Intake manifold
10-09-2008, 12:58 PM
#276
Junior Member
Join Date: 03-06-08
Location: Ledyard, CT
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
honestly I understand I cant get a hold of my tuner to have him re e-mail the hpt data files before and after manifold. It's pissing me off, he knows how important this is! I've decided to hook up freakta with a manifold but thats it. I don't like haters!
look up SMG motoring thats the company thats been tunning my car. The owners name is fred you can get to him through the venders link on the home page. Everyone who thinks I'm lying or what have you. Call him and ask him to send you the data cause I can not get a hold of him. I'm done!!!
look up SMG motoring thats the company thats been tunning my car. The owners name is fred you can get to him through the venders link on the home page. Everyone who thinks I'm lying or what have you. Call him and ask him to send you the data cause I can not get a hold of him. I'm done!!!
10-09-2008, 01:00 PM
#277
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Maidstone, SK
Posts: 5,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When will you be able to get it back to the dyno with the belt problem fixed? also, do you have the iats logged from both dyno runs. the dyno numbers don't mean as much because they can be played with. I'm curious how much this manifold will drop iats, not so much the power increase.
10-09-2008, 01:06 PM
#278
Junior Member
Join Date: 03-06-08
Location: Ledyard, CT
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
first off. you had a mechanical problem. not a fucked up idea problem.
second. those are average numbers for a 2.7 car with a stock manifold.
without log proof, this is smoke. "i was there, i saw it all" yea, thats fine and dandy. welcome to the internet age where that rule doesn't apply anymore.
ok moron. tell that that to the guy who had a 2.7 on his car for 20k miles with zero slip on the stage 2 belt and stock tensioner. bright ******* idea.
140 is average iat2's for this basic setup. what part of this do you not ******* understand?
second. those are average numbers for a 2.7 car with a stock manifold.
without log proof, this is smoke. "i was there, i saw it all" yea, thats fine and dandy. welcome to the internet age where that rule doesn't apply anymore.
ok moron. tell that that to the guy who had a 2.7 on his car for 20k miles with zero slip on the stage 2 belt and stock tensioner. bright ******* idea.
140 is average iat2's for this basic setup. what part of this do you not ******* understand?
look up SMG motoring thats the company thats been tunning my car. The owners name is fred you can get to him through the venders link on the home page. Everyone who thinks I'm lying or what have you. Call him and ask him to send you the data cause I can not get a hold of him. I'm done!!!__________________
Last edited by STS2/SS; 10-09-2008 at 01:06 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
10-09-2008, 06:11 PM
#279
i dont get where everyone thinks he is trying to screw everyone here. he made this for himself. to make his car better. he didnt have plans to sell hundreds of them. he has since the begining made it clear he would help with other people who wanted to do the same thing.
fred is an amazing tuner if anyone thinks otherwise they are stupid. if fred believes in the product and thinks it did a world of good for this car, and we saw a huge drop in temps on this car, and it made alot of hp extra from where he was last time then why does everyone here think its a lie.
he isnt a vendor promising a product that will change the world. he is an enthusiast who took apart something on his car that was not right. made it alot better.
and for all the people who keep saying thats the hp a 2.7 should make, thats the temps it should be or it doesnt get that high. well think what you want.
we drove my car,3.0 and his car 2.7 hard yesterday for over an hour. his intake manifold was cool to the touch at the end. mine burnt the hair on my knuckle when i got within 3 inched of it. thats proof enough for me. but please dont go by my word cause i dont count and all of you saw the car before and after
fred is an amazing tuner if anyone thinks otherwise they are stupid. if fred believes in the product and thinks it did a world of good for this car, and we saw a huge drop in temps on this car, and it made alot of hp extra from where he was last time then why does everyone here think its a lie.
he isnt a vendor promising a product that will change the world. he is an enthusiast who took apart something on his car that was not right. made it alot better.
and for all the people who keep saying thats the hp a 2.7 should make, thats the temps it should be or it doesnt get that high. well think what you want.
we drove my car,3.0 and his car 2.7 hard yesterday for over an hour. his intake manifold was cool to the touch at the end. mine burnt the hair on my knuckle when i got within 3 inched of it. thats proof enough for me. but please dont go by my word cause i dont count and all of you saw the car before and after
10-09-2008, 06:37 PM
#280
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Maidstone, SK
Posts: 5,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^
Not all of us are saying it didn't do any good...
