is very close to walking away from EVO's and going back to the world of real motorsports.

Now on with the program.

Stock intake/Stock throttle body. This was used as the baseline in our testing. The stock intake/stock throttle body makes the most HP and torque from 0-5400 rpm.

Ported stock intake/65 mm throttle body. This has proven good for 15 whp over stock. I do not have any current back to back dyno sheets to give an RPM range where the gains start/stop. The biggest improvement is in a smoothing of the overall curve and an increase in the entire basic range.

Indy V0. This intake is being ported by Wilson Manifolds and the first ones are on their way to us now. These will be tested as soon as I get them and will be compared to the stock ported/65 mm intakes. I will update this thread with information as soon as we can test.

Indy V1. This intake is done/available and has been tested on my RS. Power gains are from 5500 rpm and up compared to stock. Maximum gains were 26 ft lbs at 6400 rpm and 36 whp at 6400 rpm. At 7700 rpm the torque gains were 12 ft lbs while the HP gains were 16 whp.

Indy V2. This intake is done/available and has been tested on my RS. Power gains are from 5600 rpm and up compared to stock. Maximum gains were 29 ft lbs at 6400 rpm and 36 whp at 6300 rpm. At 7700 rpm the torque gains were 12 ft lbs while the HP gains were 27 whp.

I am not putting pricing in this thread because I want it as a review of the power made from the parts and for it to stay in this section. If you are curious on pricing the parts/pricing will be on our website today or tomorrow.

REMEMBER, Mike@AWDMotorsports and Buschur Racing are the only two dealers for these parts. Contacting Indy EVO only aggravates him as he does not want to deal with the public or sales, please DO NOT contact him.

One last thing this intake testing has gone from February when it was much colder than the current testing we are doing now. Testing the new Indy intake manifolds in the heat we are dealing with now makes the gains less (obviously) than had we been able to test everything back when it was freezing cold in February.

Dyno graph with dates and number:



Thanks and enjoy the information.

Last edited by David Buschur; Jul 8, 2008 at 01:10 PM.
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 10:37 AM
  #2  
caLi4G63's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (40)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 621
Likes: 8
From: so. caLi
David, I have a question. Are the different versions for testing purposes or will there be different versions available for sale? Which is your prefered and why?
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 10:53 AM
  #3  
scheides's Avatar
EvoM Moderator
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,827
Likes: 13
From: Minneapolis
Indy! Put a msg in your sig that says to contact buschur racing for your manifolds, I'm sure that will help cut down on the random PM's!

Good info Dave, perhaps when you ahve the v0 testing completed, you could edit your first post and include some dyno plots?
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 10:57 AM
  #4  
rEVoLed's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
From: WA
Does any of the Indy manifold have any low or mid range trade offs? Do they make the same power compare to stock or the ported stock with a bump in power on the topend?
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 11:04 AM
  #5  
03whitegsr's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,001
Likes: 17
From: Utah
I'm confused.

How do the V1 and V2 manifolds show 12ft-lb gains at 7700 RPM but V1 shows a gain of 16 HP and V2 shows a gain of 29 HP?

Wouldn't they both show ~18 HP gains given a torque value of 12 ft-lbs at 7700 RPM???

Copy and paste error?

Last edited by 03whitegsr; Jul 8, 2008 at 11:06 AM.
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 11:13 AM
  #6  
David Buschur's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (53)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Likes: 32
The V0, V1 and V2 are all being produced. The reason for the difference options are the different power bands on the intakes. The reason for the differences in pricing is the amount of labor/time that goes into each one.

The V1 and V2 both lose power over the stock intake manifold under 5400 rpm, that is why I listed gains over 5400 rpm. The V1 and V2 both have the least amount of loss under 5400 rpm of any of the other intake manifolds I have tested.

The losses down low are something to consider depending on the application though.

