All this hype over the LLY mouthpiece restriction has anybody ever looked at the LB7 unit? I think you'll be surprised that it too necks down right near the inlet. Doesn't seem to hurt the LB7 turbo.

While I'll agree, the LLY unit is less than optimal and the LBZ is much better, I just cannot see these night and day gains being claimed....

Maybe someone with a dyno handy should do a before and after. hint hint.;):D

All this hype over the LLY mouthpiece restriction has anybody ever looked at the LB7 unit? I think you'll be surprised that it too necks down right near the inlet. Doesn't seem to hurt the LB7 turbo.

While I'll agree, the LLY unit is less than optimal and the LBZ is much better, I just cannot see these night and day gains being claimed....

i agree

but with all the claims that every single one of them have.... makes ya think. I have an LB7 i was going to port out a smidge much like superdiesel? did from duramaxdiesels...

I'll be selling the LB7 so i may not even do it...

i bought the kodiak mouthpiece for my lly, seems to give it more power, haven't pulled a full load with it yet to really tell, i'll let ya know

I'm actually going to dyno mine after the MP install.. I already got a before one done and the MP will be the only change done to the truck.

I put the LBZ unit on my LLY and while it seems to breathe easier and be a tad more peppy, if that an acceptable truck term, I certainly have not noticed any MPG improvement or reduction in engine or tranny temps.

I read somewhere a claim of 25-40 hp?? I don't know about that, but we'll see what the dyno shows. I'll be happy with lower EGT's and maybe better mileage, but I'm not holding my breath.

I could tell the difference and the tranny seemed to notice a change as well,took it a couple of days to adjust.

I put the LBZ unit on my LLY and while it seems to breathe easier and be a tad more peppy, if that an acceptable truck term, I certainly have not noticed any MPG improvement or reduction in engine or tranny temps.

X2. I've only driven mine w/ the new MP for two days, so I don't have MPG #'s either.

X2 on the tranny seeming to notice as well.

All this hype over the LLY mouthpiece restriction has anybody ever looked at the LB7 unit? I think you'll be surprised that it too necks down right near the inlet. Doesn't seem to hurt the LB7 turbo.

While I'll agree, the LLY unit is less than optimal and the LBZ is much better, I just cannot see these night and day gains being claimed....
Maybe because the LLY and up is VVT and computer controled. Some of us have had very noticeable and measured differences,some not.I recommend you log your LLY then test Kodiak or LBZ mp to see what difference it makes on your particular truck.Ive done my tests and posted my differences.My buddies truck with LBZ picked up 1mpg and dropped EGT 100* at cruise on test run loop.Compared to mine with Kodiak I gained 2mpg and dropped almost 150*.Both 05's,his is SRW 2500 cc sb 4x4.

I could care less about the HP increase...

The throttle response and twichy feeling is 10X better with the LBZ MP and after looking close at both units you can see why... That sharp and funky left corner cut it makes into the turbo would make an aerospace engineer break his slide rule in half...! :eek: The LBZ design says look at me I`m just like a fine ported intake runner on a top fuel dragster as compared to LLY which looks more like an inline 6 off the shelf cast iron 2bbl intake with dingle berries hanging inside it...

BTW that sharp cut line in the stock LLY MP would most certainly cause a low pressure turbulence area right on one side and infront of the turbo inlet which cant be good...

I'm actually going to dyno mine after the MP install.. I already got a before one done and the MP will be the only change done to the truck.
You are going to dyno it then swap mp then dyno again so all parameters are same?Different day,temp,humidity,etc can skew results.Need to dyno back to back for most accurate result.Please do it right:D

I'm fully aware of accuracy and this won't be back to back. i dyno'd last weekend and I'll go back to the same place, same time of day, have the same guy driving it, and I'll even wear the same shirt. in all seriousness...even back to back runs of the same truck will be different, that's just the way it is..what I'm looking for are drastic changes in EGT's, boost, hp, or something obvious. I have the dyno files so I can see the temp and everything else, they will be close enough for people to decide if it's worth it or not. As a reminder..as with all the stuff I've done for this site, I'm taking my own money and time to do this as a courtesy. :-)

sounds good.Cant wait to see what dyno shows.

it really doesn't matter which one provides the highest HP unless it's a huge gain.... WHat i think would really count is what does the curve look like with each. Mid range is what everyone drives/tows with so thats where it really counts.

