Has anyone had experince with this intake manifold. From what I was told that it doesn't heat up like a typical aluminum manifold causing a colder more dense air flow. Here is a link http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors...30786.

 

Dave Hickman was "the first LS/Vtec builder?"

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JCushing &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Dave Hickman was "the first LS/Vtec builder?"</TD></TR></TABLE>

No Omniman here on the board was the inventor of ls vtec.

 

but enough about LsVtec...
what about this manifold?

 

There arent "composite" materials available to my knowledge that can claim the weldability of aluminum, yet have a higher thermal conductivity. The only material available is copper that has a higher thermal conductivity than aluminum, which isnt practical as a material for such reasons as cost, weldability and tarnishing. There are composite materials in plastic, and fibers that can have a higher thermal conductivity, but are extremely expensive and can only be injection molded or vacuum bagged to produce (this manifold does neither).

Secondly, an intake manifold design must be based off of cam duration and lift, displacement of the engine, compression ratio and intake port area and length. If these factors are not taken into account when the design is made, you'll miss the tuning peaks that can take advantage pressure waves generate inside of the intake manifold. This is called the inertial supercharging effect, and provides a high pressure wave at the inlet valve upon opening effectively cramming more air into the intake stroke and providing more volumetric efficiency for the engine.

Thirdly, the above mentioned characteristics are also taken into account when designing the intake manifold around a Helmholtz tuning phenominon. You can think of air in a intake manifold as a pnemuatic spring/mass situation. The air has a compliance like a spring, and upon certain rpm ranges the air generates more compliance and causes a bottle neck for the airflow. As a result the volumetric efficiency of the engine drops, the torque drops and thus the power suffers in that region of design. Its important in designing the Helmholtz resonator characteristics of the intake manifold that the secondary natural frequency and the primary natural frequency are considered in order to best tune the engine to its highest volumetric effieciency. Not considering this will not provide the most optimal design possible.

Finally, the intake manifold is garbage. From the non optimized plenum, plenum volume, runner length, non-taper runners and poor welds it looks like garbage. The special "composite" material looks like a very ductive form or aluminum probably 3032 or 4041, but I cant be sure without taking a material sample. Dont waste your money.

 

Speak of the Devil, ohhhh speak of tha devil...
sorry..
So what kind of IM do you like, there are lots of them out there right now. I'm looking for good midrange, and was planning to go with the AEBS.

-edit-
When you say that it does sort of look ghetto fabbed.


I also don't see how it could magically turn into ITB's either. That plenum doesn't look very nice. Unfortunately I don't know too too much about IM's. I know the basics, but why is the square bad, it should hold more air for the space it is in, and if it has velocity stacks on the inside (nobody said it did or didn't) would the square design be so bad?

 

Honestly, non of the intake manifolds short of the AIR have been engineered. I use the edlebrock on my turbo hatch, but it will soon been replace with my own custom manifolds i am going to start to make by december. The reason I know so much on the topic of intake manifolds is due to researching them for the past 6 months for my senior engineering project. I should have an all motor design designed, built and tested by spring. The boost intake manifold will begin testing this winter. Intake manifolds are far to generic on the market, they need to be custom built to the displacement, cams and compression ratio to optimize the design. I will have the flow testing done on our flow benches at school, as well as Finite Element Analysis preformed on the dimensioning via Ansys and Fluent (fluid flow, cfd programs that can accurately predict incompressible flow characteristics of geometry).

You can place itb's inside of a plenum, but this causes the advantage of having just the single tuned runner of the itb's to be thrown out. The plenum shape and volume have a tremendous effect on the engines volumetric efficiency, both with the Helmholtz resonator characterisitc and inertial wave charging aspect. The box shape will produce what is called eddies, or pools of stagnant turbulent flow. These flows effectively lower the available volume inside the intake manifold, as well as become a restriction if near the runner opening.

Velocity stacks or mini venturis are a touchy subject to deal with incompressible flow. They do speed particle flow up since the ability for the air particles to move around the discontinuity of the runner/plenum 90 degree "lip" is eliminated. The problem arrises in the taper, length and "mouth" characterisitcs of the velocity stack for the flow of the particular application. The general rule is that the longer the velocity stack the air is speed up in the higher rpm, the shorter airflow is speed up in the lower rpm. Again, just a general rule though. The usual flow increase is 5-15% with the velocity stacks.

 

You can't listen to the Misfits and go to university, its not allowed.
So you don't like the AEBS? What about the ITR manifold then? That has a lot of R & D into it.

 

The AEBS and Skunk2 are pretty much copies of each other, based off the OEM itr manifold. They do produce a good midrange gain in power, but they are far from optimized. The runner length is good for the power range, but the plenum volume, shape and material characteristics hold it back from making alot more power. OEM manufac. dont produce the most optimized designs, as you can see from the power adders available on the market today from cams, headers, exhausts, etc. They what is right for the displacement, cams, compression ratio of the engine they are designing.

 

I thought the AEBS was based off the SiR II manifold.
Of course, you'll make the most power with a intake manifold custom tuned to your application, but that is expensive for everyone. How do you feel about extrude honing?

 

Its expensive, but worth it. I am shooting for 600-800.00 price range for custom intake manifolds built for boost and all motor, but I'll have to see how that goes. Extrude honing will help, but it does nothing to help the frequency response of the manifold. Frequency response is just as much, if not more, of a factor than glass smooth finish to speed particle flow. This is what the AIR manifold has the distinct advantage, complex geometry for best particle flow, glass smooth finish and frequency response taken into account.

 

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

No Omniman here on the board was the inventor of ls vtec.</TD></TR></TABLE>

thats my point...... i thought it was well known that omniman who worked for Skunk was the first. i was just pointin that out.

 

cool, I might get an extrude hone done on my AEBS when I buy it. I hear that thing looks like anus.

 

Well from what I have heard this manifold is pretty bad ***. DHR has sold a set of these runners to Leslie Durst the 9 sec all motor crx. I don't know if they have it on the car but from what i have been told the runners are super light and almost seem like a plastic material if that helps. They have a yno of this manifold on a stock gsr making 185 whp w/ bolt ons the manifold and a 70 mm tb so I'm assuming the thing works. Also they have 2 different designs of runners on set for itb's and the other for the plenum and it does have velocity stacks.

 

If you look close at the runners, the flange part of the manifold, it was cast with a "Weber DCOE" flange on the runners. you could swap from ITB's to the plenum fairly easy, but the ITB's that you use would have to mount like the Webers do. I know that the Toda manifold has some type of insulative properties, but I can't speak for the DHR piece.

 

it looks good enough..........

for me to poop on!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by advanracing62 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
for me to poop on!</TD></TR></TABLE>
spoken like my true champion!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boosted hybrid &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...The plenum shape and volume have a tremendous effect on the engines volumetric efficiency, both with the Helmholtz resonator characterisitc and inertial wave charging aspect. The box shape will produce what is called eddies, or pools of stagnant turbulent flow. These flows effectively lower the available volume inside the intake manifold, as well as become a restriction if near the runner opening.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I forsee the future having adjustable runner lenghts AND variable plenum designs.

 

Misfits kick ***. Nuf said!

 

boosted hybrid you got some good info their. Its nice to see such deep responces. Got any specific ideas you plan to use for you IM's?