Turbo Tech Racing LNF Intake Manifold!!
william? Lol
10-20-2012, 07:30 PM
#58
TTR Powered
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: 04-15-11
Location: Vinemont AL
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well most all GM Dealerships will void the warranty on just a simple cold air intake or drop in filter.
Its stupid and lame. But even with this manifold, if you have to get warranty service done. Just swap them around with the stock one. Only 30-40mins to install lol
As most people do anyways
But yes, this is a great product. And i'm sure Aaron at TTR will possibly update the pictures once they are done.
10-20-2012, 10:01 PM
#61
Senior Member
What kind of gains can I expect to see on lightly modded K04 lnf?. With bolt-ons such as intake, DP, charge pipes, and Ic running 24-25 lbs?
Edit: w 93 octane
Edit: w 93 octane
Last edited by LNFwagonSS; 10-20-2012 at 10:03 PM. Reason: 93
10-20-2012, 10:06 PM
#62
IMO Richard could see even more gain effect with the TTR Manifold due to the additional flow allowing the tune to be more aggressive than he currently is. All he did was basically swap out manifolds and he got the added gains.
As far as the price, there are not many bolt on mods (example exhaust) which cost around $600 that even come close to offering this much increase in performance.
10-20-2012, 10:14 PM
#63
TTR Powered
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: 04-15-11
Location: Vinemont AL
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would estimate you will see similar results such as Richard's. 10+ HP and 20+ torque.
IMO Richard could see even more gain effect with the TTR Manifold due to the additional flow allowing the tune to be more aggressive than he currently is. All he did was basically swap out manifolds and he got the added gains.
As far as the price, there are not many bolt on mods (example exhaust) which cost around $600 that even come close to offering this much increase in performance.
IMO Richard could see even more gain effect with the TTR Manifold due to the additional flow allowing the tune to be more aggressive than he currently is. All he did was basically swap out manifolds and he got the added gains.
As far as the price, there are not many bolt on mods (example exhaust) which cost around $600 that even come close to offering this much increase in performance.
Very true.
10-21-2012, 06:45 PM
#67
Never the less this manifold style is used on many applications (Honda, Cobalt, BMW, etc.).
10-21-2012, 06:46 PM
#68
I will have to have James answer this for sure, however I would assume if you have the GM stage 1 and just switch out manifolds you will see a power gain and will not need a tune. However a tune would give you even more power, than the base GM stage 1.
10-21-2012, 08:47 PM
#70
Each runner has equal space from each runner to the next, along with equal runner length, directed to the large plenum. The plenum has a "V" shape to it, not allowing any dead spots. Our manifold has a better runner length than the stock one has, which 1 and 4 are longer than 2 and 3 (Stock does not even have a plenum, which is a huge helper on the TTR manifold)... Also you have to remember the plenum is pressurized on this engine (most of the time).
Never the less this manifold style is used on many applications (Honda, Cobalt, BMW, etc.).
Never the less this manifold style is used on many applications (Honda, Cobalt, BMW, etc.).
The reason I'm asking these questions is because even though you made more power with this intake manifold, I'm curious to see if you guys actually engineered this to provide the most performance, or if you guys just stumbled across a design that provided minor performance increases. If people are going to spend this kind of coin on an intake manifold, I'd like to see that it is the best design possible. TTR would sell more, and the Cobalt community would benefit by having more powerful cars running around. As a mechanical engineer who has worked on designing an intake manifold for a formula car, I have a lot of questions about your design.
10-21-2012, 09:21 PM
#71
Senior Member
ok, but how is the runner length better than the stock one? Is it because they are shorter? What range of rpm is the manifold resonance tuned for? Did you guys decide to stick with just one reflection, or did you guys decide to design it for two? Do you guys know what the stock one was designed for? I'd also like to point out that just because the manifold is "v" shaped doesn't necessarily mean there won't be dead spots or vortices forming that will hinder performance. As your air velocity increases or decreases (depending on the diameter/size), the angle of the optimal "v" shape changes so that you don't have fluid seperation from the wall of the "v", creating vortices.
