2.0L LSJ Performance Tech 205hp Supercharged SS tuner version. 200 lb-ft of torque.

Feeler for Ported M62 and lower intake manifold

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:05 PM
  #1  
Eng@RebelAutoWorxs's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-10-07
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
Feeler for Ported M62 and lower intake manifold

So we had a great conversation with the top engineer at PSE Supercharger Remanufacturing today and all I can say is WOW. This guy knew more about superchargers than I think anyone else.

What surprised me the most was how much he already knew about the cobalt and how he was so intrigued by our twin screw kit. He went through all the parts we have manufactured and gave us pointers on all of them for future revisions to get even more power out of the monster.

But what he was mainly concerned was with out stock lower intake manifold. Over and over he showed us many different problems with it, but the main one is how it is a huge bottle neck. He explained how on our stock M62 blower will hit around 12.5psi but that is after the laminova cores, what lies before them is close to 18-20psi out of the supercharger and temperatures in the high 200*F range. We of course will confirm this with our test car, but it makes sense. What actually happens when people run smaller pullies is that the compressed air has no where to go and creates high enough pressure right after the supercharger that the air actually goes right back inside the SC and gets recompressed creating even more heat...aka Heaton Technology.

He had no doubt that off the showroom floor the Eaton was way out of it's efficiency range.

So now we want to know how many would be interested in a lower intake manifold which will simply bolt up? Even with a stock pulley this thing will make power. On top of this these guys have already ported a M62 and would like us to test one out for them.

So basically a Ported M62 and lower intake manifold combo. What this will give is lower boost level with a significant improvement in efficiency.

Now what we need is some firm interest, not "yea I'm in". If you want to see this happen but down $50US and if we get enough (at least 10) we will make it happen along with PSE by our side. As for price I would say close to the $1000US mark for both but we will do everything we can to give a very affordable price. Also anyone who donates a lower intake manifold for testing get everything free.

This will also be a great upgrade for the Twin Screw, increase the pulley size to make 15psi and make more power than it does now.

If you're unsure about this company this guy drives a Ford Lightning putting down over 700HP with a High Boost Twin Screw.

Originally Posted by g5mike
whats the benifit of this for the 2.4 guys cause if i'm not mistaken, this is simular to the one i will be getting from an unnamed sourse.LOL!
you guys should be ok because you are right in the efficiency range of the blower at 7.5psi. The lower intake manifold is not restrictive as this point.

From what the PSE engineer was telling me, the cobalt 2.0L should have came with a larger blower and a better lower intake manifold....a twin screw?

Last edited by Eng@RebelAutoWorxs; Aug 23, 2007 at 09:05 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:07 PM
  #2  
Area47's Avatar
Rent me! per hour
 
Joined: 03-22-07
Posts: 24,161
Likes: 20
From: Still fixing others mistakes.
i have been saying that the m62 is out of range since day one. even on the stock cars.

im curious to see numbers. sorry, i can't jump on board for something im skeptical about in the first place
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:12 PM
  #3  
sunfirejoe's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: 12-13-05
Posts: 1,642
Likes: 1
From: Midwest. AB
i would have been 4 months ago, if my beater was running yah no problem lol
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:13 PM
  #4  
Blur.fx's Avatar
Pave It All...
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: 11-24-05
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: Iowa City, Iowa
I too need to see something more than a few words about how it's inadequate...

I'm all over an improved lower intake manifold if it shows its worth with dyno numbers. I already have a source for a ported M62 though.
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:14 PM
  #5  
BlackSS05's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-09-05
Posts: 2,508
Likes: 0
From: Eastern LI NY
im not good with prices but 1k for porting and a new intake manifold sounds to be a little expensive. When i saw 50 down i was in but 1k total its a little steep.
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:16 PM
  #6  
victory_red_SS's Avatar
LSX RWD S/C conversion
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: 03-25-05
Posts: 10,450
Likes: 277
From: Maple Ridge, BC, Canada
I totally agree with it being inefficient, as that was the opinion/reason we have had a new one designed for my project.
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:16 PM
  #7  
SSdan's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 09-17-06
Posts: 6,266
Likes: 1
From: between heaven and hell
The stock manifold sucks. That was my first thought when I took my blower off. Just looking into the small opening left for air to travel through. Couldn't believe my eyes.
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:20 PM
  #8  
Blur.fx's Avatar
Pave It All...
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: 11-24-05
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: Iowa City, Iowa
Originally Posted by BlackSS05
im not good with prices but 1k for porting and a new intake manifold sounds to be a little expensive. When i saw 50 down i was in but 1k total its a little steep.
A quality port & polish job by someone that knows what they're doing costs about $500. Maybe there are cheaper options out there but I'd rather give my money to an experienced guy vs. your basement dremel operator.

That leaves $500 for the manifold...
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:21 PM
  #9  
Eng@RebelAutoWorxs's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-10-07
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
Originally Posted by Blur.fx
I too need to see something more than a few words about how it's inadequate...

I'm all over an improved lower intake manifold if it shows its worth with dyno numbers. I already have a source for a ported M62 though.
well if we get a test manifold PSE will do some flow tests
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:26 PM
  #10  
Blur.fx's Avatar
Pave It All...
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: 11-24-05
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: Iowa City, Iowa
Originally Posted by Eng@RebelAutoWorxs
well if we get a test manifold PSE will do some flow tests
Is the plan to remove the laminovas and do a plate/box style heat exchanger instead?
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:35 PM
  #11  
Eng@RebelAutoWorxs's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-10-07
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
Originally Posted by Blur.fx
Is the plan to remove the laminovas and do a plate/box style heat exchanger instead?
most likely

The guys at PSE will likely design it, we fab it up send it to them for flow test, then they ship it back and we dyno it

These guys are serious when it comes to testing
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:41 PM
  #12  
BooSSted's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: 11-07-05
Posts: 3,247
Likes: 0
From: Bantario
How long will you need the lower manifold for testing?

PM me, I may have one for you!
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 09:46 PM
  #13  
mike25's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 03-07-06
Posts: 7,224
Likes: 1
From: west virginia
Originally Posted by Eng@RebelAutoWorxs
well if we get a test manifold PSE will do some flow tests
what kind of increases in hp can we see from porting the blower and intake mani?
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 10:06 PM
  #14  
Eng@RebelAutoWorxs's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-10-07
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
From: Toronto
hard to say, but I would think 25-30HP on a stock setup.
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 10:08 PM
  #15  
RBC's Avatar
RBC
Senior Member
 
Joined: 10-25-05
Posts: 4,359
Likes: 3
From: Saginaw/Fort Worth, Texas
I am interested as most people on this forum are, but I would like to see more pricing info before I commit to it. I would like to see the intake manifold to be a bit cheaper than $500 but it is what it is.
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 10:12 PM
  #16  
fballman1987's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 10-03-06
Posts: 6,793
Likes: 0
From: New Tripoli, Pennsylvania
i dont really know if 25 or 30 hp is worth shelling out 1000 dollars, im interesteddont get me wrong i just cant be shelling out 1000 dollars and not getting that much in return..
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 10:17 PM
  #17  
Element2.4's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 08-02-07
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
From: CaLiFoRnIa BiShEs!
So you will give us a ported blower and a intake mani for 1K. Im just making sure I got this right.
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 10:29 PM
  #18  
infernica's Avatar
Member
 
Joined: 10-30-06
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
From: Tinker AFB, Oklahoma
Sent you a pm about the lower intake mani and supercharger for testing. Please get back to me asap, since I deploy saturday.

I can have this to you by next week if you really want to go this route. Get back to me
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2007 | 10:51 PM
  #19  
2K5SS/SC?'s Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-08-05
Posts: 6,200
Likes: 0
From: Niceville, FL
The gentleman you speak of at PSE is quite knowledgeable about superchargers as he is one of the guys I spoke to about purchasing the initial twinscrew for the swap. They have done great things for other automotive groups that have stock blowers too.

Will the new intake manifold incorporate an intercooler setup still? I definitely don't want to loose that cooling factor especially in the hot weather I see all the time.
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2007 | 12:04 AM
  #20  
Rippin07's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 06-22-07
Posts: 616
Likes: 1
From: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
I am more than interested, however for this year its out of the question as I have only had the car now for 2 months and it only has 3000kms. However, I really hope this becomes a reality as I would go with this route before turbo or TS. I prefer subtle stock looks and the power that comes from efficiency. Doesn't need to be crazy power. I have cars for that.
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2007 | 02:22 AM
  #21  
Try2k's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-26-06
Posts: 742
Likes: 0
From: Austin, Texas
Very interested... Would need proof then I would put $50 down without a question. Keep me updated.
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2007 | 02:39 AM
  #22  
1gmfanatik's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 09-26-06
Posts: 9,753
Likes: 0
From: Marlton, NJ
Every day I come on here I get more excited to see the new posts by Rebel. I can't explain how awesome it is that you guys are doing the work and research for our cars.
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2007 | 02:41 AM
  #23  
Asphalt Assault's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: 03-14-06
Posts: 3,660
Likes: 1
From: soon to banned as I am from MANITOBA?
New intake, intercooled, less spin to stock blower and still achieve 15lbs? so what is the calculations going to be like say stock pulley gives you 12.5 boost and then port and new intak will increase pressures to XX.x and IAT will (increase, Stay the same, decrease?). can you fill in these blanks for me. am I understanding you correctly.
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2007 | 10:50 AM
  #24  
Jmc007's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-22-05
Posts: 1,591
Likes: 0
From: Quebec City, Quebec
Please read this ...

I agree totally that the stock intake manifold is not optimised. And about that non constant pressure after the blower ..... Even if the stock MAP2 sensor (after the blower) is located far away from the blower (after the laminovas core), how can it be possible that this same pressurised volume of air (anything between the blower and the engine cylinders) would not be a equalised pressure ?

We could easily figure it out by installing a shim under the blower to log the pressure there with a fitting and a pressure gauge.

But I am way more concerned about the stock cams/head/exhaust port combination, to me this is an even greater bottleneck. And I am ready to give some few financial help (I hope I won't be alone on that) for Reasearch and Development for all those concerns.

Also, Rebel your Turbo kit looks totally awesome, but the VE of the stock LSJ just seems to have been voluntarily detuned ... let's see why ...

I found this following article which contain some great information, and GM Racing made some testing of a "de-stroked" Ecotec (from 2.2 to 2.0L) with upgraded head, cams ... Please read it all !

http://www.year2032.com/ecotec.htm

"The new turbo Ecotec immediately cranked out 350 hp at 7000 rpm on 2 psi boost ..."

"At 450 hp and 8 psi boost, the GM team began blowing head gaskets ..."

"The Ecotec was finally reliable to 650 hp at 19 psi of boost -- a relatively low level of boost, indicating outstanding volumetric efficiency ... "

How did they achieve as many horsepower with that smalls amounts of boost ? Volumetric efficiency !
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2007 | 11:12 AM
  #25  
BlackSS/SC's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: 07-18-05
Posts: 2,130
Likes: 0
From: Canada eh!
Originally Posted by Jmc007
I agree totally that the stock intake manifold is not optimised. And about that non constant pressure after the blower ..... Even if the stock MAP2 sensor (after the blower) is located far away from the blower (after the laminovas core), how can it be possible that this same pressurised volume of air (anything between the blower and the engine cylinders) would not be a equalised pressure ?

We could easily figure it out by installing a shim under the blower to log the pressure there with a fitting and a pressure gauge.

But I am way more concerned about the stock cams/head/exhaust port combination, to me this is an even greater bottleneck. And I am ready to give some few financial help (I hope I won't be alone on that) for Reasearch and Development for all those concerns.

Also, Rebel your Turbo kit looks totally awesome, but the VE of the stock LSJ just seems to have been voluntarily detuned ... let's see why ...

I found this following article which contain some great information, and GM Racing made some testing of a "de-stroked" Ecotec (from 2.2 to 2.0L) with upgraded head, cams ... Please read it all !

http://www.year2032.com/ecotec.htm

"The new turbo Ecotec immediately cranked out 350 hp at 7000 rpm on 2 psi boost ..."

"At 450 hp and 8 psi boost, the GM team began blowing head gaskets ..."

"The Ecotec was finally reliable to 650 hp at 19 psi of boost -- a relatively low level of boost, indicating outstanding volumetric efficiency ... "

How did they achieve as many horsepower with that smalls amounts of boost ? Volumetric efficiency !
Totally agree!
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:11 PM.