there's still a 3v aftermarket? (new intake manifold)

weather man said:

JPC not available.

Click to expand...

Just a month or so ago they had one left in stock. They will make a run of them if you have a group that is interested.

From what I understand the 92mm and 102 is available... is the frpp tb a 92 i cant even remember lol... Is the 102mm another ls cable drive deal??

Dark_horse said:

From what I understand the 92mm and 102 is available... is the frpp tb a 92 i cant even remember lol... Is the 102mm another ls cable drive deal??

Click to expand...

The boss TB is 90mm

I looked on the side and they have a cable drive tb listed as needed as well as a gasket listed as for 2v's since it isn't o ringed.
On another forum I did see a pic of this with the standard twin throttle body, so I'm assuming like others said this is just a generic pic used as a placeholder

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

v8venomgt said:

http://www.jegs.com/i/Holley/510/829081/10002/-1

i thought the only ford motor worth modifying was the coyote

Click to expand...

Finally. I can get rid of this DOB manifold for something legit

Hah

NickD87 said:

I looked on the side and they have a cable drive tb listed as needed as well as a gasket listed as for 2v's since it isn't o ringed.
On another forum I did see a pic of this with the standard twin throttle body, so I'm assuming like others said this is just a generic pic used as a placeholder

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Mind linking to said forum thread?

I have a need for a new intake manifold for my 3v since the TB/injection plate setup don't seem to match up on my FRPP or Stock Intake. Hope this will be made to bolt up to a GT500 TB without a F-Fest and closes with a stock hood.

From the pics i saw it looked like its either going to accept a 3v pattern throttle body. 130 mm opening is the same as 65/65mm twin. I just think they havent updated their pics on the holley website, which means Jegs/summit etc... havent updated.

Here's a better pic that Evan smith from MMFF took while at PRI.

Coyote on the left, 3V on the right.

Any info on runner length vs stock and Ford racing intake manifold, I have the Ford racing one now mostly for looks it would be nice to find one that performs and doesn't loose as much torque as I do with the fr one

NickD87 said:

Any info on runner length vs stock and Ford racing intake manifold, I have the Ford racing one now mostly for looks it would be nice to find one that performs and doesn't loose as much torque as I do with the fr one

Click to expand...

After running the FRPP for years NA/N2O I'll never run another short runner intake manifold again. Trading torque for hp IMO is bad for just about any autosport. I can see a turbo car benefit from an intake like this, only in an extended rpm range for a proper sized turbo. A huge nitrous shot in a direct port set up may yield some gains vs stock, although direct port on a stock manifold makes its own brand of evil, and you don't have to worry about spraying in the redline.

JPC was on the right track with their long runner intake, IMO.

MGT2009 said:

Here's a better pic that Evan smith from MMFF took while at PRI.

Coyote on the left, 3V on the right.

Click to expand...

702GT said:

After running the FRPP for years NA/N2O I'll never run another short runner intake manifold again. Trading torque for hp IMO is bad for just about any autosport. I can see a turbo car benefit from an intake like this, only in an extended rpm range for a proper sized turbo. A huge nitrous shot in a direct port set up may yield some gains vs stock, although direct port on a stock manifold makes its own brand of evil, and you don't have to worry about spraying in the redline.

JPC was on the right track with their long runner intake, IMO.

Click to expand...

I'm having similar thoughts. What is the advantage to a short runner intake? I read some info on the C&L website about a short runner version of their old long runner intake that isn't made anymore. Not sure if it was just pr from a project that never made it or if they are indeed coming out with a new intake. They were also talking about 3v heads made from their own castings. Probably another project that got shelved when the 5.0 came out.

Does anyone know what the volume in liters is for this intake?

BruceH said:

I'm having similar thoughts. What is the advantage to a short runner intake? I read some info on the C&L website about a short runner version of their old long runner intake that isn't made anymore. Not sure if it was just pr from a project that never made it or if they are indeed coming out with a new intake. They were also talking about 3v heads made from their own castings. Probably another project that got shelved when the 5.0 came out.

Does anyone know what the volume in liters is for this intake?

Click to expand...

FI certainly alters the perspective of intake manifold design. It's rare to see an intake manifold tailored to the NA needs of a small cube mod motor. I plan to stay with the stock intake manifold even as I build a motor and increase boost. The torque curve is delicious. Compared to my NA FRPP manifold build with N2O, the procharger feels much stronger (440/430 on a 100 shot) and I barely rev to 6k/rpm to make max power. Not to mention my wastegate crutch. I would like to add in a set of hotrod cams and turn the boost up a psi or 2 to make up for LSA boost loss.

Oh, and I need your motor Bruce

Not sure if you have seen this yet or not. The curves with more power were done on e85 and with the frpp manifold. The curves that peter out around 6k are from the stock manifold with cmcv and 92 octane gas.

It's quite evident that the stock intake flows better at lower rpms. It does have it's limits in a n/a application though.

I'll go back on the dyno with the stock intake and e85 sometime in the next few weeks for a more apples to apples comparison of the stock intake with gas and e85.

The stock intake made a little more power that the frpp in the lower rpms even with gas as a fuel. At first I was bummed about the peak power being off but the more I think about it I don't usually go over 5k on the street anyway so having more power with less revs fits me pretty well.

They look like black MMR intakes to me...

BruceH said:

Not sure if you have seen this yet or not. The curves with more power were done on e85 and with the frpp manifold. The curves that peter out around 6k are from the stock manifold with cmcv and 92 octane gas.

It's quite evident that the stock intake flows better at lower rpms. It does have it's limits in a n/a application though.

I'll go back on the dyno with the stock intake and e85 sometime in the next few weeks for a more apples to apples comparison of the stock intake with gas and e85.

The stock intake made a little more power that the frpp in the lower rpms even with gas as a fuel. At first I was bummed about the peak power being off but the more I think about it I don't usually go over 5k on the street anyway so having more power with less revs fits me pretty well.

Click to expand...

Yes but you have a couple more cubes to be able to use an intake manifold like the FRPP. From that dyno, cams too lol. The 281 doesn't have the ass to move the air the Black Lung needs to breathe. This is why there is always a torque loss, in trade for a powerband shift to the right. I don't know if you ever saw my pics of having the FRPP taken apart, but the guts of it tells the story. It holds a massive volume of air, and the runner design is slick and very direct to the head ports. The FRPP was meant for boost, and lots of it. A 5.3L big bore will certainly make it shine NA, but like you said, it's advantages don't come in until the top end.

The second issue is cam selection. Boost or no boost, the FRPP opens up the top end range. If you have a very top end cam, you end up leaving your torque curve in the dust. I noticed this running my setup. I could rev to 6700 making power, shift, and at 5500 there was no one home, I was at the trailing end of my torque curve. I had to shift at 6400-6500 to get back down to 5200 range where there was still a shadow of peak torque. So a broad power curve cam is needed if you want to be efficient between shift points.

This is why I feel JPC was on the right track. They had a long runner intake manifold to maintain air velocity in the low-mid range and still increased volume to satisfy the top end. It would make for a killer turbo build.

interesting, I wonder if there would be any benefit running this manifold over the FRPP manifold I am running now.

Sactown said:

interesting, I wonder if there would be any benefit running this manifold over the FRPP manifold I am running now.

Click to expand...

^^x2!

I guess we will have to wait and see for a side-by-side dyno comparison. I am interested to see the comparison as well.