What I'm saying is that the gains are far fetched. 230* IAT2... **** off... please. Are we driving GTP's here?
Not to mention this little dandy;
That was long before the new manifold routing. And by the looks of things, peak wouldn't have been much higher, according to the above sheet.
Now, what I'm saying (and this is my theory) is that the cooling affect is far greater with his new, however (as I said before) the air flow path is too restrictive for high RPM flow. The motor is gasping at the top end. This explains the gains in the mid-range, yet nothing at the top. Again... it's a theory... i need to see logs to verify or debunk.
Not all of us are saying it didn't do any good...
What I'm saying is that the gains are far fetched. 230* IAT2... **** off... please. Are we driving GTP's here?
Not to mention this little dandy;
That was long before the new manifold routing. And by the looks of things, peak wouldn't have been much higher, according to the above sheet.
Now, what I'm saying (and this is my theory) is that the cooling affect is far greater with his new, however (as I said before) the air flow path is too restrictive for high RPM flow. The motor is gasping at the top end. This explains the gains in the mid-range, yet nothing at the top. Again... it's a theory... i need to see logs to verify or debunk.
10-10-2008, 08:38 AM
#281
Been following all the manifold threads for some time now and sofar we've seen only seat off the pants results, but no real hard evidence data off this mod's possible gains.
Turbo modifiers who swapped to a Hahn style manifold have reported measurable gains. I I know this is not the same, but to me shows that there is room for improvement.
I think the LSJ manifold design;
- lacks proper runner length
- is too restrictive for higher airflows
- has not enough cooling capacity for high HP
- and possibly has an inconsistent airflow to each cilinder
I will probably first run my LSJ with the standard SC layout (with ported laminova slots), but as my engine will be running in a RWD rear engine set-up, I'm also looking into a complete custom SC set-up for my car:
- Relocate Alternator to AC pump position. (I have no AC...)
- Mount SC "upside down"somewhere at alternator position
- Use some sort off "Hahn style" runner manifold (but shorter)
- Improved cooling grid, integrated in manifold. (over "4-cilinders length") Low resistance!
Depending on the positioning of the SC (oil filter! possibly cut it off and use remote filter...), this package will look something like this:
And I don't mind that the mass of the blower will be lower in my 850kg car.
Turbo modifiers who swapped to a Hahn style manifold have reported measurable gains. I I know this is not the same, but to me shows that there is room for improvement.
I think the LSJ manifold design;
- lacks proper runner length
- is too restrictive for higher airflows
- has not enough cooling capacity for high HP
- and possibly has an inconsistent airflow to each cilinder
I will probably first run my LSJ with the standard SC layout (with ported laminova slots), but as my engine will be running in a RWD rear engine set-up, I'm also looking into a complete custom SC set-up for my car:
- Relocate Alternator to AC pump position. (I have no AC...)
- Mount SC "upside down"somewhere at alternator position
- Use some sort off "Hahn style" runner manifold (but shorter)
- Improved cooling grid, integrated in manifold. (over "4-cilinders length") Low resistance!
Depending on the positioning of the SC (oil filter! possibly cut it off and use remote filter...), this package will look something like this:
And I don't mind that the mass of the blower will be lower in my 850kg car.
10-10-2008, 10:35 AM
#283
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: 01-23-06
Location: on here
Posts: 10,731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/complete-cars-101/2006-sunburst-orange-g85-stage-5-a-119126/
gained 30 hp really......
gained 30 hp really......
