Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 62

Intake "heatsoak" question...

This is a discussion on Intake "heatsoak" question... within the External Engine forums, part of the LSx Technical Help Section category; Originally Posted by zmg00camaross on a hot summer day at op temp if you shut the car off take infrad ...

  1. #41
    Gearhead
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Nashua, NH
    Posts
    43

    Black
    1999 Camaro Z28

    Quote Originally Posted by zmg00camaross View Post
    on a hot summer day at op temp if you shut the car off take infrad heat gun read of intake heads etc then check in 5 min it will be hotter due to heat soak why you think turbo cars and trucks let them idle for a couple of min before shuting down that turbo is hot and leting idle cools the oil alittle bit to help with heat soak I still wouldn't worry about a aluminium intake I would run one if my car made more power no doubt
    I agree with your point, in theory an idle car standing still should generate significantly more heat than a car in motion. I think this would affect any engine regardless of material composition, though.

    However, if the car is off, the temperature of the air in the manifold is a bit irrelevant, wouldn't you agree?

  2. #42
    TJEA Retirement Home Dr.Crash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U. S And A Greatest country in all of world
    Posts
    3,383

    Stock
    2002 Camaro

    Quote Originally Posted by Szalkerous View Post
    Honestly, I read all the threads I could find regarding this, and found mostly opinion and preference. We all know what opinions are like.

    I frankly don't care what you, your mother, your grandmother, or your best friend think about the intake options. What I'm looking for is research and reference documentation proving performance attributes of either.


    You don't hand in a research paper to a professor without cited references and proven results.... likewise, that's what I'm attempting to do here.

    If anyone has proven evidence to support either side, I ask you to post it here to assist in clarifying the options.

    (This is not to say I don't appreciate those who have spoken up, I just think that discussion has happened elsewhere and would like to see hard numbers.)
    Quote Originally Posted by Szalkerous View Post
    Not to sound condescending, but do you read before you comment?

    I clearly stated BBK's response, where they cited a reference done by an outside party. I also clearly stated that I was attempting to get the results frmo that outside source to validate BBK's claim. I never wrote that what BBK's responded with was a valid test result. I also never wrote that the link to Wesbrook was the answer, only that it was the link to the facility that I was attempting to contact FOR the results.
    Just to clear things up..........

    Ok but you said opinions dont mean anything unless backed up. so thats all i was asking is where is your back up? how can you make this claim? do you see what i am saying? i %100 understand the need for evidence to support a claim, but all you have given us is a statement form BBK (most likly thier PR rep) with no evidence. so how did you make your decision (bbk vs fast)? i could not have been based off of facts or proof because you are just now looking for it. Am i correct?
    Last edited by Dr.Crash; 03-20-2009 at 08:12 AM.

  3. #43
    Member zmg00camaross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    missouri
    Posts
    764

    pewter
    2000 camaro ss

    Quote Originally Posted by Szalkerous View Post
    I agree with your point, in theory an idle car standing still should generate significantly more heat than a car in motion. I think this would affect any engine regardless of material composition, though.

    However, if the car is off, the temperature of the air in the manifold is a bit irrelevant,
    wouldn't you agree?
    I would agree if your at the track in long lines waiting to run I would think this would affect performance your not going to lose a whole second but a few tenths is very possible me I not a bracket racer so I don't care about the lost time my buddy hotlap his 03 cobra and got slower each time but close to the same 60 ft the blower was so hot u couldn't touch it the coolant in the intercooler was boiling

    I would

  4. #44
    Senior Member Bottesini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Denton, Texas soon Lafayette, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,955

    Blue
    2002 Z28 Camaro M6

    Some interesting things going on in this thread so I just wanted to throw some science in to the thread to maybe help spur things along. Hopefully, the more educated types can throw in their knowledge.

    One thing that is a fact is colder air equals more power.

    BBKs statement is a bit of marketing bs with some faulty statements. Yes air moves fast through an intake (if I had the time and remembered more of my science stuff I could figure out out long it stays in the intake and just how hot it would get). However, putting your arm in a hot oven and pulling it out is not quite right. Mostly because, air has quite a different level of insulation than the human arm. Second a closer analogy would be to put your finger into a hot aluminium tube since the air will come into contact with the walls of the intake.

    Something else to consider with the two different materials is that metal is a great conductor while the composites are poor conductors. This means that the composites will take a long time to heat up (but they will) and they will take a long time to cool. In addition, they will not transfer that heat to the air as well.

