80 replies to this topic

[toofart]

That was easy to miss, Jim ... ER, I mean, Alan.

An honest question -- does anyone know whe weight difference between the stock 5.7 and stock 6.4?

The Maggie kit adds about 80 lbs to the front-end and produces about the same power (in its 6 psi config) so I'm just comparin' eh.

[Jay6spdRT]

So is EOCDM going to get this swap? Sounds like a good plan - a fully tunable 392 - he should do it.

[Goehner]

no ^^^^^^^^^ really?

[rdrdr90]

^^^^^

[Yellow Jacket]

So is EOCDM going to get this swap? Sounds like a good plan - a fully tunable 392 - he should do it.

Jim, you crack me up dude. I hope you were joking...

[Jay6spdRT]

What?

[rdrdr90]

Jim, read the thread dude.

[Yellow Jacket]

Hey Earl, I just noticed something: your PCV comes off the FRONT of the engine, not the rear! Check out mine:



See how my catch can has that one long hose that extends to the rear of the engine bay, whereas yours has 2 hoses of equal length, so your PCV is closer to the intake?

I wonder why that is? Anyone?

[Jay6spdRT]

Why? Did he change his plan and not have the engine swap done?

[rdrdr90]

What? Dude...

[EODCM]

Why? Did he change his plan and not have the engine swap done?

It's done ...picking it up tomorrow

Hey Earl, I just noticed something: your PCV comes off the FRONT of the engine, not the rear! Check out mine:



See how my catch can has that one long hose that extends to the rear of the engine bay, whereas yours has 2 hoses of equal length, so your PCV is closer to the intake?

I wonder why that is? Anyone?

6.1 intake?

[PGE 27M]

Hey Earl, I just noticed something: your PCV comes off the FRONT of the engine, not the rear! Check out mine:



See how my catch can has that one long hose that extends to the rear of the engine bay, whereas yours has 2 hoses of equal length, so your PCV is closer to the intake?

I wonder why that is? Anyone?

He used a 6.1 manifold because they haven't figured out a way to get the active runners to work with the NGC4 yet.

[Yellow Jacket]

Thanks guys. It's amazing how on this forum an answer comes up so quickly. As opposed to other forums that would go round and round with the speculation and nobody has a clue.

[sharkcohen]

no ^^^^^^^^^ really?

LMFAO!!!

What?

ROFLCOPTER!!!

[70Barracuda]

He used a 6.1 manifold because they haven't figured out a way to get the active runners to work with the NGC4 yet.

It is my understanding from what Alex@shophemi said over in the other thread that you don't have to change intakes as it will revert to long runners automatically when not plugged and that it runs similar to the 6.1 intake. I believe Earl just opted to use a 6.1 ported intake.

Anyone know how the rear wheel horsepower of the 392 as installed compares to the factory installed 392 with active runners? If Earl got 434 hp that sounds like it should be about the same, so not too much downside to not having the active runners, big upside to being able to tune it though.

[rdrdr90]

He used a 6.1 manifold because they haven't figured out a way to get the active runners to work with the NGC4 yet.

With no pcm switch. I believe they can use a truck pcm since it does deal with the active runners. AJ said in a thread they can manage it, he didn't elaborate so I don't know.

[HemiSam]

Why? Did he change his plan and not have the engine swap done?

HemiSam

[Jay6spdRT]

It's done ...picking it up tomorrow

Excellent! Thanks for answering the question, EODCM - notice that there's a bunch of peanut gallery people at this forum that apparently can't answer a simple question like this? Imagine if we had a complex question or issue to resolve? It would take a while with these jabronies, wouldn't it?

[PGE 27M]

It is my understanding from what Alex@shophemi said over in the other thread that you don't have to change intakes as it will revert to long runners automatically when not plugged and that it runs similar to the 6.1 intake. I believe Earl just opted to use a 6.1 ported intake.

Sorry if my post was misleading, I didn't mean to say that the 392 intake couldn't be used, just that the active runners wouldn't be active. Since the active runners are the main benefit of the 392 intake, I think most people would switch to the 6.1 intake, which can be ported. The other benefit the 392 intake does have, being plastic, is resistance to heat soak, but I would think a ported 6.1 would still be better in this application most of the time.

With no pcm switch. I believe they can use a truck pcm since it does deal with the active runners. AJ said in a thread they can manage it, he didn't elaborate so I don't know.

I have also seen talk that the active intake could be controlled by the NGC4 as the trucks had active runners pre-2011, but the last I heard, they hadn't gotten it all worked out yet. That may have changed though. I was pretty sure I read that they weren't active on NotSure's car, but now I can't find where it said that. Maybe someone from Arrington can weigh in and let us know what the deal is as long as it wouldn't be giving away too many trade secrets.

[rdrdr90]

Excellent! Thanks for answering the question, EODCM - notice that there's a bunch of peanut gallery people at this forum that apparently can't answer a simple question like this? Imagine if we had a complex question or issue to resolve? It would take a while with these jabronies, wouldn't it?

We do the heavy lifting and read....it was answered two pages ago. However it was cheap entertainment!