As a reminder..as with all the stuff I've done for this site, I'm taking my own money and time to do this as a courtesy. :-)

Briano, you're da man! It's guys like you and Ben and many others that make this place rock! Thanks!!

it really doesn't matter which one provides the highest HP unless it's a huge gain.... WHat i think would really count is what does the curve look like with each. Mid range is what everyone drives/tows with so thats where it really counts.


This is what I was thinking also.
HP may not increase overall,but the midrange numbers will be higher.


I was a little disappointed with my throttle response.I still have too much turbo lag from a dead stop,time for a different tune I guess.

I noticed an improvement in spool up time, I am also seeing a higher boost acheived when WOT, only for a second or so with the same tuning as before. My truck is nowhere near stock, therefore, I cannot certify or discount the others claims. I had a true CAI before the MP change. I also have had my cooling issues under control for 2.5 years. FWIW, I am getting slightly less mpg on the current tank than average, I suspect I may be on a different blend of fuel than before. I hadnt used the truck much since Thanksgiving, and seeing as I carry 100 gallons, I just put fuel in it for the first time since early fall. It may also be that it is taking me 10 or better miles to get the truck warm enough.

I do know that my buddies LBZ towing a slightly smaller and lighter load runs warmer than my LLY does with my previous mods and the stock MP. So the LBZ MP and intake are not the ultimate overheat solution. My racing season is about to start again, in a month or so, I will know the real differance.

I'm fully aware of accuracy and this won't be back to back. i dyno'd last weekend and I'll go back to the same place, same time of day, have the same guy driving it, and I'll even wear the same shirt. in all seriousness...even back to back runs of the same truck will be different, that's just the way it is..what I'm looking for are drastic changes in EGT's, boost, hp, or something obvious. I have the dyno files so I can see the temp and everything else, they will be close enough for people to decide if it's worth it or not. As a reminder..as with all the stuff I've done for this site, I'm taking my own money and time to do this as a courtesy. :-)

You will still need to do your baseline run on the same day to be valid, sorry. But it is an easy changeout.

FWIW, I would also put on a ppe boost controller and repeat the experiment. If you really want to see the mountainous gain, do the test up high, like Denver.

Odd that this would be tested on the dyno, as steady state heat reduction is at the center of the benefits. That is where the big gain comes from...post heat soak. You can't obtain SS heat soak on a garage dyno.

Does anyone have access to a load and a rolling road dyno?

You will still need to do your baseline run on the same day to be valid, sorry. But it is an easy changeout.

FWIW, I would also put on a ppe boost controller and repeat the experiment. If you really want to see the mountainous gain, do the test up high, like Denver.

Odd that this would be tested on the dyno, as steady state heat reduction is at the center of the benefits. That is where the big gain comes from...post heat soak. You can't obtain SS heat soak on a garage dyno.

Does anyone have access to a load and a rolling road dyno?


This from a guy who believed his DIC mpg calculator with modified tuning...:rolleyes:

Too bad TDG lost old posts, the one with 28.5 mpg in teh title (30.5 in the text) was elightening to say the least...


I really doubt that you will measure any gain. This is like the BD exhaust manifold. You know the stocker needs improvement, but you will not measure the gains....

I really doubt that you will measure any gain. This is like the BD exhaust manifold. You know the stocker needs improvement, but you will not measure the gains....

this is what I'm guessing to, but I'll find out for sure with my truck. I'm not doing the change out on the dyno; Those of you that have dyno's in your shop can do that. I'll do my best to get the conditions as close to the first one as possible as I mentioned earlier. This is just for my own curiousity and everyone can take it or leave it.

my guess is the turbo will be a bit more efficient with the non restrictive opening, but not make more power per say. we'll see..

if there is a gain it should happen all the time anyway.... + 2 or 3 horses is pointless..... If the power band is smoothed or is larger then it will be easy to say it helped...

All of us trying different things is what leads us to where we are now. Duramaxes making 1000+ lbs/tq, running in the tens in the quarter mile and so on. Some claim this as a be all end all, some are skeptical. I tried it because I got my MP fairly cheap and had nothing to lose really. Bare in mind I have never dynoed my truck because the only dyno around is an engine dyno and thats it without taking a ferry and making an all day trip. Turbo spooled up quicker off the line, my trans did shift funny for a couple of days so it was doing a relearn, and I did pick up MPG. My typical cummute to work and home is about 330 miles round trip. If I filled up before I left and topped off, it would take a little over a half a tank in the summer and two thirds of a tank plus in the winter. Now I only changed my MP last month so were still on winter blend. I went from 2/3s of a tank plus to half a tank. I picked up mileage while running winter blend diesel. So did it work for me, yeah. Is it going to pay for itself, I figure after ten tanks its paid for so I'm about half way there. It'll be interesting to see what it does on summer fuel.

