Just curious if its all hype or warranted for the sheetmetal intake manifolds, or even thme vs, the JG, vs, stock style. anyone have any knowledgable info on this subject maybe some dyno results before and after.

Thanks guys.

 

pretty much most racers and guys are using the jg mani for the price its very effective.

 

bump , looking for more info , thanks.

 

Still waiting on that JG sohc mani to come out so I can start my next setup

 

well pete, think of air like water..its most efficient when air travels in a swirl. now coming right outta ur tb if it hits a big box like a venom it hits inneficiency ...then it gains efficiency in the runners if they are circular. like water, air takes the shape of its container or the shape of the walls its forced through. the jg is a better design, you'll still gain w/ a venom due to sheer volume in size but the jg should perform better.

 

you saw that tornado informercial didnt ya? j/p

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by X-Static &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">you saw that tornado informercial didnt ya? j/p</TD></TR></TABLE>

lol, but they made 20 hp dude all they had to do was install it and turn off the A/C

It depends on your powerband Victor X is rated at 7k-10k rpm while something like skunk2 is for lower rpms.

I'm not sure what the sheet metal intakes are rated at but I'm almost positive they would be in the upper rpms too.

It's all about pairing it with you setup.

 

nah, ive seen it, the concept is right though. why do you think our runners arent square?

 

I want to know if a different manifold would actually help when you're dealing with forced induction. I know for all motor applications, the idea is to have runners of a certain length so that when the air is sucked it, it causes a vacuum effect and another column of air will be waiting right behind the valve the next time it opens up. The longer the runner, the longer it will take for that air to reach the valve, that's why longer runners are better for lower RPM and shorter for higher RPM. But isn't that whole concept thrown out of whack and you have a turbo/supercharger pushing the air in, where there is pressure in the manifold and not vacuum?

Someone enlighten me.

 

I just checked out Edelbrocks Webpage under new for 2003 they have the SOHC manifold power increases between 3000-7500 rpm. I believe the part number is 4756 you get it w/ or w/out the secondary fuel rail

I just talked to Skunk2 about the D16 IM it will be out in 2 weeks that means two years!

 

the reason im asking is becuase i have been pondering a new IM for a while now , but i dont wanna do it for the normal 3whp gains , i dunno if that changes with turbo or not , but i wanted to get some advice on the 2 types. ill prob only be reving the car to 9k, maybe a tad more , but im betting on 9k now , beucase its a astock head

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Type-GS-R-Turbo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I want to know if a different manifold would actually help when you're dealing with forced induction. I know for all motor applications, the idea is to have runners of a certain length so that when the air is sucked it, it causes a vacuum effect and another column of air will be waiting right behind the valve the next time it opens up. The longer the runner, the longer it will take for that air to reach the valve, that's why longer runners are better for lower RPM and shorter for higher RPM. But isn't that whole concept thrown out of whack and you have a turbo/supercharger pushing the air in, where there is pressure in the manifold and not vacuum?

Someone enlighten me.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I was thinking the exact same thing: "Wouldnt all this change once the air is pressurized?"
So I came up with this:


Im not sure if it works yet, because I dropped my current project, and started another one. Im hoping to know by the end of August.

 

Wow. Did you fab that yourself?

 

Will you have a hood?

 

With intake manifolds the actual plenum shape does not matter how the air flows. Whether the intake is a box shape or a cylinderical shape, as long as the intake manifold is symetrical in the way that it delivers airflow to each cylinder.

Now, the largest factor in designing an intake manifold is around Helmholtz reasonator. The engine itself is the oscillation, the intake manifold is designed around the oscillations to damper them in certain parts of the rpm band to maximize torque. The dampening of the oscillations is similar to a pneumatic spring and mass system, where you increase the spring rate to dampen out the oscillations of the mass. With an intake manifold you design reasonation chambers to dampen out the osciallations at certain rpm ranges to maximize torque therefore creating power. I have two SAE articles concerning the phenominon with diesel engines, gains of 20-25% torque at certain rpm ranges are possible but packaging constraints of the engine dont allow to design multiple reasonation chambers to dampen out a super wide range of rpm band to create the maximum amount of power.

In general designing an intake manifold relies on two things, plenum size and runner length. The general rule of thumb is plenum size should be 3" for anything under 1.6L, and 4" for anything over 1.6L. The runner length is critical to where you want to maximize your torque in the rpm band. The shorter running length the higher peak torque gain, the longer the lower peak torque gain. Take a look at the factory designs with the ITR and the b16a, you can visually compare both intake manifolds and see that the factory had this in mind.

You have to consider two main things when selecting an intake manifold IMO: 1. Fitment 2. Peak torque gains.

I have had the skunk2 and the eldebrock, and work with the sheet metal intake manifolds. For the best OEM fitment of the sensors the skunk2 takes the cake. I am running the edlebrock since I want my peak torque gain to be higher with my .82a/r exhuast housing on my turbo, but the fitment just isnt there with the skunk2 manifold. I personally dont think that the sheet metal intake manifolds are that much superior to the edlebrock. If you are going to upgrade your intake manifold go with the edlebrock and save a decent amount of money. Until a company designs an intake manifold around the Helmholtz reasonance phenominon, we are limited to what is on the market.

 

well see i wont spend the moeny on a skunk 2, becuase it baically is my stock manifold, but ported runners and polsihed very nicely.
jg would be a better option for me becuas eof my high revs, and will also be going with .82 housing also . the thing is though, will my Drag piping work without having to cut it up ?i have the rubber elbow to connect charge pipes, im wonrdering if i can just take some off the bottom of the upper ic pipe and make it fit with little mod. ?

 

Your piping will fit with the JG, I have seen two other car's I have tuned that did the same thing and the piping fit with no problems.

 

nice deff something to keep in mind for future projects.
thanks for the info Jeff. BTW , get those stickers made yet?

 

With my engine problem, tuning cars and fabricating this summer I havent had time to wipe my own butt it seems. I dont even know where to get them made...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tinker219 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
</TD></TR></TABLE>

What are you going to do about the throttle cable ? bolt it to the hood? lol

 

if you have a design , brint it with to dyno day , i can take it to the people who do our vinyl work .
im hoping to still get my car out there that day , so be prepared

 

i just ordered a JG for my buddies gsr, i guess i'll see how it looks first hand in about a week, give us 3 weeks to see how it works.

not to be off topic but was a date set for the dyno day, im 99% positive im coming if i have my car done or not. i also have my own plotter and make my own stickers so if you guys need something pm me.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tinker219 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">So I came up with this:</TD></TR></TABLE>

Dude, you rule. I wish I had money to get a welder and learn how to weld, I would be forever welding up new projects...

 

The way the throttle valve opens, I would think that the cylinders fed of of the "top" two runners would get more air than the "bottom" two.

As the throttle plate rotates about its shaft, I picture the throttle plate tilting backwards towards the merge collector at the top- allowing more flow. For the throttle plate tilting forwards away from the collector at the bottom- I picture that hampering the flow there. It seems to me that the off-idle performance of tinkers intake manifold would be rough. Keep in mind I'm picturing water when I talk about 'flow' and I'm not an expert. Maybe I'm wrong in this thinking.

 

Or switch 'top' with 'bottom' in by post above depending on which way the throttle shaft rotates.