Well dont have the actual manifolds done yet but wanted to get some comments or what not, we have made a manifold similar to this design and made some good number flow pretty good per cylinder on the flow bench. its a simple basic design, with a smaller body that is tappered to create more pressure and split the flow evenly as much as possible. check it out, its going to be made out of titanium! heres the layout:

 

If you have a prototype I would be happy to test it for you, you just pay dyno time

 

you can etch-a-sketch like a ****! can't wait to see the prototype....

 

i will get one too

 

titanium is not that much lighter than aluminum.

but it costs 9294698724872349873987 times as much....


Modified by envision2teg at 8:48 PM 5/18/2005

 

Wow....that thing is bananas..

 

Interesting design. Probably better at flowing even amounts of air / pressure into each cylinder than current IM's.

 

anyone ever try a wilsons manifold on an all motor set up?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by cubish &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">anyone ever try a wilsons manifold on an all motor set up?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

link me i wanna see it

 

interesting i'd love to follow this things story
and hope it works well

 

Runners are all different lengths... #1 being the longest, followed by 2, 4 then 3

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Innovation &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Runners are all different lengths... #1 being the longest, followed by 2, 4 then 3</TD></TR></TABLE>

That appears to be the backbone of the design... keep the pressure drop as near equal as possible between runners and theoretically the flow volume/velocity should be nearly the same as well.

 

is this manifold going to be even remotely affordable???? Im still waiting for someone to make a b16 type manifold ... Some thing that makes power in the upper midrange, instead of 20 diffrent manidolds making power past 8500, where most of us will never be able to use it

 

Why titanium? Aluminum is lighter.

Al: 2.643 g/cc
Ti: 4.5 g/cc

 

us aluminim so i can afford one please lol

 

Thanks for all the positive replies guys, heres some answers to your questions:
1. the runners are different sizes due to the fact that number 1 is at the end with a "blocked" passage way in which forces most of the air into that cylinder, I designed this manifold to have the longest runner there becuase it would recieve the most direct air pressure anyways, number 4-3 tapper and is also larger around the body of the intake manifold making it alot easier to breath and direct air into the manifold.
2. I choose titanium becuase its going to be my first one and i want to make it look good the simple truth, but as i take my time in making them, i will probably use aluminum so that they will be more cost friendly.Although im not sure about the price yet
3. The intake manifold looks large but it is actually the same size as a type-r intake manifold, a little larger on the main body though, this will keep pressure in the intake manifold. becuase as you well know, some of the other intake manifolds out there like str,venom,etc take atleast 10psi of boost to make them work properly and gain hp! So from testing those intakes i have decided to keep the intake small.
4.This project will take a while to complete. But i will post dyno's of the prototype as soon as i get everything done, I hope it may be an alternative to ITB's. The intake manifold will have a 70mm throtle body port, using as much as flow as possible.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92hatchattack &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">is this manifold going to be even remotely affordable???? Im still waiting for someone to make a b16 type manifold ... Some thing that makes power in the upper midrange, instead of 20 diffrent manidolds making power past 8500, where most of us will never be able to use it </TD></TR></TABLE>
this is being built for low-mid-high rpm's, something where all rpm ranges can benefit. But only results will tell.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ace$nyper &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">interesting i'd love to follow this things story
and hope it works well</TD></TR></TABLE>
Wish me luck guys, I haven't started making this particular design yet.




Modified by allmotordc2integ at 9:55 AM 5/19/2005

 

^^^ high rpms maybee, but low with a 78mm Tb port???? is that a typo??? How the hell are you going to maintain velocity through a 78mm TB and port????

 

78?!?! That is excessive.

Why titanium? You're going to spend $12349801239485702348 on the prototype.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92hatchattack &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">^^^ high rpms maybee, but low with a 78mm Tb port???? is that a typo??? How the hell are you going to maintain velocity through a 78mm TB and port????</TD></TR></TABLE>
Have titanium laying around from past "no-go" project. 70mm sorry about the typo!

 

70 is better, but still to big for my 1.8L application... i dont want to go over 64mm... 70 would be good for 2.0L and up though

 

im sure i can design multiple sizes. I have also designed a new throttle body port passage, it will consist of fins running along the inner body of the intake manifold in a "spriril direction" to create a since of control air turbulance. its a simple easy system that i got from a respected v8 hot rod builder.

 

Wouldnt different length runners cause each cylinder to peak at different rpms?

 

we did a research on a flowbench with a stock itr manifold with equal runners, it was a "interestinf" result. ill let you know how it works out

 

looks like a Wilson's. Is that the general shape it will take?

 

look like the Jun manifold i got for the Sr20det motor does it has air horn inside?