PDA

View Full Version : INTAKE MANIFOLD ( Modification / Design / Fabrication )



A20A1
10-27-2002, 12:33 AM
Intake Runner Length (L)
Knowing that the pressure waves (positive or negative) must travel 4 times back and forth from the time that the intake valves closes to the time when it opens and the speed of the pressure waves, we can now figure out the optimum intake runner length for a given rpm and tube diameter. We must take into account the intake duration, but you want the pressure waves to arrive before the valve closes and after it opens (air wont pass though a closed valve). To do this you must subtract some duration, typically you take off 20-30° from the advertised duration. 30° works well for most higher rpm solid cammed drag motors. So the Formula to figure effective cam duration (ECD) will be:
ECD = 720 - (Adv. duration - 30)
For a race cam with 305° of intake duration it will look like this:
ECD = 720 - (305 - 30)
The ECD of that cam would be 445
The formula for optimum intake runner length (L) is:
L = ((ECD × 0.25 × V × 2) ÷ (rpm × RV)) - ½D
Where:
ECD = Effective Cam Duration
RV = Reflective Value
D = Runner Diameter
If our engine with the 305 race cam needed to be tuned to 7000 rpm using the second set of pressure waves (RV = 2) and had a 1.5" diameter intake runner the optimum runner length formula would look like this:
L = ((445 × 0.25 × 1300 × 2)÷ (7000 × 2)) - 0.75
So 19.91 inches would be the optimum runner length.

ECD = 720 - (Adv. duration - 30)
ECD = 720 - (288 - 30)
ECD = 720 - 258
ECD = 462
The ECD of that cam would be 462
__________
The formula for optimum intake runner length (L) is:
L = ((ECD × 0.25 × V × 2) ÷ (rpm × RV)) - ½D
V = ???
ECD = Effective Cam Duration
RV = Reflective Value (why does it = 2?)
D = Runner Diameter (Inner diameter)
If our engine with the 288 race cam needed to be tuned to 7500 rpm using the second set of pressure waves (RV = 2) and had a 1.50" diameter intake runner the optimum runner length formula would look like this:
L = ((462 × 0.25 × 1300 × 2)÷ (7500 × 2)) - 0.75
L = ((300,000)÷ (7500 × 2)) - 0.75
L = (300,300 ÷ (15000)) - 0.75
L = (300,300 ÷ 15000) - 0.75
L = (20.02) - 0.75
L = 20.02 - 0.75
L = 19.27
__________
Well out comes the firewall. :D
I want to know what the v stands for... if the value is wrong so is my calculations. :D
the formula I got is from browsing the net.

fromerly89Exi
04-04-2003, 04:40 PM
Has anyone attempted this. I have all the resources to do this, I just dont know where exactly to start. Longer runners or shorter, etc..... It would made completely out of stainless steel.

AccordEpicenter
04-04-2003, 06:11 PM
longer runners will give you more peak torque but short runners give you high hp on the top end. Ive never seen anybody attempt making a custom intake for an a20.

fromerly89Exi
04-05-2003, 12:29 PM
i work at a stainless steel tubing manufacturer. i have access to everything except a lathe and a milling machine.

Mike's89AccordLX
04-05-2003, 01:18 PM
I have a short ram intake and I'm putting a hoodscoop right above the filter.

PhydeauX
04-05-2003, 02:17 PM
Idealy you want trumpet shaped runners with flairs on the ends.

http://www.sdsefi.com/techinta.htm
Some nice pictures on how to do it, look at the toyota 22R manifold near the bottom.

http://www.billzilla.org/inlet.gif
A chart for calculating inlet length. The total length from the valve to the end of the trumpet is calculated so you need to subtrace the length of the port to get the runner length.

Remember that b16a, b18a, and b18c5 manifolds can be easily adapted to fit on our motors. So make sure you do your homework and come up with a good design, because you can easily enough pick up an ITR manifold off ebay for a few hundred, drill a few holes in it, and your good to go.

andy

Mike's89AccordLX
04-05-2003, 02:32 PM
Ahh crap we're talking about intake "manifolds." I'm interested in getting a custom manifold.

AccordEpicenter
04-05-2003, 08:32 PM
yeah also you need to have it taper in and then flare the ends, it in creases velocity and thats how the honda and most other manufacturers design it

1989lxicoupe
04-09-2003, 03:42 PM
the intake manifold fomr bseries fits our cars , do the ports line up i know te bolt holes dont?

bobafett
04-09-2003, 08:02 PM
1/2 the bolts do!

1989lxicoupe
04-10-2003, 02:31 PM
i would like to know why this is a performance mod, the civic intake is for a small displacement engine, also the bolts arnt a proplem its the ports do the ports line up, im am not nocking the idea but just questin it, has anyone seen or notecd and gains in this i would like some solind info
thanks,
Kevin

fromerly89Exi
04-10-2003, 03:00 PM
and what about port-matching? if there is the slightest difference it will produce a bad swirl

fromerly89Exi
04-10-2003, 03:02 PM
i'm also working on a CAI with a velocity stack(reducer) from 3" to 2.5" just before the throttle body. Anyone else try this?

IWLSF
04-10-2003, 04:43 PM
Damn, intake runners for a 22R? That's tje same motor in my pickup...

b20a86lude
11-09-2004, 07:47 AM
i work at a stainless steel tubing manufacturer. i have access to everything except a lathe and a milling machine.
hey see if u can make an itb for me for the a20a3 ill pay whats reasonable thnx

A20A1
11-09-2004, 09:26 PM
Look for the B16A or B18C5 manifolds

they have the same ports as us just slightly different mounting stud positions which is fairly easy to fix.
REDLINE WEBER ITB (http://www.redlineweber.com/html/throttle_bodies/Throttle%20bodies_side_mount.htm)
.
.
.

Sabz5150
11-09-2004, 10:18 PM
Individual Throttle Bodies.

That is all.

Accordtheory
11-10-2004, 07:28 PM
I think the LS integra manifold would be the best option for a street driven car. It has a large plenum, and long big runners, and its engine has the most similar powerband to the A20 of the b series. (Except the b20, but that manifold is huge, it sticks up like a tunnel ram). I have the aebs typhoon manifold for the B16/B18C5, but the reason I chose that is that of the aftermarket b series manifolds, it is the only one I could find that showed good gains all over the powerband, unlike the edelbrock unit, and I believe it also has a larger plenum than the skunk2, which I was previously considering.

Also, I have this theory about how forced induction moves the volumetric efficiency curve of an intake manifold upward in the rpm range, so this may make the LS manifold an even better choice for those who want to go with forced induction..

As far as designing and building a completely custom manifold from scratch, that would be ill to the fullest, and I was actually considering doing that at one point. (I still have the flange) The reason I didnt is if you don't know the formulas for plenum volume, runnner length, runner taper, etc, etc, (I admit I don't) you are going to be building and dyno testing a lot of manifolds before you get one that delivers what you want. I would recommend starting out by at least trying to copy one that is a known quantity, and then going from there.

smufguy
03-03-2005, 01:35 PM
Alright, after a long research it is common sense that the B series intake manifolds modded to fit the A20 motors are the best to use for Turbo application. Then comes the question of what kind of design should the intake manifold carry to utelize the maximum flow of pressure with minimal restriction. Larger and streamlined plenum with short runners are the best for the application despite the engine rpm since its forced induction. Instead of slapping on widley used or recommended intake manifolds, i would like to list pretty much all the good quality manifolds available off the shelf for good companison and pick out the best at hand. The following images/products are the manifolds i want to choose from and recommend it to people who are along the lines of turboing their car since the quality of these are superior and reliability is great. So here are the following.

BBK (around $120)

http://img153.exs.cx/img153/9180/bbk6ir.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

Edlebrock ViictorX ($220 to $350)

http://img153.exs.cx/img153/3886/edlebrock9ky.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

Venom ($500 to $600)

http://img153.exs.cx/img153/9048/venom0da.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

JG Engine Dynamics {Endyne} ($ unknown)

http://img153.exs.cx/img153/6721/jg4ny.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

AIR Endyne ($400 - $500)

http://img153.exs.cx/img153/377/airendyne2rd.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

NOTE: The reason for the comparisons is purely based on performance on these manifolds and valid technical responses only. All the bullshit and offtopic posts will be deleted by a mod upon my request to keep this thread clean and specific.

PS: Price is not an issue so do not use it as a reason. If price was a reason for me, i wont be undertaking the turbo project and neither would have many who are under way. I have a pick in my mind with reasoning behind it based on my engineering. Aside from that, i would like to hear what people think would be good based on their experience either personally or thru their friends. Thanks fellas.

AccordEpicenter
03-03-2005, 01:41 PM
you forgot the AEBS intake mani

smufguy
03-03-2005, 01:44 PM
you forgot the AEBS intake mani

like i mentioned above these are my selections. I did look over it and i disregarded it for the same reason i omitted skunk2. They have much longer runners than the AIR Endyne (longest runner of the pack). and their plenum design and volume is not what i desire.

AccordEpicenter
03-03-2005, 03:07 PM
the skunk 2 isnt that much better than the the stock B16/B18C5 intake mani, but the AEBS is one of the best ones for the money ~$150 ish

NXRacer
03-03-2005, 03:28 PM
i'm assuming that the BBK will accept aftermarket fuel rails like AEM etc. Thats a pretty nice price for an IM. Its hard to find good stock B series IM's for that cheap.

this has got me thinking. . . . . .

smufguy
03-03-2005, 03:45 PM
no fellas, im not talking about the price at all. or what it would accept. Im asking which one will flow good cause all these flow differently and neither of you so far replied to what i asked for.

AccordEpicenter
03-03-2005, 03:53 PM
as for flow it probably goes like this...

Victor X>BBK>Venom>JG, Endyn>AEBS>Skunk2>Stock B16/B18C5

NXRacer
03-03-2005, 03:55 PM
you'd need dyno and/or flow bench results to know which flows the best on an A20.

AccordEpicenter
03-03-2005, 04:03 PM
thats true because it depends on your setup and the a20 is a slower reving motor. For boost i really think the Victor X etc is overkill for all but the most serious high boost high hp application, so seriously short runners are only of soo much benefit, i think youd have a much better torque curve an a20 with somthing like an AEBS intake or a Skunk2 or B16a/B18c5 without really limiting your peak power, plus adding intake plenum volume would be more beneficial than using like inch long runners to try and get more power. The stock intake will become a restriction when you start trying to make an serious power but youll make nice torque numbers with it to a point

Accordtheory
03-03-2005, 04:42 PM
price is not an issue so do not use it as a reason? Then get the Endyn one. You think you can get it for $500? Good luck. I don't know what manifiold is the best design. I would think you would want a larger plenum than stock (if you had the stock length runners) because compressed air=stiffer spring, it vibrates at a higher frequency..a bigger ported speaker box with the same port length=lower resonant frequency, you know. However, turbo saab, short runners, big plenum, opposite of turbo dsm.. I know endyn does their research, and I would bet on their engineering. However, so does edelbrock.

smufguy
03-03-2005, 05:12 PM
the motor is gonna push a max of 30psi and a norm of 12 to 15 and on a sunny day like a blistering hot summer, probably around 20 to jsut mess around. I am gonna take it to the track and thats why its gonna be high. The block and the head will be worked on and its no problem. everything with the fuel is worked out already and so is a special gastank. From what i have read and talking to engine builders, venom manifold is usually preferred for the drag application since its better with high boost. But for a daily driver, which this car is gonna be (dont even start saying anything about it) i need to have better response even with low boost. Im leaning towards the AIR Endyne.

A20A1
03-03-2005, 05:15 PM
If you look at the construction casted manifold may not flow the best... but ones like the JG where the plenum was not completed... means they had access to the ports and could smooth them out more... then seal off the plenum latter. That CF one looks cool... I know that it will mean cooler temps which is always a plus, is it designed for boot though?

smufguy
03-03-2005, 05:25 PM
I know that it will mean cooler temps which is always a plus, is it designed for boot though?

it is designed to withstand upto 50psi and 250 F. i like the design of the venom and AIR cause they are tapered towards cyl1 makin the air flow even across the 4 cylinders.

AccordEpicenter
03-03-2005, 05:43 PM
thats the big thing about that manifold, it keeps the charge air temps cooler but its a modest size intake, not big/huge like the victor x etc so itll give you a nice tq curve too

A20A1
03-03-2005, 05:57 PM
What about this along with the CF manifold...
http://store.yahoo.com/twincamtech/honinmangas.html
.
.
.

smufguy
03-03-2005, 06:10 PM
What about this along with the CF manifold...
http://store.yahoo.com/twincamtech/honinmangas.html
.
.
.

i was thinking of that too, and i heard somewhere that a company made those things in a ceramic composite which is a much better heat insulator that goes in bwt the manifold and the gasket, rather than replace the gasket itself. heat dissipation is one thing i am mainly concerned about both in the intake and exhaust areas. But as far as the exhaust, i think i have it covered, but the design is under way, and there will be a thread for the exhaust manifolds soon. ;)

MIKE: i appriciate your replies man, cause u know a lot about the manifolds and whatnot. Thanks.

BlueBead
03-03-2005, 06:47 PM
Im leaning towards the AIR Endyne.
Daily driver... FUN! -lol
I'd go towards the AIR Endyne myself. Light weight and insulating properties are a big factor in my mind. I'd go with one of those aftermarket gaskets too.
The big thing is to get lots of COLD air into the head quickly, so nice, aerodynamically smooth internal shapes and a highly polished finish are going to be the best for airflow.
Getting dyno tests for all of these models on an A20 is pretty much out of the question, so unless you can get some airflow test results for each of the intakes its going to be a matter of personal opinion and guesswork.
Ideally you want lamilar flow at a high psi. I'd see if the manufacturers' can provide any concrete testing numbers such as volume per min and in/out pressures for each cylinder.
One last thing; I'm glad you're going at this from a non-$$ motivational perspective.... its refreshing!
best of luck praveen!
-Al

smufguy
03-04-2005, 07:48 AM
thanks al. One of the things that the AIR does in the competition, is that their runners are tapered. the JG endyne on the other hand has venturies inside this manifold for greater flow. Custom race manifolds are the best for turbos, but they work good in high rpm alone or high boost (constant). I dont know why everyone laughs at a car with this much power is streetable when they themselves are not pushing anything close to it. I have ridden in a 500hp H22 civic, that passed NJ state inspection and it drives just like any other car, let alone look like one. I understand they are not the same motors, but still......................... you will see. ;) but as for the intake manifolds, im seriously considering AIR.

Edlebrock manifold is what they offer for the D16 motors as a part of their turbo package. I like their look and so does BBK, but when i look at their specs, they said the manifold is good for makin power from 7k to 10K (NA) so i dont know how they flow in the lower rpms with boost. But with headwork done to the max, i should get the car where i wanna with no problem.

Accordtheory
03-04-2005, 08:24 PM
I think it would be kind of cool to cut up a factory manifold and weld on a plenum like the JG unit. Maybe I'll try it, that would look sick in addition to my intercooler..(did you see the pic?) I just don't know exactly what length to keep the runnners, and how big to make the plenum.

RobT5580
03-04-2005, 08:41 PM
The BBK is more than $120....I wanted it but they only have it for the GSR so i got the polished victor x manifold which is growing on me by the day. Hopefully i will have an opinion on it very soon.

Accordtheory
03-05-2005, 06:34 PM
What someone needs to do (preferably not me) is compile a list of aftermarket manifolds for a popular turbo car, (2nd gen eclipse? etc), with the runner lengths, diameters, plenum volume, and accompanying dyno charts. The dyno testing should also have been done by a legit place, for instance turbo & high tech performance magazine, etc. Then we would have a better idea of how certain manifolds would work on our stupid accords. I'm about to do a little internet research on this now.

RobT5580
03-05-2005, 07:55 PM
My Tuner who has tuned over 100 turbo honda's ranked the Victor X as the best. I was gonna get the skunk 2 one but took his advice since he tunes/dynos cars daily.

smufguy
03-05-2005, 10:25 PM
on flow testing done by AIR, the AIR flowed much better than the JG one. I dont know if the JG was the JG Edlebrock or the JG Endyne, but im guessing it was the Edlebrock.

Here is the flow data and dyno sheet from their webside http://www.advancedinductionresearch.com/Performance_data.htm

AccordEpicenter
03-05-2005, 10:39 PM
i dont think it was the victor x i bet it was the other one, that looks like it flows like ass compared to the air mani

dillirk
03-06-2005, 10:19 PM
Dont let Edelbrock fool you same with skunk 2 and BBK. Little change in design mostly in the lenth of the runners to move the peak HP RPM up. Mostly a P&Ped stock intake. The Venom has a flat back wall to better reflect the sound waves back down the runners combined with shorter runners to increase flow and move Peak HP to higher RPM. I would go with the Endyne. It has the semi flat back wall and the runners arn't too short for us to use, too high Peak HP RPM. I also like that it is tapered to help keep pressure up and turbo lag down. Is that covered in CF or is it built out of CF that is bonded to the aluminum flanges?

A20A1
03-06-2005, 10:58 PM
hrm...

Runner Length Tuning

Second Pulse Lenght = 2nPL
Third Pulse Lenght = 3rdPL
Fourth Pulse Lenght = 4thPL
Fith Pulse Lenght = 5thPL

Pulse with stronger returning wave / narrower power band
2nd PL (INCHES) = 108,000 / RPM
3rd PL (INCHES) = 97,000 / RPM
4th PL (INCHES) = 74,000 / RPM
5th PL (INCHES) = 54,000 / RPM
Pulse with weaker returning wave / broader power band

Runner Taper

As taper angle increases, speed of returning wave increases.
13" runner with 4 degree taper = 10" runner with no taper

Straight runner for low rpm power
2-4 degree taper good for high rpm power
.

Grape-Ape Racing has good info too.
http://www.grapeaperacing.com/GrapeApeRacing/tech/inductionsystems.pdf
.
.
.
.
.

racerx
03-07-2005, 03:34 PM
I've heard nothing but bad things from people I know who bought a Venom manifold.
Upon my personal inspection, I found that the runners were the same size/shape, so at least in that particular one, there was no tapering.

Also, inside the plenum, there was no effort for aerodynamics. It's just a sheet metal box with 4 tubes. I was rather disappointed.

It goes to show you that price does not equal quality.

I would recommend:
1. AIR
2. JG
3. Edelbrock

Accordtheory
03-07-2005, 05:05 PM
I've heard nothing but bad things from people I know who bought a Venom manifold.
Upon my personal inspection, I found that the runners were the same size/shape, so at least in that particular one, there was no tapering.

Also, inside the plenum, there was no effort for aerodynamics. It's just a sheet metal box with 4 tubes. I was rather disappointed.

You're saying there was no transistion between the runners and the plenum? That's pathetic! I wonder about the golden eagle manifold, isn't that basically the same as the Venom?

racerx
03-07-2005, 05:48 PM
yeah, it's entirely pathetic. Seriously, what it looks like on the outside pretty much reflects the inside. Nothing hidden there. No R&D.

smufguy
03-08-2005, 12:24 PM
You're saying there was no transistion between the runners and the plenum? That's pathetic! I wonder about the golden eagle manifold, isn't that basically the same as the Venom?

golden eagle is the same as the Venom, but the price is just too much. $700 - $800 for that kinda manifold, fully race, is just not practical for me. Besides, i dont really like the way it looks or its construction.

The insides of the AIR on the other hand is pretty satisfying, smoothed out ends on the runners to the plenum since the cf mat could be contoured to make an even radius. Its quality looks good.

A20A1
03-08-2005, 12:46 PM
I wanna grab the CF manifold off that Mugen B20A :D

Accordtheory
03-09-2005, 10:25 AM
This goes out to all you engineering types...I am looking to further educate myself with some mathematical formulas regarding intake manifold design. I just finished reading "Maximum Boost", by Corky Bell, and that book taught me absolutely nothing about intake manifolds. Or much else for that matter. Anyone know of any good reading material on this subject?

A20A1
03-10-2005, 01:39 AM
There were a few for domestic carbed motors... I'm sure some applies to efi as well.
I just hang out in boarders books and read thru the books there.

There is a book specificly on automitive math but I'm not sure how much of it atually went into tuning... it was probably more for engine tolerances and stuff like that.

Or look for books on Computer IC engine building. usually they show the written form of the formulas that their program performs... and some have software included in the back page as a CD.

ICEMAN707
03-15-2005, 01:21 AM
That JG Engine Dynamics manifold looks like they hacked a stock b-series intake manifold in half and welded on a tank-style plenum. I'm sure the same thing can be done to a stock A20A3 manifold. I think the 89 manifold would be the better choice cus it's a 2-piece design instead of having to hack the 87 manifold. Just take the runner half and port and polish it then make a custom plenum yourself and bolt it on. That would be the cheaper and easier way to do it. If I were to spend $500 on a manifold, I'd much rather save up and go ITB's, for non-turbo I mean.

Also, I've been thinking about removing the spacer on the 89 A20A3 manifold to see if that makes a difference...anyone ever tried it?

rjudgey
03-15-2005, 03:07 AM
you can still use ITB's with a turbo you just have to get a airbox thats sealed and can handle the pressure from the boost, the ITB's are sealed and air tight so no reason why it shouldn't work, you'd then be in control of the size of the air box and the tubing going to it might work out better like that maybe?

ICEMAN707
03-15-2005, 03:10 AM
you can still use ITB's with a turbo you just have to get a airbox thats sealed and can handle the pressure from the boost, the ITB's are sealed and air tight so no reason why it shouldn't work, you'd then be in control of the size of the air box and the tubing going to it might work out better like that maybe?

That's true! Best of both worlds. ITB's are way better.

smufguy
03-15-2005, 05:35 AM
ITB's are not good for turbo since they beat the purpose of their true nature. ITBs are used in naturally aspirated cars to ensure each cylinder gets its own dose of clean air rather than being distrubuted by the plenum with one big Throttle plate. THe reason using one TB is it that its cheaper, but it does not even out the air flow across cyls making some burn rich and some lean since NA works off engine vaccum. On a turbo, its force fed as we know and there is no Reason to have a ITB. There are race manifolds that look like the ITBs without the individual Throttle plates. They call them horns or venturies and they are constructed in the way venom does, gradiating towards cyl 1 from cyl4 to speed up air flow towards cyl1 and have air flow somewhat even across the cylinders. unless otherwise we use intake manifolds like the RX7s, there is no assurance that we will have even air flow.

ps: next time you guys wanna reply to this thread, can u guys please stick to the subject? Thanks

Accordtheory
03-16-2005, 02:11 PM
None of that makes any sense to me...except the cost rationale. I think individual throttle bodies are b.s., something left over from the days of carburetion. (no plenum to dampen the pulse of intake suction across the venturi= better fueling) I see no reason to use this shit with multiport injection. If you have uneven volumetric efficiency from cylinder to cylinder because of your intake manifold, that doesn't mean you have to go to ITBs to correct this. Change/replace/improve your manifold. (And how the Hell would being under boost change the cyl/cyl efficiency??) If anyone thinks they can convince me otherwise, go for it. To back up my point of view, Endyn didn't use ITBs on their 300whp B20 Vtec, they modified the shit out of a skunk2 casting. Also, if endyn is going to be associated with the AIR manifold, then it automatically gets my approval.

FyreDaug
05-06-2005, 06:19 PM
First I should mention my intentions of this project, it will be a carbed charged system, obviously pull through setup with a 500+cfm carb (undecided, this is just a research step)

Not sure on the charger I will use either, but I plan to only run on 6psi. I was thinking of getting a GM charger from a wrecker off of a 3.8L v6(roots), but it looks too big. Either way I will keep looking around for chargers and carbs, but for now I need to research intake manifold design.

First I have 1 request, since cant currently pull the head off my daily driver and I havent bought a wrecked one yet I would like to see a picture of the cylinder head. Showing the intake ports and if possible the exhaust aswell.

Ive been doing quite a bit of research about tuning intake runners, length, diameter and flow and Ive learned enough that I'm ready to do one on my own. Ive got some designs in my head, but I'm not sure how it would work.

But basically all 4 runners will be the exact same length/diameter going straight back to a single "charge tube" 3x the size of a single runner that all 4 runners be connected to. Not sure about the size of that as of now, but its all R&D. I plan to have the runners tuned to 4500rpm.

Problem I'm having though is I dont have a head to work off of for research stuff right now so all I have is you guys. I'm gonna pick up a wrecked accord when I can find one for cheap with an engine, Id rather have a parts car than just an engine. I'm going to do this 1 step at a time, the intake manifold will be made, and then port matched to the head, same with a header to the head.

I can build the manifold for cheap and get it welded good to hold the boost, also the upper dogbone mount will be relocated, and will probably have 2, 1 on either side of the engine.

Anyways, I'm going a little off topic right now but how good are the internals on these a20s will it be good for 4-5psi? I dont know how much milage will be on the donor car but I will probably be using that one for this project, as it would save time and money and ill still be able to drive the car. Plus Im pushing 290k on the factory engine still holding strong and beating non vtec integras :p

I'm thinking if I do everything right the first time, it will be under 700 bucks.

A20A1
05-06-2005, 08:54 PM
Would runner length really be as effectice since you're under boost instead of N/A.

well you have the higher c/r to deal with the stock pistons...
As for stock internals I wouldn't say they'd give you more then 7 psi.

I have a head laying around but the ports are all sooty and oily... you may not get the pics you desire.

A20A1
05-06-2005, 09:11 PM
Here you go... I wasn't sure if you wanted the port or all 4 so I did both.

Click on the images below to see the full size.
Exhaust is the left image ... intake is on the right.


BTW: There is a thread on SC carbs... not much has been done but I have looked at a system by CAMDEN for the 22R problem is our pully isn't on the same side as the 22R and we cant just rotate the SC or the screws will spin in the opposite direction. I asked if the pully could be removed from one side of the shaft and placed on the other but I got a reply telling me to call someone... I'm not ready to do that, and I'm surpised they didn't just reply let me know what I figured would be common knowledge to them.

