KA24E Custom Intake Manifold Is Finished=)

Share ideas/designs/theories/tips/development:
(manifolds, chassis, personal projects, MIG, TIG, etc)
veilside180sx
SuperMod
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:13 am
Location: PDX Metro

Post by veilside180sx »

I'm not worried about it.

On a side note everyone I know that wants real power out of the RB20/25 swaps out the manifold to be rid of the stock one and it's poor location and switch to one more like mine. Making it designed more like the RB26, or Veilside 2JZ manifold.
Image
JGS Precision
Wastegates, Bypass Valves, KA Turbo Kits
Image
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 »

JGSturbo wrote:If the RB25 intake was so great, why did they dump it when they made the RB26DETT?
I am not knocking yours skills, craftmenship, or intelligence.
Its kind of difficult to see that with all the "you should have done this or that" comments you always give every time something of my doing is posted.

I'm sure you have your reasons, but downgrading somebodies hard work with saying I could have done this or that (when you know it would have been damn near impossible with the restrictions I was given on where everything needed to be and how much it needed to cost) and not expecting some kind of back-lash is well foolish.

Maybe you should send less time picking apart other people's work and more time building your own parts. That way you can show us how its suppose to be rather than just tell us how its suppose to be.

If I over stepped the line, I'm truely sorry but this is how I see it.
Don't take this as an insult, take it as a challenge
Nissan UPGRADED the RB25 symmetrical design intake manifold to the RB26 Individual Throttle Body intake manifold WHICH PROMOTES EVEN MORE AND EQUAL air flow to all cylinders. You really didn't know this? Designer, builder, creator, and studier of all kinds of intake manifolds to see what works and what doesn't didn't know about this? :shock: You really need to study this motor a lot more. Many people have said, and I agree with them, this is by far the best race worthy motor Nissan has ever put together.

Again, you need to READ my posts more carefully. I never said "YOU should have done this", what I did say was " I WOULD HAVE" expressing how I would do ( am doing ) things differently. By no way is this an expression of how you are doing anything wrong. If you read EVERY single post in this thread that I posted, you would see I have given your manifold compliments.

If you were given restrictions in terms of cost and construction size limits, obviously you can only have soooo many options. But you should also state to us that if you were not given these variable restrictions, how would your ideal manifold construction look like? What features would you change or improve? Tell us your logic or reasoning for such. I agree this thread should not be about bashing each other, but to be able to talk about several of the key points that make up an ideal manifold. No one yet has begun to talk about optimal low or high port designs. I am trying to get all the ideas and talks out on the table...you should too.

I don't downgrade or pick apart other peoples projects. I have seen lots of ideas from other peoples projects that I too would love to incorporate into my own. You take the things I say the wrong way. I try to share and exchange ideas for the sake of self improvement and possibly enlightening others.

You also need to understand, not everything you touch turns to gold. You should be proud you built a good manifold. I would if I built that. But you need to be able to admit that although your design is good, their are better and optimal designs out there. That your design is the only one good enough for the SOHC KA and we should accept it and not bother trying to improve it...is the wrong mentality. If I have to build a better one to show you it can be done, then I will. I don't take anything you say as an insult. I accept your challenge. I can admit my mistakes, flaws, and errors. It just seems like you can't. Like everything you do is perfect and I am wrong for making postive and constructive remarks about how I would do things differently. I guess thats why it seems to you that you are always butting heads with me. Thats how I see it.

But on another note, I would like to know how you determined the optimal internal volume of the plenum. Did you use some kind of math formual or just a general rule of thumb?
-los
veilside180sx
SuperMod
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:13 am
Location: PDX Metro

Post by veilside180sx »

Yes I knew they were individual throttle bodies. Mine was not in reference to the RB26 though, mine was in reference to the RB20/25. Which topic was skirted.

Everyone needs to stop and look at each others perspectives.

Los wants technologically advanced products with no preclusion to cost.

Jordan wants cost effective solutions that offer a lot of bang for the buck.

Lance is somewhere in between offering reasonably cost effective solutions with enough logical advancement within the bounds of reasonable price ranges.

It's not that Lance is not saying there are other products that are better than his own, but they are not available at a reasonable (average motorist) cost. Every time he posts one, he gets ripped apart for making it one way or another. Sometimes it does everyone a whole lot of good if we can keep our mouths shut and enjoy another's ingenuity and craftsmanship skills.