10-10-2008, 10:53 AM
#284
Not seat of the pants, but that one is still pretty inconsistent and no real proof...
Just like to see some solid graphs from the OEM mani (tuned "to the max"..) and then the same configuration with a modified mani (preferably also tuned "to the new max".
)
I will also settle for some logs showing significant lower IAT's.
Just like to see some solid graphs from the OEM mani (tuned "to the max"..) and then the same configuration with a modified mani (preferably also tuned "to the new max".
) I will also settle for some logs showing significant lower IAT's.
10-10-2008, 01:21 PM
#287
Senior Member
Join Date: 04-28-08
Location: Newton, IA
Posts: 1,221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Been following all the manifold threads for some time now and sofar we've seen only seat off the pants results, but no real hard evidence data off this mod's possible gains.
Turbo modifiers who swapped to a Hahn style manifold have reported measurable gains. I I know this is not the same, but to me shows that there is room for improvement.
I think the LSJ manifold design;
- lacks proper runner length
- is too restrictive for higher airflows
- has not enough cooling capacity for high HP
- and possibly has an inconsistent airflow to each cilinder
I will probably first run my LSJ with the standard SC layout (with ported laminova slots), but as my engine will be running in a RWD rear engine set-up, I'm also looking into a complete custom SC set-up for my car:
- Relocate Alternator to AC pump position. (I have no AC...)
- Mount SC "upside down"somewhere at alternator position
- Use some sort off "Hahn style" runner manifold (but shorter)
- Improved cooling grid, integrated in manifold. (over "4-cilinders length") Low resistance!
Depending on the positioning of the SC (oil filter! possibly cut it off and use remote filter...), this package will look something like this:
And I don't mind that the mass of the blower will be lower in my 850kg car.
Turbo modifiers who swapped to a Hahn style manifold have reported measurable gains. I I know this is not the same, but to me shows that there is room for improvement.
I think the LSJ manifold design;
- lacks proper runner length
- is too restrictive for higher airflows
- has not enough cooling capacity for high HP
- and possibly has an inconsistent airflow to each cilinder
I will probably first run my LSJ with the standard SC layout (with ported laminova slots), but as my engine will be running in a RWD rear engine set-up, I'm also looking into a complete custom SC set-up for my car:
- Relocate Alternator to AC pump position. (I have no AC...)
- Mount SC "upside down"somewhere at alternator position
- Use some sort off "Hahn style" runner manifold (but shorter)
- Improved cooling grid, integrated in manifold. (over "4-cilinders length") Low resistance!
Depending on the positioning of the SC (oil filter! possibly cut it off and use remote filter...), this package will look something like this:
And I don't mind that the mass of the blower will be lower in my 850kg car.
10-10-2008, 01:27 PM
#288
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Maidstone, SK
Posts: 5,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air to air setups don't as well on mid engine cars as they do on front engine cars... less air flow can be captured.
10-10-2008, 01:41 PM
#291
Been following all the manifold threads for some time now and sofar we've seen only seat off the pants results, but no real hard evidence data off this mod's possible gains.
Turbo modifiers who swapped to a Hahn style manifold have reported measurable gains. I I know this is not the same, but to me shows that there is room for improvement.
I think the LSJ manifold design;
- lacks proper runner length
- is too restrictive for higher airflows
- has not enough cooling capacity for high HP
- and possibly has an inconsistent airflow to each cilinder
I will probably first run my LSJ with the standard SC layout (with ported laminova slots), but as my engine will be running in a RWD rear engine set-up, I'm also looking into a complete custom SC set-up for my car:
- Relocate Alternator to AC pump position. (I have no AC...)
- Mount SC "upside down"somewhere at alternator position
- Use some sort off "Hahn style" runner manifold (but shorter)
- Improved cooling grid, integrated in manifold. (over "4-cilinders length") Low resistance!
