What do y'all think of this intake: P5007381

[Woods74]

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/dcc-5007381

Thinking of switching it on for street duty, Magnum 5.9 with a .525 lift .226 @ .050 112LSA cam, spread-bore carb, 1 5/8 headers, 2 1/2" all the way back. I have a crosswind intake now.

 

[Abodybomber]

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/dcc-5007381

Thinking of switching it on for street duty, Magnum 5.9 with a .525 lift .226 @ .050 112LSA cam, spread-bore carb, 1 5/8 headers, 2 1/2" all the way back. I have a crosswind intake now.[/QU
What are you looking for,more low end torque? The difference,isn't worth the swap ,JMO.

 

[buckshotbishop]

isnt that just a aluminum stock manifold? kinda pricey if it is.

 

[Woods74]

Yeah it is pricey, thinking about MPG I guess, probably not much of a difference to offset performance gained with a good airgap eh?

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/edl-7577

 

[Abodybomber]

Yeah it is pricey, thinking about MPG I guess, probably not much of a difference to offset performance gained with a good airgap eh?

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/edl-7577

Curious, what mileage? We are both ,in the same boat. The Q -jet's main well plugs on the bottom have been sealed with Devcon or similar two stage epoxy,I hope? Older Q.J's are notorious for two plugs leaking fuel into the intake plenum. The usual indicated: black smoke,rough idling & sluggish all around everywhere.

 

[Woods74]

Curious, what mileage? We are both ,in the same boat. The Q -jet's main well plugs on the bottom have been sealed with Devcon or similar two stage epoxy,I hope? Older Q.J's are notorious for two plugs leaking fuel into the intake plenum. The usual indicated: black smoke,rough idling & sluggish all around everywhere.

I've got the carb all tuned up, timing dealt with, I think mileage still sucks. I was just thinking about using that intake. For street and cruising, it would probably suck at any type of performance application, looking at the runners and how they are laid out. The air gap version looks like a better piece for the same price. Just wonder if the ends justify the means.

 

[RustyRatRod]

I think that is a step down from the crosswind.

 

[Abodybomber]

I've got the carb all tuned up, timing dealt with, I think mileage still sucks. I was just thinking about using that intake. For street and cruising, it would probably suck at any type of performance application, looking at the runners and how they are laid out. The air gap version looks like a better piece for the same price. Just wonder if the ends justify the means.

A parts guy,I worked with: Stock short bed 1998 R/T 5.9. He had stock cam /Shortie headers/ stock tune. He was averaging 14-15 on flat ground,stock with 3:55's.(Light footed). So basically, you are looking for gas mileage (duh!). FWIW,that's the same ,as a stock cast iron intake.

 

[Woods74]

Alrighty, I'll keep the original plan then. :cheers: