A day that turned into a week, on the flow bench.
I hope I don't sound like a jerk, this is not my intention. Just a reminder. Torque is what is actually measured and HP is a calculation of that.
So if someone says it makes more HP at low rpm and more HP at high rpm, it is the exact same thing as saying it makes more TQ at low rpm and more TQ at high rpm. You cannot say something makes more torque down low but more HP up top, it's all the same thing. If torque goes up, HP has to and same if it goes down. It's a mathmatical calculation that doesn't change.
(Torque X RPM) / 5252 = Horsepower
You are welcome for the testing, glad you guys are enjoying it.
So if someone says it makes more HP at low rpm and more HP at high rpm, it is the exact same thing as saying it makes more TQ at low rpm and more TQ at high rpm. You cannot say something makes more torque down low but more HP up top, it's all the same thing. If torque goes up, HP has to and same if it goes down. It's a mathmatical calculation that doesn't change.
(Torque X RPM) / 5252 = Horsepower
You are welcome for the testing, glad you guys are enjoying it.
not to go off topic dave but i dont see the wilson mani's on your web site anymore are u still selling them?? i dont have $1500 for an intake mani and was leaning towards your ported manifold anyway cant wait till your all finished up with testing to see the final results
We are not selling the Wilson manifolds anymore.
This testing is finished, if you need an intake manifold the results show all you need is the standard ported intake, it's $140.
This testing is finished, if you need an intake manifold the results show all you need is the standard ported intake, it's $140.
DB,
The larger you make your plenum the more power it will produce. period.
I know this from experience from engine dyno work that I've done. From a 600cc F4i engine to a 12.9L Diesel... The larger the plenum is, the more power you'll produce, at the sacrifice of throttle response.
The larger you make your plenum the more power it will produce. period.
I know this from experience from engine dyno work that I've done. From a 600cc F4i engine to a 12.9L Diesel... The larger the plenum is, the more power you'll produce, at the sacrifice of throttle response.
Account Disabled
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,206
Likes: 0
From: Bel Air, MD
LOL told you I was Drunk 
Good luck on your own intake design..
Here is a good link of someone doing a intake mani. design. Idea borrowed from Audi Turbo rally car it seems......
http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=127863
PS It's possible the distance or lack of distance to the charge has something to do with the bends and runner length of the original mitsu. design.
Good luck on your own intake design..Here is a good link of someone doing a intake mani. design. Idea borrowed from Audi Turbo rally car it seems......
http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=127863
PS It's possible the distance or lack of distance to the charge has something to do with the bends and runner length of the original mitsu. design.
Written wrong way round, but yeah that's the principle; short runners - high end power... longer runners - low end torque.
That's the principle that everyone's always worked by, as you said the butterflies in the runners, or the adjustable length runners on race cars like the mazda 26B (4 rotor) LeMans machine....
...but I have also seen the opposite happen, on my wife's car; a 2L N/A VW Jetta, with a really long IM from the factory I wanted to use a top-mount turbo setup..so I fabbed an aluminium IM using just basic principle's but I did no measuring or harmonic calculations...just a short intake runner for space reasons.
Tried the car before-after on the dyno without the turbo - just the IM and I picked up 15 ftlb of tourque at 2,500rpm's - I couldn't believe it because logic would've suggested the opposite.
Hindsight makes me believe that the original intake me just have been too smooth in it's path towards the head, and that the new manifold promoted more of a "tumbling" effectand therefore better combustion; holding the gas in the air and off the cylinder-head walls resulting in better torque.
Sorry for rambling, it's not even an Evo motor, just trying to offer a different point of view.
That's the principle that everyone's always worked by, as you said the butterflies in the runners, or the adjustable length runners on race cars like the mazda 26B (4 rotor) LeMans machine....
...but I have also seen the opposite happen, on my wife's car; a 2L N/A VW Jetta, with a really long IM from the factory I wanted to use a top-mount turbo setup..so I fabbed an aluminium IM using just basic principle's but I did no measuring or harmonic calculations...just a short intake runner for space reasons.
Tried the car before-after on the dyno without the turbo - just the IM and I picked up 15 ftlb of tourque at 2,500rpm's - I couldn't believe it because logic would've suggested the opposite.
Hindsight makes me believe that the original intake me just have been too smooth in it's path towards the head, and that the new manifold promoted more of a "tumbling" effectand therefore better combustion; holding the gas in the air and off the cylinder-head walls resulting in better torque.
Sorry for rambling, it's not even an Evo motor, just trying to offer a different point of view.
Last edited by oldevodude; Feb 15, 2009 at 09:10 PM.
oldevo, I found that site in the past. The intake manifold that guy built is absolutely freaking amazing. I don't know if it works or not but holy crap is it a piece of art work. Thanks for the link.
jxs, yes the head is ported on my car.
jxs, yes the head is ported on my car.
David, have you thought about stagering the inlet dividers inside of the manifold? I wonder if you could get better distribution by playing with the dividers inside of the manifold.
Unfortunately this would probably require too much time continually modifying in this manner.
Unfortunately this would probably require too much time continually modifying in this manner.
I have no considered staggering the anything in the manifold. It would be pretty difficult to do on a production basis in a non-cast intake. I'm not convinced it is the way to go either.
My mind is open to about anything at this point as it seems just about everything has been done already. Everyone's got something on the market. Building the same intake as everyone else makes no sense.
You can probably expect something atleast somewhat different than what everyone else is doing.
The way I see it a runner length of 5"-7", velocity stacks and a big plenum are all going to get you in somewhat the same ball park. I don't want to be in the same ball park. If I can't build something that performs different than what I have tested then I am better off to just buy someone else's or run the stock ported intake. Actually, stock portes is going to be freaking hard to beat.
My mind is open to about anything at this point as it seems just about everything has been done already. Everyone's got something on the market. Building the same intake as everyone else makes no sense.
You can probably expect something atleast somewhat different than what everyone else is doing.
The way I see it a runner length of 5"-7", velocity stacks and a big plenum are all going to get you in somewhat the same ball park. I don't want to be in the same ball park. If I can't build something that performs different than what I have tested then I am better off to just buy someone else's or run the stock ported intake. Actually, stock portes is going to be freaking hard to beat.
Evolved Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,788
Likes: 1
Dave I loved reading about this round of testing you did. Thanks for that and what a crazy turn of events that your stock ported beat a Wilson v2 up to 8k! It makes me feel pretty dumb because the 2k I spent on a Kansai probably was not the absolute best purchase I could have made, but I've been happy with it and who knows what the 90mm throttle body does in terms of power too.
I have to say though, I'm totally shocked you are still pursuing making an intake manifold. If I were you, I would be on more of a mission to prove that there really isn't many intake manifolds that can hang with a stock ported. And maybe raise the price of your porting by $50 or so and be done with it. But I admire the fact you are entering such a competitive space. Even though there is so much competition I don't under-estimate you in the slightest because I think you test more than anybody out there and that is a huge advantage.
Do you know anyone in the industry that does computer simulations of intake manifolds? I really know nothing about intake manifold design but it would be so awesome if you could link up with someone that could model the stock intake and some others you've tested and you could actually match what you see on the dyno with what you see on the computer. Then from there you could move forward with a new design?
Also, just a general question about plenum size. My simpleton understanding of the purpose of the plenum is so that it behaves like a reservoir so that when pressure is being fed into the manifold, and intake valves are constantly opening and closing, there is a place for that flow to go rather than causing some reversion acting against the flow going into the engine. The reason I bring this up, is because I want to learn more about the purpose of the plenum, and also I wonder what your testing reveals about what plenum size a car with your power output needs?
This makes me wonder... do you think the larger plenums of the v2 and DI might have shined a bit more if you had done the testing in max boost mode on your car?
I have to say though, I'm totally shocked you are still pursuing making an intake manifold. If I were you, I would be on more of a mission to prove that there really isn't many intake manifolds that can hang with a stock ported. And maybe raise the price of your porting by $50 or so and be done with it. But I admire the fact you are entering such a competitive space. Even though there is so much competition I don't under-estimate you in the slightest because I think you test more than anybody out there and that is a huge advantage.
Do you know anyone in the industry that does computer simulations of intake manifolds? I really know nothing about intake manifold design but it would be so awesome if you could link up with someone that could model the stock intake and some others you've tested and you could actually match what you see on the dyno with what you see on the computer. Then from there you could move forward with a new design?
Also, just a general question about plenum size. My simpleton understanding of the purpose of the plenum is so that it behaves like a reservoir so that when pressure is being fed into the manifold, and intake valves are constantly opening and closing, there is a place for that flow to go rather than causing some reversion acting against the flow going into the engine. The reason I bring this up, is because I want to learn more about the purpose of the plenum, and also I wonder what your testing reveals about what plenum size a car with your power output needs?
This makes me wonder... do you think the larger plenums of the v2 and DI might have shined a bit more if you had done the testing in max boost mode on your car?