Explorer Intakes. EGR vs Non EGR. Flowbench, track times or dyno results requested

TooSlo86

TooSlo86

Club Member
Ok guys, so I've looked all over the great www and can only find that your typical Stang guys prefer the EGR variant of these simply because they can keep their egr and most have the act sensor boss, not to mention it is the same cast as the Cobra lower. I'm not your typical stang guy and could give two craps about that stuff and just want to know which intake I should keep for a "stock" build ;-). I've got one of the early GT40 cast lowers with internal egr (RF-F4ZE 9K461-BA) same cast as the FRPP Cobra lower, and the matching explorer upper with the internal egr passage, and I've got a non egr upper/lower from a '99 also which is cast RF-F4ZE 9K461-BB. Like I said, I don't care about what the typical stang guy does while comparing these, I want to know if there is a clear difference in flow/power on one of these vs the other variant or maybe even mixing and matching upper/lowers.

I'm also thinking about fabbing up block-off plates to check the volume of each of the castings, lowers and uppers using measured water. I know that it won't tell me flow characteristics but in theory the one with more volume would be the one I would lean at keeping around. What are your thoughts on that?

If anyone has ANY data or FIRST HAND experience comparing the two that would be great, otherwise it looks like I have a day of dyno pulls ahead of me before selling one of them. I'll obviously have to make some baseline pulls with the aftermarket upper/lower I run currently. Just wondering if someone has actually gotten this deep into these instead of just saying they are all the same before I spend a day on the dyno to figure it out.

Thanks
 
So no-one wants to give up their secrets, or no-one is as sick as me and cares which is worth 1 or 2hp more? :lol:
 
I doubt anyone has done back-to-back runs for a "stock" intake.
Most anyone working to that level of detail is using aftermarket stuff.
 
Very true, and seeing as I can only think of 1 class that restricts you to these as an option that further limits the chance of people that have gone through a stack of them to see which one, or combination of, work best. But it's worth a shot ;)
Looks like a lot of measuring, trial fitting for port alignment and testing ahead.
 
A long time ago a friend did some testing with these when he ran NMRA factory stock. He ended up using a 93 cobra lower and a 99 explorer upper. Not sure why it exactly worked that way but if you look at the later explorer castings they are much cleaner. On the early cobra lowers many of them look like the casting shifted when they were poured and there is a crease in the runners.
 
TopElimn8r said:
A long time ago a friend did some testing with these when he ran NMRA factory stock. He ended up using a 93 cobra lower and a 99 explorer upper. Not sure why it exactly worked that way but if you look at the later explorer castings they are much cleaner. On the early cobra lowers many of them look like the casting shifted when they were poured and there is a crease in the runners.
Click to expand...

Now that's what I'm looking for! Just so turns out that's the two I have at the time. Any clue how he went about plugging the egr port in the cobra lower since there is nothing there to seal it off on the 99 upper? I'm thinking really the only way to legally do it is to use block-off's sandwiched between the head and lower since you can't weld the port shut on the lower.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top