Intake Manifold discussion. Tech debate.

Q&A regarding engines, turbos, and intercoolers and power upgrades

Postby illGT4 » Tue Oct 05, 2004 6:49 am

The JUN won't fit.

I don't have any info on the HUX.. Other than the following two are better.

The Ross is very nice, $695.

The one Chris Kattage makes IMHO is the best. His design makes more mid range. He was charging about $1200. Best to contact him and see.

fj_chris@yahoo.com
Members don't see the above ad. Register now - it's free!
Imagewww.illtuned.com

- Professional Motor Sports Driver & Instructor
- Vehicle Dynamics Specialist
- I4WDTA 4x4 Certified Trainer

User avatar
illGT4
Established Member
 
Posts: 1820
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:39 am
Location: New Castle PA

Postby turbotom » Tue Oct 05, 2004 11:48 am

Wow It looks like most of your questions have been answered. Yes I agree that you pretty much have only 2 choices. ChrisK does for the most part make intakes based on the customer. You have a limit to how much you can change in such a tight area though. I tried to come up with something that was more cost effective and production oriented. It works. Bryan Moore is making 400 wheel on pump gas using this manifold on his customers cars. He is doing another car right now which should also do the same. I will do whatever I can to help you out. I really think you would have to see our intake i person to see the workmanship in it. Everything is CNC Machined except the plenum which is 4X4 square tube. Even the curved runners are machine out of billet and not sheet metal. Hope this helps you out.

Thanks
Tom
turbotom
 


Postby ChrisD » Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:36 pm

I've emailed Chris. $1200 sounds like a lot but may be worth it, I guess depending on your goals.

turbotom wrote:Wow It looks like most of your questions have been answered. Yes I agree that you pretty much have only 2 choices. ChrisK does for the most part make intakes based on the customer. You have a limit to how much you can change in such a tight area though. I tried to come up with something that was more cost effective and production oriented. It works. Bryan Moore is making 400 wheel on pump gas using this manifold on his customers cars. He is doing another car right now which should also do the same. I will do whatever I can to help you out. I really think you would have to see our intake i person to see the workmanship in it. Everything is CNC Machined except the plenum which is 4X4 square tube. Even the curved runners are machine out of billet and not sheet metal. Hope this helps you out.

Thanks
Tom


Hey Tom,

Thank you for replying to this. I am definitely impressed with the results shown with your manifold. I guess it shows that our engines really love to breathe.

I still have a few questions that I am not sure on.

- At what point does it become beneficial to upgrade the intake manifold? Hyde made gains at 258whp...but how low in powre could you go and still see appreciable results from? For example, how much hp would you need if you got only a 15whp gain? 10? Are we talking 200, 220, 240 to the wheels? Lets say for the average person, no EMS, using some turbo that is larger than the stock CT26, be it an upgrade, 20b, t3/t4, etc. No cams.

- If sitting in the 250-275whp range, could you add an intake manifold, drop the boost, and suffer no negative affects? I saw that the torque curves didn't seem to shift very much with your manifold...maybe you'd see the same hp and less torque if you did this?

- Do you think you would need to alter the ignition timing maps significantly to keep safe with this manifold? Or would it be more likely that I would only need to tune fuel?
1988 ST165
1994 ST205 WRC
ChrisD
Established Member
 
Posts: 1622
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:30 am
Location: Calgary AB Canada

Postby enzytebob » Tue Oct 05, 2004 3:00 pm

I just remembered, there is also the option of extrude honing the factory manifold. ATS does this as a service. I don't have cost or hp data with me, however. Maybe ATS can enlighten us on this possible alternative.

The other benefit i see is that you retain all the crap that keeps you legal. It also is a good way to get more hp w/o calling attention to tech inspectors in race events in case you wanted to race in those brackets that do not allow intake manifold changes.
enzytebob
Club Member
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 8:14 pm
Location: Mostly in the woods

Postby billprice » Tue Oct 05, 2004 3:21 pm

chris_dittrick wrote:




- At what point does it become beneficial to upgrade the intake manifold? Hyde made gains at 258whp...but how low in powre could you go and still see appreciable results from? For example, how much hp would you need if you got only a 15whp gain? 10? Are we talking 200, 220, 240 to the wheels? Lets say for the average person, no EMS, using some turbo that is larger than the stock CT26, be it an upgrade, 20b, t3/t4, etc. No cams.

Chris, I don't think there is a "threshold" of horsepower where gains start. I think you could figure somewhere between 5-8% hp gain on a stock ECU and probably more like 10-15% with a progammable ECU.
chris_dittrick wrote:- If sitting in the 250-275whp range, could you add an intake manifold, drop the boost, and suffer no negative affects? I saw that the torque curves didn't seem to shift very much with your manifold...maybe you'd see the same hp and less torque if you did this?


Methinks Tom would be better suited to answer that one and the next.
Image

'07 GS350 AWD
'09 Toro Z5030 ZTR 23hp of lawnmowing fun
User avatar
billprice
Club Member
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 9:56 am
Location: Indianapolis, IN.

Postby chrisk » Tue Oct 05, 2004 5:33 pm

When looking at a custom manifold one has too consider what the engine/car is going to be used for. Factors like where power use will occur and RPM range desired play a large role in the manifold design. A manifold that takes away from mid range and works very well on top might not be the ideal for street use. Then again a manifold that works exceptionally well in the mid range might not be ideal for drag use or long circuits where all the power is need up top.

Runner diameter, length and plenum size is very important when it comes to manifold design. Air flow is important but just as important is the velocity or the speed at which the air flows. It does not help if a manifold flows very well (lots of CFM) but the air speed is so slow that it can not fill the cylinder in time. (especially in the mid range or low valve openings) This situation is daily seen when cylinder head porters hog out the ports too much. The car makes power up top but it’s a dog low down.

If an open port (port without valves in it) flows for example 280 CFM with airspeed of 320 feet per second and with valves in, flows 265 CFM at airspeed 345 feet per second the manifold that flows higher CFM but at a lower airspeed will make more power upstairs but will be a lot less affective down stairs but a manifold that flows slightly less than 280 CFM but match the 345 air speed or slightly better will do well threw out the range. Example of this is the manifold I built for David Lashbrooks MR2 that made 755 HP with 550 plus foot pound of torque. Runner diameter was 1.870 with a length of 11 inches. Mid range on this car is not poor due to manifold design but due to turbo size. T78’s are very lagy on a 2.0 L engine.

Too much airspeed can also become a problem and in a turbo car can be eventually the cause of compressor surge and or poor cylinder fill.

My manifolds are not one size fits all but custom hand made for each individual’s requirements with an emphasis on power at low boost levels and even more at the higher levels. (No Bling bling just functionality)

The question was asked at what HP level does it becomes necessary to change the manifold. It is my opinion that there is a direct benefit at any HP level, even air distribution and unobstructed flow is beneficial to any engine no matter what the HP level
chrisk
 


Postby illGT4 » Tue Oct 05, 2004 6:37 pm

chrisk wrote:When looking at a custom manifold one has too consider what the engine/car is going to be used for. Factors like where power use will occur and RPM range desired play a large role in the manifold design. A manifold that takes away from mid range and works very well on top might not be the ideal for street use. Then again a manifold that works exceptionally well in the mid range might not be ideal for drag use or long circuits where all the power is need up top.

Runner diameter, length and plenum size is very important when it comes to manifold design. Air flow is important but just as important is the velocity or the speed at which the air flows. It does not help if a manifold flows very well (lots of CFM) but the air speed is so slow that it can not fill the cylinder in time. (especially in the mid range or low valve openings) This situation is daily seen when cylinder head porters hog out the ports too much. The car makes power up top but it’s a dog low down.

If an open port (port without valves in it) flows for example 280 CFM with airspeed of 320 feet per second and with valves in, flows 265 CFM at airspeed 345 feet per second the manifold that flows higher CFM but at a lower airspeed will make more power upstairs but will be a lot less affective down stairs but a manifold that flows slightly less than 280 CFM but match the 345 air speed or slightly better will do well threw out the range. Example of this is the manifold I built for David Lashbrooks MR2 that made 755 HP with 550 plus foot pound of torque. Runner diameter was 1.870 with a length of 11 inches. Mid range on this car is not poor due to manifold design but due to turbo size. T78’s are very lagy on a 2.0 L engine.

Too much airspeed can also become a problem and in a turbo car can be eventually the cause of compressor surge and or poor cylinder fill.

My manifolds are not one size fits all but custom hand made for each individual’s requirements with an emphasis on power at low boost levels and even more at the higher levels. (No Bling bling just functionality)

The question was asked at what HP level does it becomes necessary to change the manifold. It is my opinion that there is a direct benefit at any HP level, even air distribution and unobstructed flow is beneficial to any engine no matter what the HP level


Very good to see you are back! Welcome!

Please stick around this time. :)

Best Regards
Imagewww.illtuned.com

- Professional Motor Sports Driver & Instructor
- Vehicle Dynamics Specialist
- I4WDTA 4x4 Certified Trainer

User avatar
illGT4
Established Member
 
Posts: 1820
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:39 am
Location: New Castle PA

Postby Zeus » Tue Oct 05, 2004 11:57 pm

chrisk wrote:My manifolds are not one size fits all but custom hand made for each individual’s requirements with an emphasis on power at low boost levels and even more at the higher levels. (No Bling bling just functionality)


this is what i love... and why i would consider having you custom build one to be the best option out there... because if the cutomer has a certain power band in mind you can build to suit and maximize everything for that

that being said the rmr being cheaper(you didnt actually quote any prices so im going with illgt4 and asuming this is correct... if you dont mind how much do your intake manifolds average) is a bargain with good gains too

Chris what would you recomend once most of the regular bolt ons are done.. cams? or an intake manifold?

i think the intake manifold is the safer of the two... while the cams are better bang for the buck?
Blake Brown
Image
User avatar
Zeus
Club Member
 
Posts: 824
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2004 4:43 pm
Location: Victoria BC Canada

Postby chrisk » Wed Oct 06, 2004 1:55 am

Although cams "Might" give you more bang for the buck, a well built manifold will be a safer attribute due to the fact that there will be an even distribution of air flow and a reduced detonation risk on the piston 3/4 side.

My personal choice would be first to correct airflow and then chase down peak performance. I good manifold will allow the full potent ional of cams when installed at a later stage.
chrisk
 


Postby Zeus » Wed Oct 06, 2004 3:23 am

that was my feelings as well on the safeness issue... also i think jeykles car showed that the intake manifold is the restriction more so than the stock cams

hmmm guess i will start saving
Blake Brown
Image
User avatar
Zeus
Club Member
 
Posts: 824
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2004 4:43 pm
Location: Victoria BC Canada

Postby AwdGte » Wed Oct 06, 2004 10:27 am

He is obviously referring to situations where you are under WOT, in which case the ecu does not look at the voltage signal from the AFM, it references preprogrammed maps in the ecu, which are based on the VE of the engine when the car is in stock form. The extra pound of fuel pressure was added to compensate for the increase in VE, as they apparently did not have control over duty cycle.


RedCelicaTRD wrote:As long as you still have an AFM on your car the ecu will be able to make the correct fueling changes. Boost doesnt matter at all on a stock ecu'd car, only cfm does. This manifold will change how much air you can push into the engine which will change the cfm amount. The ecu will see this with the AFM and add fuel accordingly. The only way you would detonate more with this intake manifold is if you ran out of fuel due to increased flow. If you where already running you stock injectors at 80% duty and then added this manifold you would have problems. If you already a decent intercooler adding this manifold could lower the intake temps due to the fact there is less restriction and the turbo wouldnt have to work as hard which could help put the turbo into a more efficient zone.
AwdGte
Club Member
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 2:02 pm
Location: MD

Postby MrWOT » Wed Oct 06, 2004 3:14 pm

chrisk wrote:When looking at a custom manifold one has too consider what the engine/car is going to be used for. Factors like where power use will occur and RPM range desired play a large role in the manifold design. A manifold that takes away from mid range and works very well on top might not be the ideal for street use. Then again a manifold that works exceptionally well in the mid range might not be ideal for drag use or long circuits where all the power is need up top.

Runner diameter, length and plenum size is very important when it comes to manifold design. Air flow is important but just as important is the velocity or the speed at which the air flows. It does not help if a manifold flows very well (lots of CFM) but the air speed is so slow that it can not fill the cylinder in time. (especially in the mid range or low valve openings) This situation is daily seen when cylinder head porters hog out the ports too much. The car makes power up top but it’s a dog low down.

If an open port (port without valves in it) flows for example 280 CFM with airspeed of 320 feet per second and with valves in, flows 265 CFM at airspeed 345 feet per second the manifold that flows higher CFM but at a lower airspeed will make more power upstairs but will be a lot less affective down stairs but a manifold that flows slightly less than 280 CFM but match the 345 air speed or slightly better will do well threw out the range. Example of this is the manifold I built for David Lashbrooks MR2 that made 755 HP with 550 plus foot pound of torque. Runner diameter was 1.870 with a length of 11 inches. Mid range on this car is not poor due to manifold design but due to turbo size. T78’s are very lagy on a 2.0 L engine.

Too much airspeed can also become a problem and in a turbo car can be eventually the cause of compressor surge and or poor cylinder fill.

My manifolds are not one size fits all but custom hand made for each individual’s requirements with an emphasis on power at low boost levels and even more at the higher levels. (No Bling bling just functionality)

The question was asked at what HP level does it becomes necessary to change the manifold. It is my opinion that there is a direct benefit at any HP level, even air distribution and unobstructed flow is beneficial to any engine no matter what the HP level


I have heard and read in several books that about 310ft/s should be ideal velocity for optimum performance in the intake manifold, exhaust is slightly higher around 350ft/s. Got the numbers from this book http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1859606911/qid=1097079241/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/002-9748183-9588001?v=glance&s=books&n=507846. Quite comprehensive. Deals with manifold design, combustion chamber design etc. It's a good read.
MrWOT
Club Member
 
Posts: 956
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 10:12 pm

Postby illGT4 » Wed Oct 06, 2004 4:28 pm

MrWOT wrote:
chrisk wrote:When looking at a custom manifold one has too consider what the engine/car is going to be used for. Factors like where power use will occur and RPM range desired play a large role in the manifold design. A manifold that takes away from mid range and works very well on top might not be the ideal for street use. Then again a manifold that works exceptionally well in the mid range might not be ideal for drag use or long circuits where all the power is need up top.

Runner diameter, length and plenum size is very important when it comes to manifold design. Air flow is important but just as important is the velocity or the speed at which the air flows. It does not help if a manifold flows very well (lots of CFM) but the air speed is so slow that it can not fill the cylinder in time. (especially in the mid range or low valve openings) This situation is daily seen when cylinder head porters hog out the ports too much. The car makes power up top but it’s a dog low down.

If an open port (port without valves in it) flows for example 280 CFM with airspeed of 320 feet per second and with valves in, flows 265 CFM at airspeed 345 feet per second the manifold that flows higher CFM but at a lower airspeed will make more power upstairs but will be a lot less affective down stairs but a manifold that flows slightly less than 280 CFM but match the 345 air speed or slightly better will do well threw out the range. Example of this is the manifold I built for David Lashbrooks MR2 that made 755 HP with 550 plus foot pound of torque. Runner diameter was 1.870 with a length of 11 inches. Mid range on this car is not poor due to manifold design but due to turbo size. T78’s are very lagy on a 2.0 L engine.

Too much airspeed can also become a problem and in a turbo car can be eventually the cause of compressor surge and or poor cylinder fill.

My manifolds are not one size fits all but custom hand made for each individual’s requirements with an emphasis on power at low boost levels and even more at the higher levels. (No Bling bling just functionality)

The question was asked at what HP level does it becomes necessary to change the manifold. It is my opinion that there is a direct benefit at any HP level, even air distribution and unobstructed flow is beneficial to any engine no matter what the HP level


I have heard and read in several books that about 310ft/s should be ideal velocity for optimum performance in the intake manifold, exhaust is slightly higher around 350ft/s. Got the numbers from this book http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1859606911/qid=1097079241/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/002-9748183-9588001?v=glance&s=books&n=507846. Quite comprehensive. Deals with manifold design, combustion chamber design etc. It's a good read.


?

I don't think he was quoting specific numbers....

Bottom line, do what you feel is right. I'll trust my hard earned money in the hands of an experienced builder. And one that has done a Lot of 3S-GTE work, with an excellent reputation.
Imagewww.illtuned.com

- Professional Motor Sports Driver & Instructor
- Vehicle Dynamics Specialist
- I4WDTA 4x4 Certified Trainer

User avatar
illGT4
Established Member
 
Posts: 1820
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:39 am
Location: New Castle PA

Postby ChrisD » Wed Oct 06, 2004 6:42 pm

Thanks for the info Chrisk, much appreciated! Do you have any before/after dyno sheets I can see to show how the intake manifold affected the power curve? I'd be especially interested in any midrange loss/gain, the shape of the curve up top (rising, flat, falling etc), and the change in the shape of the torque curve. I just want to see some examples of people who have went with your manifolds. I know that it is optimized for each application of course.

AwdGte wrote:He is obviously referring to situations where you are under WOT, in which case the ecu does not look at the voltage signal from the AFM, it references preprogrammed maps in the ecu, which are based on the VE of the engine when the car is in stock form. The extra pound of fuel pressure was added to compensate for the increase in VE, as they apparently did not have control over duty cycle.


When you are under WOT the ECU does use the AFM signal. This is how it derives the load in which the engine is under. You are correct in that it does use maps, however those maps are given at x RPM and y Load. The ECU does not use the signal from the O2 sensor when under WOT.
1988 ST165
1994 ST205 WRC
ChrisD
Established Member
 
Posts: 1622
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:30 am
Location: Calgary AB Canada

Postby chrisk » Wed Oct 06, 2004 7:34 pm

chris_dittrick wrote: I'd be especially interested in any midrange loss/gain, the shape of the curve up top (rising, flat, falling etc), and the change in the shape of the torque curve. I just want to see some examples of people who have went with your manifolds. I know that it is optimized for each application of course.


All the dyno sheets I have available are of fairly heavy modified 3S-GTE engine.

My business philosophy is fairly simple: If I build a customer a manifold and he\she is not happy with the result, that customer can return the manifold for a full refund. The only requirements are that the customer returns the manifold in the same condition he/she received it in, include a dyno sheet and or some proof that he/she at least tried to tune the engine appropriately.

I am thinking of doing a GB but to make it worth for the customer (+/- $700 - $750.00) and me I will have to make about 15 units.
chrisk
 


PreviousNext

Return to Performance and Power

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests