Recent thoughts on that BBK SSI intake?

A

andrewVA

New Member

Oct 13, 2004

20

0

1

Mar 17, 2007

#1

• Mar 17, 2007

• #1

I have a 67 coupe thats going to get a 5.0L HO when I put it back together and I wanted to get the experts' opinions on the BBK SSI intake.
I searched, but there wasn't too much recent info here.

My goals with the engine build are not all out power. I'll be happy with 300rwhp and I would like something a little different looking than the standard intake design.

I read the comparison in the June 06 MM&FF, where they dyno'ed the BBK against a ported Cobra intake, and the BBK made marginally more (12hp and 5lb-ft). Peak numbers for the BBK on the mustang dyno were 268rwhp and 300 lb-ft, but they were possibly limited by using ported stock heads. I hadn't decided yet, but I was thinking of going with a set of 2.02/1.60 Edelbrock performers (unless that will create PTV clearance issues with 1.7 rockers and a stock bottom end).

Anyways, Im not afraid to spend a little more on the BBK intake if I get decent performance and the uniqueness. So months after this thing came out, does anyone have new opinions or first hand knowledge of the overall quality of the BBK SSI?

Thanks
-Andrew

 

DMAN302

My mom says thanks for the pearl necklace.

Nov 8, 2003

2,120

2

59

windsor, Canada

Mar 17, 2007

#2

• Mar 17, 2007

• #2

a decent intake but as you know pricey. With the large valve eddy heads you might well have PTV clearance issues with a stock style piston and would likely benefit from the smaller valve head...you would sacrafice little in peak HP on a mild 302 build if any and might find better avg numbers in the low/mid range. Personally for a fun street driver and the Eddy heads I'd look at the performer or RPM intake as an option and a nicely matched OTS or even custom cam is $$ permits. Really can't go wrong with any of the current intake offerings out there just depends on what you want...and the BBK is less common today.

 

A

andrewVA

New Member

Oct 13, 2004

20

0

1

Mar 17, 2007

#3

• Mar 17, 2007

• #3

Thanks for the reply Dman.
I have seen the edelbrock intake as well and it looks a reasonable option. My main interest in the BBK intake is the unique look to it, even if its not the best bang for the buck on the market.

So you think the big valve head may be overkill? I understand for best performance, all the engine parts need to support/compliment each other. Im completely rebuilding this car and trying to learn as much as I can along the way.
With my goal of 300rwhp, I will definitely consider either the smaller valve edelbrock or some aluminum GT-40 heads.

I just remember hearing awhile ago about some production issues like coolant leaks from the intake, and I wanted to gather some opinions here on the build quality, and "word on the street" so to speak.

Really doesn't seem like many people are using this intake though. Its a shame cause its pretty unique looking.

 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"

Founding Member

Aug 7, 2002

9,516

6

99

Arkansas

Mar 17, 2007

#4

• Mar 17, 2007

• #4

I think you should go for the BBK SSI...it will be a good performing intake for what you want.

Anyone got flow numbers on the SSI?

 

HISSIN50

"How long does it take to get help in here?

15 Year Member

Nov 29, 1999

31,179

33

129

Mar 17, 2007

#5

• Mar 17, 2007

• #5

Derek and David always have their ears low to the ground on this stuff.

One thing that's in the back of my peabrain:
Didnt that intake have some sort of oil control issue? EDIT: See the link in post 7 for a possible answer. End Edit.

69 Clark on here (Tom, a real nice guy with a mag- featured car) has run one (I think he went with a Hogan type breadbox afterwards). He might also have some thoughts for you.

Good luck.

 

4G-KDMP

10 Year Member

Jul 23, 2005

935

19

39

CA

Mar 17, 2007

#6

• Mar 17, 2007

• #6

i'd like to hear more about the possible problems with the SSI intake, i thought everything was straightened out with that intake.

 

HISSIN50

"How long does it take to get help in here?

15 Year Member

Nov 29, 1999

31,179

33

129

Mar 17, 2007

#7

• Mar 17, 2007

• #7

I just searched a little bit because I was interested in why I thought I recalled some folks complaining of oil issues and some not. In reading a post by Byran Rogers (who works for BBK), he says that some of the oil issues reported are from user-error. Here's where he addresses it (post 15). BBK thread.

Just something to consider when searching threads and contemplating your decision. Threads are great but we don't know what an individual does during the install, which obviously can make quite a bit of difference.

Good luck.

 

4G-KDMP

10 Year Member

Jul 23, 2005

935

19

39

CA

Mar 17, 2007

#8

• Mar 17, 2007

• #8

thanks for the update.

but isn't it funny how the manuf or someone who works for them usually seems to think its user-error.

 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"

Founding Member

Aug 7, 2002

9,516

6

99

Arkansas

Mar 17, 2007

#9

• Mar 17, 2007

• #9

HISSIN50 said:

Derek and David always have their ears low to the ground on this stuff.

One thing that's in the back of my peabrain:
Didnt that intake have some sort of oil control issue? EDIT: See the link in post 7 for a possible answer. End Edit.

69 Clark on here (Tom, a real nice guy with a mag- featured car) has run one (I think he went with a Hogan type breadbox afterwards). He might also have some thoughts for you.

Good luck.

Click to expand...

You always put the most thought in to a decision though, probably by keeping your ear even closer to the ground


.........................

4G - I know what you are saying but Bryan has got a nice consistent rep. What he says makes sense and user errors occur a lot. Just look at the front page of most auto enthusiast forums, probably more common than you think


From what I gathered to JT's 'thoughtful' link, just install the baffle correctly (according to Bryan/instructions). He talked of 'most' cars with a proper working pcv system have oil in the intake but you can not see it with the stock intake so you assume everything is fine.

I know I had oil right after my rebuild, a puddle of it, and that was with a new valve/screen, clean hose, and less blow-by (new bottomend). I guess it is pretty natural. I'm sure I got some extra crankpressure from somewhere else though

That was sort of off-topic I guess...but I just started typing...hehe.

 

T

t.o.93_GT

New Member

Jun 2, 2002

41

0

0

Mississauga

Mar 17, 2007

#10

• Mar 17, 2007

• #10

MY ISSUES

This is a new fresh build of my turbo car. I am running the BBK SSI intake on my Beatty Woods built 306. Car produced 660 RWHP previously, drive ability was brutal for a street car. Ive gone back to a more civil street setup, ac back in and power steering... no more 80mm

Anyhow, im having issues with the fuel rail crossover. Ive contacted BBK as this is the 2nd shop to deal with it, and the first shop had warned me about this intake previously... so... my thoughts. The intake is unique and very slick looking. From my experience, its being a total pain in the arse

 

A

andrewVA

New Member

Oct 13, 2004

20

0

1

Mar 18, 2007

#11

• Mar 18, 2007

• #11

HISSIN50 said:

I just searched a little bit because I was interested in why I thought I recalled some folks complaining of oil issues and some not. In reading a post by Byran Rogers (who works for BBK), he says that some of the oil issues reported are from user-error. Here's where he addresses it (post 15). BBK thread.

Just something to consider when searching threads and contemplating your decision. Threads are great but we don't know what an individual does during the install, which obviously can make quite a bit of difference.

Good luck.

Click to expand...

Thanks a lot! That was a good read. As it stands now, I will most likely be going with the SSI intake.