Evo 3 intake vs stock intake for 2.3?

[nastyleak]

Is there any reason that the Evo 3 manifold wouldn't be a better choice than the stock intake with the stroker, 68HTA, and K272 combination?
There is a very long thread about the Evo 3 intake which I have read numerous times. I wonder if there would be any reason not to use it now?

 

[gprix1]

IMO, That is the perfect intake for your setup.

 

[91stocker]

I think it depends on the set up, and with your set up i would probably go with the evo 3. Though the k272's might be a tad large for a 16g.

Me personally i would have gone with a properly gasket matched 2g mani and hks 272's with the 68hta. But then again i guess it all depends on your goals.

 

[Tiki2777]

What do you want the manifold to give you? Do you want more top end? Torque? Horsepower? What?

 

[nastyleak]

After finding and buying the intake, the mechanic refused to install it for me claiming that he thought it would lose HP because the plenum was smaller. The real reason was most likely the fact that the TB was still attached to the oem intake which meant less work for him. Now the guy says he will give me a deal and install it for 200$ after I already asked him to while it was all apart. When I brought the guy the intake I explained to him that it was rare and that I paid $200 for it. I even explained to him that it was okay that the MDP sensor could be left unplugged.
I fully believe that this will make more power than the OEM intake and I spent a lot of time and money to get one.

 

[estoyaqui30]

I just got a EVO 3 intake manifold from a guy in Thailand and I'm planning to send it to curt brown racing for his port work. He'll set it up for a 70 mm throttle body and port and clean it. I got a brand new skunk 2 68mm throttle body, but just ran into a bump in the plan. The throttle body is for an EVO 8-9 and I thought it would work, but no. The 2G sensors are different. So, I have to rethink it. I heard that the EVO 3 IM is really good, especially with HKS 272/272 and FP exhaust manifold and FP HTA 3076.

 

[nastyleak]

Tikki2777: I want more 1/4 mile performance with my particular setup.
91stocker: I have read obsessively about other people who had similar combinations of parts as well as camshaft comparisons and their results led me to believe that K272 's would actually work very well for my car. From my reading I found that the K272 cams actually maintain low end torque fairly well when compared to similar cams. Please correct me if I am incorrect in any of these statements-assumptions as I am here to learn. The gains should be almost throughout the whole power-band according to the results others have experienced, having 9.5:1 compression and 2.3 displacement should make up for any loss of low end torque so that isn't a concern.

I would like to be able to compare the airflow differences between the two with no other changes with data from Ecmlink, although logically the next things I need to do are intake and wide-band.

In response to Estoya: Is it possible the sensors would be interchangeable, (fit the TB) which would allow you to use the ones which would be ideal? Yes I would like to have used an HTA3076 to begin with, although the cost is prohibitive and I feel that there is a limit to how far I can go without having reliability issues (transmission, rear-end, etc.).

 

[91stocker]

Well here is a review from a knowledgeable member.

http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/cylinder-head-short-block/387215-delta-k272-impressions.html

It is true that the stroker will eat more cam. But i still think thay are a tad large. They wont start making power until 2000 rpms after the 16g has peaked. The larger cams will also cause slower spool and make the 16g fall off harder then it already does near redline.

Heres a member with a solid build. Stroker, hx40, hks 272's, runs 10.40's
DSM Forums - View Profile: red1993gsallmt

 

[nastyleak]

The spool of the 14b in the 68HTA housing seems identical if not better than before already as I've been really easy on it so far. Low RPM power feels better now even with 1mm over-sized intake valves and ported exhaust outlets, dual valve springs, and the K272's.
91 stocker: I would imagine the turbocharger would have something to do with the results in the link you provided. From the posts I read the K272's actually maintained low end torque better compared to similarly sized cams. I wouldn't even consider changing cams at this point, and I spent countless hours reading here about the K272's.

 

[nastyleak]

The 68HTA is not really a 16G, maybe closer to being an 18G+. Sure Holeset turbos are really bad-ass but I've got a 68HTA, if and when I go to a bigger turbocharger it will be a dual ball bearing (more efficient, more expensive) design. There seems to be some argument here for or against HX35-40 etc. which is fairly entertaining, almost like a soap opera for men like wrestling.
For entertainment I'll add my input on Holeset turbochargers:

Using half sized radiators and or push fans is great up north but here in the south overheating is a problem in even barely modded cars.
Expensive housings, special fans, and smaller radiators bring the cost close to the price of the previously mentioned and more efficient turbochargers.
There are lots of Holeset turbochargers for sale because guys who own big diesel trucks are selling them and buying bigger and or more efficient turbos.
IMHO the HX turbos would be a better choice if I lived in a colder climate and I didn't mind spinning up the engine a lot to make a lot of HP.

 

[91stocker]

Yea sorry not really suggesting that you switch cams at this stage, especially since you have them already. That was just my opinion, whatever that may be worth .

Where your at now i would run the evo 3 IM with out a doubt. The short runners will favor the high rpm power band of your cams.

Plus there's always other tricks to getting the turbo to hold more boost through redline. Vacuum pump on the wastegate, etc.

 

[jrohner]

I put K272's in my 2G with the 16G, and they trade off driveability and torque for a slight HP increase. The car was not as fun to drive and I lost more than I gained. I also thought the idle sounded a lot better with my BC272's. Mine doesn't even lope with the K272's, it just doesn't sound good or mean (hard to explain). Even now that I've taken the 16G off for a Holset, I still want BC272's again.

 

[nastyleak]

K272's= more HP according to most everyone here vs cooler sounding at idle cams should be an easy choice to make. If you used adjustable cam gears and dialed in the BC cams you would likely lose the lope considering they are less aggressive cams. If you want the cool sounding lope then purposely incorrectly adjust your idle air settings with link?

Jrohner: Do you use E85? Here in the deeply backward south it is a 170 mile drive away. Those are pretty good dyno #'s and I would be happy with those results myself.

 

[jrohner]

Yeah I'm on E85. The dyno results were on the BC272's. I didn't even break 390 on the K272's, RVR intake, and holding almost 30psi instead of 22; yeah, I was pretty disappointed.

 

[nastyleak]

So the less than 390 dyno was with E85, 16G and K272's? Its odd that such similar combinations of parts differ so much hopefully, I'll be one of the lucky ones. I hope for something between 350-400 with 93 (closest E85 is over 100 miles).