    Personally, I think that the superior material for an intake is composite as long as the flow is the same and it can handle all of the structural demands (which would need to be tested by truely unbiased parties). Things like high boost I suspect will raise the temps up to high along with all of the pressure, one of the reasons I imagine the indy cars do not have composite intakes... yet (of course they have many rules that might keep them from using it as well).

  5. #45
    TJEA Retirement Home Dr.Crash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U. S And A Greatest country in all of world
    Posts
    3,383

    Stock
    2002 Camaro

    Quote Originally Posted by Bottesini View Post
    Some interesting things going on in this thread so I just wanted to throw some science in to the thread to maybe help spur things along. Hopefully, the more educated types can throw in their knowledge.

    One thing that is a fact is colder air equals more power.

    BBKs statement is a bit of marketing bs with some faulty statements. Yes air moves fast through an intake (if I had the time and remembered more of my science stuff I could figure out out long it stays in the intake and just how hot it would get). However, putting your arm in a hot oven and pulling it out is not quite right. Mostly because, air has quite a different level of insulation than the human arm. Second a closer analogy would be to put your finger into a hot aluminium tube since the air will come into contact with the walls of the intake.

    Something else to consider with the two different materials is that metal is a great conductor while the composites are poor conductors. This means that the composites will take a long time to heat up (but they will) and they will take a long time to cool. In addition, they will not transfer that heat to the air as well.

    Personally, I think that the superior material for an intake is composite as long as the flow is the same and it can handle all of the structural demands (which would need to be tested by truely unbiased parties). Things like high boost I suspect will raise the temps up to high along with all of the pressure, one of the reasons I imagine the indy cars do not have composite intakes... yet (of course they have many rules that might keep them from using it as well).
    Good info!

  6. #46
    Gearhead
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Nashua, NH
    Posts
    43

    Black
    1999 Camaro Z28

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Crash View Post
    Just to clear things up..........

    Ok but you said opinions dont mean anything unless backed up. so thats all i was asking is where is your back up? how can you make this claim? do you see what i am saying? i %100 understand the need for evidence to support a claim, but all you have given us is a statement form BBK (most likly thier PR rep) with no evidence. so how did you make your decision (bbk vs fast)? i could not have been based off of facts or proof because you are just now looking for it. Am i correct?
    Maybe I'm not making this very clear, so I'll try to be to the point.

    BBK cited an outside facility, Westech, who had done an independent test using the BBK, and the FAST manifold. This is the "back up" to their claim. I've said a few times I am trying to get the testing results from Westech to prove their claim is correct. Until that time, BBK's response is merely hearsay.

    FAST, I sent the exact same email to, and has yet to respond whatsoever. Once they do, I will include theirs as well. I hope they can also cite an unaffiliated testing facility who has proven their product is superior.

    As I said prior, if anyone has any leads to testing done at a reliable facility between a metal-based and composite-based intake they would like to share, I'd gladly accept it.

    Finally, I'll say I am trying to obtain this information unbiased. My preference for one over the other has nothing to do with the data I'm trying to collect.

  7. #47
    TJEA Retirement Home Dr.Crash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U. S And A Greatest country in all of world
    Posts
    3,383

    Stock
    2002 Camaro

    Quote Originally Posted by Szalkerous View Post
    Personally, still, I'd go with an aluminum intake over a plastic one.

    Three reasons:

    1) I intend to supercharge the motor.

    2) I can't justify over twice the cost on a plastic manifold that I have yet to see unbiased evidence proving it is a better product.

    3) Metal intakes have been run for years on cars making quite a bit of power, and I'd think if it made such a difference, GM would have swapped over years ago. I personally do believe the only reason for swapping is simply cost shaving. Aluminum is by far more expensive of a material than plastic. If someone can quote a GM engineer to the contrary, I'd love to see it. (EDIT: As I did some research on the Aluminum market, it had indeed skyrocketed from the late 90's through to around late 2007, where the economy began to falter, and the price has tanked since, which would explain why aluminum intakes are getting so affordable suddenly.)
    Quote Originally Posted by Szalkerous View Post
    Maybe I'm not making this very clear, so I'll try to be to the point.

    BBK cited an outside facility, Westech, who had done an independent test using the BBK, and the FAST manifold. This is the "back up" to their claim. I've said a few times I am trying to get the testing results from Westech to prove their claim is correct. Until that time, BBK's response is merely hearsay.

    FAST, I sent the exact same email to, and has yet to respond whatsoever. Once they do, I will include theirs as well. I hope they can also cite an unaffiliated testing facility who has proven their product is superior.

    As I said prior, if anyone has any leads to testing done at a reliable facility between a metal-based and composite-based intake they would like to share, I'd gladly accept it.

