I was considering picking up one of these intakes for my 5.9 Magnum engine in my Ram 2500 truck if these claims in the ad are accurate, especially the gas mileage claims. Its an awfully highly priced intake, so I would like to hear thoughts from folks that are using it and what your experiences have been.

http://www.hughesengines.com/Index/produ...mp;partid=24773

For MPG the Kegger is the benchmark.

Getting rid of that fat wad of torque down low is going to hurt MPG not help it.

Thanks for the details!! Kinda went along with what my gut was telling me.

Any thoughts from others?

The tune is a bigger factor than the intake. The factory tune is a mile off.

Those dyno sheets don't look right either. Look at the Hughes intake and the M1 2bbl, their torque and horsepower intersect at 5250 RPM like they are supposed to, but the kegger and the M1 4bbl aren't even close, so something is off. I'm no expert but i've learnt that at 5250 RPM, torque and horsepower are supposed to be equal

Thanks for all of the responses. I'm relatively happy with the truck's overall performance right now - just trying to optimize gas mileage. I just put a used 5.9 Magnum motor out of a '99 Dakota into my '96 Ram 2500 4x4 truck and did several stock/enhancement mods to the engine prior to the install (roller chain/gears/tensioner, HV oil pump, MP oil pump drive, Milodon 8qt oil pan, valve job on heads and new head gaskets, Hughes aluminum kegger intake lower plenum kit, shorty Pacesetter headers, new distributor/water pump, cleaned/bead blasted throttle body, new distributor, plugs, plug wires, etc.). After getting engine installed, motor runs like a clock - just really want to optimize mileage at this time - also plan to swap the R46RH tranny with a rebuild unit with Transgo shift kit, new converter and deep trans pan soon. Just want the truck to be reliable and pass a gas station from time-to-time.

If the Hughes Magnum Intake were to truly improve MPG,
what would be doing it?

I can't think of any effect at part throttle,
except if the different runner design
provided a more equal cylinder-to-cylinder
air to fuel ratio.

There is some evidence that
the stock kegger intake may allow cylinders 7 and 8 to run a bit leaner
... what I mean is that those two back runners flow a bit more than the other six,
which with the same fuel injector flow mean the back two have a air to fuel ratio above 14.7

The spark plug ceramics on cylinders 7 and 8 almost always seem whiter after 20,000 to 30,000 miles of use.

The majority of blown head gaskets reported by owners are on cylinders 7 and 8.

If you wait until a very hot and dry summer afternoon,
then fill up with 85 or 87 octane
and do full throttle runs up a steep hill,
a 5.9 Magnum V8 with the stock kegger intake manifold will many times begin pinging slightly at 3500 to 3800 rpm
(unless it has been 'Death Flashed')

This pinging can be made to go away temporarily if you either:
1. De-carbonize cylinders 7 and 8 with Mopar Combustion Chamber Conditioner spray.
or
2. install 'fires in oil' spark plug extension sleeves on cylinders 7 and 8
or
3. Swap cylinders 7 and 8 to
Autolite 3923 spark plugs
with their short nose design.

Instead of changing to the Hughes intake manifold, it might be possible either to install slightly larger fuel injectors in cylinders 7 and 8 (bigger than 23.2 lbs/hr)

Ford uses movable'swirl valves' in some of their intake manifold runners.
It might also be possible to weld in or drill and tap a custom swirl vane in the top surface of the runners of cylinders 7 and 8.
This might give faster burn and slightly less flow.

For better MPG,
you want higher torque available at lower rpm,
with the gearing adjusted to take advantage of that,
so that when you are driving at part throttle
the vacuum in the manifold is in the 4 to 8 inches of HG range,
where fuel efficiency (BSFC) is near optimum.

http://autospeed.com/cms/title_Brake-Specific-Fuel-Consumption/A_110216/article.html

I had heard that Hughes changed the angle of the fuel injectors so that they spray more towards the intake valves

I've also heard that the stock dodge injectors are single hole, and shoot a pretty solid stream of fuel. By changing to 4 hole injectors that have a much finer mist spray pattern, the fuel is better atomized and burns more completely, improving mileage a hair.

Combine the two?

maybe i'll pick up a set of 24lb FMS injectors and have hemi-fever write me a tune for those...if i ever get the damn edelbrock heads on and a cam.

whats the price on those ford injectors?

I've been thinking lately of running E85, and getting an engine tune to run it. that would be a lot cheaper than the premium fuel I'm running now, and still ensure that I'm ping free with the cam, intake, and headers I'm running.

not sure the 24 lb/hr injectors would be big enough though, and would probably run out of flow at WOT above 3500-4000 rpm.

As I build my 56 Dodge pickup daily driver, one goal is decent power but also decent fuel economy. The Hughes F1 airgap intake looks promising as a replacement for a modified Kegger on the 5.2 Magnum going into my 56. I also have a 8HP-70 trans to go with it, so I should have good low end torque for crusing on the highway at 70, hopefully to get the revs around 1800 with the 3:55 rear axle ratio. The rear axle is the stock 9.25" limited slip from my 2001 donor Dakota. Getting the crusing revs near 1800 seems to be a sweet spot for good fuel economy, like mentioned above:

For better MPG,
you want higher torque available at lower rpm,
with the gearing adjusted to take advantage of that,
so that when you are driving at part throttle
the vacuum in the manifold is in the 4 to 8 inches of HG range,
where fuel efficiency (BSFC) is near optimum.

This past weeked we did a 600+ mile round trip up to Bayfield WI in our 2019 Kia Sorento. Its got a 3.3V6 rated up to 290hp, and 252 ftlb of torque and an 8 speed trans with a final 3:22 ratio. At 60+ mph it gets about 28mpg on level roads, turning around 1500 rpm. 70+ mph takes about 1800 rpm and still gets over 26 mpg.

Gets me thinking about the Hughes F1 airgap intake to help get the best daily driving mileage from the 5.2.

As I build my 56 Dodge pickup daily driver, one goal is decent power but also decent fuel economy. The Hughes F1 airgap intake looks promising as a replacement for a modified Kegger on the 5.2 Magnum going into my 56. I also have a 8HP-70 trans to go with it, so I should have good low end torque for crusing on the highway at 70, hopefully to get the revs around 1800 with the 3:55 rear axle ratio. The rear axle is the stock 9.25" limited slip from my 2001 donor Dakota. Getting the crusing revs near 1800 seems to be a sweet spot for good fuel economy, like mentioned above:

For better MPG,
you want higher torque available at lower rpm,
with the gearing adjusted to take advantage of that,
so that when you are driving at part throttle
the vacuum in the manifold is in the 4 to 8 inches of HG range,
where fuel efficiency (BSFC) is near optimum.

This past weeked we did a 600+ mile round trip up to Bayfield WI in our 2019 Kia Sorento. Its got a 3.3V6 rated up to 290hp, and 252 ftlb of torque and an 8 speed trans with a final 3:22 ratio. At 60+ mph it gets about 28mpg on level roads, turning around 1500 rpm. 70+ mph takes about 1800 rpm and still gets over 26 mpg.

Gets me thinking about the Hughes F1 airgap intake to help get the best daily driving mileage from the 5.2.

The kegger is made to provide power at low rpms. The F1 raises it. The dyno results that Hughes posts are fixed. I seen actual dyno results compared to other manifolds and the kegger makes more power down low. The other manifolds will make more power just at a different rpm. You may want to check this out.

It's just a conversion factor, 33,000/(2*pi)=5252.113.... 33,000 lbs/min=1 HP, 2*pi is the conversion of radians per revolution. This is for HP and lb-ft. The metric system will have a different conversion factor.

THANKS!
I've been looking for Danno's flow chart for years. The Dakota RT board is long gone, and a HD failure dumped my archive copy.

I came across this website recently. The owner appears to have done a lot of research and modification to prove that the kegger intake is more than capable on a street driven, low end torque craving engine.

https://utawesomeperformance.com/tech-info.html

There was a test on engine masters from a company i cant remember. They made a version of the kegger that did flow better than the stock one but i don't remember how it did on low end performance.