Depending on the positioning of the SC (oil filter! possibly cut it off and use remote filter...), this package will look something like this:
And I don't mind that the mass of the blower will be lower in my 850kg car.
Turbo modifiers who swapped to a Hahn style manifold have reported measurable gains. I I know this is not the same, but to me shows that there is room for improvement.
I think the LSJ manifold design;
- lacks proper runner length
- is too restrictive for higher airflows
- has not enough cooling capacity for high HP
- and possibly has an inconsistent airflow to each cilinder
I will probably first run my LSJ with the standard SC layout (with ported laminova slots), but as my engine will be running in a RWD rear engine set-up, I'm also looking into a complete custom SC set-up for my car:
- Relocate Alternator to AC pump position. (I have no AC...)
- Mount SC "upside down"somewhere at alternator position
- Use some sort off "Hahn style" runner manifold (but shorter)
- Improved cooling grid, integrated in manifold. (over "4-cilinders length") Low resistance!
Depending on the positioning of the SC (oil filter! possibly cut it off and use remote filter...), this package will look something like this:
And I don't mind that the mass of the blower will be lower in my 850kg car.
10-10-2008, 01:52 PM
#292
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-16-08
Location: Boynton Beach, Fl
Posts: 5,610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I found something, not sure how it would be mounted...
Tech Specs
Thickness: 3/4"
Length: 15 1/2"
Height: 5"
Core: 12"
Fitting Size: 3/8" Push On
I know its 3/8ths, you could always have a seperate system or a reducer... but maybe this could be slapped on somewhere?
Tech Specs
Thickness: 3/4"
Length: 15 1/2"
Height: 5"
Core: 12"
Fitting Size: 3/8" Push On
I know its 3/8ths, you could always have a seperate system or a reducer... but maybe this could be slapped on somewhere?
10-10-2008, 01:57 PM
#294
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-16-08
Location: Boynton Beach, Fl
Posts: 5,610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didnt someone try to weld a intercooler onto the intake mani?
I know it is... its innovation... seeing if other products can be used for different purposes..
Just an idea dude..
I know its not an intercooler, small enough to possibly fit on or near the mani
I know it is... its innovation... seeing if other products can be used for different purposes..
Just an idea dude..
I know its not an intercooler, small enough to possibly fit on or near the mani
Last edited by ShortStack; 10-10-2008 at 01:57 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
10-10-2008, 05:43 PM
#296
Junior Member
Join Date: 03-06-08
Location: Ledyard, CT
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still can't get a hold of my tuner sorry guys. Some one said something about runners these manifolds don't have any runners? The runner actually starts in the head? I could actually hear the belt slipping the wine of the SC would sound like it's getting slower the higher the RPM'S get? Fred the tuner looked at me and said belt slip. He looked at the hpt graph and showed me the onset of slip, you'll see once i get the graphs I'm terribly sorry for the wait.
10-10-2008, 05:55 PM
#297
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Maidstone, SK
Posts: 5,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And yes, the only controlled section is indeed in the head, although it can't really be called a 'runner'.
What is needed is a tuned, controlled runner that will not only evenly distribute the air flow though out the cylinders, but provide optimal torque and power though the whole power band. The difficult part, though, is to find the perfect diameter and length of tube to get the job done, and then fit it in the area we've been given.
10-10-2008, 06:01 PM
#298
Junior Member
Join Date: 03-06-08
Location: Ledyard, CT
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the hahn turbo kit with the intake manifold.
This is my manifold with 2.7
Look at my torque and hp it's instant. With the hahn kit you get more HP/TQ but not till you almost done with the gear? So while I'm woppen ass of the line your waiting for your turbo? HHMMMMMM!
This is my manifold with 2.7
Look at my torque and hp it's instant. With the hahn kit you get more HP/TQ but not till you almost done with the gear? So while I'm woppen ass of the line your waiting for your turbo? HHMMMMMM!