FyreDaug
05-06-2005, 11:51 PM
Excecllent just what I was looking for. Why do you have a head just lying around? heh. Thanks.

shepherd79
05-07-2005, 03:36 AM
Excecllent just what I was looking for. Why do you have a head just lying around? heh. Thanks.

All of us have cylinder heads laying around just in case we need some to work on it.
look here: http://www.3geez.com/showthread.php?t=18800

A20A1
05-07-2005, 12:54 PM
If you notice I bought a magazine on blower tuning in the pic, I've had it laying around for some time...

I was reading up on cam selection and they said a mild profile for the intake paired with an agressive exhaust profile is good for supercharged motors.

FyreDaug
05-07-2005, 05:38 PM
Yeah, since its forced induction it doesnt need a long duration for the intake.

About the runners, theres 2 theories I have, 1 being short runners will help low end with a charger because it has a shorter path travel and it would have higher velocity.

The second being long runners will be more effective for higher end, since it will use the runner as a "buffer" during higher rpms.

Basically a very short version of it, but I will be keeping it closer to the long size of the runner.

FyreDaug
05-09-2005, 03:06 PM
Alright, a friend an I were working on my theory a little more and we came to some better conclusions. When I was in high school I took welding class, with a couple friends too and our teacher told us "If you took my class, your set for life if you need to come back" and he's still teaching there, so we can use his shop.

Anyways, the idea we came up with (whether it will work the way we want or not is part of the R&D) is having header style runners off of a 3" intake charge pipe. Basically from the SC it will have 3" piping that will be split into 4 equal length 1.5"(?) runners, which will then have a widening (and maybe a split, into 2 0.75" pipes for each valve, if it deems to be unpracticle it will just be 1.5" to it, then matching for each valve (which does seem more practicle). There wont be a plenum on the manifold, and the runner will be running down to the firewall, thus giving me space to mount the blower/carb.

On the intake side pre-carb it will be 3" piping, however we came up with another mini-theory now that there is no plenum that near the end (about 80% of the way to the filter) the 3" will split to 2 2.5" and then run for another foot or so and connect to 2 filters. Essentially acting as a plenum in there with the increased space in the intake housing some filtered air ready to be used.

***Is there anything specific to a draw through system I should be worried about? I couldnt find too much information on it, but its basically sticking a carb on the intake side of the charger, and the charger pulling in air/fuel and compressing. Probably 4-5psi boost.

***And also, should I be worried about cooling the intake manifold? I dont want to use the engine coolant running through it. And I dont know how its effectively cooled stock. Since echarged air is warmer I was hoping to get some suggestions from you guys on how to effectively cool it. I wont be running an IC, but I would like to have some sort of setup cooling the charge pipe and the very least. Not sure if this is a good idea or not, but I was planning on putting that exhaust cover stuff (keeps heat out, long day cant think of the word) around all 4 runners, and cooling the charge pipe.

But please, if there is something I'm missing with this setup, please let me know. Maybe I'm missing something with the draw-through setup that I need to know, like if charging air/fuel is gonna reduce the life of the charger etc.

For the parts I'm considering (without doing any proper research yet) is a carb off of a 350 chevy, rebuilt. Not a performance one or anything, just a stock carb off a 350. And the charger off of a 3800 series II engine (pontiac GTP). I dont know if the charger is electronicly controlled in any way, but its obviously belt driven.

I will need a MAP (manifold air pressure) sensor, which will be fitted right before the 3" goes into 4 runners. But what about boost controlling? How would I go about getting a constant 4 psi all throughout the power band?

phrenology
05-09-2005, 04:36 PM
Hell the new 05 Mini Cooper S gets 168 Hp out of its 1.6 Litre with a SC. Hmmm if I had 22K I could get me one of those and put the charger in my Accord! LOL. I wonder if BMW would sell us a supercharger from the Mini? So much for carbs though. I've always wanted to work on doing a small draw through SC with my DCOEs, but I'm having enough shit to deal with just getting the motor back together. Hah. :uh:

A20A1
05-09-2005, 04:37 PM
The link isn't working for me when I visit the J&S site... so I found some other stuff written on them
http://www.mustangworks.com/articles/poweradders/KnockControl.html
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/45840/

A20A1
05-09-2005, 04:40 PM
I wonder if BMW would sell us a supercharger from the Mini? So much for carbs though. I've always wanted to work on doing a small draw through SC with my DCOEs, but I'm having enough shit to deal with just getting the motor back together. Hah. :uh:

Not all SC will work with carbs though... some could cause the fuel to ignite in impellers/screws.

phrenology
05-09-2005, 04:50 PM
Not all SC will work with carbs though... some could cause the fuel to ignite in impellers/screws.

I realize that..that's why I said "So much for carbs..."

Fantasy: A fully stocked machine shop, a dyno and a small research and development crew and I'd be churning out parts for an Accord ready SC.

Reality: I'm broke as shit, and my A20A3 is still in pieces and the amount of headaches involved in this NA rebuild multiplies daily as it is.

A20A1
05-09-2005, 04:56 PM
Here is the stock manifold cut... you could add a plenum to that instead of 4 into one... but then the runner lenghts are long and the runners taper wider near the ports instead of smaller.
http://www.3geez.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3879
.
.
.

FyreDaug
05-09-2005, 08:39 PM
Thanks for the replies. What about the PCV? Can that be disregarded entirely or do I need it? (not emission controlled area)

Im going to steal the scanner from my moms place since she doesnt have a computer anymore and scan my diagrams. I want all the input I can get before building stuff.

I do live in a climate that gets to -40 in the winter, and the manifold will be made out of cheap shop class metal. (well not cheap, but not aluminum though)

A20A1
05-10-2005, 08:27 AM
be careful what metal you use, you don't want your manifold rusting... and coating the inside of the manifold to prevent rust... well I dunno if the paint would work well with fuel... it may begin to errode and then expose the metal again.

You do need PCV, and the brake booster... and some way to provide proper vacuum to those... add check valves so they don't see pressure if you connect them to the manifold but there is no gaurantee that you'll ever get a good high vacuum signal from the manifold... even with the car at idle.

I read that some carburetors that are not setup to run with superchargers tap into manifold vacuum thru ports in the carb base... this causes problems because there is a fake vacuum signal created by the suction of the blower... and since there is extra vacuum the powervalve closes and leans the fuel mix.

They may be trying to sell demon carbs but they said that there is a demon that uses boost referenced powervalve.

FyreDaug
05-10-2005, 09:13 AM
be careful what metal you use, you don't want your manifold rusting... and coating the inside of the manifold to prevent rust... well I dunno if the paint would work well with fuel... it may begin to errode and then expose the metal again.

You do need PCV, and the brake booster... and some way to provide proper vacuum to those... add check valves so they don't see pressure if you connect them to the manifold but there is no gaurantee that you'll ever get a good high vacuum signal from the manifold... even with the car at idle.

I read that some carburetors that are not setup to run with superchargers tap into manifold vacuum thru ports in the carb base... this causes problems because there is a fake vacuum signal created by the suction of the blower... and since there is extra vacuum the powervalve closes and leans the fuel mix.

They may be trying to sell demon carbs but they said that there is a demon that uses boost referenced powervalve.

How would I run a PCV system? I've still got a new valve, but I'm just not sure how to set it up. I figured I could live without it.

As for vacuum, I know I'm going to have problems getting negative pressure under boost. But what about pre-carb, there is a small line tapped into the already 3" opening that runs to the carb aswell. And by small I'm thinking, large vacuum line size, and then connecting all vacuum accessories pre-carb through a check valve? (I'll add this to my diagram when I get the scanner and explain what I mean)

What are the chances a typical charger wont work with air/fuel? I dont want to be blowing myself up, but I also want to be getting a charger from a wrecker.

I dont understand why a carb wont work with a charger when its being pulled through for a couple reasons, mainly it doesnt have to make the carb work as hard, it will just be creating a different pressure (still negative) than that used in the intake stroke to pull the mixture through, so why would it lean it out? Wouldnt it just take the mixture faster?

As for manifold rusting, I'll leave that for later. I'll get it working and then pull it off ~1000km later and check it out, if it needs some coating, that can be done, but I'm not too worried about it right now.

What kind of charger should I be looking at? Would a roots be acceptable? From what I know off hand without doing anymore research is that a roots charger can pretty much give me full boost down low (which is what I am wanting) but it heats up alot, thus the previous question about cooling the manifold. I'd rather not push hot air into the engine if I can cool it. And twin screws being very efficient (but where would I find one from a wrecker?? Good luck finding one) and a centrifugal is iffy to me.