The reason i'm asking these questions is because even though you made more power with this intake manifold, i'm curious to see if you guys actually engineered this to provide the most performance, or if you guys just stumbled across a design that provided minor performance increases. If people are going to spend this kind of coin on an intake manifold, i'd like to see that it is the best design possible. Ttr would sell more, and the cobalt community would benefit by having more powerful cars running around. As a mechanical engineer who has worked on designing an intake manifold for a formula car, i have a lot of questions about your design.
The reason i'm asking these questions is because even though you made more power with this intake manifold, i'm curious to see if you guys actually engineered this to provide the most performance, or if you guys just stumbled across a design that provided minor performance increases. If people are going to spend this kind of coin on an intake manifold, i'd like to see that it is the best design possible. Ttr would sell more, and the cobalt community would benefit by having more powerful cars running around. As a mechanical engineer who has worked on designing an intake manifold for a formula car, i have a lot of questions about your design.
10-21-2012, 09:32 PM
#73
Ok, but how is the runner length better than the stock one? Is it because they are shorter? What range of rpm is the manifold resonance tuned for? Did you guys decide to stick with just one reflection, or did you guys decide to design it for two? Do you guys know what the stock one was designed for? I'd also like to point out that just because the manifold is "V" shaped doesn't necessarily mean there won't be dead spots or vortices forming that will hinder performance. As your air velocity increases or decreases (depending on the diameter/size), the angle of the optimal "V" shape changes so that you don't have fluid seperation from the wall of the "V", creating vortices.
The reason I'm asking these questions is because even though you made more power with this intake manifold, I'm curious to see if you guys actually engineered this to provide the most performance, or if you guys just stumbled across a design that provided minor performance increases. If people are going to spend this kind of coin on an intake manifold, I'd like to see that it is the best design possible. TTR would sell more, and the Cobalt community would benefit by having more powerful cars running around. As a mechanical engineer who has worked on designing an intake manifold for a formula car, I have a lot of questions about your design.
The reason I'm asking these questions is because even though you made more power with this intake manifold, I'm curious to see if you guys actually engineered this to provide the most performance, or if you guys just stumbled across a design that provided minor performance increases. If people are going to spend this kind of coin on an intake manifold, I'd like to see that it is the best design possible. TTR would sell more, and the Cobalt community would benefit by having more powerful cars running around. As a mechanical engineer who has worked on designing an intake manifold for a formula car, I have a lot of questions about your design.
Manifold was assisted by fundamental therory, but was actually more based on physical testing.
10-21-2012, 09:34 PM
#74
the design of the manifold took ttr and I about 2months to design it.. First design was to much of a box with uneven flow to runners due to the throttle body so close to 1/2 cylinders. The design now has the tapers edges to help increase the flow to 1/4 but also give 2/3 the same amount of flow. 1/4 being furthest from the cylinder... This actually helps with the higher egts in cylinders.
10-21-2012, 10:19 PM
#75
Manifold was assisted by fundamental theory, but was actually more based on physical testing. 99% of the products on the market don’t even offer a dyno chart. As you can see we took it above that, as ours had been tested for months. Could it be possibly better? Yes, there is always room for improvement on everything in this world; however being we wanted a direct bolt on, there was limitations on what we could change. We feel this is the best direct bolt on intake manifold we could produce with the criteria we set forth.
Manifold was assisted by fundamental therory, but was actually more based on physical testing.
Manifold was assisted by fundamental therory, but was actually more based on physical testing.
Ok. Sorry if I came off as attacking this product, I was just asking some really specific questions.
and hey, there are only two manifolds on the market right now: stock and yours. I'm sure this product will be quite popular.
the design of the manifold took ttr and I about 2months to design it.. First design was to much of a box with uneven flow to runners due to the throttle body so close to 1/2 cylinders. The design now has the tapers edges to help increase the flow to 1/4 but also give 2/3 the same amount of flow. 1/4 being furthest from the cylinder... This actually helps with the higher egts in cylinders.