JG Edelbrock intake manifold
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,854
Likes: 4
From: Southern California, U.S.A.
I am looking for some input on this manifold from people who have actually dynoed. I am considering running this manifold on my all motor Civic. Currently running a Type-R intake. What's the HP/torque difference (if any) between the JG and the Type-R manifold on an all motor application? I know that each individual setup will yield different results, but I am looking for anecdotal info.
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,854
Likes: 4
From: Southern California, U.S.A.
Thanks for the reply, it sort of helps. My type-r manifold is not extrude honed, so I don't know how it will stack up against the two manifolds that you mentioned. I am looking for dyno numbers if anybody has some.
I'm not sure the actual hp/tq difference, but it is noticable, though mostly only at really high rpm. I would just see whats cheaper, the JG, or extrude honing the ITR. The only other plus to a JG is that it is set up for a bigger TB already. (65mm I think...)
I am looking for some input on this manifold from people who have actually dynoed. I am considering running this manifold on my all motor Civic. Currently running a Type-R intake. What's the HP/torque difference (if any) between the JG and the Type-R manifold on an all motor application? I know that each individual setup will yield different results, but I am looking for anecdotal info.
I believe the JG/edelbrock manifold is mainly designed for Turbo application, by the looks of the short runners. I've seen it used on NA engine setups, but most of the motors I've seen them used on were basically full blown race engines that ran big cams like JUN 3's, Toda Spec B-C's, etc. If you're planning to use it for a daily driver setup, I think you're better off with an ITR manifold. I could be wrong about the JD/ED manifold though.....the time of my collected info was about a 1-1.5 years ago when it first came out; they might have improved recently...
[Modified by Katman, 12:44 PM 9/4/2002]
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,854
Likes: 4
From: Southern California, U.S.A.
The motor that this manifold would be going into is a B18c1 sleeved to 84mm with JE 12:1 pistons + all the bolt ons. Redline is at 9,500. Using Skunk2 Stage 2's which are pretty close to the Jun3's. Looking to pick up any HP/Torque that I can. I would be willing to spend the money if the JG manifold would give me at least 5 HP up top.
The choice between JG Edelbrock and ITR (or the very similar Skunk2) is really a matter of horses for courses. The JG Edelbrock is a full-out race manifold, which is designed to maximize power in the 7500-1000RPM range (as their ad states). But in this RPM range, I would not be surprised if output is better than the ITR (or Skunk2). After all, this large plenum, thick and short runner manifold was made to flow but not tuned for low RPM torque. The ITR (or Skunk2) manifold is a more street-oriented part, designed to boost power output in the RPM ranges used more in daily driving. So if you are building an all-out race car, JG Edelbrock is better suited to your needs. But for the street, stick with the ITR.
[Modified by StorminMatt, 4:06 AM 9/6/2002]
[Modified by StorminMatt, 4:06 AM 9/6/2002]
Trending Topics
im sgT he has plots of his built motor with and with out the manifold and can tell you what you need to know
btw i saw that damn thing last weekend and its fkn huge man i was like wtf
but my skunk works for me
lata
chris
btw i saw that damn thing last weekend and its fkn huge man i was like wtf
but my skunk works for me
lata
chris
Like Katman said, its primarily a manifold for boosted applications, and as far as extrude honing an intake manifold goes, yes, it should have better flow bench results, since turbulene decreases the amount of time that it takes air to get from point A to point B, but on the other hand, giving up tubulence in the intake tract on an all motor is not neccacaraly a good thing at all, turbulence leads to atomization, which deters you from detonation and provides a cleaner burning mixture, greatening your chances to pass sniffer with ease, giving you better fuel enconomy, less stress on the motor, more accurate A/F and EGT reading from cylinder to cylinder and did I mention that if you design the head properly, there is more signifigant of a horsepower increase to be seen from a more homogenous mixture?
EDIT-had to fix some typo's and I thought I'd give this link to ya also,
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=214097
[Modified by riceboy, 9:06 AM 9/6/2002]
EDIT-had to fix some typo's and I thought I'd give this link to ya also,
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=214097
[Modified by riceboy, 9:06 AM 9/6/2002]
thats my thoughts using the stock GSR manifold... quality power in the midrange with noted high end gains teamed with the right tranny... 98 JDM ITR... we will see... 180/140 would be fun with those gears...!
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,854
Likes: 4
From: Southern California, U.S.A.
I am running the ITR tranny-LSD and close gear ratios rule! Judging from the info that I have received, sticking with the ITR intake is the way to go. Losing significant power in the midrange is not worth small gains in the 7,000+ range.
I have both manifolds and have noted that the JG ported up to 70 mm to match TB very nicely. Don't have dyno runs yet but am going with that over the ITR mani....All this is on 12.5:1 built CRVTEC with Toda B's.there were some dyno comparos in one of the recent rags, but forgot which one at the moment..i think peak gain with the JG was, like, 14.7 HP or thereabouts.....
there were some dyno comparos in one of the recent rags, but forgot which one at the moment..i think peak gain with the JG was, like, 14.7 HP or thereabouts.....
If i were you, i would stick with the itr manifold
2L+ needs a larger plenum, ITR could be a bottleneck for CRVTEC or built 84-86mm B18C, as you say the JG may be better for a larger displacement B series car
2L+ needs a larger plenum, ITR could be a bottleneck for CRVTEC or built 84-86mm B18C, as you say the JG may be better for a larger displacement B series car
to do, but for now, JG is losing to the ITR manifold in ALL respects.
So you would think. Hell I thought so as well. I still got some more testing
to do, but for now, JG is losing to the ITR manifold in ALL respects.
to do, but for now, JG is losing to the ITR manifold in ALL respects.
true, consider the source.. but i am going to give it a try and back up to the itr if that is the best way(powerwise).
still, steve, can you give data to support your statement re: itr vs. JG
scary venturing away from Honda OEM in general
still, steve, can you give data to support your statement re: itr vs. JG
scary venturing away from Honda OEM in general
So you would think. Hell I thought so as well. I still got some more testing
to do, but for now, JG is losing to the ITR manifold in ALL respects.
Can you expand on this? You've actually swapped manifolds on the same car, and the ITR makes more power, better fuel economy, more top end, etc then the JG?
to do, but for now, JG is losing to the ITR manifold in ALL respects.
Can you expand on this? You've actually swapped manifolds on the same car, and the ITR makes more power, better fuel economy, more top end, etc then the JG?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
powercenter7
Forced Induction
5
Dec 10, 2004 07:45 PM