I think roots would be the best way to do it and
An intercooler will most likely be necessary at boost levels above 6psi with a roots supercharger. and since I'm not boosting that much, if I can cool the intake I should be fine. Like a secondary rad idea, with an aux water pump to run all over the intake manifold. And a roots would be the one I would typically find in a wrecker. (and is the one on the GTP's)

FyreDaug
05-10-2005, 09:18 AM
And I just had a wild idea of expanding the charge pipe width a little bit (maybe to 4") and running 2 parallel lines of coolant through there, that way when the charge passes around it, it will hit some chilled pipes. Probably not effective, but it was something that just came to me right now. I'm thinking maybe just tap into the engine coolant line like what is normally done on the manifold would help cool a roots charge, but I would love the idea of having secondary rad to cool it seperately this way.

Any comments on this?

EDIT: By the way, the charger I am looking at is the Eaton M90. Comes on thunderbirds, GTP's etc. Typical roots setup capable of 9psi I believe.

A20A1
05-10-2005, 12:20 PM
I dunno About the Eaton, I've only seen them on newer 1990 and up model EFI cars and it doesn't look like a top feed like most carbed blowers I've seen on domestics... I remember you saying something about 6cyl though... for me I'd look for something with a carb on it already, that to me would at least get rid of the doubt... you could always e-mail eaton
...
What about digging around for a Weiand 142 cid blower
or a Camden?

A20A1
05-10-2005, 12:37 PM
I dont understand why a carb wont work with a charger when its being pulled through for a couple reasons, mainly it doesnt have to make the carb work as hard, it will just be creating a different pressure (still negative) than that used in the intake stroke to pull the mixture through, so why would it lean it out? Wouldnt it just take the mixture faster?


I didn't say it wouldn't work... you will just get LEAN spots when the extra vacuum created by the blower CLOSES the POWER VALVE. Blower vacuum is not the same as manifold vacuum and is usually much higher..

True that other parts of the carb work better... but remember most of the carb doesn't run off ENGINE / MANIFOLD VACUUM it runs off of VENTURI VACUUM... the VENTURI VACUUM is created at the VENTURIES.

On a supercharged motor vacuum below the carb is giving the parts that operate off of ENGINE VACUUM false vacuum readings.

Vacuum below the carb 24"
Actual engine vacuum 14"

As you open the throttle vacuum is supposed to drop to allow the power valve to open... however...

Vacuum below the carb is 12"
Actual engine vacuum is 2"

Under actual engine vacuum the power valve should be open all or most of the way @ 2"
but because of the blower you get 12" so the valve doesn't open all the way or not at all and your mixture ends up being lean.

The POWER VALVE needs to be OPEN in order to RICHEN the fuel mixture...

I hope that clears things up. :) the "CAPS" are just to highlight terms

FyreDaug
05-10-2005, 12:55 PM
I'll get ahold of eaton, even if it isnt top feed charger (because it is off of an EFI car) we can always make a bracket on the intake side with a tube to have the carb upright.

If we get a carb off of a 350, make the barrels manual, what other vacuum stuff do we have to worry about?

How would we make it work so the power valve opens properly? Maybe I missed that part of carbs in high school. What can we convert to make it work?

IMPORTANT

What can we do about venting excess pressure? My friend has this idea of a seperator to seperate the air/fuel, return the fuel to the tank and blow off the air. But what can we use a seperator?

EDIT:


Hi there, I have a some-what wierd question to put across you.

I am building up a honda carbuerated motor and am building a pull-through charger system to power it.

I have access to an M90 charger that we plan on using to pull through a 500cFm 4bbl carb.

One of the major problems that has arisen (even though we are good fabricators) is that we havent built a pull through system before, and our main question is if this blower is capable of compressing air/fuel up to 5-6psi into a custom made intake manifold. (bypass/blow off is not a big issue right now)

All of our blue prints are ready and we have access to an m90 for a very reasonable price.

But like I said, we are worried about the air/fuel in a roots charger, we dont want to end up blowing ourselves up. :)

I was told to go directly to the source to ask if this application would work for the blower.

We would very much appreciate a response. Thank you for your time.

The email I sent to Eaton. Link to their site (http://www.automotive.eaton.com/product/engine_controls/superchargers/whysuperchargers.asp)
and I hope to get a response shortly.

By the way, I should have my 3 pages of notes/diagrams up tonight, I have a scanner now but I have to go to work.

IMPORTANT

How would we go about doing the pcv? I havent checked how it works stock on our engines, but I would assume it would have to be hooked up to vacuum and not boost :p

A20A1
05-10-2005, 01:56 PM
stock the PCV connects to manifold vacuum.

You could have boost referenced secondaries... or just have manual secondaries... I'm sure there have been a few conversions already.

For venting pressure you could make a horizontal tube connect to a large chamber near the top of the chamber... this will drop the pressure in the charge that was expelled... add some baffles in the chamber between the tube and the vent holes... the vent holes should be drilled at the very top of the chamber to slowly bleed the air... then at the bottom have a drain for fuel back to the fuel tank... the reason for the horizontal tube to the chamber is so that the fuel doesn't puddle in the tube or the blow off valve you use.

FyreDaug
05-10-2005, 01:59 PM
Whoa, I missed that...
For venting pressure you could make a horizontal tube connect to a large chamber near the top of the chamber

Top of which chamber?

Bah, how about you help me with my blue prints. I'll see if I can bring the scanner into work.

Wait no, I cant attach? That sucks, do you have a host or anything? Again though, thanks for all your help. It will get me through this :D

EDIT: Or could you draw something? The inlet on the charger is on the opposite-pulley side. And obviously outlet is bottom of the roots.

FyreDaug
05-11-2005, 12:54 PM
UPDATE: DOCUMENTS SCANNED TODAY

Page 1 (http://www.cardomain.com/member_pages/show_image.pl?fg=000000&bg=FFFFFF&migration=1&image=http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/4/web/808000-808999/808617_10_full.jpg)
Page 2 (http://www.cardomain.com/member_pages/show_image.pl?fg=000000&bg=FFFFFF&migration=1&image=http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/4/web/808000-808999/808617_11_full.jpg)
Page 3 (http://www.cardomain.com/member_pages/show_image.pl?fg=000000&bg=FFFFFF&migration=1&image=http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/4/web/808000-808999/808617_12_full.jpg)

A20A1
05-11-2005, 03:10 PM
woahisme... My internet isn't working with cardomain at the moment... all the pics and even my own site doesn't load.

FyreDaug
05-11-2005, 03:45 PM
Damnit :p

Alright, well whenever you get a chance take a peek and let me know. Dont mind the hand writing, when I jot stuff down and make notes its always like that. Ignore the little doodles too :p

A20A1
05-12-2005, 04:23 PM
Got the pics... need time to make out what you wrote.

You should upgrade the header and exhaust for sure or you'll be choking bad.

I saw your diagram... the runners seem a bit long... there isn't a lot of space and you need to take into account that the pully on the SC can't sit too far back or it will hit the body of the car near the strut tower...
http://www.3geez.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4294

FyreDaug
05-12-2005, 05:13 PM
Arg, damn forums. I had something typed, but whatever. Basically I like the header style intake runners. I know they are too long, but it was a figurative diagram. I get my parts car tomorrow.

Anyways, my buddy here had this idea of venting it through a large cannister of ball bearings and mesh. The gas will condense around the metal and the air will be vented up (since theres less resistance than going through the return line into the gas tank) but how well will that work? I need some more ideas to seperate air/gas.

A20A1
05-12-2005, 07:18 PM
I saw the 4 into 1 collector... problem is you want all 4 runners to meet on a level plane.. .
If you have 2 runners paired above the other 2 then it could mess up fuel distribution to the cylinders on top. Also to make smooth transitions you'll need a fair amount of length or else you end up with sharp 90* bends.
To seperate fuel from the air make sure the air has to go thru a few very tight / sharp 90* bends before it finds the exit... this will slow down the fuel and let the air pass it... you may still get some of the finer vaporised fuel but the big dropplets should be left behind. You could also cool the discharge from the manifold but that will take too much effort space and weight to be useful. Some cooling goes on automaticly when the gas expands.
You might be able to vent straight to the tank thru the charcoal canisters line... but then you'd need a second line to vent the tank consistently to keep the pressure down. You could use the intake and use the extra gas vapors or control it's release with a solenoid.

Ahaha. :) Sure you could vent the gasses thru the exhaust... it may be a bit wasteful... you may not need the BOV, but I guess it's nice having an extra safety measure.
When you vent it's gotta be somewhere that will vent the gasses evenly to all runners.
It may be better to choke the motor out and just restrict the amount of air the charger has to compress... this will also tie up some of the fuel as well but you'll be pulling large amounts of gas from the idle circuit.

FyreDaug
05-12-2005, 08:37 PM
I think the 4-1 collector wont really matter since the whole system will be pressurized. I dont wanna vent the gasses through the exhaust, if I run it through the charcoal how would I keep the gas tank pressure down?

