you are exactly right Andrew, but as I've said all along the CFI is the only 'vette intake I know that share simular design to an old Offy or Weiand ...btw I missed the new thread, my bad

Thus the confusion...



So it appears that Norm was perhaps confused? He mentions the LT-5's "valet" mode, but maybe incorrectly recollects year and design? Not going to speak for him... I let him explain further if he chooses too.

I think we have reached the end of the tunnel.

Hooray!!!!!!!!!!!

Hi Andrewk, All,


Did anyone say it did?


CFI shared a nearly identical design (all differences were cosmetic) with at least 4 crossram manufacturers.

How does that relate to my original statement?


Are you sure I'm the one that's confused?



2 EDITS: Used the edit, instead of the quote button. Then had to repair the damage.

Regards, Norm

Hi andrewk, All,



Did I say it was for a V8?

Regards, Norm

No Im not.



No you didn't. Is it? Please explain.

Hi All,

Another correction.


Found out today, the manifold I referenced was, indeed, an Offenhauser offering.

It seems, I was in error when I pointed out my own mistake.

Regards, Norm

Hi andrewk, All,


Sorry, that should have been phrased differently. I didn't intend it to be rude.


Not only SBC, and not only V8.

Answers to just two of the many questions DrRansom442 should have asked, before, starting his BS posts.

BTW: Not much chance he'll post a link to the source of the pix. I don't think he wants us to see its accompanying article. Kinda like DrJay and his "venders" site.

Regards, Norm

No offense taken




Interesting... So it had 2 intake runners to each intake port? How did it work?

What other engines/sizes was it offered on? Sounds like an interesting piece of equipment...

Andrew

Hi andrewk, All,


Similar to the induction setup on those Corvettes that used a manifold with two runners to each intake port. One was used for normal driving, both for max power.

Perhaps, I'll answer this one after DrRansom442 posts the link I requested. It would fit in here perfectly.


Less complicated than the induction setup on those Corvettes that used a manifold with two runners to each intake port. One was used for normal driving, both for max power.

Less complicated than the Crossfire, also.

Regards, Norm

Hi 85cieraholiday, All,

Sorry for the delayed response to the balance of your post.


DrRansom442 made the same declaration several times but, after repeated requests, he has been unable to post any quotes.

If you can, please do.


Fact 1: DrRansom442 made three false statements in the original thread.

Fact 2: DrRansom442, has not attempted to acknowledge, clarify, or even discuss the validity of those statements in any way.

Fact 3: DrRansom442 has gone to extreme lengths, to avoid dealing with his own falsifications, up to and, including character assassination.

Do you think anyone should be allowed to perpetuate "urban myths" "wives tales" and any other forms of "internet misinformation", without being challenged?

If so, please explain your logic.


I repeat: I will admit I'm wrong, when I am actually wrong.

Regards, Norm

So it is similar in the fact that the offy version does it mechanically, and the LT-5 with the ECM? That would make the fact that they both have 16 intake runners coincendental right? (Since the LT-5 is DOHC, and would be unable to "shut off" or not use one set of intake runners?)

Just making sure I am understanding this correctly.

Andrew

Hi andrewk, All,


The more I edit this, the more similar they get. They both do it mechanically.

The computer closes one intake valve which limits the volume of air to the combustion chamber, while keeping the velocity up.

The carb closes one runner which limits the volume of A/F mixture to the combustion chamber, while keeping the velocity up.


Not a coincidence. Using 16 runners for velocity control is the reason they are functionally the same.

EDIT: It's possible that one uses ⅜" bolts and the other uses 10mm, but that is DrRansom442s area of expertise, not mine.


I'm glad you're interested. Many times I gain a better understanding of a subject by explaining it to someone else. I this case I've learned a lot.

In addition to furthering our knowledge, your questions demonstrate to TOCs more astute readers, the difference between a discussion and an argument.

Regards, Norm

I said I was done with norom's nonsense and misinformation but once again here i am



Norom, the ONLY non V-8 Corvettes were 53/54s (these cars had Blue Flame I-6s with 3 side draft Carters - definately not the 16 runner Offy inspired Corvette intake you keep claiming exists). So yes, by process of elimination we are talking strictly V-8. Again $50. can be yours by posting this picture.



This is not how the LT5 operates, where you concocked this out of the "valet mode" is mesmerizing. When the "full power mode" is switched off the ECM merely limits the fuel and timing in "valet mode". This is NOT like the V8-6-4 were valves were physically (magnetically if memory serves) held shut



Andrew is DEAD ON. the LT5 has 16 runners because it has 16 intake valves ... all runners are open, all 4 cams turn and all 32 valves open and close when the engine is running .... if they stop, call a tow truck. My claims can be substatiated Norom, its all common knowledge. Unlike you I don't have to invent stuff to sound like I know what I am talking about. Andrew pointed out on another thread i was wrong, and I admitted it, why can't you play the grownup too and admit, I got you .... over and over. The more Corvette "facts" you post, the further you dig yourself in and the more you prove you are a HACK

Hi andrewk, All,

Just noticed these while looking for the above image for your CFI only thread.


I really need to learn how to use those smileys.

Those "many cosmetic differences" have nothing to do with any comparison between the designs or operation of all five manifolds.


They have everything in common except those differences.


The question was rhetorical.

Examination of the above pix show the layout is the same. Other than cosmetics, all four Crossrams and the Crossfire are the same design.


It doesn’t matter which image I used. You posted it, it was handy, and it illustrated my point. Which, by the way, you missed.

I’ll admit I’m wrong when I’m actually wrong.

Regards, Norm