Here's a little project I've been working on.

The thought was to make a short runner IM out of a 2k IM, similar to what Tilley recently did (ref: http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?t=395063). I took a different approach:

 

Results?

Like Tilley, I noticed a drop in torque, but top end felt good.

I did a 3rd gear run to 7000 rpm and logged maf voltage. Comparing to data from a recent dyno run with an unmodified 00VI, I show less airflow at low-midrange rpm, and occasional insignificantly small gains alternating with losses from 5300 rpm on up.

Based on this, I'm not going to bother to have a dyno done, although a dyno might show higher gains with the modified 00VI, since the airflow data was collected on a considerably warmer day than the dyno results I am comparing against.

 

wouldnt that hurt haveing the runners still behind the TB?

 

I'm wondering the same thing. My next step is to cut the runners off flush with the new plenum.

 

OMG! That is such a sweet way to mod that beast. Its basically an open log type manifold now.

 

The factory TB mount is set up to deliver the same amount of air to all cylinders by gradually decreasing the size of the main channel until the last cylinder runner. By doing what you did, I would be worried about different cylinders running lean/rich in the setup. Since the main channel is the same size, the rear cylinders may not be getting the same airflow. It also looks like the flow would be very rough the the other cylinders because of the runners sticking up in the middle of the air path.
Way to be innovative, but I would be careful.

 

This was the exact thing I was thinking. Perhaps if he cut off the extra intake and custom mounted things needed he would see better performance.

 

I said the same thing to him via email.

I'd really like to see the difference in airflow with the TB in the original location and the vias box location blocked.

Any chance you could try taking airflow measurements with that setup Stephen?

 

I could do that.

 

How did you manage to cut way into the manifold?

 

 

With a 2.75" hole saw. Wasn't easy, though.

In case you're wondering, yes, I did cut all the way through to the last runner.

 

wow reminds me of the ls1 composite intake manifold.

 

Can I assume you are going to try and log MAF voltage data on a similar day to your previous run to get a more accurate assessment of whether this is worthwhile? Because based solely on the chart posted, I'd question the usefulness of the mod unless that 5300+ range is all that interests you. Because the losses look to outweigh the gains according to the MAF voltage.

 

That was my conclusion. Unfortunately, we are warming up fast down here in Texas, we may not get another day as cool as the one I dynoed on until next fall.

 

Awesome .

 

What MAF are you running? im running stock MAF and at 7500 im hitting 4.85v

 

He's running a Z32 MAF, which peaks at 5.14v and ~420whp supposedly. So, 4.5v is ~368whp and agrees with his latest 369whp dyno.

The A32 MAF peaks at ~290whp supposedly, so that means you'd be seeing enough air for ~274whp? How are you measuring? SAFC?

 

I put down around 250-260 and get 78%-80% on my AFL reading via S-AFCII. Stock a32 MAF

 

im reading it with the techtom.

 

I'd verify that with a multimeter then.

How much did you end up picking that up for?

 

Its verifyed with the AFC too.

 

Just my skepticism, but I wouldn't trust either over a multimeter.

Are you adding fuel via the AFC? If so, is it showing you output voltage after the AFC or raw input?

 

im only adding a few % at that rpm