2dsei
05-13-2005, 10:28 AM
it would probaly be easier to get a vortech super charget and build mounting brackets and plumming then to built a manifold

A20A1
05-13-2005, 11:18 AM
I've asked before Vortech doesn't work with carbs

FyreDaug
05-13-2005, 05:45 PM
Hey mike, whats the deal with you thinking the 4-1 collector wont work? (curious, not sounding like an ass)

A20A1
05-13-2005, 07:27 PM
Hey mike, whats the deal with you thinking the 4-1 collector wont work? (curious, not sounding like an ass)

I didn't say it wont work I'm worried about the flow inside the manifold... it may not work as well as one with all 4 runners level with the plenum.

If you can find other supercharger manifolds that are not N/A Fuel injected manifolds with the same design as yours then go with it.

FyreDaug
05-13-2005, 07:37 PM
Would the flow really matter though? Obviously the whole system will be under pressure, and with 3" splitting 4 ways equally, the flow should be fine.

And again, need some idea on filtering the air/fuel..

A20A1
05-13-2005, 07:54 PM
If it was just air then no it wouldn't be as big a deal... I dunno how the fuel will behave in that type of configuration... sure everything is hot so the fuel should be all vaporized and flow well... then again I dunno... so why take the chance.

Besides flow I really don't see their being enough space for that design unless you decide to make room by cutting the hood.

If anything we have so little space that the charger and pully will have to be pretty darn close to the valve cover so it doesn't hit the strut tower or master cylinder.

FyreDaug
05-13-2005, 08:34 PM
:mad: Stupid forums.
Basically: you dont think the 4-1 is a good idea?
If I have to (to make room) I can move the alt to the front of the car where the AC would sit. I'm sure if im capable of building a charger setup I can weld a bracket to put the alt up there :)
This is going on a long shot here, and I doubt this is a good idea but:
Since the bypass valve on the charger will be pushing and not pulling (still putting a check valve inline) we could run it directly into the tank, in the bottom, so the charger would bubble through the gas, putting the fumes back into the liquid form. I have absolutely no idea how the characteristics of fuel work in this way. Then have a vent at the top of the fuel tank ((EDIT: not line, tank)) for the vapors possibly running through a charcoal cannister (or even just another filter) then into the intake where the 2 filter pipes meet.
At idle the engine should be 2psi or so and it wont be bypassing, so it would suck through the bypass. So we'll put a check valve in there, should cure that. Might also help with not upgrading the fuel pump, if the intake does some of the sucking getting fuel vapor.
The only problem I see (right now anyways) is that once the boost is being bypassed it will run rich....
EDIT: Actually I think this is a good idea, I showed it to my buddy here at work (who came up with the ball bearing idea) and he said its awesome. Since the bypass will be pressurizing the tank at the bottom, any pressure in there will want to escape the only way it can, ,and since it would rise, and is being pressurized FROM the bottom, it would go up, and the vacuum of the intake would help.
And about the rich on boost part, I could just change the idle mixture to run right, and then lean out the primary/secondary's right?

Another thing, since I'm shopping around I'm gonna need a boost sensor and a boost gauge shortly. Any recommendations? I'm afraid to get something off ebay off of another car for a boost sensor, what do turbo guys usually use? (Keeping it fairly cheap, no wideband or anything)
EDIT: Are all maps the same in the voltage readout? Like all MAP's will show 5v at 15psi absolute or something? Or do they vary?

A20A1
05-13-2005, 08:55 PM
I dunno how the power valve looks inside the carb you are using... but if you could I would say add a port the carb so that vacuum normally reaching the power valve from the hole in the carb would be sealed out... ad attatch a line from the port you made to the boosted side of the manifold and swap the location of the spring inside the powervalve so that it's not resisting vacuum but instead resisting pressure.
Spring rates will have to be worked out.
Leaning your primary and secondaries is not the answer.
The adjusting the idle mixture may help... but in the long run fixing the power valve so it's boost referenced would be better.

I beleive I had a picture of someone's modification to boost reference a powervalve on a weber... I'll have to go look it up.

FyreDaug
05-14-2005, 12:44 AM
And if it can be done on a weber it can be done on a 350 carb.

Bump?


Another thing, since I'm shopping around I'm gonna need a boost sensor and a boost gauge shortly. Any recommendations? I'm afraid to get something off ebay off of another car for a boost sensor, what do turbo guys usually use? (Keeping it fairly cheap, no wideband or anything)
EDIT: Are all maps the same in the voltage readout? Like all MAP's will show 5v at 15psi absolute or something? Or do they vary?
Kinda curious about that

Sorry for the quad post, I'm kinda using this thread as a public note pad. So here's where this project sits right now:
I've got the parts car, it runs. I'm gonna pull the head and get the cam ground, meanwhile I'll pnp it myself while doing some exhaust/intake header/manifold with the help of my 3 tech-head roommates it shouldnt be too bad. Depending on the money situation this summer (more than likely) I will be able to afford a bottom end rebuild aswell, using stock comp pistons, balanced crank and forged rods. I know a guy who can hone out the bores for me aswell.
So I figure it would be best to wait to charge it until the engine is capable of it. Ive only got 2 engines, 1 is getting old (daily) and 1 is my backup. I dont wanna go and fuck stuff up and not have another motor to play with.
Another project I want to undertake is the hybrid accord/lude trans, just because.
I dont want to rush this project, I do that all too often and I end up not finishing stuff. As long as I have a plan and certain "stages" I shouldnt have problems doing this. I havent been able to build an engine for a while and Im dying to do it again.
I'll keep pics of all my progress/updates too. My plan is to keep this as a daily driver that looks like a rusty beater (like it does now) with some factory 14-15" honda rims wrapped with some killer rubber. Wanting 14's at the least from this car. The charger I will be using is capable of 10-12psi, and I intend to run that much when I want it.
Might sound like a dream right now because im pushing the charger back until everything is done, but I feel its neccesary, itll give me plenty of time to do any more research I need and make sure it works the first time.
Hope you can still help me out down the road mike. But right now I'm stuck between putting in a suspension to replace the dying suspension I have now or starting this engine. I can definately pull the head and start doing that in my free time, but everything else requires more dedication, I'm sure ill spend a good 50 hours on this head to make it perfect.

A20A1
06-07-2005, 03:05 PM
Here is a site with some basic info... http://datsun1200.com/modules/nsections/index.php?op=viewarticle&artid=35
"It's a B&M 144c.i. blower. blower Guess they're called Holley now"
http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLine/Products/Marine/AMS/SC/155010.html
http://datsun1200.com/modules/myalbum/photo.php?lid=2367
http://datsun1200.com/modules/myalbum/photo.php?lid=825
.
.
.

more good info
http://www.superchargersonline.com/content.asp?ID=76
the screw and impeller type SC's are not good with carbs.
I wonder if they do custom jobs
http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLine/Products/AMS/SC/SCbuild.html
Here are the SC dimensions
http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/TechServ/TechInfo/SCTech3.html
.
.
.

A20A1
02-14-2006, 06:21 PM
http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1431516

I guess it can use B series and Mustang TB's
Someone had already used a FORD 65mm TB on a B-Series Installed on an A20
here : http://www.3geez.com/forum/showpost.php?p=505136&postcount=93



This is the Full-Race Bseries intake manifold

Price is $899



http://www.full-race.com/prototype/intmani/FRIM.jpg

Top View, OEM throttle cable placement

http://www.full-race.com/prototype/intmani/FRIM-4.jpg

Bottom View with b16 and b18 IAC, stock IAT and plenty of vacuum ports, and 4 additional injector bungs

http://www.full-race.com/prototype/intmani/FRIM-3.jpg

B16/B18C5 AND B18C Head flange

http://www.full-race.com/prototype/intmani/FRIM-2.jpg

Side View

http://www.full-race.com/prototype/intmani/FRIM-1.jpg

Internal View of Plenum and Velocity Stacks

http://www.full-race.com/prototype/intmani/FRIM-5.jpg

Showing Mustang AND B series Throttle Body Mounting



1) FULL-RACE

2) AIR ENDYNE CARBON

3) EDELBROCK

?) VENOM


Plenum : Edlebrock VS Full-Race
http://www.kohlerperformance.com/hosted/jgvsfr.jpg

Legend_master
02-14-2006, 07:37 PM
I am loving the velocity stacks inside the manifold, but I wonder if it works any better then other manifolds.

bobafett
02-14-2006, 07:44 PM
check out the honda tech link... serious WHP gains :)

gfrg88
02-14-2006, 08:29 PM
does the ford tb bolt right up, cause i tried it and im not sure if it was the right one????