    Finally, I'll say I am trying to obtain this information unbiased. My preference for one over the other has nothing to do with the data I'm trying to collect.

    but you are biased, you told us earlier that you would get a metal over plastic. you have already made up your mind. is that not biased? so like i was saying how did you make your choice with out facts????

  8. #48
    TJEA Retirement Home Dr.Crash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U. S And A Greatest country in all of world
    Posts
    3,383

    Stock
    2002 Camaro

    BTW these are just questions, not meant to out anyone! just looking for the information like everyone else. thanks

  9. #49
    Gearhead
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Nashua, NH
    Posts
    43

    Black
    1999 Camaro Z28

    Quote Originally Posted by Bottesini View Post
    ...One thing that is a fact is colder air equals more power...
    Absolutely.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bottesini View Post
    ...air has quite a different level of insulation than the human arm....
    Another excellent point, and one I started to consider as well. Which is why I tossed out BBK's response and went after the facility reference instead.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bottesini View Post
    Something else to consider with the two different materials is that metal is a great conductor while the composites are poor conductors. This means that the composites will take a long time to heat up (but they will) and they will take a long time to cool. In addition, they will not transfer that heat to the air as well.
    I agree with this somewhat. Again, I'd like to see some controlled test cases to see exactly how much molecule radiation is present at the same temperature in both materials, and also with a steady stream of air moving alongside. I do not disagree that a metallic intake will radiate more heat, but my suspicion is that the actual delta between the two is closer than is otherwise thought. To say a composite material is not contributing heat between the material and cooler air I believe is incorrect. Nothing is a true 100% insulator, you will leak heat radiation to some degree in all materials. Not having the facility to test this myself, along with not knowing the exact material mixture FAST uses, makes that rather impossible for one of us to do the testing along those lines precisely.


    Although not lab research, I appreciate your educated reply all the same.

  10. #50
    Gearhead
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Nashua, NH
    Posts
    43

    Black
    1999 Camaro Z28

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Crash View Post
    but you are biased, you told us earlier that you would get a metal over plastic. you have already made up your mind. is that not biased? so like i was saying how did you make your choice with out facts????
    I would, and have in the past. This is my personal opinion.

    After hearing a lot of opinion, I decided to seek out facts. In doing so, I am providing unbiased cited sources. If FAST (or anyone else) replies with hard evidence that their intake is superior, I will gladly say I was incorrect in my opinion.

  11. #51
    Senior Member Bottesini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Denton, Texas soon Lafayette, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,955

    Blue
    2002 Z28 Camaro M6

    Quote Originally Posted by Szalkerous View Post
    I agree with this somewhat. Again, I'd like to see some controlled test cases to see exactly how much molecule radiation is present at the same temperature in both materials, and also with a steady stream of air moving alongside. I do not disagree that a metallic intake will radiate more heat, but my suspicion is that the actual delta between the two is closer than is otherwise thought. To say a composite material is not contributing heat between the material and cooler air I believe is incorrect. Nothing is a true 100% insulator, you will leak heat radiation to some degree in all materials. Not having the facility to test this myself, along with not knowing the exact material mixture FAST uses, makes that rather impossible for one of us to do the testing along those lines precisely.


    Although not lab research, I appreciate your educated reply all the same.
    Agreed though I highly doubt that the materials used in the composite intakes are as good of a conductor as aluminum. As I view it now the composite intakes are like dealing with a hot potato, or how you can walk across hot coals without getting burned. Since they are such poor conductors they transfer little heat, while anyone that has grabbed a bolt after cutting or grinding knows just how well metals tend to conduct (saw my friend make this mistake a few days ago). It is hard to make anything other than educated guesses however without the use of real lab stuff.

    For now my intake decisions are based more on flow than material. Though if I could find the intake I want in either composite or aluminum I would go towards the composite (depending on price as well).


    I saw someone had the Victor Junior on their car. I was wondering how well that fit. This is actually the intake I am leaning towards for my build, but that is because I am also planning on L92 heads and intake options are limited (and I know the fast will be out of the the current budget).

  12. #52
    Senior Member Bottesini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Denton, Texas soon Lafayette, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,955

    Blue
    2002 Z28 Camaro M6

    Quote Originally Posted by Szalkerous View Post
    After hearing a lot of opinion, I decided to seek out facts. In doing so, I am providing unbiased cited sources. If FAST (or anyone else) replies with hard evidence that their intake is superior, I will gladly say I was incorrect in my opinion.
    One thing I have to say for the Fast is that I have seen someone have significant gains (something like 20+) just from swapping from the LS6 to a 90/90. This was a heads cam car though however. So far I have not heard of any other intake really doing better than the LS6 other than the Fast.

