They're on the link to the site

The only JMB to be tested on this site caused massive KR for an unknown reason and was sold on Ebay. Going back to a gutted airbox solved his problem.

I have no idea what changes have been made to the JMB since then.

The JMB is more show than the INTENSE as far as looks under the hood, but there'* really no major advantage in flow if any. At the same time, I don't know the price difference between them, so that would be something to compare as well.

They're both pretty much equal.
JMB'* is 5 bucks more so not really a huge chunk out of your wallet.

right, but the JMB has proven to cause KR....and with the amount of engine flex (even with the solid hockey puck mount) i would NOT want a soild intake, even the 2 piece one, on my car

What'* KR?

KR = Knock Retard. The Knock sensor detects a knock, and the PCM retards the timing to compensate.

Has this occured alot?
Or just recorded once?

Looks like only one has tried it, with poor results. Who knows? Maybe it was just a fluke.

On the other hand, there are a lot of Intense FWI'* around, and everyone seems happy with them.

And both are the same price, roughly? I think I'd go with what works, vs. what is unknown/known to suck.

...

i have stock motor mounts and the 2-piece JMB FWI and have had no problems. i dont understand how a smooth tubular intake that is powdercoated and stays cool can cause massive KR vs. a bumby strechy tube. the JMB should flow a lot smoother then the bumpy rubber from the intense. what is the reasoning behind the JMB causing "massive KR"??? doesnt make sense how intakes soo similar have such different gains. and the smoother, cooler one is worse.