GEN 2 LT1 INTAKE TEST-CARB VS EFI! STOCK LT1 EFI VS GM DUAL-PLANE & EDELBROCK VRS CARB. WHO WINS? 

Yea they recently came out with a Holley EFI single barrel modeled after the Autolite 1100 that my I6 Falcon has and I really want to experiment with it, but dang it if the carb doesn't just fire up perfectly every year with ethanol free gas and run fine off the tune I put a weekend into years ago.

Another good thing is the SB2 5.8L heads fit the SBC, in 2007 the R07 engine came out

I would hope a larger displacement motor would make more power than a stock LS.

Exactly. I got a free truck with 5.3 LS and was ready to swap it into my 68 and trash the truck body until I priced everything out for a 500 hp build and ended up staying with the 68s original small block and building it. Now I have a running driving 5.3 truck and still got my 500 horses impala. Win win. Ended up being a lot cheaper that way even with the LS itself being free lol. Nothing against LS swaps tho they’re really cool and I want to do one in something one day just for fun. Maybe an obs Chevy truck!

@@yeahitskimmel My friends with EFI they can start their cars up from a cold start and it will idel perfectly.My carburetor takes a min of warning up to get going.The EFI sniper 2 I was curious about but not $2000 curious.Also curious about e85 gas.e85 carburetor $700 ish + new fuel system if you don’t already have one is roughly $700-1000.I am still old school and like things simple that still work good.More mechanical less electrical.EFI my friends have is definitely easy self tune no doubt.Once I got my timing curve set right and got my carburetors nozzles,Jett’s,power valve,AFR set just right,I felt a lot easier to maintain.

I have the same setup in a 1986 GMC short bed

@@johnnyblackking169Carb Lt1 ? Nice.

I wouldn’t take any test as an end all be all for anything but every test is important because it adds more data to the pool and is good for comparing the different variables associated with each test. Richard has done a lot of good videos comparing fi and carbs, most end up with really close numbers!

I agree. If you look back at the video a few years ago, he ran an equivalent engine and it made wayyyy more power. Something’s definitely up.

I had pretty much the same setup on my 97 ta for a short while , and the difference was night and day. Idk if it was 100flb worth , but different for sure.

@Emilthehun I just can't see that lt1 intake making power until way up on rev range All the testing Richard does on other engines proves this yet old test suggests lt1 works well and hard to improve apon. Stealth ram has longer runners and you would think it kills lt1 intake

@@CLEEPER1 the best lt1 intake is a stock one ported by Lloyd Elliott

Well I was right! Now I'm not sure if what I'm thinking is correct or not. That 100 lb-ft of torque difference down low was caused by the carburetor not having a plenum. My theory is that the plenum is slowing the air being pulled into the cylinder's at lower rpm's. Less air+less fuel=less power in the combustion process which is less power that the engine produces. Where as the carburetor doesn't have a problem pulling in a more significant amount of air fuel mixture at lower rpm's. Which is what the engine prefers having. Now I maybe wrong in my assessment of the provided information. Let me know what you think of my thoughts on this. Is there a way you can measure the air intake on the EFI system with the hat I know it can be done on the carburetor? That's the simplest way of checking if that's what it is.

its not that

Went back to see TUNE PORT TECH-L98 vs CARB ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QazvSzZKj24.htmlsi=QOOe3vCIYG6_uDeZ Seems the cam and heads match the old tune port set up..

The LT1 heads are different than L98

I have run that test

I did that already on the L99

holesaw-not recommended

I wish Richard would get Llyod Elliot heads and cam package to add to these tests.

LE 2 and LE 3. HIS TRICK FLOWS TOO!

I think he is working with TPIS so that won’t happen

this is not a long runner TPI-it was a short runner LT1

peak torque on lt1 is not 2400 rpm

@@richardholdener1727 You can be kind of a clown sometimes. The tq I mentioned was a published figure from GM for early lt1's in f-bodies. This figure was suggested to show you your numbers look goofy. I have chassis dynoed my 94 when it was stock and saw table top tq from 2000-4500 rpm, as well as many others show the same characteristics in manual cars. Obviously those exact characteristics vary with headers, optimized timing, etc. Either way, the point is that peaks may vary but it's funny you focus on that rather than the general issue where your numbers seem off even compared to another stock lt1 you dynoed in the same configuration.

@@ttank1994 peak torque on lt1 is not 2400 rpm

the dist is locked-timing on efi is controlled by ecu

you feel carb pump alone the throttle body was 732 cfm go 750 Elderbrock or holley

air foil FTW!

@@richardholdener1727 LETS GOOO !! Would you be willing to do a dyno run with and without the air foil ? I’d love to see some proven results. I’ve only ever found an old notes chart from a forum where a guy supposedly tested the air foil, seeing an average gain of 5 hp, but never showed a dyno chart.

@@theredwedge9446 He lied He turned your TB into 48 mm when with idle air is 52 mm TB works just like SCCA 220 horse blocker plate take off cia and start the butterflies will be shut bock 4mm hole with pencil eraser it will stall rev it 2-3000 rpm and plug hole it will bog airfoil was invented by ford companies to steal lt1 power about 50 horse

@@theredwedge9446 its at wot a 100 cfm loss

this video already tested those two things

tps is spot on-does not need a MAF (Map is not a serious handicap and is in fact a flow increase)

@@richardholdener1727 Your right Rich. I was just trying to figure out why torq was down quite a bit compared to your 1st lt1 video where it was 360 hp and 391 tork but your down 200 hp and 100 torq at 3000 rpm at 310 hp 330 torq wonder if 1st vid was 30 over bore lol or if this one is smaller than 4 inch bore truck engine? You going to laugh but I just did test on stock 97 6 speed with stock performance exaust with 1 cat disintegrated you can drop rock through on one side lol 2 1/2 inch Y 4 1/2 inch single into Hooker Superformance muffler with 2 exit pipes . The test was drilling out idle air hole to 1/8 inch idle was 800 rpm with butterflies closed now its 1100 rpm idle which is livable in backed up traffic sitting still in jam but sucks more gas but increased power through out power band very notice able without dyno lol making what was 52 mm 732 cfm into 54 1/2 mm 807 cfm Throttle body. every body thinks I have LT4 . after creaming their LS1 or LS3 or 2014 LT1 lol But Their Heart stops When I show them Stock exaust manifolds and LT1 lol

@@richardholdener1727 map is a ball park ignition spark maf sensor with optispark and cpu is miles ahead of the Hei and map sensor you set timing and it is what it is The optispark would amaze you if you watched how fast and how far it throws in advance and when maf sensor fails it goes to map sensor back up and loses power in high rpms if you make knock sensors deaf with 4.3 capacitors to ground or tune them out the cars pull harder than ever before and Msd and distributor would melt out center coil carbon trying to keep up lol been there done that over and over for ten years in Blown Baha truck actually the failure of optispark was two plastic caps facing each other and dead ending the 2 vacs a simple notch cut at 6 oclock to match and let vacume do its job is easy fix lol I bet super ram would carry max Hp longer and farther it did on Lingenfelter cars. GM actually bought out mitsubishi to get optispark technology

we plan to test that later

nice

Stock is twin 48mm. 52mm is the next size up and the biggest one you can run on an unported intake

@@sstevocamaro stock is 52mm with 4mm idle hole at 732 cfm that why there is 0 gain with 52mm BBK cant do it with automatic and car will use more fuel at lights intown driving I drilled idle hole to 1/8 from 4mm to 6.5 mm idle went to 1100 rpm TB is now 54.5 mm 807 cfm and goes higher in rpm than it did before my 97 was 561 heads stocker Fast now is Stupid Scary Fast took some getting used too knowing the biggest hold back was the tb and 58 BBK is a little to big for stocker lt1 lol

Vortec or almost any SBC ports line up-just the bolt pattern is different

@@richardholdener1727 so an intake for a vortec can be filled for lt1? I ask because I have access to a stealth ram

If its a 1500 or a heavy half you have the 4l60e. I don't think you need one. The stock computer should already be reading vacuum, throttle position, speed sensor and timing. I would check forums, has definitely already done it lol

Someone has definitely already done it*

very well-but BTR doesn't make a Truck Norris for the LT1

that vid is up

Searched and don't see it.

any 5.3L will handle nitrous

@@richardholdener1727 LM7 flat top pistons bottom end or lc9 4th gen all aluminum

@@richardholdener1727 I have a lm7 flat top pistons application rn in the car how much will it handle?

Holley HP-but using a distributor

very good

nothing there is correct

@@richardholdener1727 cool! Show us what went wrong!

they work fine

why

@@richardholdener1727 most of us don’t run the stock manifolds it’s one of the first mods is to port them with a 58mm TB.

Crazy how stock pickup truck engines will outrun the end of run 30 year old Chevy based on a 70 year old design? Flathead, Oldsmobile and Cadillac OHV guys said the same thing about the SBC. People still build them. Hell, the 2.0 liter turbo mills today are same HP/More Torque than the LT1 in a Camaro. Surprise. All of them are better than walking.

Yea that’s true in stock form, but once you add heads to the LT1 it starts to walk away from those engines you mentioned. Those 5.3’s don’t respond well to aftermarket heads because the ci isn’t there.