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Szalkerous View Post
    The theory here is, that the air moves with such alacrity that it does not become drastically affected by the surrounding material, thus making the actual composition of the intake less of a factor than is already assumed.

    The purpose of this thread is to find credible proof to or against that theory.
    Contact any induction systems engineer at ANY of the OEMs, as every vehicle manufacturer now uses plastic intake manifolds somewhere in their lineup.

    Contact Edelbrock and ask them why they introduced the Air-Gap manifold line.

    There are dozens of books and magazines that have documented results of painting older intakes white on the oil side, or installing oil shields - like my 1985 305 Camaro had from the factory. Icing the intake works. LMAO at Philly who doesn't buy into that... all that money in his car and he can't afford a clue.

    Using the 6 ,7, 8 and second car arguement is hilarious. Please realize that manifold design is more crucial than the material, and that molded plastic intakes have severe limitations
    Last edited by Marc 85Z28; 03-20-2009 at 09:49 AM.

  14. #54
    Knight of Chaos xzaero0's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Nebraska
    Age
    37
    Posts
    468

    Black
    2000 Trans Am

    At the high RPMs that you would be running like if you were racing heat soak is prolly non-existant. The air is moving so fast though the intake that it has little to no time to pick up any heat from the intake before its already past it.

    Now down low where you are in line waiting to run or setting at a stop light I could see it being more of an issue, with a metal intake.

    The intake design is more important than the material its made of, and if it was just for show the FAST looks way cooler IMO than the others do.

    But if we all didnt think that heat soak wasnt an issue at some point we all wouldnt be buying things like ceramic coated headers, lower deg. thermos, heat extractor hoods and so on.

    A cooler engine just runs better, the colder the air the more power, if anything with the composite intake not gaining heat from the engine is just insulating it in to the rest of it, making it hotter.

    As for edelbrock, after my exp. with some shortie headers I'll never buy or believe anything they say ever.

  15. #55
    Veteran Hi-Po's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    10,461

    Black
    1999 TA WS.6

    Are we saying the BBk performs better than the FAST here? Im not reading all this mumbo jumbo.

    Also, the FAST has optional Burst panels just like that purty BBK you posted about.

  16. #56
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    Quote Originally Posted by Hi-Po View Post
    Are we saying the BBk performs better than the FAST here? Im not reading all this mumbo jumbo.

    Also, the FAST has optional Burst panels just like that purty BBK you posted about.
    lol true they do..but they are extra money...it is possible that there exists a intake that flows better then the coveted fast

  17. #57
    Veteran Hi-Po's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    10,461

    Black
    1999 TA WS.6

    Or its possible a PR rep says it out performs another competitor.

  18. #58
    TJEA Retirement Home Dr.Crash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U. S And A Greatest country in all of world
    Posts
    3,383

    Stock
    2002 Camaro

    Quote Originally Posted by Hi-Po View Post
    Or its possible a PR rep says it out performs another competitor.
    thats what i said!

  19. #59
    Member WS6ICK2K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pittsboro NC
    Posts
    587

    Metallic Blue
    2000 Trans Am WS6

    This is going to turn into a never ending pissing contest. I think I am going to agree with Bottesini on this one. Air flow should win reguardless the material. Good luck guys let me know if you come up with some hardcore evidence (if it exist).

  20. #60
    Veteran Hi-Po's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    10,461

    Black
    1999 TA WS.6

    Quote Originally Posted by WS6ICK2K View Post
    This is going to turn into a never ending pissing contest. I think I am going to agree with Bottesini on this one. Air flow should win reguardless the material. Good luck guys let me know if you come up with some hardcore evidence (if it exist).
    Shit, I could care less about this heat soak topic. I personally agree. But im NOT an enigneer of these products. Thats who realy knows.

    Im talking about HP, which one actually produces the most top end HP. I think we all know that answer though.... even if we get funny little emails from PR's saying different.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-10-2016, 12:39 PM
  2. Having "gunk" build up around the Intake Maniold *PICS*
    By Lunatikgixxer in forum External Engine
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 12-21-2011, 01:41 PM
  3. Comp Cams "Fast" intake..
    By yelotret in forum Firebird / WS6
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-02-2007, 01:10 PM
  4. OEM Z06 Wheels, Brand New "Honker" intake (Still in box)
    By Vette LS-1 in forum Parts For Sale / Trade
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-04-2006, 06:35 PM
  5. LS1 Intake Size "Throttle Body"
    By x10-wakerider in forum External Engine
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-09-2005, 01:53 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •