Intake Manifold design theories

Share ideas/designs/theories/tips/development:
(manifolds, chassis, personal projects, MIG, TIG, etc)
Verik
240sx Wannabe
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Atlanta

Post by Verik »

Al_s14 wrote:Does anybody know where he got ITB Flanges to weld to stock runners? or were they jsut sawed off extra set of itbs?
it was custom.. he welded them on after test fitting with silicone couplers.
Image
JGSturbo
KA-T.org Sponsor
KA-T.org Sponsor
Posts: 2438
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Coos Bay, OR

Post by JGSturbo »

Burke wrote:
JGSturbo wrote:
you have some good points and seem to know you stuff but here you have some misconceptions. A tapered dome would be ideal. What happens on a side feed plenum is that the air rushing in from the throttle body does not want to change direction and flies past the other cylinders and smashes into the back of plenum right at #4, creating a more dense pocket in the plenum. This leads to #4 getting a greater mass flow rate or air, essentially creating a leaner condition in that cylinder.
That is why you have a tapered plenum. You create a greater restriction for that cylinder, evening out the cylinder distribution.
What would be ideal is a plenum so large that the runners act like there is no plenum and open to atmosphere. This is why you have the runners protrude up into the plenum so that are no restriction on the entrance from the side of the plenum. But in a cramped engine compartment this is quite difficult.
With the age of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) one can create many variations of plenum shape and decide upon the optimal shape relatively quickly, which is why you are seeing what you are with tapered plenums.

I hope this helps. If you have any questions I spent a year studying this stuff to design mine for my thesis.
I've seen lots of tapered plenums etc. and if the plenum was fairly small I could see your point. Fluid dynamics are great if your taking constant flow to all cylinders but there isn't constant flow to all cylinders and then toss in waves from opening/closing engine valves and you have a mess.
Also tappering down the plenum the wrong way could actually direct more flow into the last runner IMO.
Running a very large plenum volume some times 2x displacement your going to have decent equalization because the volume dampens these abnormalities. This should negate some of the need for a tapered plenum. Also the dome seems to re-direct the air that hits the back of the plenum. Having the plenum extend past the last cylinder should reduce the chance of channeling the incomming air flow to the last cylinder as well. Granted oversize plenums have their downfalls but they do work.
Look at the Edlebrock honda manifold, I'm sure they have plenty of engineers well versed in CFD yet they still run a simple cylinder shaped plenum. They could have designed up just about anything with the solid models used in modern casting.
I'm not claiming to have any kind of background in fluid dynamics, etc. but over the years I have built many successful intake manifolds and have observed lots of different trends in lots of different markets.

IMO the supra guys (veilside IIRC) started using tapered plenums (maybe for a few other reasons than rear cylinder flow) so other mfg. want on the lastest greatest trend so they start doing the same.

There might be something to a tapered cylindrical plenum but whether it can be done well enough to have a tangible improvement has yet to be seen. Tangible would be making it worth the extreme amount of labor/$$$ to have such a feature.
Last edited by JGSturbo on Sun Oct 01, 2006 11:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
http://www.jgstools.com/turbo/index3.html
See our JGS KA-t.org section for lots of good info :)
User avatar
8-bit
SuperMod
Posts: 4701
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 11:21 am
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

Post by 8-bit »

mattmartindrift wrote:
Verik wrote:Those ITB's are GSX 750 throttle bodies and velocity stacks. he's using a megasquirt to tune it. when his car was N/A he made 155 whp with exhaust and the itb's so they are quite effective.

Think about it...those TBs are wayyy too small. They're made to run a 750cc engine @ around 130hp tops....and you're trying to push 300+hp on a 2.4L

Do things add up????
there are 4 of them.. i think it'll be fine... lol
http://www.areasoundmusic.com

*Nistune/Calum ECU tuning advisor

Thinking about E-Mance? Think twice and read this:
viewtopic.php?t=45057&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

WARNING: Emance is now using an alias as ECUTUNERGUY and REFLASHPROS. Spread the word.
Verik
240sx Wannabe
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Atlanta

Post by Verik »

jgs makes great points. and even though you'd think a tapered plenum would be best, you have to remember that the plenum is going to remain pressurized all the time meaning when the valves close, the pressure will equalize in all 4 runners, when they open again, it's best to maintain equal volume or air flow by using a large volume/non tapered plenum.
Image
Burke
240sx Wannabe
Posts: 100
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 4:26 pm
Location: Detroit

Post by Burke »

Fluid dynamics are great if your taking constant flow to all cylinders but there isn't constant flow to all cylinders and then toss in waves from opening/closing engine valves and you have a mess
.

Any decent CFD package will do a transient analysis nowadays.
You would be suprised about how little research aftermarket companies really do. The Edelbrock manifold you speak of is the WORST intake manifold design on the Honda market. The only companies I know of that have really done real engineering work are AIR and FullRace. and well, their intake mainfold outperform any and everything out there. I have heard from one of the engineers who designed the Edlebrock manifold and he said that is really wasnt designed and there was no good work put into it. They just wanted some out really fast.

And the tapering does not direct the flow whatsoever, it creates a restriction to the flow, hence evening out the flow to the other cylinders.

I am sure you have made more intakes than I have seen, as well as watched the trends. But trends are just that, trends. Not science, trends. Not many after market companies or designers actully optimize the distribution as well at the could because of the time and cost. A single Fluent CFD seat is tens of thousands of doallars. Why do that when you can just crank out more sooner with a guestimated desgin?

Using a 1-D wave equation is the way to go to design your runner and plenum sizes. But do you know the complexity of those? Outrageous! The software to do this is again tens of thousands (only OEM can afford this). This is why most aftermarket companies just crunch a couple Helmholtz equations and there you go.

I dont want to come off all high on my horse like. But I have a Master's in Mechanical Engineering and just spent the last year researching and desgining Intake manifolds, so I honestly know what I am talking about. I dont think or guess at any of it. I read atleast 30 SAE and ASME papers on the stuff and read multiple books. I am more than happy to share any and everything I know about it. [/i]
seanc
Belongs To The TOP CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS!
Posts: 2346
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 5:23 pm
Location: Lake Stevens, Wa

Post by seanc »

disclaimer: i am not discredited any of you what so ever just have a few questions :D

ok for those of you that have degrees in the science of fluid dynamics, mechanical engineering etc... have you ever done a side by side comparison with a the following designs: ITB log plenum, single TB log plenum, and a single TB tapered plenum with a WBO2 on each cylinder to find lean spots during engine testing? because IMHO without real world experimentation all of this talk from behind books is kind of a moot point.
klattr1
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3724
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 10:22 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC
Contact:

Post by klattr1 »

this is a great topic started...first thing I have realized is that no matter what plenum you create, you will have critics...but it is good to have a reason for everything you do when making it and then people wont bug you as much...

as far as the argument goes above (symmetrical vs non-symmetrical) or (taper vs non-taper), all that is dealing with is airflow distribution from cylinder to cylinder. Whereas the other argument would be creating something that obviously flows better (more HP) and serves the setup of the motor better (based on runner length, plenum volume, etc)...

i do think alot of people get caught up on saying "ah dat manifold is junk since it doesnt have a taper" since its trendy...and then you ask them why and they respond "cuz it doesnt looka like dat Veilside surge tank thingy" hehe

then another argument is on the port entries...(raised velocity stacks vs floor radiused entries)

some of the particulars you will run into when making an intake manifold...whether its cutting up a stock one or making one from scratch:

1) watch out for clearances between plenum/hood, TB flange/hood and TB flange/water outlet
2) the angle of the runners match the angle of the walls inside the intake ports
3) the odd shape of the water outlet from the head needs to transition to a tube
4) dont forget about TB cable brackets, boost/vac provisions, IACV integrated or not, PCV provisions or not, etc
5) which TB u decide to go with (stock, Q45, Wilson, Accufab, etc)
JGSturbo
KA-T.org Sponsor
KA-T.org Sponsor
Posts: 2438
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Coos Bay, OR

Post by JGSturbo »

Damn good points! And wayyyy more useful in getting the job done than any other post here :lol:

Crude as a "generic" intake manifold can seem they've been getting the job done for many years.
Edlebrock was just one example, many others from banks to the veyron use basic round plenums.
Image
http://www.jgstools.com/turbo/index3.html
See our JGS KA-t.org section for lots of good info :)
Burke
240sx Wannabe
Posts: 100
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 4:26 pm
Location: Detroit

Post by Burke »

JGSturbo wrote: Crude as a "generic" intake manifold can seem they've been getting the job done for many years.
True, true, true.
If you are trying to extract every last HP, then by all means, spend the $ and do the research. but for the most part, i'd leave the IM till last and spend your time and effort on a built bottom end, cams or a sweet EMS. besides, you wont see the full effect until your exhaust and head are optimized to match the IM.
So if I was to design an IM for a ka, this is what I would do for simplicities sake, and still get excellent results.
Leave stock runners and hack them in half or so. Leave mounting for a stockish tb location and size. Now you have your stock fuel rail mounting points and injectors bosses along with all your tb mounted stuff.
Design a boxish size plenum and weld it to the IM.
Base you plenum size on Helmholtz equation's and you be able to significantly shift your torque curve around to where you want it.
Add a bunch of vacuum ports and IAT location.
Wahlaa!

Sure you can put little velocity stack on each runner, sure you can taper the plenum, sure you can round out the plenum. But in the end, its A LOT of work to make sure everything is being optimized, and honestly I would sacrifice those couple HP to lighten my load. If you are super worried about cylinder distribution, then put egts on each runner and even up the temps with fuel.

hope this helps
User avatar
ispentallmymoneyontires
Encyclopedia-Nissan
Posts: 1463
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: south florida
Contact:

Post by ispentallmymoneyontires »

maybe this will sound retarded, maybe genius. i have been thinking about the reason for having an exaust mani be equal length is it is supposed to maximise efficency by having all the air hit equally, well why wouldnt th3 same idea apply to intake but reverse, like have equal length runners and go into a transversly mounted phlenum with the air input and TB be at the far side? it would be really weird to fit but possible i think...maybe dual 90mm TB's while im thinking crazy lol.
There are many paths to Enlightenment: but no one said they can't be taken sideways.
Image
89'hatch rustolum black/96'motor s13 new trans/OBD1 convert/F1 flywheel/DSS steel driveshaft/headers, testpipe, egay N1dual/ JGS poly engine, tranny/ Cory's Coil mod

RIP 480sx
veilside180sx
SuperMod
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:13 am
Location: PDX Metro

Post by veilside180sx »

As a side note the fastest drag SRT4's (Shaun Carlson/Darrel Cox) still runs a basic round plenum and have no problems putting down power.=)

Basically I think when it comes down to it, with the basic constraints that everyone has...time and money. Secondly and probably more importantly if you build something that flows better than stock and shifts the powerband to something more conducive to what you need then that's all that matters.
Image
JGS Precision
Wastegates, Bypass Valves, KA Turbo Kits
Image
JGSturbo
KA-T.org Sponsor
KA-T.org Sponsor
Posts: 2438
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Coos Bay, OR

Post by JGSturbo »

I wasn't going to mention that because "SRT-4" is a curse word around here :lol:

It's nice that we can all be "real" about this instead of the usual overboard message board BS.

The tapered plenum seems to be some what above even OEM levels of $ spending to develop properly (the $$$$ involved in the CFD seats have already been stated). IIRC not even the Cosworth XFE used such a feature...
Maybe we should start building in barrel throttles to our street cars if we really must have that last efficency increase :?
J/K pretty sure that would SUCK to drive in ANY kind of stop and go LOL.
Image
http://www.jgstools.com/turbo/index3.html
See our JGS KA-t.org section for lots of good info :)
NateDogg
Dont Question My Nissan Knowledge
Posts: 993
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 4:31 pm
Location: BC CANADA

Post by NateDogg »

Something I have seen not mentioned is to make the runner floor from plenum (short side radius) to the shortside radius of the valve is equal to the runner 'roof' distance to the roof of the valve.

This allows an equal amount of friction for the intake air which encourages more complete fuel atomization (less fuel separation).

IMO the stock manifold is best for <500whp.
klattr1
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3724
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 10:22 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC
Contact:

Post by klattr1 »

NateDogg wrote:Something I have seen not mentioned is to make the runner floor from plenum (short side radius) to the shortside radius of the valve is equal to the runner 'roof' distance to the roof of the valve.

This allows an equal amount of friction for the intake air which encourages more complete fuel atomization (less fuel separation).

IMO the stock manifold is best for <500whp.
draw a diagram of what you are talkin about cuz its kind of confusing what you are sayin...
SOHC 240SX
Dont Question My Nissan Knowledge
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:53 pm
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Post by SOHC 240SX »

Image

WOW! Very impressive thread. I sugguest a mod make this a sticky. Lot of very good points made here, the only one I want to add is by making the motor work more efficiently opens the door to make more horsepower. So the key point is to make the intake manifold more efficient to help the motor as a whole function even better...in this case breath better, freely, and evenly to all cylinders.

Basicly, it is very costly to make the ideal "formula 1 racing" intake manifold. If money isn't the biggest factory, then the next would be space. And as mentioned earlier, you must know what your doing or else it could all be in vain. It really is a lot of trouble to go thru to make such a manifold when other dollar per horsepower gain mods seem more favorable. The stock manifold is capable of meeting every need...a race worthly manifold is best left to extremests.

This is what I have learned in my research on the subject, which is why I built my intake manifold (pictured above) the way I did. Symmetry and runner length are the most important. The distance from the intake side of the head to the strut tower chassis measures about 15 inches in the S13. I didn't want an upward design for fear of strut tower brace or hood clearance issues. Designing it downwards could cause oil filter access problems. Besides, too many awkward twists and bends would just work against me to create a smooth free flowing intake manifold that allows the motor to breath freely. So building the manifold straight outward seemed to be the most logicly step in keeping all runners even and equal in length, design, and symmetry. Luckly for SOHC KA motor, Nissan Motorsports made an alternative intake manifold for a carb option. I used this as my basis for starting my build. Since the inlet offers a round entry into the manifold and a DCOE carb bolt pattern, I thought it would be best at this point to use individual throttle bodies. Using TWM throttle bodies, Four 45mm throttle bodies would obviously be able to feed the motor more than one 60mm stock throttle body. Plus one throttle plate per cylinder will have lower flow loss which helps to produce more power and I should have no fears of max'ing out my throttle body...meaning flowing so much air that the throttle plate itself becomes a restriction. It was nice that fabbing at this point was never required as these parts bolt up together. Next the throttle bodies are connected to the air horns and the horns meet up to a plenum. Once again I have changed the design from the one pictured above. Instead of using Ross Air horns, I switched over to TWM air horns. I felt these have a better air flow velocity then the Ross ones and no modification is needed. They bolt onto the throttle bodies with ease. Once the machine work is done to weld the air horns to the plenum, the ends of the plenum will be capped-off. The inlet will be the bottom center of the plenum between cylinder 2 and 3. This way the air will be evenly distributed through out the plenum, thus making a more symmetrical flow (bell shape curve) to all four cylinders. In the end, this is the ideal result to acheive to prevent one cylinder from seeing more air than the other cylinders, thus running lean, possibly making more power, and in the end running hotter, causing detonation, and usually blowing a headgasket around this cylinder.

One thing that hasn't been discussed which is also related is fuel injection. The injectors for my setup were placed after the throttle plates. This location is about 4.5 inches from the head. The logic here is that as the fuel travels further from a location away from the head, it has more time to mix and better atomization with the air as it then fills into the cylinder. Just like a carb effect of beening set further back for fuel distribution, but obviously more evenly controlled via fuel injection.

Thats my 2 cents, just look at the RB25DET intake manifold stock from Nissan. Clearly wether its race or stock, equal distrbution of airflow to each cylinder with one throttle plate or individual throttle plates is a desirable characteristic to make the motor more efficient....which makes more power.
-los
nomadtrash
Knows Some Stuff About 240's!
Posts: 260
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 8:20 pm

Post by nomadtrash »

The Formula SAE guys in college build motorcycle powered race cars for a worldwide competition. They are required to breath through a 20mm restrictor. They go to great lengths to get the best manifold design. Here is an example and a movie of how it works.


Click on the photo for a full size view.

Image

http://www.thedrunken.com/downloads/badflow.avi

The designer didn't like this design.


The UTA FSAE cars have an interesting design. The plate that the runners are welded into is a circle. The runners are at 12:00, 3:00, 6:00, and 9:00. The plenum is a dome shape with the intake at the crest.
Nomad Trash
1968 Datsun Roadster "Bucephalus"
E-Mod 68

Bolt on modification? I used some bolts.

Image
JGSturbo
KA-T.org Sponsor
KA-T.org Sponsor
Posts: 2438
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Coos Bay, OR

Post by JGSturbo »

SOHC 240SX wrote: Plus one throttle plate per cylinder will have lower flow loss ....
The inlet will be the bottom center of the plenum between cylinder 2 and 3
Actually compared to similar single throttles ITBs will have to deal with more shaft % for each port. Once the throttles are OPEN there is no difference besides the square area of the openings.

People with MR2s would not agree with you about better distribution with a center inlet plenum... their 2 and 3 cylinders are always hotter.

Heres a nutty intake manifold that had a ton of R/D...

ImageImage

Cross air ram induction with interchangable plenum covers...
Something we machined on a long time ago. Notice the runners that are very long with a constant taper :D
Image
http://www.jgstools.com/turbo/index3.html
See our JGS KA-t.org section for lots of good info :)
SOHC 240SX
Dont Question My Nissan Knowledge
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:53 pm
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Post by SOHC 240SX »

Obviously nothing is perfect. Once the air enter the air filter, the Laws of Physics take over. There is no way to constantly make sure that the total volume of air molecules is divided evenly into all four cylinders. One can only try to make the best flowing intake manifold and let nature take it from there.

With the MR2 manifolds, they use a throttle body with a plenum afterwards. I use a plenum before the throttle bodies. As you said earlier, by running a larger plenum, hopefully the volume will dampen the abnormalities in that air will be able to or has a higher probablity of flowing equally to all four cylinders.

At any rate, I am sure I will see better gains using this design verses the stock manifold. Dollar per horsepower gain may not be the most attractive, but then again I will always favor better efficiency.
-los
JGSturbo
KA-T.org Sponsor
KA-T.org Sponsor
Posts: 2438
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Coos Bay, OR

Post by JGSturbo »

It REALLY doesn't matter where the throttle body(s) are, once their open they're just a minor flow restriction. If the large plenum is equalizing the flow why would it matter where you placed the inlet? Plenty of old intakes had your idea so its nothing new but those intakes where built for carbs to give decent fuel distribution. The N/A 2JZ, 7M, and RB25 stock intake had this same idea any they're certainly no marvels of efficiency. Their designs where more born from lack of room for a standard inlet or packaging. And to put it out there as some kind of great innovation now with all the packaging issues it'll cause :? You'll be adding under nessary complication based that will end up hindering instead of advancing IMO.

It should also be noted that the HIGHEST HP (efficiency) engines still use a standard throttle body. Pickup the latest Turbo to see some fine examples of this. ITBs are more of a restriction than large singles because there will be more shaft % protruding of each throttle. Basically a 75mm throttle has about the same shaft size as a single ITB, but the shaft takes up more % of each throttle.
The advantage of ITBs is always seen in N/A engines use no plenum for the best breathing.

The only benefit of an ITB turbo engine is the FEEL/throttle response NOT efficiency. That's the reason why the GTR has them because it was made for homologation. This is where outright peak efficiency will get shafted by features to make the car faster around the track and not just down the straight away.
Image
http://www.jgstools.com/turbo/index3.html
See our JGS KA-t.org section for lots of good info :)
NiSilS14
Knows Some Stuff About 240's!
Posts: 377
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:21 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Post by NiSilS14 »

Now this is just a thought of mine, but do you guys think that "rifling" an intake manifold could increase power? Seeing how a throttle body spacers work off of the same concept. Yay or Nay?
Miami240
Dont Question My Nissan Knowledge
Posts: 891
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 6:06 pm
Location: Miami, FL

Post by Miami240 »

Here is the current one i'm working on...

Image
Image
Image
Image
12508 SW 117 Ct.
Miami, FL 33186
Ph: (305) 251-1995
JGSturbo
KA-T.org Sponsor
KA-T.org Sponsor
Posts: 2438
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Coos Bay, OR

Post by JGSturbo »

Somebody covered this some where, it's not going to help.
Rifling makes a bullet go straighter not really any faster...
Image
http://www.jgstools.com/turbo/index3.html
See our JGS KA-t.org section for lots of good info :)
User avatar
tastyratz
Dont Question My Nissan Knowledge
Posts: 854
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:51 am

Post by tastyratz »

http://forums.240sxone.com/index.php?ac ... entry71863

FWIW I have been planning on building a manifold for my car with ITB's, and have been posting my updates and research on my local 240 owners club forums.

Things to consider:

A larger manifold with a larger internal volume takes a longer amount of time to pressurize.

ITB gains over single throttle: the plenum gets pressurized when the throttle plate is open a little or a lot, making for better transient throttle response under boost... less lag (instead of it going from pressurized to vac under boost and shifting, etc.)

Dont forget runner internal diameter. Stock runners are approx 42mm. Going between say 40mm or 45mm is a very drastic change for runner diameter even though it doesnt sound like much

For example, for your needs sohc 240sx: going to the twm 45mm may work better- for mine I would like something more along the stocks 42mm size.

For people planning on the gsxr-600 TBs, they are a 40mm. Do you want to run a smaller than stock diameter with an additional throttle plate restriction?

I have always been a very large supporter of ITBS, and am planning on probabbly building a similar setup to you except I have to remain a bit more economically minded with my setup.

Does anyone have any good autocad/mastercam/etc files with flanges, or blueprints of flanges, tbs, etc? basically anything useful.
klattr1
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3724
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 10:22 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC
Contact:

Post by klattr1 »

tastyratz wrote: Does anyone have any good autocad/mastercam/etc files with flanges, or blueprints of flanges, tbs, etc? basically anything useful.
i have an AutoCAD file (.DXF) of the intake head flange but I'm not just going to give it to anyone (since I put work into it)...but I'll sell the flanges to people if they want it...you can see pics in my thread here:

viewtopic.php?t=7949&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=300

Image

Image
JGSturbo
KA-T.org Sponsor
KA-T.org Sponsor
Posts: 2438
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Coos Bay, OR

Post by JGSturbo »

tastyratz wrote:http://forums.240sxone.com/index.php?ac ... entry71863

FWIW I have been planning on building a manifold for my car with ITB's, and have been posting my updates and research on my local 240 owners club forums.

Things to consider:

A larger manifold with a larger internal volume takes a longer amount of time to pressurize.

ITB gains over single throttle: the plenum gets pressurized when the throttle plate is open a little or a lot, making for better transient throttle response under boost... less lag (instead of it going from pressurized to vac under boost and shifting, etc.)



We're taking fractions/second here :) Any good driver never really lifts if we're talking drifting/RR here (heel/toe) :twisted:

Not to mention ITBs are known to produce a weak vac signal that will make speed density metering a PIA. That leaves you with mass air (stock) or TPS (waaay crude). Speed density is the best for high boosted engines IMO.

My point about turbo ITBs is they are not more "efficient" that a similar area single TB.

Just like anything your always stuck with trade-offs.
Image
http://www.jgstools.com/turbo/index3.html
See our JGS KA-t.org section for lots of good info :)
JGSturbo
KA-T.org Sponsor
KA-T.org Sponsor
Posts: 2438
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Coos Bay, OR

Post by JGSturbo »

Oh and I have SOHC flanges if anybody happens to be looking for one.
Image
http://www.jgstools.com/turbo/index3.html
See our JGS KA-t.org section for lots of good info :)
Morgan
NooB
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 9:21 am
Location: Germany

Post by Morgan »

klattr1 wrote:....... I'm not just going to give it to anyone (since I put work into it)......
Anybody who could make use of such information could easily make their own flange. Lose the selfishness and maybe you could help a fellow enthusiast by saving him the time and effort of repeating the work you've already done. That's really a pretty crappy attitude for somebody who runs the site to have.

Isn't sharing information the primary purpose of this website? Or is there another purpose?
klattr1
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3724
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 10:22 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC
Contact:

Post by klattr1 »

Morgan wrote: Anybody who could make use of such information could easily make their own flange. Lose the selfishness and maybe you could help a fellow enthusiast by saving him the time and effort of repeating the work you've already done. That's really a pretty crappy attitude for somebody who runs the site to have.

Isn't sharing information the primary purpose of this website? Or is there another purpose?
when you make your own, you'll understand...the reason I wont give the file out is because anyone could take the CAD file and just start selling the flanges when I put the hard work into designing it...how fair is that?

i'm giving the opportunity for someone that wants it bad enough to buy it from me...so im helping out enthusiasts by saving them time of having to design one and they could just buy one from me...how selfish is that?

plus, you got 9 posts in this forum, so kiss my :bootyshake:
BRAD D
KA-T.org Featured Ride
KA-T.org Featured Ride
Posts: 2164
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 9:02 am
Location: winnipeg

Post by BRAD D »

Here is a shot of mine, i cut the stock intake just above the injector holes and added bent tubes. hood clearance is not the best with this setup. when the motor shakes it tapped the hood brace.. so I had to trim it a bit.

I would of liked to come off the flange with straight tube, but the air flow would have a kink in it when it hits the head.... You ,might be able to port this kink out.

Not that I know if my intake makes any power.

Image

Image
User avatar
el tigre
Encyclopedia-Nissan
Posts: 1491
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:24 am
Location: GH of MI

Post by el tigre »

Man Brad, that tapers down a lot as it approaches the number 4 runner, think it is a restriction at all?
1981 AC El Tigre 5000
1991 240 SE KA-T, 5 sp. -Sold
1991 Miata, KA-T - Project
Post Reply