Skleppy...unless I am missing something you were getting exceptional mileage. I think, and I could be wrong, but my tank is 24 gallons. If you are going 330 miles, using half a tank of summer blend or approx. 12 gallons, that puts you at 27.5 mpg!! and thats before your MP change. Even with your mods that seems very impressive. Am I missing something from your previous post?

Before I go to work I will leave town with a "topped off" tank. I've got a CCSB so I have the 24 gal tank. According to Google my trip is 122 miles one way so say 240 miles return. While I am at work, I drive back and forth three and a half times (14 miles round trip) and then do some shopping on my day off and mileage will vary on that one but probably at least another 20 miles that day. So 240 + (14 * 3.5 = 49) + 20 = 309 miles so I am off by about twenty miles on my original math but the consumption is still the same. So say 310 / 12 = 25.8 mpg. WOW:eek: thats the first time I've ever worked it out. If thats on winter fuel, I really want to see what its going to do on summer blend.

Driving style, steady cruise at 110 km/70 mph, tires are at 65 psi all around, Diesel Kleen in every tank and good regular maintenance. If I make a couple of minor changes, say go down to 100km/60 mph and air up past seventy I might even be able to come close to 30 mpg this summer!!! Is it just me or do that seem fantastic for a 9K lbs truck???:)

where are you getting the 12 gallons used figure? If your gauge is at half, chances are you're actually quite a bit beyond 12 gal.

If you're going that far on 12gal thats amazing. I get a touch over 430 miles per tank (usually takes ~23gal when I fill up). But thats a lot of around town driving and turning 35's.

lets go ahead and turn this back to the mouthpiece thread rather then becoming a battle of fuel mileage....

When I go to work in friday, I have to fill up before I go. This time I will record and see the mileage (kms vs litres) and then fill up right when I get home as well and we can do the math. Most of my driving (>75%) is highway driving and I'm only running 265s on H2 wheels as well. Big enough for me but small enough to make sense.

What about exhaust and intake mods on stock trucks? All dyno graphs I have seen in DP magazine show very small maximum gains but significant changes in power delivery (mostly with exhaust).

I spent $500 on an exhaust and got a nice exhaust note, I spent $300 on KB's IOH kit and got a truck that drives completely different (again, feels like a stock LBZ).

As far as MPG, have not really tracked it to see if there is a difference. I have never had problems with over heating based on how I use my truck so improvement there is not a huge concern for me.

I am interested in Briano's dyno test, but regardless of the out come I am a huge believer and would buy the intake again in a second and reccomend it to anyone with an LLY. -Keith

If "BANKS" or another company was selling this mouthpiece their claims would be 24 hp increase and 12% increase in mileage. ;) Place your bets.

I did not intend to turn this into a mpg. thread, just making sure I have all the info straight in what I read as I am new to diesels and want to learn as much as I can. Even confrontational is posting dramatic mileage at 18.7 mpg touting a lot of around town driving. Personally I get 17mpg mixed driving and 21 on the hwy. And whoever said the when the gauge reads half a tank it probably is more than 12 gallons used is right on the money.

Still kind of off topic, but my fuel guage is opposit of what you all are saying. At half, I've only used maybe 8 gal. On empty, with the low fuel lite on, DTE reading LOW, I only put in 18 gal. 1 time I did actually put in 23 gal, but had driven about another 60 miles after the lite came on, while pulling a trailer. Normally, only 17-18 gal with the low lite on. Topped off 1 time just cause i found cheap fuel when needle was at half, and only put in 6 gal. makes me think possibly stepper motor, but if motor than why would the low lite come on so early as well?

To figure out your mpg you can not guess on how much fuel you used. Best way to do this is fill your tank right up to the brim, right to the top where you can see the fuel. Then set your trip to zero. Now you have a complete full tank and zero miles. Drive like you always drive, don't change your driving habits. Keep track of all the fuel that you put into your truck. Burn at least 3 to 4 tank fulls. Then at the end fill your tank again right up to the brim where you filled it the first time. Then write down your miles from your trip. Add up all the fuel that you put into your tank right up to the last fill up. Now do the math, that will give you real life mpg as the way you drive and where you drive. Don't add the fuel that you filled up with when you started just the fuel you put in after the start.

Filling up your tank and then driving down a flat hwy for a couple of hundred miles like a granny, then guessing on how much fuel is left in your tank does not give you real life mpg. I am not saying that everyone is doing that but there are a few that do and that is where you see guys claiming 28 or 29 mpg.

Bruce

everyone... please no more mileage posts.. this is about the LLY/LBZ Mouthpiece..

there are tons of mileage posts already in this section, start a new one or add to the existing. this is all off topic of this post.

a mod should remove all of these if possible.

I think the whole thread should be canned. There is no productive point to it, just another editorial and speculative agenda. If someone actually had anything substantive to support a claim, then open it up again.

DANGER....DANGER Will Robinson!!!!! Hurry up Mods come and censor us!!!!!! the thread is getting out of hand. Give me a break! Too many people here get butt hurt way too easy these days. Everyone RELAX!!!

threads eventually get non productive on their own. my only concern was to keep the topic on track so future readers don't have to go through 15 pages of random stuff just to get to the relevent info.

threads eventually get non productive on their own. my only concern was to keep the topic on track so future readers don't have to go through 15 pages of random stuff just to get to the relevent info.

Are you still going to dyno this weekend?

Are you still going to dyno this weekend?

I'd be interested in seeing dyno data as well. It would really be good to see it on both a stock and modified vehicle, to see if has a greater impact on one or the other.

Unfortunately, I'm kinda one of the naysayers on this mod. I won't blast it , because I don't think it could hurt. Maybe because I have a Cali emissions truck it is less responsive to some mods, I don't know. Or, because it's winter by me, the winter blend fuel and/or cold temps are having an impact. As of now however, I haven't noticed any change in power or accelleration, going by the butt-o-meter. Maybe I'll see something when it warms up, and I'm putting the truck to work.

All this hype over the LLY mouthpiece restriction has anybody ever looked at the LB7 unit? I think you'll be surprised that it too necks down right near the inlet. Doesn't seem to hurt the LB7 turbo.

While I'll agree, the LLY unit is less than optimal and the LBZ is much better, I just cannot see these night and day gains being claimed....

Maybe someone with a dyno handy should do a before and after. hint hint.;):D


That is a great point. Why come out with an attack on a mod that people are saying benefits them? You could have disprove this with your "Superflow Lie Detector in house (http://www.kennedydiesel.com/photogal/pages/dyno.htm) " . So Mr. Kennedy, what is your true motive here?


I really doubt that you will measure any gain. This is like the BD exhaust manifold. You know the stocker needs improvement, but you will not measure the gains....

So are you now against modding the drivers side manifold for better flow? Don't you have a DIY on your site for cutting out the restriction and welding a plate over the hole?

As anyone knows improving air flow in an engine improves it's efficiency and little improvements and up to larger improvements.


This from a guy who believed his DIC mpg calculator with modified tuning...:rolleyes:

Too bad TDG lost old posts, the one with 28.5 mpg in teh title (30.5 in the text) was elightening to say the least...


As a member here and a potential customer, I view this comment as way out of line. Are we not here to help each other improve our trucks? What relevance is something a member may or may not have said about something else on another site that has been deleted? I would expect more appropriate conduct of a supporting vendor, but I'm new and that's my opinion.

There is stink on this whole thread.

That is a great point. Why come out with an attack on a mod that people are saying benefits them? You could have disprove this with your "Superflow Lie Detector in house (http://www.kennedydiesel.com/photogal/pages/dyno.htm) " . So Mr. Kennedy, what is your true motive here?




So are you now against modding the drivers side manifold for better flow? Don't you have a DIY on your site for cutting out the restriction and welding a plate over the hole?

As anyone knows improving air flow in an engine improves it's efficiency and little improvements and up to larger improvements.




As a member here and a potential customer, I view this comment as way out of line. Are we not here to help each other improve our trucks? What relevance is something a member may or may not have said about something else on another site that has been deleted? I would expect more appropriate conduct of a supporting vendor, but I'm new and that's my opinion.

There is stink on this whole thread.

You said it perfect, and it started with the first post.

X2 - Well said!

Thank you INA. Well put. If people are seeing a benefit, small or large, then it was worth it to try.

Closing this thread since it's going nowhere. If dyno results become available, hopefully they'll be posted in a more helpful, useful thread...