TCCoA Forums banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Yes I searched...

Has anyone seen a dyno on ONLY the pi intake being swapped on a totally stock 96/97 npi?

I saw one dyno here where the guy's upper hp went up but his low-mid torque fell off, but he had other mods like cams, etc.

I ask because bigger cams, TB's and MAF's will not help low-mid torque.

The smaller 65mm TB is likely to keep the intake velocity up thereby allowing for l-m torque.

I know the pi intake is good for 15+ hp up top but I'd hate to lose more than 5 ft lbs in the low-mid to get that.

Thanks.
 

·
Like Titles Matter
Joined
·
2,129 Posts
No torque is lost anywhere from the PI intake.

Throttle bodies and MAFs have nothing to do with torque either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
892 Posts
No torque is lost anywhere from the PI intake.

Throttle bodies and MAFs have nothing to do with torque either.
The same as non-restrictive exhaust costs torque over restrictive. If your engine needs restrictions anywhere in the intake/exhaust system to perform you have the wrong cams. Period. This is a very common problem on our heavy cars because there is no "real" off the shelf performance parts for our heavyweight cars. Everyone tries to take parts designed for 500lb lighter vehicles and make them perform. Doesn't work. All the rest is internet garbage in/garbage out. Go run around the block breathing through a 1/4" straw and then do it again without. Tell me which gives you more power. Port fuel injection is not affected by intake velocity. It is affected by restrictions. Head port velocities are a whole nother discussion.

Brad
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
I didn't feel any loss down low when I did my PI intake(have no dyno results to prove it though). The car never really had a whole lot down low anyway. I am basically stock under the hood besides pullies, K&N, removed silencer. But, like I said, I have no real world numbers to prove either way.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top