It's all about respecting anothers work and time that has gone into something. If there is something you would change on your own, please do. Post it and explain to us why is a better designed product. As we point fingers about this or that, all we do is stifle any comradarie that would potentially exist as SOHC elitest (merely because there is fewer).
Image
JGS Precision
Wastegates, Bypass Valves, KA Turbo Kits
Image
User avatar
Jordan Gladman
Belongs To The TOP CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS!
Posts: 3254
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:14 pm
Location: Abbotsford, BC

Post by Jordan Gladman »

The only reason id change the design is because i think the tapered manifolds look better :wink:

Performance comparisons would be very similar, and i think id side with JGS on this one for that reason, however the large tube design just looks cheap imo, something like what Ivan did would be much more appealing to me.

A bunch of extra work, but looks well worth the extra money once its welded, ground and polished.

Image
WWW.GLADFAB.COM SOHC Turbo Manifolds
fromxtor
Knows Some Stuff About 240's!
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 5:25 am
Location: NC
Contact:

Post by fromxtor »

im feeling that, but would take a JGS one anyday :wink:
-Josh

'04 Titan SE CC -DD
'90 240sx HB- AMS GT32,JGS SOHC Starter kit,JGS plug wire shield,JGS MMs, Nismo tranny mount, Ross pistons, ARP H/Rs, Polished Rods, Port and Polished head,polished crank,greddy RS BOV,650cc injectors,ROM tuned ECU
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 »

Some body with a KA-E worried about looking cheap :lol:
You entitled to your own opinion but-
Trust me there is nothing cheap about my intake manifold.

In response to SOHC 240SX-

WTF it seems like your sticking words in my mouth (well typing anyhow), not cool. When did I say my intake manifold was the ultimate KA24E intake manifold??????????? Its one of the only available, thats all.

Yes I did say that the idea of tring to get perfect air dist. seems like alot of work for little if any difference... and lots of other builders (including some of the fastest 4 cylinders engines ever) seem to agree with me. So until you want to prove out the benfits of such a design you won't see me worring building such a design.
Formula 1 where EVERY thing could make a difference don't have any kind of dist. plentum last time I saw one.
If your putting the throttle in the middle of the pletum, your still not getting any better dist.. In fact you could end up screwing up the dist. like the MR2 Turbo intake manifold, where cylinders 2&3 always run much hotter because the air gets shot straight at them. Also just because an engine has indivial throttlebodies doesn't mean the plenum shape and size doesn't have effects on the engine... It just enables huge plenum volumes without effects on idle, throttle response, etc. This is why you'll see most high performance ITBs with NO plenum...
A large plenum equalizes the cylinders in their own way... Since there is only a valve opening every 180 degrees and a turbos volumetric rate it huge once the engine is past the boost threshold, there is plenty of time to refill even the larger plenum inbetween openings. This allows all the correct volume to go to the correct cylinder every time it opens. The only thing to stay away from is having ports too exposed to the in-rush of air (as I talked about above with the mr2 turbo).

Anyhow the runners on my intake certainly aren't oversized and the plentum was kept to a very reasonable size (volume wise). Basically its as small as a 4" dia plentum can be... I would guess a little under 2.4L.
It would be interesting to find the res. freq. of the runners but I don't feel it matters as much on a FI engine vs. N/A. FI is all about cramming as much as possible...
Last edited by JGSturbo on Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:28 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
Jordan Gladman
Belongs To The TOP CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS!
Posts: 3254
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:14 pm
Location: Abbotsford, BC

Post by Jordan Gladman »

JGSturbo wrote:Some body with a KA-E worried about looking cheap :lol:
You entitled to your own opinion but-
Trust me there is nothing cheap about my intake manifold.
joke or no joke, probably the saddest thing ive seen you type yet!

Booerns on that one. And i think anyone would agree a tube looks cheaper than a weld done manifold like the PHAT KA-T one. 1 is a piece of pipe capped at each end, the other is a manifold constructed from many well cut pieces welded and sanded. Finished product would scream quality and performance. With your type or sarcastic attitude its no wonder people would think the SOHC was "cheap" :p

Unfortunately the only thing cheap about the motors is the beholder... if you wont give the motor the attention it deserves and you half ass the parts you build for it, it will show.

People can tell when they look at the finished product if it was done well and time was taken if it looks like you made your manifold from a fire extinguisher, people will think its a cheap build if you do it right and put in the time it will pay out.

I can see that you put lots of time into making yours and for what it is and for what you charged it probably does the job well, but dont act like there is no room for improvement or like the SOHC KA isnt worth the time of day.
WWW.GLADFAB.COM SOHC Turbo Manifolds
veilside180sx
SuperMod
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:13 am
Location: PDX Metro

Post by veilside180sx »

Obviously he believes it's worth the time of day, or he wouldn't be spending the time he is to promote using it. Although I will admit it's not the most aesthetically pleasing motor. Mine is starting to look good, but needs valve cover work first. After those modifications I think it will be much more attractive.
Image
JGS Precision
Wastegates, Bypass Valves, KA Turbo Kits
Image
User avatar
Jordan Gladman
Belongs To The TOP CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS!
Posts: 3254
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:14 pm
Location: Abbotsford, BC

Post by Jordan Gladman »

veilside180sx wrote:Obviously he believes it's worth the time of day, or he wouldn't be spending the time he is to promote using it. Although I will admit it's not the most aesthetically pleasing motor. Mine is starting to look good, but needs valve cover work first. After those modifications I think it will be much more attractive.
If he gave it the time of day, he'd build his own ;) No offense to what you're building, but it appears to me that he builds things that are in his opinion the bare minimum to perform and defends it by saying its just a SOHC.. etc.
Last edited by Jordan Gladman on Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
WWW.GLADFAB.COM SOHC Turbo Manifolds
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 »

I understand Lance's perspective. But that doesn't mean he can't be open to discuss other possiblities without getting his feelings hurt. I never said his manifold was bad in any perspective. I just think we could all be mature adults and discuss / explore other possiblities, logic, and even theories without getting bent out of shape about it.

But hey, if thats not what anybody wants, then I guess you guys are all better off without it and can have your routine noobie weekly discussions about how "I just got my 240SX with KA24E and I want to know how much boost it can handle and how to turbo it"....
-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 »

Jordan-

You know what?
You guys call my work cheap piles of crap and act like it was tossed together in 5 minutes. I disagree with what people say I should have done and I get made out to be a know it all.......
This is just F'd up.

The KA24E is a cheap (as in $$$) motor with all the people tossing them right and left and those people view the people tring to build them as cheap, thats all I was reffering to. I guess you'll take it as you want to take it.

Have a nice day.
Last edited by JGSturbo on Mon Aug 08, 2005 7:13 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
Jordan Gladman
Belongs To The TOP CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS!
Posts: 3254
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:14 pm
Location: Abbotsford, BC

Post by Jordan Gladman »

You need to learn how to take criticism and suggestion. This isnt the first time you've gotten upset about people picking at your parts. We all get it, you just seam to take a heavy footing in defending what you make and you would even act like you'd try something different.

If people are raggin on your design, maybe you should change something. If you make a product and refused to change things based on suggestion you wont sell many. I guarantee if you posted that manifold around on other boards etc you'd get lots of comments on the fact that it might look cheap. If you take the time to tig weld up a nice intake manifold, might as well make something that works AND looks good. Just my opinion. People bring their criticism to you because you aren the one making the parts, i wouldnt complain to joe schmoe about his JGS manifold because he isnt the one making it etc.

I dont want to compete with you and i dont think SOHC wants too either, that isnt really what this is about, i have no intention nor does anyone else of ever making and selling intake manifolds.
WWW.GLADFAB.COM SOHC Turbo Manifolds
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 »

Jordan Gladman wrote:
If he gave it the time of day, he'd build his own ;) No offense to what you're building, but it appears to me that he builds things that are in his opinion the bare minimum to perform and defends it by saying its just a SOHC.. etc.
I am building my own and I'm using almost ALL the same parts as Veilside. I try to build parts that I know fit the wallet of the little guys. I'm not here to build outlandish constructions that are double the price for the guy just tring to get some decent HP in his/her KA-E. The part in question here was designed as a BOLT-ON (or at least as close to one as I could manage). I feel the some of the changes mentioned here would sacrifice some of those types of features or would add needed costs to the final product.
I can't I disagree? Is it against the rules to disagree with certain parties here? Alot of this isn't even about the intake at all...
Its about I'm tired of certain people attacking my products because their too simple...too plain...not efficent enough...etc. Its happened over and over again and I'm sick of it. When it comes from the same people over and over again with little to no postive comments, I tend to start to take offense.
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 »

