BBK intake manifold?

LethalInjection · Oct 10, 2004

Ok, I haven't really had that much time to mess with my car here lately, but I got the Bother's Performance catalog a month or so ago, and I noticed that BBK is now making an intake manifold... For the most part these guys seem to make some good stuff, and and I kinda like the idea of the individual runner setup spaced out enough to possibly cool the incoming air.. I am not really sure how well that these new pieces will perform though, due to their dual but relatively small plenums on the upper... Had anyone tried one of these and have any input on how they perform... Some dyno numbers before and after would be great, but those are often times hard to come by... I am currently in search of some new parts for my car and would like to know if it would be advantageous to get this, or to just go ahead and get the new edelbrock performer rpm 2...

Thanks for any input,

-Les

Kabuki_notch · Oct 10, 2004

5.0 magazine just did a install/test on a 93 cobra with the new bbk ssi intake the got i bieleve a 41hp increase over stock plus the new upper/lower intake comes with fuel rails which in my opinion isnt a bad deal at all i think it retailed according to them at 569.99 but i dont know for sure i am in the process of deciding whether to get the SSI or get a cobra upper/lower.

LethalInjection · Oct 10, 2004

Wow, was that on a stock headed 5.0? I think I am eventually going with a 331 with some afr 205's and a pretty healthy procharger... I wonder how that intake will do in a forced induction environment? That is on down the road though, and I imagine that I will drive it N/A for the rest of the year on this shortblock... I was thinking maybe some afr 165's and that intake with a different cam might get me through until I get around to everything else... But it would have to show some advantages over the rpm 2 to make it worth it..

Kabuki_notch · Oct 10, 2004

i really only browsed the article but i think it was with stock heads I think the only mods done to the car were basics like a TB, Massair not sure what else i do recall them saying it would produce 30hp so i think with the cars other mods it gave it 41 but i think i have decided myself on getting it. i am in the market for a SC myself im sure it can handle the forced induction.

PhLoBuS · Oct 10, 2004

I plan on getting the intake... best intake for a street 5.0 yes the gt-40 and cobra intake is nice but this performs alot better according to stuff I have heard

roush 97 · Oct 10, 2004

Wouldn't the 41hp also be with GT-40 heads, since it was tested on a Cobra?

MustangMulch · Oct 10, 2004

The December issue of 5.0 M&SF did a dyno test with the BBK intake on a stock 93 cobra. With the stock 5.0 HO intake and stock TB, it made 233 hp and 289 torque. With the BBK intake and 75mm TB, it made 265 hp and 296 torque. That's 32 hp and 7 ft lbs torque.

Seems like a good intake. I'd like to hear people's opinions on it after actually putting it on their car. $569 isn't bad at all with new fuel rails.

wytstang · Oct 10, 2004

A comment was made on another forum that he wasn't to sure about the sharp 90 degree turn it has to make to get to the front cylinders and then another 90* turn down to feed them. But if it has been tested and is putting up good #'s it can't be that bad.

silver87 · Oct 11, 2004

has anyone heard anything about this with forced induction?

Road_Runna · Oct 11, 2004

MustangMulch said:
The December issue of 5.0 M&SF did a dyno test with the BBK intake on a stock 93 cobra. With the stock 5.0 HO intake and stock TB, it made 233 hp and 289 torque. With the BBK intake and 75mm TB, it made 265 hp and 296 torque. That's 32 hp and 7 ft lbs torque.

Seems like a good intake. I'd like to hear people's opinions on it after actually putting it on their car. $569 isn't bad at all with new fuel rails.

Seems like the same numbers FF&MM got from a performer and a 70mm tb. Everything on the fox stang was stock, except for the intake and TB.

StangLou · Oct 11, 2004

Im debating this same thing. I think the new BBK piece looks very nice, not to mention the new fuel rails!!!. The only drawback is the price when you can go on ebay and probably get a Cobra/Performer II Intake for ~350-400. Granted the Cobra isnt the best intake on the market, but its one of my favorites.
Also, for the Performer II dont you need an EGR spacer as well? Is one needed with the BBK piece? I was under the impression that some of the intakes did not ened EGR spacers

criticman · Oct 11, 2004

StangLou said:
Also, for the Performer II dont you need an EGR spacer as well? Is one needed with the BBK piece? I was under the impression that some of the intakes did not ened EGR spacers

BBK = No need for EGR Spacer.

willys1 · Oct 11, 2004

I read the article,it said it works best with stock,or slightly modified motors.So with a 331 and a sc,you might be better off with something else.

PhLoBuS · Oct 11, 2004

I think its good for the price... fuel rails etc

millhouse · Oct 12, 2004

The article is a bit misleading. If you read carefully, they took a stock 93 cobra, and put on a regular h.o. intake for the origianl dyno tests. Come to think of it, that is very misleading. The stock intake is such a big cork with the gt-40 heads, it's no wonder they got high h/p gains out of it.

I'd venture to say that the h/p gains on a otherwise stock 5.0 (non cobra) would be in the 20h/p range with a larger t.b. About on par with the eddy intakes.

tmoss · Oct 12, 2004

Read the article again guys - it's totally bogus. They take a "real" 306 Cobra with RPM heads, stock cam, ProM, long tubes, smog pump eliminator and electric fans and put a 5.0 stock intake on it. Then they put the BBK on it and talk about the great gains - *ullshat!

They should have used the Cobra and they know it. In one of the side bars they anticipated this criticism and talk about how the stock intake would make similar numbers to the Cobra intake anyway - also total *ullshat.

Lets see em use a Performer, RPM, Street Heat,Track Heat, etc in the comparison test and then we'd get the REAL picture.

IndyBlk5.0 · Oct 12, 2004

getem' Tom

millhouse · Oct 12, 2004

tmoss said:
Read the article again guys - it's totally bogus. They take a "real" 306 Cobra with RPM heads, stock cam, ProM, long tubes, smog pump eliminator and electric fans and put a 5.0 stock intake on it. Then they put the BBK on it and talk about the great gains - *ullshat!

They should have used the Cobra and they know it. In one of the side bars they anticipated this criticism and talk about how the stock intake would make similar numbers to the Cobra intake anyway - also total *ullshat.

Lets see em use a Performer, RPM, Street Heat,Track Heat, etc in the comparison test and then we'd get the REAL picture.

LoL, I missed that part. Maybe I should read it yet again....not! I read enough to know that none of the numbers can be trusted in any way shape or form. They manipulated the test around so much to come up with some huge bogus gains.

willys1 · Oct 12, 2004

I agree with you guys to a point.The HO 5.0 has been hasnt been made for 10 years.These guys at BBK should have an Idea how to make a killer intake by now.Id like to see what it does on a 100% stock 5.0 (non-cobra) If anything,it looks pretty cool

roush 97 · Oct 12, 2004

That's what I'd like to see, an early 90 something stock GT, then the same car with the BBK intake, and then the same car with the other aftermarket ones.

BBK intake manifold?

LethalInjection

Kabuki_notch

LethalInjection

Kabuki_notch

PhLoBuS

New Member

roush 97

New Member

MustangMulch

New Member

wytstang

Mustang Master

silver87

New Member

Road_Runna

StangLou

Active Member

criticman

Member

willys1

Active Member

PhLoBuS

New Member

millhouse

tmoss

Gettin Wired

IndyBlk5.0

New Member

millhouse

willys1

Active Member

roush 97

New Member

Similar threads

BBK intake manifold?

New Member

New Member

New Member

Mustang Master

New Member

Active Member

Member

Active Member

New Member

Gettin Wired

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency