Banks Monster-Ram is the best Cummins 6.7L intake manifold available.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 сер 2024
- If you're building a 6.7L Cummins for the track, the stock intake manifold will be a choke point. Choosing the best-flowing design allows you to make the highest horsepower and torque on the dyno. Plus you'll get quicker spool, greater fuel efficiency, and maximize the boost and manifold air density regardless of your turbo setup.
Here's a full flow bench comparison of all the major intake elbow products we could find.
The Banks Monster-Ram intake elbow is available for non-emissions race-only vehicles and is not intended for on-highway use. Road-going RAM trucks will use the new 50-state legal Monster-Ram.
bankspower.com...
Monster-Ram with 4" inlet, red or natural aluminum
bankspower.com...
Monster-Ram with 3.5" inlet, red or natural aluminum
bankspower.com...
This guy started hot-rodding 60 years ago. Respect!
He’s more than a hotrodder. He’s an engineer.
You can tell he enjoys every minute of his discoveriers.. That giggle, and shit eating smile he gets. Kust tickles me..
I’m not a diesel guy but watching these videos is very informative and amazing how he backs up what he’s talking about with real numbers
fordrac1ng81 - actually I’m a degreed Engineer who’s built many racing engines and done CFD intake manifold and head modeling work for a Pro Stock team in the late ‘80’s and early ‘90’s. There’s a good reason we threw a large towel over our intake manifold every time we took the hood off - we invested thousands of hours in plenum and runner design. If he’s running his flow bench at 10 inches of water it’s equivalent to between 3/8 to 1/2 pound of boost depending on variables like altitude and barometric pressure - so it’s a fair test. Ask my buddy Steve Morris up in Michigan how much a carburetor hat or an EFI inlet elbow design change is worth under 20 pounds of boost - it makes a HUGE difference. Imagine what Gale’s inlet would be worth on a diesel compound boost set-up. Gale knows more about boosted diesel inlet design than anyone else walking the planet.
Steve🖒
I was just looking for a comment explaining why he used such a small amount of pressure while testing a diesel that usually runs high boost.. So in not engineer speak it is a matter of how much of an advantage can be seen in flow without the aid if tons of pressure forcing it through?
@@jblob5764 the flowbench maxes out at 1100 cfm. so any more pressure and he would not be able to measure it.
Flow bench limitations and many in the industry flow at 10” for large CFM items which makes for an easier comparison from others who deal with real world flow bench data.
@@user-me8hc3bs7i the flow bench is designed to measure small ports in a head not large intake pieces. simply cant measure that much cfm. so a lower pressure is used pt put the cfm into a measurable range.
Gale Banks stock just shot over the moon with me, I like his style, calm collected and gives solid information with EXTREME AUTHORITY, see there was another fella that was calm and collected and when he talked about what he respected in his profession and what he thought was good, people listened to what he had to say, his name is Carrol Shelby.
I think what i love about Gale Banks more than anything, is that he’s a real tried and true gear head. He loves this shit.
I've used Bank's products over the years, never had an issue and generally prices are good. First time was years ago a 6.2l diesel GM turbo kit and it all fit right out of the box and including all hardware ect. I was hooked since. You guys do your homework, great stuff.
NO ONE beats Banks engineering, PERIOD! If you have a Diesel work truck, or Play Truck, Banks is simply the BEST and has been for decades, the proof is over-whelming
I’ve been look to mod my truck for a bit. Would you say is better than sinister diesel
Roman philips banks power is probably better.
Banks makes great hardware and is probably the most consistent. But it’s pretty ignorant to say he’s the best in every category
Not sure I've ever seen so much focus and effort made on around a foot of pipe. Well done.
Have you seen what we've done with a rear diff cover? Haha. ua-cam.com/video/vdtmDl5EDJ8/v-deo.html
Mr. Banks!!! You are a turbo wizard... this was a great video and can't wait for my warrenty to be up... so I can purchase and install one of your complete systems for my 2017.
Thanks for sharing all your research and wisdom for us too improve our trucks!!!
WOW.. Gene Banks giving a demo/review...SWEEEEEET.!!. I have been using Banks equipment since the mid 1980's. Turbo kits for the Buick GNX always worked very well..!! Thank you Gene..!!
Gail his parents hated him.
A lot of know-it-all comments on many of Banks' videos...I just shake my head. Imagine some internet hero that think he knows more about turbocharged engine performance than Gale Banks.
HeavyMetalMechanic80 Everybody’s an expert, right?
That's an argument to authority. You don't need to be a know it all to see conflicts of interest or bad testing methodologies. Matter of fact you don't need to know anything about engines at all to see this.
@Erik Kovacs: I don't think anyone is saying that Mr. Banks can't be wrong about something, BUT I am personally more inclined to believe a man with 60+ years doing what he does, even if he does have a slight bias, than someone on an internet comments section, which as we all know are always filled with the most intelligent folks on the planet
He may know allot, But sure as hell, he knows more about dirty play and twisting numbers and test results to suit hes needs. Shameful act. What is even more comical is , that often the limiting factor comes from elsewhere in car other than intake. ... So you spend big bucks on huge intake and accessories you need to install it, but still get the same power out as your turbo is the limiting factor or more likely the diesel pump is the limiting factor where your supply just cannot get more power out, no matter how well your manifold flows.
@@disturbedrocks1996 OK fine. Use your brain and keep an open mind. There are glaring omissions to this test. Like testing the whole intake turbo to cylinder head. If, for instance, it turns out that the the largest restriction is the cylinder head (once you upgrade all other components) once you get to a certain flow level there would be no point in going to a Banks intake elbow vs a competitor with a slightly lower flow (and significantly lower price).
Speaking of pricing... I did my initial pricing comparison via both online catalog of the major parts houses, and my local Pep Boys, who surprisingly had the lowest price. They get their parts from Joe Amato's big warehouse in PA. After getting the best price, I called Banks directly and asked if they price matched. Thankfully they did, and I bought direct. It doesn't cost anything to ask folks. Banks is the best, and will work with you on price. Just give them a chance. You will be pleasantly surprised.
Happy to help!
@@bankspower can you please comment as to why you didn't show the stock intake like you did all the others? It (stock) was sitting to the side for a bit then disappeared off camera. It seems as though there are at least two versions of the 6.7 intake. Banks along with everyone else shows a really restricted version for all their comparisons. When in reality (read the reviews and look at the pictures on banks power website) the stock intakes are not near as restrictive as you advertise. Please comment on this because the consumer deserves the truth, and not some marketing/advertising gimmick.
@@HamRadio200 The stock unit was on camera for over four minutes. It was moved because it was no longer part of the conversation. The stock intake elbow is incredibly restrictive by comparison. If you look set the stock and Banks side by side thee inlet and outlets are dramatically different in size. The flow analysis is accurate and can be duplicated by anyone with a flowbench.
@@bankspower Please explain the difference here. Customer review cdn-yotpo-images-production.yotpo.com/Review/94701437/84524156/original.jpg?1560071040 and banks advertisement www.bankspower.com/images/F143799941.jpg I am not doubting an increase in performance, I am merely questioning your results based on your advertisement. thank you.
@@bankspower Thank you for the reply. Please explain why you advertise this www.bankspower.com/images/F143799941 and the reality is this cdn-yotpo-images-production.yotpo.com/Review/94701437/84524156/original.jpg?1560071040 ? Most if not all of us watching these videos do not have a flowbench, so we the consumer rely on honest and accurate comparisons. This video, made comparisons, but did not prove that you were testing a stock intake as the customer reviewed, or one in which you are advertising. Awaiting your response.
Mr. Banks, truly appreciate your review and breakdown comparison showing an honest evaluation and comparison. Truly appreciate your professionalism and breakdown.
Love how straight up mr.Banks is. Logical, methodical and honest. All the while, constantly shitting on his competition lmao
This guy is a brilliant man! He reminds me of my father who was a mechanical engineer.
Mr. Banks,!
Sir,. You have always been the Best and #1 Cummings Diesel Performance Pro. ,! In my life time. ! Thank you Sir , for making the Cummins diesel Purr. ! 👍🇺🇸
I am just getting worried, when we don’t have Gale any more!!! Thanks Gale
Old skool right he tells it how it is doesn't sugar coat nothin or hold back
🤙🏽
As a 5.9 cummins owner, i would really like to see the same test done on the 5.9 24 valve cummins intake manifolds. obviously the 2003 to 2007 intakes are more restrictive than the 1998.5 to 2002, but other than the left two bolt locations (on top of manifold vs at the flange) I think it would make for another great video.
Over here wishing Mr. Banks did race stuff for Chevy LS engines!
They do gas engine stuff too... www.bankspower.com/c-68-products-power-efficiency-systems-twin-turbo-system.html
Dammit i got ripped off. Where was this video 2 years ago. A new Banks intake is definitely on my shopping list
No one puts more into R&D than Banks. That is something you know when holding their products.
When you hear him speak, you can tell he is an Engineer who has a business...not a businessman who has engineers.
I am not a salesman, I just have installed many products.
I love the study’s and test you did on the 6.7 Cummins intake horns I would love to see the same testing on 3rd gen 5.9 intercoolers
Cheesy but informative. I bought the H&S and am now considering the banks because they didn't cut corners. The new fuel line and design is better. Left little to argue. Nice product.
Yes, the elbow flows more, but if your cylinder head is stock, and you don't plan on porting and upsizing the valves in your cylinder head, you're throwing your money away. The flow restriction on a stock motor isn't the elbow, or even the intercooler, it's the cylinder head and valves themselves.
Great video Gale. In reality this was very straight forward, comprehensive and well done test, regardless of how you view the product. We had similar results when doing research and were able to show a marked increase in flow rates on mirror applications. They key to remember is by eliminating restriction not only equals more flow but also equals the amount of heat that is being dissipated. For example if you were to break down flow rates into each cylinder, one would think that they are all equal. This is not the case. In real world applications, each cylinder varies more than you realize and this is very apparent the farther away from pressurized zone at the inlet of the plenum that attaches to air intake horn. When analyzing the laminar and thermal flow rates into each cylinder, is was discovered that #5 and most notably #6 we almost starving for air in comparison to cylinders #2 and #3 with #1 and #4 following. One of the most logical ways to cure this problem is to make every attempt to equalize pressure into each valve inlet within the cylinder head. When you consider the stock configuration limitations it would make the most sense remove any restrictions possible and make all attempts to increase air into the cylinders that are starving or better yet suffocating for air. In racing and pulling applications, it is common to literally have the bottom half of the casting intake on the cylinder head to be machined off and utilize extremely high flow intake manifold assembly that encourages equaled flow into each cylinder. This is done not only for power but also heat. All in all and to be honest you would not gain much power from utilizing any on these systems but you will most definitely gain some and dissipate heat. Much like an high flow exhaust system, only marginal power gains can be found but additional heat is eliminated. Most power increase come from tailoring to programing pulse deration, sequence, timing and other parameters including charge volume and pressure. With that being said it would stand to reason that increasing power via programing and increase volume and pressure by larger or multiple turbo chargers that every restriction possible should be eliminated. One thing you can say about Banks is that they do their homework and a lot of research and development goes into their products. I believe that as far as bolt on applications go the only system better than this Banks unit is the application that is currently under development here at Diesel Research Labs. This design will have close to 100% equal dispersion to all cylinders and flow a lot more air than even the Banks unit but it will be released in very limited numbers so I would just get the banks. It is the best of the bunch tested.
Finally the truth...
Ole Banks is my hero . Banks is always TOP NOTCH !!
Ok, it flows more CFM, but the restriction is your head. Put a 55 gallon drum horn on it if you like, but it's only going to breath as much air as the head breaths...
Exactly what I was thinking. Not an accurate test because flow isn’t measured at the head of an engine.
I find it funny that the custom muffler shop horn is better than most of the competition.
Just to add a littl emore. Do not forget that Banks is just about the only MFG that provides a complete package that is fully integrated and tuned to provide the best performance consistently. Buying piecemeal is a recipe for disaster and disappointment. I am not a spokesman for Banks performance, I get no benefit from them, but YES I have Banks products on my truck, and am very pleased with the results achieved.
Thanks for the compliments, Gary!
I picked up a nicer looking version of the pusher for $100 shipped after watching this video. Eventually I'll get a banks monster ram, but the pusher knock offs are good bang for the buck.
I know this is an old video but if they are so proud of their products and their design and not compromising on the design they shouldn't charge for the fuel line. It should be included since you 100% need it.
Running Banks Monster Ram intake & Intercooler on my 5.9,best around!
Did you notice an improvement with the monster ram
Also got the Banks intercooler,so yes,gonna install the grid heater delete & Flex A Lite fans next,just installed a Fass 165,Beans Diesel sump,Glowshift big line kit & Fleece fuel filter delete distribution block.
A more than competitive price. Great value.
You have some of these dudes so fuckin fired up and mad they can't see the forest through the woods with this demonstration lmao.
I wish gale banks was my grandpa
There are many factors to measuring performance on a dyno or drag strip, but comparing component to component using CFM's makes to most sense. Banks has been doing diesel performance and winning at the track for years. In summary, the man knows what he is talking about; diesels are not a sideline at Banks.
Looking at the individual component makes the least sense. Your engine is a system, not an individual component. You need to determine which component is your weakest flowing component and address that first. Having an intake that has a 200% or 2000% the stock flow does not matter if that's not your limiting factor.
@@otm646 I'll give you partial credit but the banks intakes have engineered flow for water/meth upgrades, and an intake is more of a support upgrade. you won't see huge gains but you will see them after other upgrades have been made like a turbo or head job. flowbench testing is the best method, you have CFM numbers to compare on the specific part. you can't dyno 4,000 different engine configurations, Banks would go bankrupt, so they leave that up to you
The pusher 3.5 shows you can flow for cheap money as you can make it at home.
Just by looking with my eyes i can tell the shape of the intake makes it far superior
Great video Gale. In reality this was very straight forward, comprehensive and well done test, regardless of how you view the product. We had similar results when doing research and were able to show a marked increase in flow rates and increase of Air Density on mirror applications. They key to remember is by eliminating restriction not only equals more flow but also equals the amount of heat that is being dissipated and increasing Air Density. For example if you were to break down flow rates into each cylinder, one would think that they are all equal. This is not the case. In real world applications, each cylinder varies more than you realize and this is very apparent the farther away from pressurized zone at the inlet of the plenum that attaches to air intake horn. When analyzing the laminar and thermal flow rates into each cylinder, is was discovered that #5 and most notably #6 we almost starving for air in comparison to cylinders #2 and #3 with #1 and #4 following. One of the most logical ways to cure this problem is to make every attempt to equalize pressure into each valve inlet within the cylinder head. When you consider the stock configuration limitations it would make the most sense remove any restrictions possible and make all attempts to increase air into the cylinders that are starving or better yet suffocating for air, thus increasing Air Density. In racing and pulling applications, it is common to literally have the bottom half of the casting intake on the cylinder head to be machined off and utilize extremely high flow intake manifold assembly that encourages equaled flow into each cylinder that will help in increasing Air Density. This is done not only for power but also heat dissipation. All in all and to be honest you would not gain much power from utilizing any on these systems but you will most definitely gain some and dissipate heat and increase air density. Much like an high flow exhaust system, only marginal power gains can be found but additional heat is eliminated. Most power increase come from tailoring to programing pulse deration, sequence, timing and other parameters including charge volume and pressure to increase Air Density. With that being said it would stand to reason that increasing power via programing and increase volume and pressure by larger or multiple turbo chargers that every restriction possible should be eliminated. One thing you can say about Banks is that they do their homework and a lot of research and development goes into their products. I believe that as far as bolt on applications go the only system better than this Banks unit is the application that is system currently under development here at Diesel Research Labs. This design will have close to 100% equal dispersion to all cylinders and flow a lot more air and increasing Air Density better than even the Banks unit. But it will be released in very limited numbers so I would just get the banks. It is the best of all the units tested.
Mr banks i recently purchased all your products for my 2022 dodge ram 3500 4x4 mega cab. Wsiting on cold air induction and intercooler tubes and horn. Intercooler still in development but will add that later.
How is your truck holding up?
@Sharee so far really good got 19,000 miles on it
@@GaryBlankenship96b40 OK, that's great to hear. I have the monster intake with heater grid delete. I will install mine soon.
@Sharee i just a recall on that to park outside because heater can malfunction so i can disregard lol
@@GaryBlankenship96b40 LOL, yes I received a recall notice for my brand new Ram as well, but I also have a 2016 Ram 3500 that I'm referring to about replacing the intake soon. They never made a recall for that heater grid which they should.
Its so awesome that you are doing this comparison Gale, it's giving Clarity. How about the new cummins from Nissan, do you have a tune for it? Your big bundle package would turn this truck into a beast. If not could you do so quickly cause me and the rest of Titan owners will love you more for this. Thanks in advance Gale, you da best.
Raymond Grant If someone like Banks would release products for the 5.0, it would definitely interest me.
Buy American
Oneboyscout Ok 👌
Yes, GB is a living legend in the world of diesel performance and his products are top quality. But, how much of the flow increase of these pieces can the engine actually use?
Banks is just like Edelbrock. If you buy a complete Edelbrock kit it will do everything they claim and is better than anything else for the money. If you buy a Banks kit it will absolutely do everything he claims, increase power, fuel efficiency and your engines reliability under heavy use. It's not cheap but it is a bargain. Money well spent you will not be dissapointed. Want more power? Tell him what you want, Banks can do almost ANYTHING you want better than anyone else and no guessing. He knows.
Absolutely beautiful. That muffler piece a person could knock out in their garage with a TIG and a little time and probably do a better job. I swear that one pissed Gale off because it was so sad and after seeing what they are asking for it I see why. I guess he's right about them not being engine people because the first thing you should think when faced with the injection line issue is to change the line not the intake hat. Seriously I can just hear the guys at those other companies bitching out their engineers "Why didn't you think of making a new injection line instead of changing the flow characteristics of the intake?"
Like how he said that building horsepower in the big block Chevy is not a problem but getting it to last is.
Quality, Proven Performance...Banks all the way. @Hammersrt. I have an 03 Dodge 5.9 with all Banks equipment...Love it!
Imagine the brains of Banks and Musk working together. The asteroid belt would be our mile marker for space races.
I've seen this guy before. I've been mechanicing for 40 years. And his face I've seen.
I'm not so good with names, but I remember faces.
wow, that's an eye opener
I think the real test would be bolting each one on a truck then dyno them all back to back.
YEP! And,,, I'll bet there isn't much difference between any of them because that elbowis not the primary restriction. The intake valve seat and the port itself is the pinch point.This is like putting one of those HUGE mufflers and tail pipes on a Honda Civic. Lets flowtest the f--king muffler then make outrageous claims about the "potential" gains. LMAO!I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the elbow isn't going to do a whole lot one wayor the other. Especially on a stock motor!!!
MCE Performance I would whole heartedly agree with you.
Or even adding a huge exhaust tip on a diesel pickup...
MCE Performance You compare an intake restriction to a non restrictive large exhaust on a Honda, you might want to rethink that statement!
Just posted - Great video Gale. In reality this was very straight forward, comprehensive and well done test, regardless of how you view the product. We had similar results when doing research and were able to show a marked increase in flow rates on mirror applications. They key to remember is by eliminating restriction not only equals more flow but also equals the amount of heat that is being dissipated. For example if you were to break down flow rates into each cylinder, one would think that they are all equal. This is not the case. In real world applications, each cylinder varies more than you realize and this is very apparent the farther away from pressurized zone at the inlet of the plenum that attaches to air intake horn. When analyzing the laminar and thermal flow rates into each cylinder, is was discovered that #5 and most notably #6 we almost starving for air in comparison to cylinders #2 and #3 with #1 and #4 following. One of the most logical ways to cure this problem is to make every attempt to equalize pressure into each valve inlet within the cylinder head. When you consider the stock configuration limitations it would make the most sense remove any restrictions possible and make all attempts to increase air into the cylinders that are starving or better yet suffocating for air. In racing and pulling applications, it is common to literally have the bottom half of the casting intake on the cylinder head to be machined off and utilize extremely high flow intake manifold assembly that encourages equaled flow into each cylinder. This is done not only for power but also heat. All in all and to be honest you would not gain much power from utilizing any on these systems but you will most definitely gain some and dissipate heat. Much like an high flow exhaust system, only marginal power gains can be found but additional heat is eliminated. Most power increase come from tailoring to programing pulse deration, sequence, timing and other parameters including charge volume and pressure. With that being said it would stand to reason that increasing power via programing and increase volume and pressure by larger or multiple turbo chargers that every restriction possible should be eliminated. One thing you can say about Banks is that they do their homework and a lot of research and development goes into their products. I believe that as far as bolt on applications go the only system better than this Banks unit is the application that is currently under development here at Diesel Research Labs. This design will have close to 100% equal dispersion to all cylinders and flow a lot more air than even the Banks unit but it will be released in very limited numbers so I would just get the banks. It is the best of the bunch tested.
Gale needs to start making upgrades for the 7.3 gas motor. So much potential over stock.
Im pretty sure them holes on the pusher one are for a boost gauge ect. I don’t think they were planning on them to be used for injection
Gale is a smart man.
Respect, you know your stuff.
The elbow flowing good is all fine and dandy but what is the purpose of the elbow when the log on the intake is the same no matter what elbow is on it. Its basically impossible to port the log on all 6 cylinders all the way to the intake valve. So what exactly is the point. Its like a victor manifold on a stock goodwrench 200 horse 350 chevy.
Dear Mr. Banks... I truly hope you are mentoring someone and instilling as much knowledge as possible in them... Just the practical knowledge you possess would fill book after book. I'm sure you've forgotten more than any college text book. Sure, anyone that can read can learn volume, flow, PSI, mass, and so on... But only you, and folks like you, that have been doing this for decades can teach real world application and results. BTW, where do I send my resume?
Would have loved to see cfm plus, and would love to see some of this on other trucks older cummins, or definitely a 6.0 powerstroke
Banks performance is top tier, no dispute. Very concise and informative with apples to apples comparisons. The only thing i would question is, how do these flow ratings on this one piece of the 6.7's turbo system translate into hp/tq and driveabilty? Is it worth upgrading if you already have one of the competitors? For instance, my 2015 came with the pusher piece installed by the previous owner. It rates the highest next to his products. I would prefer his product but is it worth it? He also bashed design style and components of the pusher, buts makes some products of his own very similar. For example, the Power Pack for the early ford powerstroke 7.3 pre super duty manifold. This is the cold side piece that diverts the charged air into each head's intake plenum....very similar technology! Unless they have improved it in the past few years its the same tech they used in the mid 90's when it was new. He also hits AFE for marketing tactics of their MDV, which i agree is a gimmick. Every company has a marketing tactic to sell their stuff. Banks seems to use years of experience and technical data as "proof" which are valid but could also just be part of a technical jargon marketing plan, again how do they compare in HP/TQ and/or MPG?
I'd replace it for piece of mind if i had the pusher installed. The extras would be the angle for the water/meth ports, sure the other one has them but they're in positions that probably wouldn't even be beneficial.
Gale Banks has forgotten more about diesel power than most people will ever know!
Legend thank you for all your knowledge
Any time
I been shopping intake elbows for a few months. This video answered so many questions. Love the custom fuel line. Hey Mr Banks do u also sell a heater grid delete plenum?
For our brand new version, yes we do. Check them out here: www.bankspower.com/c-16
Awesome video great content can’t get enough 🇺🇸
Thanks 👍 Stay tuned for more, we have a the new Monster Ram dropping this fall with a new shoot out.
@@bankspower wow no way you know what would be nice to see if you can order them in color matched pain or powder coat to truck maybe by vin number ?
Love the work you do!! Want to know about this product for my 2005 5.9L Cummins. What is benefit? Does it help with fuel mileage? What will it do for my truck and do you make one for the 5.9L Cummins?
Banks does r and d and that is not cheap, then with r and your getting the best product peeps.
Gale the 🐐
👌
Thank you me banks!!!! You’re awesome!!!
Comes out with 10 years after the engine is released and makes fun of other people's designs that dropped new 8 years ago. A little late to the game but good job for the slight improvement.
Slight..... ROFL.
Fan boi
if I could afford a banks power package for my truck he wouldn't be able to take my money fast enough lol
awesome... best product ever
I dont buy banks for 3 reasons.
1. It wont clear twin fuelers - ie ATS twin fuel kit
2. Im not convinced that the extra flow equates to ACTUAL RWHP. My truck sees well over 100 psi at the intake manifold
3. It consistently cost more
Mr. Banks can you please make a video addressing the EGR on diesels? are they a detriment to the power and overall health of the engine? Im just new to this, and I own a BMW 335 diesel. Thank you so much for sharing your incredible life experience.!
Yes they are. They raise intake temperatures and introduce none burnable air into the cylinder to save on NOX emissions. The best way to handle NOX is with SCR in the exhaust system. Anytime you put extra heat into a motor you are making the engine wear out faster.
I'm a big fan of what you do and how much R&D you put into your products; however, why aren't the same design principles applied to all of your products? For example, I have a 98 12-valve Cummins, but the intake elbow has square cross-sections and costs about double what this one does. I realize that it is a different overall design and may have more machine work involved, but it seems like that could be executed better like the 6.7 L version is.
Impressive research!
Such a great video
I see the idea of this test but this is measuring total CFM through the intake horn to atmospheric pressure, no restriction (cylinder head). Most stock Cummins heads flow approximately 165 CFM and modified heads around 250 according to D&J Performance’s website. If you have a intake elbow that flows 900-1000 CFM what are you really gaining if your head will only flow 165-250? Theoretically the stock elbow will flow twice what the factory head is capable of.
I don't know about your pricing, you can buy that pusher style all day long for around $100...
Funny how he hated on the cheapest and closest competitor to his
Makes me wonder what Carol Shelby would have been like in today's UA-cam era .
It might be a little more fair to include the cost of the fuel line in your cfm to price list. It’s not like you don’t have to buy, it’s not reallly optional.
Seriously? Watch the video again dumbass.
Saw one of these a while back and I was struck by the engine's intake design - the inlet being right at the front of the engine. I was also struck by Mr banks' intake design - I thought there may have been an advantage in reducing the outlet of the elbow a little at the rear to form a venturii effect by using an internal radius to help turn the air towards the rear cylinders, even extending the elbow into the manifold to get a better radius.
As is, it would seem that the front cylinders will run with a little more effective boost than the rear ones* - or am I missing something here - remember, however good something is in isolation, it is how it works in place that counts? Perhaps just trying them on a bare head and checking the CFM at each cylinder, as in some cases the average may be different from the peaks and for any engine, it is important that they beathe the same for best performance - *NOTE, I believe Mr Banks' products would still come out on top, and I otherwise do like their design, but in isolation...*
Not being a smart-ass, it is a genuine query.
*Anyone tried running pressure sensors at each end of a running, loaded engine?
He's right about the "blade runner" thing, fins and vanes inside of any part of your intake tract are nothing but marketing gimmicks, all that was gone over sometime back by a guy named Jerry Branch who modified cylinder heads for Harley's, it's hard to find but he wrote a book on his findings that was only available to distributers of his (I was one when I had my bike shop), all that kind of malarkey is nothing but gimmicks designed to seperate people from their money.
Looks like this is the way to go...Cannot believe the other cast intakes did so poorly as to even get beaten by the sheet metal pusher intake( which Pusher only rates itself as a 49% gain over stock) .
So is this something that is worth installing on a stock engine? Would love better throttle response if possible but is this only something that compliments other upgrades?
I know you guys do all sorts of testing, but have you ever thought about dimpling the inside of the elbow like a golf ball to create a lower drag coefficient for the air passing over the walls?
It's a great application of that technology, but it's likely not cost effective in this situation. The air horn is meant to slow down the air (increasing the pressure) and directing the flow into the manifold.
That Pusher 3.5 sure has a mighty dent in it......
So what is the actual benefit?
More mpg or responsive in the foot pedal?
I assume without the pcm being tuned to allow more air you wouldn’t see any actual power gains from this?
Flow is great but show us the last step. Does all that flow make for more power necessarily. I for one would really like to see dyno numbers for each. Use the same vehicle and keep swapping up based on worst flow to best flow.
On a stock engine its more efficient and reduces heat by feeding your turbo more air it was starving for. On a built engine youll hit a wall with power or something will give with boost being trapped.
Just a general question. Why, other than the optimal methanol spray angle and sensor mount angle, do you need a 1000 com elbow on a cummins stock head that can't flow even 300 cfm? Race heads can't flow much more than that...
Does the giant increase in volume reduce the boost preemptive from the turbo? Do you have to free up exhaust to realize a power gain? If you never exceed 2500 rpm, how does more opportunity for intake help?
Lol I've seen many 600hp+ trucks with the STOCK intake horn. It dosent make that much difference. It's 90% show. It looks cool to pop open the hood and show it off.
We have another video you might be interested in...
ua-cam.com/video/sd2Jly-jszI/v-deo.html
Believe me if you tried to get anything like this in the UK it would be 2x the cost
What good is this test if the elbow isnt the most restrictive part in the intake? To be more accurate you would have to set up an entire intake from turbo to intercooler to cylinder head and test that.
Fast forward to 2022 and now BANKS is almost 3X the price as they were here in this video
The price provided in this video was for the Monster-Ram as a solo device with no fuel line, no high-flow billet heater plate, etc. If you factor those items into the 2017 price and you account for price hikes in raw materials that have affected thousands of businesses including auto manufacturers, you're at the 2022 price.
@bankspower I bought a Canadian 2013 6.7 Cummins with a Shocker Pass (air shut off safety system). I have disabled the system and removed the wiring harness. I want to remove the butterfly air shut off assembly beneath the intake elbow piping. The truck is already EGR deleted and tuned but has a factory intake elbow. I have heard that leaving the heater block installed makes the banks intake elbow useless. I live in a cold environment and want to leave the heater alone. My roundabout question for you: Is this true? Will I get any improvement with just your intake elbow? Also I need to remove that Shocker system which takes up around 8 inches of tube beneath the elbow, is there a complete replacement included in the kit. Thank you very much for your time. Hopefully I will make my first Banks Power upgrade and become a lifetime customer.
What happens to #1 injector when the HP line is disconnected and rust falls in? Bad news on LB7’s, which of course this ain’t.😀
It would be nice if they actually made them for the new 5th gens
Good video
Damn this dude out here wildlin😂
Clorox Bleach Huh?
All this told me is that I should get the pusher intake because I dont have to take an injector line off. Thanks, Gale.
CliffordRam that’s what I did and love it!!
How much did you pay for that Pusher? Hopefully no more than $150.
I love my pusher intake!!!
So what's the hazzle with taking an injector line off?
And the cost of that said line that you have to pay extra for but you don’t see him adding that 60$ to his cost per cfm chart do ya
I have the Cummings 903 engine in my boats. Good reliable engine. Just weaker then hell. Only pushing about 300hp with twindisk gears 2:1 and 28”x24”props. Ill check on prop measurements again tomorrow to make sure i told you right. Can i get some info on any ideas for more power on them. Have someone contact me please.
Dear Gale Banks…. Some of us are still building 12 valves. Can we do some blast from the past stuff??
We still offer parts for some select model years. What are you driving?
@@bankspower 1992 Dodge W250
Is there any way to do this test on exhaust manifolds . A real popular thing today is the 2nd gen swap. And stock replacement manifolds like the stead speed t4i. Is there any benefit over stock ?????? No one has determined this yet .
On a emissions cummins can you relocate the IMAP sensor so the EGR soot won't get to it ? Thank you