Could be. But now you have a problem. I know the manifold that came on my 93 stock works very well. We don't know about yours.

LOL. Well, i guess we are about to find out...
intresting though, atleast, with mine, we will know.
Depending on how it works, i may try to get a 1993 LIM this Summer/fall.

I would suggest it. From what I've seen of the (maybe late 93) possibly 94 confirmed 95 manifold, I'm not impressed. Those dead areas are a flow disruption that will create turbulence in the manifold. I can think of no other purpose for their existence than acoustic damping for the shockwave generated by the valve closing.

I just located a 93 LIM in Edmonton, gunna call on it tomorrow...
i may be tearing into the car before Bfest..to get it running correctly.
Going to make sure he verifies his stamping # with mine as well.
Im glad i read all this!

Would 95 be able to run a 93 manifold correctly?

Or the "modified" version that you had intended on doing?

Personally, i dont see why not, my car still runs with the 94/95 version, it just doesnt like it
NO WONDER, I had FAR more material to get rid of inside of my manifold, versus what you had to Bill, hence i was asking you how far into the port you went.
Just looking at some of your old porting pics, i can see the first 1/4 inch or so in each of your ports, that you ported and polished, there isnt much material behind that first 1/4 inch on the 92/93 mani, but there is a butt-load on the 94/95, as I learned
This is a damend good topic!

Well I believe that the 94/95'* are already pretty well set up....maybe a lil work here and there.....

But the 92/93'* are designed for the less efficient supercharger, so I may have more of a problem that way, but who knows.

I could be WAY off base with that conclusion.

Let'* take this a step further.

In raw numbers, if you look at GM'* under-rating, the difference is:

205 HP @ 4600 Rpms and 260 Ft Lbs @ 2600 Rpms
225 HP @ 5000 Rpms and 275 Ft Lbs @ 3200 Rpms

Let'* assume for comparison'* sake the 92 and 93 are the same.

Why did the numbers go up and the peak rpm'* change?

From the factory, both versions ran the SAME LEVEL OF BOOST. While the Gen3 is more efficient, they spin it slower with a larger drive pulley. Hmm.....same boost pressure at WOT. But it takes slightly longer to achieve that because of the pulley diameter differences, so throttle response in the 92/93 SHOULD be slightly better. So if they post the same boost numbers (8-9psi average boost from the factory), where'* the extra power coming from? It'* simple. The Gen3 creates less heat (slightly). Netting perhaps 5hp, no more. Interesting thought.

So where'* the power coming from? We know the TB is larger. This would account for more hp and tq, and the peak rpm'* shifting. We also know the LIM was somewhat different, but we have yet to answer the 1994 question when Joe get'* in here with pics. But at the same time, is the different part numbers between 92 and 93 at least ONE of the keys to unlocking the difference in performance? Or is it the Exhaust manifolds? It'* certainly not JUST the valvetrain.

What it all boils down to is that it'* NOT the supercharger that gains the major portion of power. The end result is that the car doesn't car if it'* a clay brick on top, all it cares about is how much boost it sees.

Did Matt make his system more efficient? You bet. When he gets the fueling figured out, he'* probably going to have more power than an identical setup with no LIM porting. However, this is coming at a cost, as he'* going to draw more flow through the smaller restricted Gen2 inlet and smaller TB. These are VERY hot surfaces to begin with. This restriction creates heat before the boost charge is even created. It'* not just about how much flow there is, but also how much restriction there is.

So now what do I do? The 93 manifold works great with the Gen3 top end. But does that mean the 94 or 95 manifolds wouldn't be better? Maybe. Maybe not. We're going to have to rely on Joe for this one, or I'm going to have to do some very time-consuming computer flow modeling (which I have the software for, but have to go through the daunting task of reproducing both manifolds in 3D first).

The short story is that the power increase didn't come from the Gen3 supercharger, at least from it'* point of efficiency. The inlet diameter (mostly attributed to the TB bore diameter) was the key.

Porting the LIM should benefit both generations equally. It IS a proven restriction (on the flowbench and on the street). Which LIM should be used for the best results? We'll know soon.

In MATT'* case, I'd be tempted to go ahead and get a 93 LIM, but set it on the shelf. Let'* try to nail down the fueling with the current manifold first, and learn something.

Lot'* of good info. Where the heck are Joe'* pictures..??? C'mon Joe..we are waiting on you.

Bill..
Please add the pics to the GH account with year titles etc for future info.

it looks as if the 92/93 Mainfold is more free flowing, less to get in the way, less to create extra heat..
im going to get a price today, then get my hands on an adjustable FPR