1LE high flow intake elbow

[blackfire93]

I went down to the dealer to order the 1LE intake elbow thinking that 25147210 was the right part number for a 93. The guy down at the parts counter seemed to think that the part that i was ordering was going to have a hole for the resonator tube that comes out the bottom, just like the stock elbow that came with my car. Then I had second thoughts about ordering the part. Does anybody know if I'll get an elbow without the resonator hole with this part number.

[Injuneer]

25147210 is the correct number for the 93-94 part. The part will have the "boss" for the silencer tube, but the boss will not have a hole in it. It really isn't a "high flow" elbow... its an elbow without a silencer tube.

Courtesy of Shoebox:

[blackfire93]

Yeah, I know that it really isn't going to give me much of a power gain. My other one is just torn and has needed replaced for quite a while.

[Rob B (shoebox)]

Yeah, it is good for a replacement. The rubber is a little thicker at the TB flange and less prone to folding over and eventually cracking. There won't be any power gains.

Tip: If you use a little Vaseline on the flanges, it will slide on much more easily.

[msfyter]

Get a vortech one, looks better when powdercoated.

[Injuneer]

The Vortec aluminum elbow conducts heat faster, has a smaller open flow area and a dividing wall down the center. I looked at it for my stroker, and it looked really pathetic for flow, even after we machined the internal baffle out.

[Craig 94 TA GT]

The Vortec aluminum elbow conducts heat faster, has a smaller open flow area and a dividing wall down the center. I looked at it for my stroker, and it looked really pathetic for flow, even after we machined the internal baffle out.

That is interesting to know. Fred, do you think for those of use still using the stock MAF, that the MAF will be the biggest bottleneck? Or is it possible that the elbow is more of a bottleneck than the CAI/MAF?

[Injuneer]

You have to evaluate each part of the intake track independantly. The system flow is limited by the sum of the flow resistance of each component. In very general terms, you can look at the open area. The open area of the stock 48mm TB and the stock MAF sensor are not all that much different. The stock MAF sensor is no more of a problem than the stock TB. Its a lot more streamlined, and has a flow distribution grid on the inlet.

If you just look at the elbow, the important factors are the open area (more is better), the "wetted" surface (perimeter of the flow channels, where less is better) and the "roughness" (where smoother is better). The stock elbow wins the area battle, and has less wetted perimeter than the Vortech, with its divided flow channel. But on the third element, the smooth aluminum elbow is better than the corrugated rubber configuration of the stocker.

There's no clear-cut winner, but my analysis favors the stocker. In the end, I found the difficulty of reworking the intake track to flow enough for 500 NA HP to be merely an excuse to opt out for the simplicity and improved flow of the WS6 configuration. The fact that I don't run an MAF, and swapped the WS6 corrugated bellows for a smooth, larger diameter sewer pipe connector just puts the icing on the cake....

[Craig 94 TA GT]

Thanks for the info, Fred, some good stuff to know. I have been running the elbow with a 58mm TB, but with a stock LS1 MAF, and never thought it was worse than the stock elbow - but now I know. I didn't realize the whole system was getting to be a restriction for ~500 flywheel hp either. So that's something I'll take a look at re-doing after the motor is broken in.

Sorry blackfire, didn't mean to hi-jack the thread, but I would just go with the 1LE since that silencer tube is another thing that just "gets in the way."