From 3000-3600 rpm the Stock/V1 and V2 are identical in HP and torque. At 4600 rpm the V1 has a loss of 46 ft lbs and 43 whp, that is the largest loss. The V2 has a loss of 63 ft lbs at 4800 rpm and 62 whp at 4800 rpm.

So there is a trade off in low end power when going to the V1 or V2. This topic was started to inform everyone of what is available and the power bands that each part works in.

I really have to make sure that everyone understands that every single fabricated intake manifold I tested lost power in the low/mid range and that the V1 and V2 have the least loss of any of those tested and the V2 has the best top end power.
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 11:17 AM
  #7  
David Buschur's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (53)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Likes: 32
At 7700 rpm the stock intake made 416 ft lbs and 605 whp.
At 7700 rpm the V1 intake made 428 ft lbs and 621 whp.
At 7700 rpm the V2 intake made 428 ft lbs and 632 whp.
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 11:28 AM
  #8  
03whitegsr's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,001
Likes: 17
From: Utah

Huh?

HP=Torque*RPM/5250

Stock: 416*7700/5250 = 610 HP
V1: 428*7700/5250 = 628 HP
V2: 428*7700/5250 = 628 HP

Your numbers do not make sense. Either that mustang dyno is adding in some undocumented correction somewhere between the measurement and the output, or something is quite odd here.
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 11:29 AM
  #9  
Boltz.'s Avatar
Evolved Member
FCOTM Winner
iTrader: (42)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,502
Likes: 0
From: St. Charles, IL
Originally Posted by davidbuschur
At 7700 rpm the stock intake made 416 ft lbs and 605 whp.
At 7700 rpm the V1 intake made 428 ft lbs and 621 whp.
At 7700 rpm the V2 intake made 428 ft lbs and 632 whp.
David,

Seeing as HP = rpm x T(torque) 5252(constant) blah blah, How could you possibly make 11 more whp at the exact same level of torque and RPM? Are these figures rounded?
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 11:41 AM
  #10  
David Buschur's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (53)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,622
Likes: 32
The numbers are not rounded, they are straight off the sheet that is in front of me.

Stock 7700 416 torque
V1 428
V2 428

Stock 7700 605 whp
V1 621 whp
V2 632

The V2 makes 628 whp at 7,000 rpm and is making 631 whp at 8,000 rpm.

Actually, sitting here doing the math on any of it doesn't work out to the exact HP.

For example, 7500 rpm, 440 ft lbs should be 628 and it reads 633 whp.

I am reporting the numbers on the sheet, can't do much more than that.
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 12:17 PM
  #11  
SloRice's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,347
Likes: 0
From: West Chester, OH
The numbers are due to the smoothing of the graphs. The dyno gets the raw data, then based on the data points and the smoothing factor, they smooth independent of each other.

If David put the filter at 0, the numbers would work out.
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 12:17 PM
  #12  
vwjeff's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 1
From: Las Vegas and HATING it
Christ.. why do people get on here and wanna argue about what is posted.
It is what it is. The facts are posted in your face... READ THEM.
The manifold works... bottom line.
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 12:19 PM
  #13  
deadbeatrec's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,139
Likes: 0
From: Albany, NY
hum? this is interesting. something is off somewhere. math doesnt lie.
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 12:19 PM
  #14  
justboosted02's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,926
Likes: 14
From: northeast
Originally Posted by vwjeff
Christ.. why do people get on here and wanna argue about what is posted.
It is what it is. The facts are posted in your face... READ THEM.
The manifold works... bottom line.
take it easy, constructive criticism is a good thing

i dont think anyone is doubting that the manifold works or not
Reply
Old Jul 8, 2008 | 12:19 PM
  #15  
deadbeatrec's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,139
Likes: 0
From: Albany, NY
Originally Posted by vwjeff
Christ.. why do people get on here and wanna argue about what is posted.
It is what it is. The facts are posted in your face... READ THEM.
The manifold works... bottom line.
why are u getting so defensive?
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:24 PM.