B16KILLA
02-14-2006, 08:33 PM
I dont think it bolts right up,thats why the manifold above has different mounting holes.I dont know,just guessing

gfrg88
02-14-2006, 08:55 PM
OMG!! and i though edlebrock had a big plenum, damn thats huge.... i want one :hs:

A20A1
02-14-2006, 09:07 PM
The runner taper looks reversed... but it's not really a taper. It just looks like it does. The increase in wisual width near the flange is just because of the oval transition to the ports.

Also the plenum doesn't get smaller near the last runner, a lot of plenum shapes from F1 cars to the manifolds on the market today have some taper to the plenum shape towards the back.


Alright, after a long research it is common sense that the B series intake manifolds modded to fit the A20 motors are the best to use for Turbo application. Then comes the question of what kind of design should the intake manifold carry to utelize the maximum flow of pressure with minimal restriction. Larger and streamlined plenum with short runners are the best for the application despite the engine rpm since its forced induction. Instead of slapping on widley used or recommended intake manifolds, i would like to list pretty much all the good quality manifolds available off the shelf for good companison and pick out the best at hand. The following images/products are the manifolds i want to choose from and recommend it to people who are along the lines of turboing their car since the quality of these are superior and reliability is great. So here are the following.
BBK (around $120)
http://img153.exs.cx/img153/9180/bbk6ir.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
Edlebrock ViictorX ($220 to $350)
http://img153.exs.cx/img153/3886/edlebrock9ky.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

Venom ($500 to $600)
http://img153.exs.cx/img153/9048/venom0da.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

JG Engine Dynamics {Endyne} ($ unknown)
http://img153.exs.cx/img153/6721/jg4ny.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

AIR Endyne ($400 - $500)
http://img153.exs.cx/img153/377/airendyne2rd.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
NOTE: The reason for the comparisons is purely based on performance on these manifolds and valid technical responses only. All the bullshit and offtopic posts will be deleted by a mod upon my request to keep this thread clean and specific.

PS: Price is not an issue so do not use it as a reason. If price was a reason for me, i wont be undertaking the turbo project and neither would have many who are under way. I have a pick in my mind with reasoning behind it based on my engineering. Aside from that, i would like to hear what people think would be good based on their experience either personally or thru their friends. Thanks fellas.

A20A1
02-14-2006, 09:17 PM
Focuz B16/B18 Intake Manifold
It's polished like a mirror on the inside

Welds aren't very well done on the flange end

It's cheap, but it looks like it will do well!

Plenum is larger then the Edelbrock unit as well. =)

Please take that inside picture again but try and cover the flash or disable it... if it's too dark try and adjust the exposure time... just make sure you hold the camera steady.

carotman
02-14-2006, 09:35 PM
DAMN!!!
I thought my Edelbrock manifold was big.... this is huge!

A20A1
02-14-2006, 10:16 PM
Yeah, the Full Race looks like a f'ing Zepplin. =)

We should dub it the "Hindenburg"

Accordtheory
02-14-2006, 11:20 PM
You cannot get the bbk for $120. that is complete bullshit. If you can, let me know where!
My only question about the full race is that the velocity stacks do not follow endyn's 1/2 radius formula. But we know how everyone '"rides full race's nut sack"...h-t..
but full race does engineer really exceptional shit though.

A20A1
02-15-2006, 01:07 AM
I did this a while back but it was a fairly rough measurement, I guss I was off.

The smallest port inside the carb manifold measured 1.48 square inches... well 1.162392000001
The port where it meets the head it’s 1.76 square inches, well 1.656703125 actually.
hehe I think I did HxW instead of: pi ( r x r )


You're right I think the intake diameter of the port to the head is 1.5" you find both radii then add them to get the new diameter... or am I wrong?

it was 1.125' High and 1.875" wide oval port.

4802 Peak Torque RPM
Optimum Intake runner area 1.62 square inches (calculated)
Optimum Intake Length 17.49 inches long (from valve head to plenum).

I double checked it with this as well
http://www.bgsoflex.com/intakeln.html

I used 17 inches.

Looks like we have a winner, no?



http://www.team-integra.net/forum/display_topic_threads.asp?ThreadPage=4&ForumID=10&TopicID=87512&PagePosition=1





Here is a snipt from JUN
http://www.junauto.co.jp/products/intake-part/surge-tank/index.html?en

Surge Tank / Plenum


Also some nice info here:
http://www.team-integra.net/forum/display_topic_threads.asp?ThreadPage=2&ForumID=10&TopicID=87512&PagePosition=1

Also on page 4...

my reading continues.
.
.

Check out this computer design program.
http://www.ricardo.com/download/pdf/vectis_intake_manifold_opt.pdf

It's showing VW manifold.

Showing honda
Lean burn blah blah blah, yakety smackety.

http://www.ricardo.com/download/pdf/vectis_honda_vtec.pdf

. :)








I was messing with the calculator.
- Peak TQ @ 5500 RPM with a 1.76 Square Inch Runner you want 112.90 CID
- Peak TQ @ 5500 RPM with a 1.84 Square Inch Runner you want 118.03 CID
- Peak TQ @ 5500 RPM with a 1.86 Suare Inch Runner you want 119.31 CID

Our 119 is actually between 1.85 / 118.67 CID and 1.86 / 119.31 CID
But I consider our 119 CID measure to be arounded figure anyways.

If you go back up top and type in 1.86 and 119 CID you get 5,514.35 Peak Torque RPM
Then if you use those values for the next calculator to get 15.23" Intake Runner Lenght.

15.23" - 2.55" = 12.68"
The stock Carb manifold is about that long.


Why are those measurements So far off from dyno proven manifolds? Look at the AIR, Full Race, BBK, Victor X, RevHard, etc, etc. All Much shorter runners than 20 something inches..more like under 6

Maybe it has to do with plenum volume... something that is not included in these calculations.

Maybe plenum volume or valve diameter has an effect on V ?

Same as collector shape diamter has its effects on pressure waves in a header, I'd have to refesh my exhaust tunning to explain further.

All we need to do now is figure out how to make V = 400 so that L = 8.12 .

:)

So is V an effect of plenum volume or valve diamter(s)... or both?

What is the stock peak TQ and HP RPM for both EFI and Carb?

I agree, but it would be nice to have some means of throwing out some of those variables to get us closer to our goal. At the very least find out what plenum volume does... since changing that isn't as easy as adjusting runner length.
If we can plug in the know plenum volume and valve diameter and see where / how V is effected then we'll be that much closer.

I kinda want to use the other formulas you posted in that link to figure out the intake runner diameter for both the primary and secondary barrel, using the fixed length of the stock accord 2bbl manifold.
I want a dual plane/port, not just a divied plenum one, like an offenhauser manifold where the primaries get smaller diameter runners of their own and the secondary gets it's own larger runner. It should be good in getting a vacuum secondary 4bbl to run, especially down low.

I'm not sure if the acid I have at school works with aluminum but I can use the flat biting technique to add textrue to aluminum pipe if I use any at all.

primary runners for peak tq @ 3,600 RPM

Optimum Intake Length 23.33

Secondary Runners for Peak TQ @ 6,800 RPM

Optimum Intake Length 12.35

I measured the runners a few times, it came out to 10" from the flange tot he plenum.

10.00 + 02.55 = 12.55

I'm not sure how I'd add on an extra 11 inches to the primary runners without introducing a few more bends. I could try extending the plenum towards the firewall in a /\ fashion. then at the norrowest point add the new runners out towards the strut towers... then gently loop around back towards the "Y" where it will feed the two runners from the top of the "Y" joint.

Since the secondary runners are already close to 12" I'll leave those alone.

here you can see where they split the primary and the secondary.
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b351/Wendy_girl/car%20stuffs/15A00.jpg

Accordtheory
02-16-2006, 12:07 PM
I just read some of that stuff on the mototune site, and that's pretty interesting about reducing port size and actually making more power.. (I already know that it takes cylinder press to seat the rings..but that's good info too)
I have some questions about the port size reduction though..Why only the end of the port near the valve, and can't you still make more power by taking advantage of a larger port with the cam timing/setup? In other words, close the intake valve a little earlier to compensate for the reduced intake inertial charging, and still keep the better initial volumetric efficiency? I know people are making up to 300whp on n/a b18/b20s, and they sure as hell don't have stock or smaller than stock ports..and they do use flowbenches too..and so does endyn..

I jock endyn 4 life. There is an endyn sticker on my car

Accordtheory
02-19-2006, 12:48 PM
yakety smackety indeed. Let me just go plug some numbers into that vectis program real quick, and then come out with the new hotness.

