Ground Zero LIM and oil pan pics
#1
Rotary Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Union, NJ
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ground Zero LIM and oil pan pics
Snapped a few pics of both GZ lower intake manifold and oil pan.
Runners on intake are much straighter moving upper intake forward.
Runners on intake are much straighter moving upper intake forward.
#4
FD Maniac
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All look like well engineered pieces but everything is always great in theory so lets see how that lim really helps on the dyno as well as the oil pan reducing flex between housings.
Trending Topics
#9
fart on a friends head!!!
Originally Posted by Gargamel
Why wouldn't they go ahead and enlarge those runner a bit? They look the same size as stock.
whats kinda odd to me is that the LIM/UIM flange seems to sit more "forward" than stock. i would assume that would cause fitment issues.
the runners look a bit thick. . . which is NICE. that means there is PLENTY of room to open up.
very nice piece.
also, this piece looks like it might have fitment issues with the stock twins. . . has this been taken into account?
paul
#10
OooooohWeeeee
iTrader: (3)
Originally Posted by rotorbrain
probably has something to do with the ports on the motor. they more than likely assumed that the average buyer would simply slap it on the motor w/o port matching. if you gasket match the LIM and not the engine (which would be somewhat hard to do with it STILL in the car) then you would have flow problems, fuel atomization problems, and so on. i think it was a good idea to leave that to the owner of the car.
whats kinda odd to me is that the LIM/UIM flange seems to sit more "forward" than stock. i would assume that would cause fitment issues.
the runners look a bit thick. . . which is NICE. that means there is PLENTY of room to open up.
very nice piece.
also, this piece looks like it might have fitment issues with the stock twins. . . has this been taken into account?
paul
whats kinda odd to me is that the LIM/UIM flange seems to sit more "forward" than stock. i would assume that would cause fitment issues.
the runners look a bit thick. . . which is NICE. that means there is PLENTY of room to open up.
very nice piece.
also, this piece looks like it might have fitment issues with the stock twins. . . has this been taken into account?
paul
#13
Originally Posted by eyecandy
Why wouldn't work with stock twins? Do you mean sequential?
-Max
#16
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The land of Lincoln
Posts: 1,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rotorbrain
im willing to bet the flow might matter more than a few ounces of weight difference.
paul
paul
I'd still like to know the weight.
#18
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The land of Lincoln
Posts: 1,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by badddrx7
Does this oil pan STOP oil leaks - yes....no...
Tom
Tom
#22
fart on a friends head!!!
i think they are the same thing. . . and gargamel. . . sorry about the uh humor thing. . . kinda hard to figure out someones tone on the internet. . . besides, this forum is so full of blowhards lately its almost an expected occurance.
paul
paul
#24
mm from what i can see..the ports look the same!! i rather keep my re and shave and cut the emmisions off of it..make it look clean and have better flow..i was hoping the ports would be better..yes it does look like there is a bit you can port out..but i rather have the re manifold and just port and pollish that and still be ahead? amd i right?
but i will wait on flow numbers and dyno numbers..and than decide i guess
but i will wait on flow numbers and dyno numbers..and than decide i guess
Last edited by GOTBANNED?; 01-01-05 at 01:52 PM.