SOHC 240SX wrote:I understand Lance's perspective. But that doesn't mean he can't be open to discuss other possiblities without getting his feelings hurt. I never said his manifold was bad in any perspective. I just think we could all be mature adults and discuss / explore other possiblities, logic, and even theories without getting bent out of shape about it.....
Hey, I'll admit maybe I took the wrong path a little ways into the thread...
But like I mentioned about the MR2 3SGTE intake, I have stong reasons to stay away from putting the opening inbetween 2 & 3...
I have been trying to discuss your concerns inbetween the BS, but my comments seem to go ignored... like they couldn't mean anything comming from somebody who builds such cheap looking stuff.
:roll:
Image
http://www.jgstools.com/turbo/index3.html
See our JGS KA-t.org section for lots of good info :)
User avatar
Jordan Gladman
Belongs To The TOP CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS!
Posts: 3254
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:14 pm
Location: Abbotsford, BC

Post by Jordan Gladman »

We all agree that the part will work, add hp and work quite efficiently, no one have argued against that, the only complaint i would have would be the general shape and look of the part, its wouldnt be hard to improve that. Improving apon the shape and look would work 2 ways too, it would look better and it would work better. Im sure it wouldnt cost that much more to build anyways, as you'd be working with a flat plate when welding your primaries and you'd be able to have a lot of the pieces pre-cut.

Its a good manifold, dont stop the design and improvement after the first one though, every manifold you build should improve apon the previous one. Nothing wrong with chaning it up as you go along.

You have to admit it though, this picture doesnt do very good for the presentation..

Image
WWW.GLADFAB.COM SOHC Turbo Manifolds
Nissan_Freek
Knows Some Stuff About 240's!
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 11:42 pm

Post by Nissan_Freek »

Continuing on with Jordan's comments, no one here is ever gonna say it's a piece of crap. I think that for a first run, the workmanship is beyond even what was ever necessary. We (through constructive criticism) as a forum want to see you advance beyond that manifold and make one that is superior to what you made. Basically, any manifold you make "now" will be superior to that one, for obvious reasons (experience).

As for Los' thoughts regarding throttle body placement (between 2 & 3rd cyl.) that seems to me that it isn't a very good idea. The goal of the intercooler piping system is to move air not only through the intercooler and get it to the engine, but it is to do it quickly with less restrictions, thus, efficiently. Now why would you spend the hours designing and welding up that ultra efficient IC piping only to have it make it to the intake mani and slam into that wall only for a massive amount of turbulent air bounce around the mani like 2nd graders in mcdonald's, only moving into the cylinders because it accidently fell in? (Los please don't think i'm flaming you or anybody about your thoughts) With the straight (log) design, the air moves in in a straight line, and is sucked/forced through the intake chamber, with the only turbulence (being very minimal at best) at the rear of the manifold! Honestly though, the only improvement it seems you can make on the mani is to add the penis shape (sorry it's late, very few words in my midnight dictionary) towards the end of the mani. Maybe it's supposed to force air towards the final cylinder?? I don't know, but regardless... it looks cooler :twisted:
I like the one Jordan likes LOL

Jimmy
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 »

Jordan Gladman wrote:
If people are raggin on your design, maybe you should change something. If you make a product and refused to change things based on suggestion you wont sell many. I guarantee if you posted that manifold around on other boards etc you'd get lots of comments on the fact that it might look cheap. If you take the time to tig weld up a nice intake manifold, might as well make something that works AND looks good. Just my opinion. People bring their criticism to you because you aren the one making the parts, i wouldnt complain to joe schmoe about his JGS manifold because he isnt the one making it etc.
<Edit- I mis-read your typo>

I've took lots of critcism over everything I've posted here, but its always from the same people... I don't go posting on other boards because this is where I've decided to be and posting my products on other boards is like tring to milk free ads. I'm not looking for anything free.
I'm not really looking to sell anymore of these intakes anyhow, there was suppose to be 2 of them made... one for my car and one for veils.
If anybody wants to buy one, I will make them one. But other than that I'm not making anymore (so I'll bet unless you look at one of those 2 cars you'll never see one of my ugly ass intakes :roll: ). But as it turned out I only got to make ONE intake and that went to Veilside :cry: And he got one hell of a deal for being such a good customer 8) Is there things I'd change on the next one? Sure, but nobody has mentioned anything I'd change... A shapely plenum isn't going to add anything I need besides making the plenum smaller providing a little more low end and better idle (low-end isn't going to be nessary with the setup I have planned :wink: ).
Yes it LOOKS like it FLOWS better but I get to see alot of things from many different communities and I have not seen any real data putting it above the regular round plenum. If the round plenum sucked ass why would people like Banks and Edelbrock cast their manifolds with round plenums? Their making castings so there is no difference between a tapered plenum and round plenum money wise...
:? THe factory SRT4 racers (the guys who started the big intake plenum trend) seem to have no problem building 1200HP engines on a round plenum.
Anyhow if a bunch of people get together and ask for something like you showed me, sure I'll build it. Until then I'll promote what will do the biggest bang for each $ and still have a well constructed, nice looking (maybe not the best), and great fitting product. Thats what I've always been (and will always be) about.
Last edited by JGSturbo on Mon Aug 08, 2005 8:49 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 :)
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 »

JGSturbo wrote:Some body with a KA-E worried about looking cheap :lol:
You entitled to your own opinion but-
Trust me there is nothing cheap about my intake manifold.

When did I say my intake manifold was the ultimate KA24E intake manifold???????????
Granted you never said it directly, but with comments posted like this from you, it is very easy to argue that you take more pride in your manifold than the ability to make the KA24E have more power potential.

I totally agree with Jordon on this one. I think I speak for all SOHC KA owners when I say, we would love to see more manufactures produce more and a wide range of aftermarket parts for the KA24E. That is what my whole website is all about. No one likes it when we have to outsource or custom build something when the DOHC KA or SR owners can get something similar or of better quality for cents on the dollar on ebay.

Jordon, as the custom fab builder he is, is giving you sound advice IF you ever decide to mass produce to the sell to the public of such a narrow and thin market (89-90 KA24E). He and I both agree it works. Others look at the price tag before actual performance gains. In the end you decide how you will build it.

My problem with you, as Jordon pointed out, is you get your panties in a wash everytime some makes a comment. I understand you HAVE restrictions....lack of space...building costs....performance gains....etc. All I wanted was to discuss intelligently that if NONE of these things WERE a factor, would your design change? Why or why not? What is your supporting evidence? My problem with you is you make or find an excuss to hide behind instead of talking about the issue at hand.

You started to tickle my fancy when you talked about one valve opening every 180 degrees in relation to plenum internal volume and the importance, if any, between the two and its relationship to the motor as a whole. You began to SUPPORT your idea with the MR2 example about cylinder 2 and 3. And just as I thought your thread got interesting, you started crying about how no one whats to play with you nicly.

Again, you need to learn to take suggestions, and positive critics. We are all here to help each other. Myself included.
-los
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 »

Nissan_Freek wrote:As for Los' thoughts regarding throttle body placement (between 2 & 3rd cyl.) that seems to me that it isn't a very good idea. The goal of the intercooler piping system is to move air not only through the intercooler and get it to the engine, but it is to do it quickly with less restrictions, thus, efficiently. Now why would you spend the hours designing and welding up that ultra efficient IC piping only to have it make it to the intake mani and slam into that wall only for a massive amount of turbulent air bounce around the mani like 2nd graders in mcdonald's, only moving into the cylinders because it accidently fell in? (Los please don't think i'm flaming you or anybody about your thoughts) With the straight (log) design, the air moves in in a straight line, and is sucked/forced through the intake chamber, with the only turbulence (being very minimal at best) at the rear of the manifold! Honestly though, the only improvement it seems you can make on the mani is to add the penis shape (sorry it's late, very few words in my midnight dictionary) towards the end of the mani. Maybe it's supposed to force air towards the final cylinder??
Not at all offened. I welcome this type of discussion. THIS IS the type of discussion I would like to see on this board more so than "it would cost too much so I don't care to talk about it" additude.
-los
veilside180sx
SuperMod
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:13 am
Location: PDX Metro

Post by veilside180sx »

All I have to say is when things like this go down, they need to do it in somewhere other than one of my "showcase" my new addition to my build threads.

Someone needs to begin a thread with a product in mind and discuss w/o pointing fingers designs and merits of such.

Since mine/ours are the ones that seem to be most prevalent, they seem to always be the point of discussion. Either negatively or positively. This is why Lance "gets his panties in a twist" as you put it.

These opinions need to be kept within the bounds of the thread. Which what has gone on during this thread, was not. Nor was it when we posted the new log manifold that was made.

I have no problems with someone disliking a design, but make your own and discuss it, or discuss it preemptively.

Frankly I think Lance is an amazing fabricator which is why he has built my parts, and will continue to do so.

There is a time and a place for everything, this was neither. Although all this has been brewing between everyone for a while, and was bound to come out eventually. Question is do we learn and grow, and get pissed and be childish?
Image
JGS Precision
Wastegates, Bypass Valves, KA Turbo Kits
Image
Nissan_Freek
Knows Some Stuff About 240's!
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 11:42 pm

Post by Nissan_Freek »

SOHC 240SX wrote:
Not at all offened. I welcome this type of discussion. THIS IS the type of discussion I would like to see on this board more so than "it would cost too much so I don't care to talk about it" additude.
no discrepancies here :wink:

Jimmy
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:

You started to tickle my fancy when you talked about one valve opening every 180 degrees in relation to plenum internal volume and the importance, if any, between the two and its relationship to the motor as a whole. You began to SUPPORT your idea with the MR2 example about cylinder 2 and 3. And just as I thought your thread got interesting, you started crying about how no one whats to play with you nicly.

Again, you need to learn to take suggestions, and positive critics. We are all here to help each other. Myself included.
I posted a little more than that :P support that is not bs...
I know what your tring to duplicate (I read maximum boost too :wink: ) but any plenum with a center inlet generally had the inlet going in to the plenum but not directly into the runners but hitting the side of the plenum and making the air do a 180 turn (thus equalizing the aircharge)... this isn't bad but seems a little counter productive when you pushing instead of pulling...
If your going to build a better flow intake, one of the best ways is to mak runners that tapper...
Image
Basically like extending the ports all the way to the plenum...

Side note- One very strange intake I recall that had hopes of better dist. was one on a Bullish car IIRC, it had dual plenums with dual throttlebodies...
Image
http://www.jgstools.com/turbo/index3.html
See our JGS KA-t.org section for lots of good info :)
User avatar
Jordan Gladman
Belongs To The TOP CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS!
Posts: 3254
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:14 pm
Location: Abbotsford, BC

Post by Jordan Gladman »

veilside180sx wrote:All I have to say is when things like this go down, they need to do it in somewhere other than one of my "showcase" my new addition to my build threads.

Someone needs to begin a thread with a product in mind and discuss w/o pointing fingers designs and merits of such.

Since mine/ours are the ones that seem to be most prevalent, they seem to always be the point of discussion. Either negatively or positively. This is why Lance "gets his panties in a twist" as you put it.

These opinions need to be kept within the bounds of the thread. Which what has gone on during this thread, was not. Nor was it when we posted the new log manifold that was made.

I have no problems with someone disliking a design, but make your own and discuss it, or discuss it preemptively.

Frankly I think Lance is an amazing fabricator which is why he has built my parts, and will continue to do so.

There is a time and a place for everything, this was neither. Although all this has been brewing between everyone for a while, and was bound to come out eventually. Question is do we learn and grow, and get pissed and be childish?

All i can say is, there is a reply button for a reason, if you want to showcase parts and setups, put them up as a setup page or make a cardomain page, anything posted on a board is game for praise, criticism etc. Dont get hurt about it, i could pull up HUNDREDs of threads where i've been flamed, and im banned from quite a few websites for defending ideas and opinions etc. if all you want is praise when you post something you should be a bit more selective in the parts you choose to post up.

You posted a thread about your new intake manifold people praise it and people critique it. Thats the basic concept behind a web forum. I dont think any of the comments have been childish and havent really witnessed and personal attacks or anything to that nature. I think if you cant take the heat, stay out of the oven. Unless you manifold is R&D'd to the moon and back, criticism is in order. And thats not a bad thing.

It wouldnt require any more resources to build a tapered or more flow friendly manifold on Lances part so i dont see why its so impossible for him to try something that would look a bit more appealing.
WWW.GLADFAB.COM SOHC Turbo Manifolds
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 »

FINALLY!!!!!!!!! The good stuff... :twisted:

-Jimmy

Interesting you say that one would try to maximize the flow of the routing of the intercooler piping only to cause turbulance when trying to produce a symmetrical intake manifold. People try to use the least number of bends in the intercooler piping do so to prevent the minimal about of pressure drop, not turbulance due to most piping is indeed...round. The plenum is much like an intercooler in the concept that they are both containers for air and both are pressurized in FI vehicles. If turblance does exsist in the plenum, it would make sense to redesign the plenum or the air track into it to prevent or have the minimal amount of turblance....which is the reasoning for the round plenum Lance is using. If the plenum is properly sized and properly shaped, turbulance should not be an issue to the point were it causes problems with the motor function itself. My only point was to change the charged intake or in this case throttle body location, so that the air begins to fill and pressurize the middle of the plenum so that it expands outwards, to BOTH ends, ensuring close to equal flow to all four cylinders.

-Lance

I know you said more than that...I just para-phrased to keep it short.

I understand you probably had at the customers request a certain budget to work within and probably also requested to keep sensors, throttle body, and coolent piping in stock location as much as possible yet still build a performance intake manifold. This is truly a task I could never accomplish. Your are right that building the runners straight out and placing the throttle body in the middle would probably fed cylinders 2 and 3 more so than the others, causing the same problems you mentioned in the MR2. Don't you think you could resolve this problem by having the runners of 3 and 4 bow outwards towards the end of one side of the plenum and the runners of 1 and 2 bow outwards towards the other end. Not a whole lot I mind you, but just enought to give you a "gap" between cylinders 2 and 3 so that you don't just feed two main cylinders by try to distribute the air flow more evenly?????? Just a thought. I would think for someone who has built so many great quality products, would be able to bend the intake runners slightly. Althought I complete understand that it is much easier to just cut and weld in straight round piping for runners. I am not a great fab builder as you are, but I would think this is a small change you could do that wouldn't so much hard ache. Now repositioning the throttle body and making changes to the throttle cable and having a 90 degree piping to feed the throttle body from the intercooler is another matter all together.

I don't think its counter productive weather your pushing or pulling, the air is still flowing in the same direction...into the head.
-los
veilside180sx
SuperMod
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:13 am
Location: PDX Metro

Post by veilside180sx »

All i can say is, there is a reply button for a reason, if you want to showcase parts and setups, put them up as a setup page or make a cardomain page, anything posted on a board is game for praise, criticism etc. Dont get hurt about it, i could pull up HUNDREDs of threads where i've been flamed, and im banned from quite a few websites for defending ideas and opinions etc. if all you want is praise when you post something you should be a bit more selective in the parts you choose to post up.

You posted a thread about your new intake manifold people praise it and people critique it. Thats the basic concept behind a web forum. I dont think any of the comments have been childish and havent really witnessed and personal attacks or anything to that nature. I think if you cant take the heat, stay out of the oven. Unless you manifold is R&D'd to the moon and back, criticism is in order. And thats not a bad thing.

It wouldnt require any more resources to build a tapered or more flow friendly manifold on Lances part so i dont see why its so impossible for him to try something that would look a bit more appealing.[/quote]

I don't have problems with critique, it's the nature with which you go after some of the time. Which is the reason you run into problems on other boards as well. So I don't feel the need to discuss that.

A certain fabricator on nicoclub.com posted a intake manifold as well, and was critiqued. The difference is that it was not done in a condescending manner, but was very good constructive criticism. It's ok to have opinions about what you would change, etc...it's not if you don't think before opening your mouth.

I know you've been flamed for your setups Jordan, but criticism to you become personal very quickly as well. In how you take it anyway. Which is a natural human reaction.

I've purchased your products in the past and had to resell it because it would it not work, even after buying the 50 trim instead of my T3, just because of that. I never said a word and kept it to myself.

So don't tell me I'm butt hurt about criticism.

In the end this is retarded because there is maybe 6-7 good posts in this entire thread that aren't condescending to one or another. I critiques are good, but the bs is not and has nothing to do with what is being represented here.
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 »

SOHC 240SX wrote:FINALLY!!!!!!!!! The good stuff... :twisted:

-Jimmy

Interesting you say that one would try to maximize the flow of the routing of the intercooler piping only to cause turbulance when trying to produce a symmetrical intake manifold. People try to use the least number of bends in the intercooler piping do so to prevent the minimal about of pressure drop, not turbulance due to most piping is indeed...round. The plenum is much like an intercooler in the concept that they are both containers for air and both are pressurized in FI vehicles. If turblance does exsist in the plenum, it would make sense to redesign the plenum or the air track into it to prevent or have the minimal amount of turblance....which is the reasoning for the round plenum Lance is using. If the plenum is properly sized and properly shaped, turbulance should not be an issue to the point were it causes problems with the motor function itself. My only point was to change the charged intake or in this case throttle body location, so that the air begins to fill and pressurize the middle of the plenum so that it expands outwards, to BOTH ends, ensuring close to equal flow to all four cylinders.

-Lance

I know you said more than that...I just para-phrased to keep it short.

Your are right that building the runners straight out and placing the throttle body in the middle would probably fed cylinders 2 and 3 more so than the others, causing the same problems you mentioned in the MR2. Don't you think you could resolve this problem by having the runners of 3 and 4 bow outwards towards the end of one side of the plenum and the runners of 1 and 2 bow outwards towards the other end. Not a whole lot I mind you, but just enought to give you a "gap" between cylinders 2 and 3 so that you don't just feed two main cylinders by try to distribute the air flow more evenly?????? Just a thought. I would think for someone who has built so many great quality products, would be able to bend the intake runners slightly. Althought I complete understand that it is much easier to just cut and weld in straight round piping for runners. I am not a great fab builder as you are, but I would think this is a small change you could do that wouldn't so much hard ache. Now repositioning the throttle body and making changes to the throttle cable and having a 90 degree piping to feed the throttle body from the intercooler is another matter all together.

I don't think its counter productive weather your pushing or pulling, the air is still flowing in the same direction...into the head.
Well, making the runners paired any closer together would be difficult as we have stacks formed inside the plenums (another little trade mark I a long time ago). The other problem is the runners already have to be angled up... so you would need some kind of compound double angle.
But not to worry, the 1-2 and 3-4 runners are already very close... moving them a 1/4-3/8 of an inch would be futile IMO.
Making them formed and tapper like on the hogan I posted would be the next step in make better flow numbers. But its not been shown yet we need a better (than I've built) intake manifold... I would like to see how this one does before I build a more complicated model.
I like to start with the basic stuff and see how far it'll go before moving on to more "race"ier parts. Because the more flow you build into an engine, the more of a PIA its is to drive around. I'm fairly certain this simple cost effective setup will make 500-600WHP @ high boost (which I'm sure it will) and still be driveable. IIRC thats Veilsides stated goal (right now anyways).
BTW-
Even with the throttle body moved 2inchs forward, you still don't need a 90 deg in to the throttle body if you route your pipes like I have...
Image

Jordan- There is NO WAY adding things like hand formed tapered runners, multisection plentums, etc. will not add time to the part. Adding time to the part = more $$$$ :roll: Maybe someday when you pay people buy the hour to make products maybe you'll understand...
Jeez people I already practically gave this part away, now you think I should add more features so I can lose more money? :shock: :lol:
[joke]I want what your smokin man [/joke] :P
Image
http://www.jgstools.com/turbo/index3.html
See our JGS KA-t.org section for lots of good info :)
veilside180sx
SuperMod
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:13 am
Location: PDX Metro

Post by veilside180sx »

My goals as stated are to max out my current turbo which is somewhere in the mid 500's.
Image
JGS Precision
Wastegates, Bypass Valves, KA Turbo Kits
Image
User avatar
Jordan Gladman
Belongs To The TOP CONTRIBUTING MEMBERS!
Posts: 3254
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:14 pm
Location: Abbotsford, BC

Post by Jordan Gladman »

Jordan- There is NO WAY adding things like hand formed tapered runners, multisection plentums, etc. will not add time to the part. Adding time to the part = more $$$$ Maybe someday when you pay people buy the hour to make products maybe you'll understand...
Its a simple concept, however you are showing off your parts, so whats an extra 2 hours on a new product to show off what you can do :?:

I've purchased your products in the past and had to resell it because it would it not work, even after buying the 50 trim instead of my T3, just because of that. I never said a word and kept it to myself.
That was a one off manifold, something i made for myself and decided to sell, not something i advertised as fitting all makes and models etc, if you HAD complained it would have been just as easy to give you your money back and to just sell the manifold to some one running the same turbo i was. Complaining, aka criticising is how you get what you want ;) I have had people complain about me not porting the insides of my manifolds well enough, so now i take an extra 2 hours to hand port the insides of all of them unless someone wants to pay less and not have that done.

Unless Lance is incapable of doing a better intake manifold, which im sure he could, he shouldnt take it so personally, because he should know that he is perfectly capable of doing better and he didnt want to waste that much time on your manifold.
WWW.GLADFAB.COM SOHC Turbo Manifolds
nazstang
Knows Some Stuff About 240's!
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 7:31 pm
Location: rhode island

Post by nazstang »

nice manifold man, good for you. it's a hell of alot better than 99% of us could do. great job on the first, i can't wait to see the final result.

quick question, i know long runners are great for n\a high end power, but are they a big help for turbo apps. ? i have friends with blowers and they run short-runner manifolds... :?:
-Nissan stanza ( KA-T)
-Nissan stanza (65 shot N.O.S.)
-94 Cobra (modded)
- 88 Mustang LX (modded so much, not street legal)
- Suzuki gsxr1000 (modded)
- Craftsman 22" 6.75 hp mower (modded :) )
toki
Knows Some Stuff About 240's!
Posts: 369
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:39 am
Location: tucson, az

Post by toki »

got that backwards there...short runners are for high end...longer runners are for low end....in general.
turbo SOHC
Post Reply