Versanick
03-19-2006, 06:30 PM
On the subject of intake manifolds, (no one needs respond, but I wanted to post so that I knew what thread I wanted to post on later with it),

I just bought my b18a/b18b/b20d/b20z (I forget what others it fits)...
so that solves whether the b18a and b18b have the same manifold. In case it hadn't already been figured out. My good friend Mike is welding in his classes in college and is going to be in charge of everything the Tig needs to do, and the drilling of everything. We may or may not opt to use a ford 65mm tb, or find a good way to bore out the stock TB a little bit..

Cost was $168 shipped (from eBay). I did NOT opt for the AEBS because of all of the extra work involved, but actually more importantly because every AEBS I've ever seen has had some of the POOREST casting I've ever been in the presence of. I don't think you'll find too many people who will argue with that.

The BLOX is clearly a (VERY ported) integra type R style manifold copy. The difference between it and my a20/b20 manifold is ridiculous. The a20 manifold literally takes a 90 degree bend (as we all know) and its runners don't NEARLY match the size of the runners on this BLOX.

http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~pkopalek/blox/

That's what she looks like inside and out. Mikey is constructing a vacuum box that will tap off of the end of the plenum of that BLOX, and have the 19 vacuum ports (random estimate, I haven't figured out how many are needed yet really) required to be attached to the a20 manifold, for proper pj0 ECU operation.

I'll post a new thread about this once the project gets moving better. It doesn't look like too much will be involved. This manifold, also to note, seems to be pretty much exactly as large as my (GUDE ported) head ports. This will offer me a massive improvement over the old manifold. The a20 manifold looks like it's throwing a hot dog down a hallway there. Some minor port matching (by grinding the inside edges of the BLOX) will be done to try to smooth airflow.

Also, to note with what manifold is "best" here, guys, let's keep in mind a few things. An amazing ITB setup isn't going to completely 'blow away' a good setup with an Edelbrock (all things else well tuned and similarly configured, obviously) or other good IM. For that matter, an n/a setup with a skunk2 (or similar mani) isn't going to be that much less powerful than the same n/a setup with the AIR research manifold. You have to think about whether that $650 price difference between the high end manifold and the BLOX is justifiable, or if that money is better saved and spent later on a turbo kit or a bottom end rebuild or some tuning/dyno time with a professional..

IMO, $800 for a manifold is a COMPLETE waste of money to anyone on this board that I know. Unless you're spending $50,000 on your track car, and you need to make that extra 14hp at 9200rpm to pass that built BMW around turn #3, manifolds like this BLOX are for us.

I'm not telling anyone not to get whatever they want, and (can?) afford, but I'm telling you that I don't know anyone who, (considering everything involved, and the fact that money can be much better spent elsewhere) would reccomend spending as much as we could on some of those high-end manifolds. If the manifold is the last thing you need to do to your car and you already have retarded money into it, go ahead and get your ITB's. They're cool. But they're not going to make you blow the doors off of that kid with the Cobb tuned WRX. Maybe the BLOX and some nitrous would get you closer, though.

sweet work with the SC research too, fellas. I've always wanted to go carb on my b20a (two dual 45mm DCOE's, I've looked at)... but the carb manifold has always been the problem. I'd considered having one made, but I'm so deep into EFI at this point, I'd have to sell my whole EFI/ecu setup to afford the conversion.

thanks for reading. hope you like those pictures.

b8er
04-16-2006, 12:17 PM
EDIT:
I want to know what the v stands for... if the value is wrong so is my calculations
well i found out what it means...."V = Pressure wave speed (approx 1250-400 ft/s)" so i guess the 1300 you had asumed was close but not quite right
what is the stock intake runner diameter?
also i ran the calculaions for a 252 cam and, second set of waves , 6000rpm and a intake diamater of 1.5, i ended up with an ECD of 498 and runner length of 26.22, the firewall is definatly gonna have to come out for me, aha, but what im wondering is if the optium runner length is like for a race application. and would you be cutting youself short if you, well cut it short, aha. what im getting at is that there doesnt seem to be 2 feet of room from the head to the firewall and would it serious cut power or 'restrict' power if you did follow the calculations?
EDIT: ( warning these are the best measurments i could take ) just took some measurments for a head i have lieing around. the stock intake manifold runner measures : width: 1.844
hight: 1.000
so im not quite sure what diamter that makes the stock intake runner but at least we got the measuments
and from the backside of the valve inside the head to the intake mani side of the head the runner length is 2.588
so that means in stead of my optimum runner length being 26.22 it only has to be 23.632 because the runner length starts from inside the head.

i ran the equation again using V=1200 instean of 1300 and ended up with L=24.15 then i minused the 2.588 from above and ending up with 21.56, which saves me 2. 07 inches, a guess saving a few inches will help but i kinda wish it was more.
i also found another website with more equations
: http://www.wallaceracing.com/runnertorquecalc.php

Accordtheory
04-16-2006, 05:26 PM
Why are those measurements So far off from dyno proven manifolds? Look at the AIR, Full Race, BBK, Victor X, RevHard, etc, etc. All Much shorter runners than 20 something inches..more like under 6

b8er
04-17-2006, 10:24 AM
Why are those measurements So far off from dyno proven manifolds? Look at the AIR, Full Race, BBK, Victor X, RevHard, etc, etc. All Much shorter runners than 20 something inches..more like under 6

i think what it might be is that we didnt know what V was for, it could be anywhere from 1250 to 400.

when i ran it with V=1200 i ended up with 21.56 inches but when i changed V to 400 i ended up with L=7.55 minus the 2.55 from inside the head, would mean the optimun intake runner length only has to be 5 inches making it very possible. but that will only work if our pressure wave speed (V) is equall to 400ft/s

b8er
04-17-2006, 11:08 AM
If you go back up top and type in 1.86 and 119 CID you get 5,514.35 Peak Torque RPM

so i re-ran the equation like L=((498x0.25x400x2)/(5500x2)-0.93 where 498 is the ECD for a 252 cam, 400 is the V and 5500 taken form A20's calculations for peak Torque and 0.93 as half the diamater of 1.86 also taken from A20's calulations.

the end result, L= 8.12 but then minus the 2.55 from inside the head and we get a 5.57 inches for my application, seems possible

b8er
04-17-2006, 11:19 AM
So is V an effect of plenum volume or vavle diamter(s)... or both?
good question

im thinking the V is kinda depented on valve size, vacume pulse and how much vacum there is, plus intake runner diameter, prety much alot of things that are all questionable depending on each personal setup, what do you guys think

well i can knock the plenum one out for me cause im gonna be running itb's so i dont really need to knwo the plenum size but i will be looking to help fellow members on the board

rjudgey
05-01-2006, 12:25 PM
my new inlet manifold is 6 inches long and then you have the length of the carbs and trumpets on top, great thing with Webers or ITB's you can get trumpets of varying size to increase or decrease length.

2dsei
07-04-2006, 03:51 PM
if i cut the center out it should make the manifold more like the b-series with out the lower end torque loss of the b-series and a lot more air cutting out everything in the middle of the lines has anyone tried this not sure about the vacuum
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b351/Wendy_girl/gasket_imanifold.gif

B16KILLA
07-04-2006, 04:01 PM
someone has done that I dont think you will see in increase since your ditching the secondaries, those allow you low end torque. If it's the secondaries that are bothering you just install an rpm activated switch so that they open at an lower rpm.

snoopyloopy
07-05-2006, 09:36 PM
yeah, so nothing to do with any real major modding of the im but actually about disconnecting all those coolant lines from it. what would that do? because i'm tired of one of those things getting a hole in it and then i have to contort my arm in the dark to get it off and put on a new one. so if i remove them, can i just cap them off and run the two hoses that feed and drain it into each other and be fine?

gfrg88
07-05-2006, 10:15 PM
talk to cke about this.....

snoopyloopy
07-06-2006, 12:05 PM
nice. i like the sound of that. do you have an pix of how it looks? and what lines are getting bypassed? and does it have any adverse or enhancing affect on performance?

nice nice, very nice. i'm just tired of changing those damn hoses after it starts splitting and getting my arm into impossible positions. so as long as there are no adverse side effects, i'm happy. any performance gained is a plus.

NitroNeonRT
07-09-2006, 07:36 AM
I would like to see the pics also!

Also anyone ever thought about pumping cold water in the manifold and tb?

AccordEpicenter
07-09-2006, 03:58 PM
bypassing coolant lines def does help. Other than that i suggest getting a used LS or B16 intake manifold and get it to fit, dont waste your time on the 88-89 im

A20A1
07-19-2006, 11:08 PM
I think you will lose low end... with runners that large it will move your power up higher in the rpm range...

Also the intake pulses will be effected... this supposedly has an effect on runner lenght. More taper in the runners appears to make the runners act like shorter untapered runners.

Detail are outlined in this thread, just read the previous posts.

89T
08-18-2006, 05:18 PM
here is some good info that i found.
http://snow.prohosting.com/~johngift/intakefab.html
http://sdsefi.com/techinta.htm