Custom Intake Manifold and 87mm Throttle Body - Page 4 - Maxima Forums



All Motor All Motor Advanced Performance. Talk about Engine Swaps, Internal Engine work. Not your basic Y pipe and Intake Information.

Custom Intake Manifold and 87mm Throttle Body

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-11-2012, 03:12 PM   #121
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastnFuriousMax View Post


just noticed the variable timing solenoids are removed and capped off. is that against regulations in that circuit?
Finchum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 05:34 PM   #122
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 177
probably cams with 13+ lift
tuko316 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 09:26 AM   #123
Supporting Maxima.org Member
iTrader: (5)
 
nishfish871's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,081
Another option is to mess with the 7th gen lower and upper. Im sure it could fit without a whole lot of work.
nishfish871 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 11:17 AM   #124
dot dot dot ...
iTrader: (22)
 
NmexMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 34,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by nishfish871 View Post
Another option is to mess with the 7th gen lower and upper. Im sure it could fit without a whole lot of work.
http://forums.maxima.org/all-motor/3...altima-im.html
http://forums.maxima.org/nitrous/614...t-doing-3.html Post #90



07 Alti IM and 09 Maxi IM's vary slightly, as do their TB's. This is covered in Surra's swap thread fairly extensively.
NmexMAX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 11:24 AM   #125
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: RI
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
While I agree that I won't be hitting anywhere near 300whp, I have to disagree about the whole volume thing. I think plenum volume is key to maintaining top end power. That is really all that sparks did (besides the 3.5" elbow).

As far as copying the manifold posted above, it seems like too much work for my case considering I have an internally stock motor. I bet the law of diminishing returns will come in to play there. Might make 275hp with my new manifold and 285hp with that killer manifold...just not worth the work to me. Maybe for someone with a 7th gen motor or a cammed regular DE but not for my old *** VQ.

I will still look into it, but from what I gather so far, it seems like it will be an expensive project for minimal return. I can't even find the velocity stacks for under $40 each.

I do have some new pictures though. I made the new back piece with the tapered inlet and cut the flange for the 7th gen throttle body (shoutout to SAL of course):


SG proved more volume doesn't equal HP: http://www.sg-motorsport.com/?p=693


"The first test we did involved physically removing the upper plenum in the middle of a dyno run, to see exactly what kind of power the engine would produce with the intake runners entirely open to the atmosphere. We found 25+ wheel horsepower. Following that incredible discovery, we built an extremely large plenum out of aluminum to see if plenum volume was the issue. No gains were found, so the next logical step was to increase airflow into the plenum. A large 3.5 hole was opened in the top of the plenum with a velocity stack that would allow airflow additional to what was coming through the factory throttle body. That 25 wheel horsepower came right back, so we concluded inlet flow was more of an issue than the actual plenum flow. The engines power output at this point was 334whp."




Sparks is a POS scam artist and his dyno and IM gains are VERY suspect. He ripped people off and lied the entire time. **** him.

Last edited by FastnFuriousMax; 12-13-2012 at 11:29 AM.
FastnFuriousMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 02:46 PM   #126
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Hayward, CA
Posts: 1,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastnFuriousMax View Post
SG proved more volume doesn't equal HP: http://www.sg-motorsport.com/?p=693
thats really not what the test proved. When they pulled the top they were showing that a plenum with infinite volume and no inlet restrictions makes 25 more HP than their original setup. There is evidence and proof everywhere that shows proper plenum volume and design provides more HP, but just like every other modification, if you dont do it right or have other issues with the system you might not see any gains even from the worlds greatest manifold. What their test really showed was that an increase in plenum volume could be meaningless if you have a bottleneck before the manifold.
Gemner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 03:51 PM   #127
LandShark has Cosworth
iTrader: (12)
 
grey99max's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 4,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by NmexMAX View Post
http://forums.maxima.org/all-motor/3...altima-im.html
http://forums.maxima.org/nitrous/614...t-doing-3.html Post #90

07 Alti IM and 09 Maxi IM's vary slightly, as do their TB's. This is covered in Surra's swap thread fairly extensively.
Yes, indeed, the '07+ UIM and LIM are possible on an earlier VQ35, but don't forget the SSIM mod that SurraTT made on the Maxima UIM that added even more plenum airflow.
grey99max is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 04:02 PM   #128
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gloucester County NJ
Posts: 1,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gemner View Post
thats really not what the test proved. When they pulled the top they were showing that a plenum with infinite volume and no inlet restrictions makes 25 more HP than their original setup. There is evidence and proof everywhere that shows proper plenum volume and design provides more HP, but just like every other modification, if you dont do it right or have other issues with the system you might not see any gains even from the worlds greatest manifold. What their test really showed was that an increase in plenum volume could be meaningless if you have a bottleneck before the manifold.
I agree. While their test did prove that airflow was more important, plenum volume is a common way to counteract the effects of a restrictive inlet. That's why cars with tiny throttle bodies have large plenums and cars with large throttle bodies have smaller plenums.

Also, they may have already had the optimum plenum before they made the extremely large one, thus entering the region of diminishing returns with the new larger one. I bet if they took their setup and reduced the overall plenum volume to 1 liter, they would see a loss.

But like SG, I feel as if my plenum is large enough and that the reason I didn't make what I was expecting to is because of the poor flow characteristics of my design.

So this is exactly why I am going with a rear entrance. I feel like it will flow much better and make more power. We will know as soon as I am done with it and can compare MAF readings.

As far as Sparks, yes he is a scumbag for screwing those people for their money but I do believe his dyno charts are legit. He was trapping 108mph in the quarter which actually makes me think that his dynos were a bit LOW.

You may be right in that plenum volume is not AS big of a deal as airflow though. I'm willing to bet that 75% of Sparks gains came from simply replacing the stock elbow to the nice 3.5" mandrel bent pipe.

Last edited by Unklejoe; 12-13-2012 at 04:10 PM.
Unklejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 07:55 AM   #129
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: RI
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
I agree. While their test did prove that airflow was more important, plenum volume is a common way to counteract the effects of a restrictive inlet. That's why cars with tiny throttle bodies have large plenums and cars with large throttle bodies have smaller plenums.

Also, they may have already had the optimum plenum before they made the extremely large one, thus entering the region of diminishing returns with the new larger one. I bet if they took their setup and reduced the overall plenum volume to 1 liter, they would see a loss.

But like SG, I feel as if my plenum is large enough and that the reason I didn't make what I was expecting to is because of the poor flow characteristics of my design.

So this is exactly why I am going with a rear entrance. I feel like it will flow much better and make more power. We will know as soon as I am done with it and can compare MAF readings.

As far as Sparks, yes he is a scumbag for screwing those people for their money but I do believe his dyno charts are legit. He was trapping 108mph in the quarter which actually makes me think that his dynos were a bit LOW.

You may be right in that plenum volume is not AS big of a deal as airflow though. I'm willing to bet that 75% of Sparks gains came from simply replacing the stock elbow to the nice 3.5" mandrel bent pipe.
The neck or elbow is as restrictive as it is stock. does this not prove volume doesn't help? They throw the stack on and get all the HP back they got when they popped the top. Air speed > Volume.
Name:  plenum02.jpg
Views: 53
Size:  77.4 KB

If they already had an optimal plenum design they wouldn't have gained the HP when they built the custom IM and gained back the 20+hp no?

Sparks gains and SGs came from the larger intake elbow not the increased plenum volume from what I can see. It is all about the speed you can get air into the plenum not the size of it...I haven't seen anything proving plenum volume helps much at all unless you go super small which just reduces the air speed as it is against the boundary layer of the walls of the IM which slows things down big time. Look at all discussions on how to properly build an intake manifold. None have massive plenum volumes because what you care about is how fast the air can move into the plenum and then into the runners as equally distributed as possible. At least this is from what I have read. Granted going larger probably hurts less vs. going smaller assuming you are still equally distributing air to each runner which is #1 with #2 being air speed.

Name:  pic01.jpg
Views: 124
Size:  110.8 KB
The intake tapers to the front as it should to keep the speed of the air high. Volume doesn't look like a concern at all and their dyno proves the gains come from the larger elbow&tb/tapered design.

If volume mattered why would there be the massive empty middle in their intake manifold design which had great gains? Granted the volume of the IM is larger than stock but I see that as only to keep the air speed up as fast as possible as walls and floors slow the air down to 0. Either way SG uses the revup lower intake manifold for max HP.

F1 intake manifolds have small volumes compared to the HP they produce right? Given the logic you need a large plenum based on HP numbers shoulnd't F1 engines should have massive plenums...
http://www.eng.vt.edu/sites/default/...o_Williams.pdf

I am not arguing here btw I am enjoying this discussion. I want to see someone make a great manifold for this engine and get closer to the SG numbers. The guy in the dyno section hit like 320/330 with C9s. But he has a custom IM with a 90mm tb. He is the closest i have seen to SGs numbers. I want to see someone run the custom JWT cams SG was using...13mm lift or higher?


Last edited by FastnFuriousMax; 12-14-2012 at 08:00 AM.
FastnFuriousMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 08:41 AM   #130
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Hayward, CA
Posts: 1,393
1) regardless of plenum design, if you cant get enough air volume INTO the plenum you arent going to make more power.

2) you say formula 1, but post formula SAE which has a 20mm restrictor in the intake which is placed after the throttle body. Formula 1 engines actually have bigger than you would expect plenums for a 2.4L engine.


3) more volume doesnt always equal more power as we said before. Actual design plays a high level of importance, you cant just through a 6ft tall box onto a lower intake and expect it to perform well. Their "bigger" aluminum manifold looks like ****, I seriously doubt that they did any flow testing, CFD, etc to design that thing.
Gemner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 08:54 AM   #131
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gloucester County NJ
Posts: 1,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastnFuriousMax View Post
The neck or elbow is as restrictive as it is stock. does this not prove volume doesn't help? They throw the stack on and get all the HP back they got when they popped the top. Air speed > Volume.
I'm not sure I'm following your point here but what this proves is that for a given plenum volume, more airflow is better. Then they increased the plenum volume by a large amount and kept everything else the same and saw no gains. That doesn't prove that volume doesn't matter, but rather they already had enough volume. There is a point at which plenum volume no longer matters. They were probably at that point (most likely 5+ liters).


If they already had an optimal plenum design they wouldn't have gained the HP when they built the custom IM and gained back the 20+hp no?

I'll assume you're talking in regards to airflow. Both the plenum volume AND airflow have to be optimized. You can't just throw a huge plenum on an otherwise stock intake manifold and expect to make max power. The more free flowing the intake, the smaller the plenum you need for max power. Any increase past the optimum point will result in no gains.


Sparks gains and SGs came from the larger intake elbow not the increased plenum volume from what I can see. It is all about the speed you can get air into the plenum not the size of it...I haven't seen anything proving plenum volume helps much at all unless you go super small which just reduces the air speed as it is against the boundary layer of the walls of the IM which slows things down big time. Look at all discussions on how to properly build an intake manifold. None have massive plenum volumes because what you care about is how fast the air can move into the plenum and then into the runners as equally distributed as possible. At least this is from what I have read. Granted going larger probably hurts less vs. going smaller assuming you are still equally distributing air to each runner which is #1 with #2 being air speed.

The whole purpose of having a large plenum is to make each runner behave as if it is operating in free air. Mainly for boundary layer reasons like you said. Also, the plenum will dampen the vacuum pulses from each cylinder. People have tried not using plenums at all; basically using a header, and saw poor performance.


The intake tapers to the front as it should to keep the speed of the air high. Volume doesn't look like a concern at all and their dyno proves the gains come from the larger elbow&tb/tapered design.

The manifold pictured above looks to have about twice the internal volume as a stock FWD manifold.

If volume mattered why would there be the massive empty middle in their intake manifold design which had great gains? Granted the volume of the IM is larger than stock but I see that as only to keep the air speed up as fast as possible as walls and floors slow the air down to 0. Either way SG uses the revup lower intake manifold for max HP.

Because if they opened the area in the middle, they would hurt the flow characteristics so bad to the point where it would lose power. Remember, no one said plenum volume is MORE important than airflow, but rather that it matters.

F1 intake manifolds have small volumes compared to the HP they produce right? Given the logic you need a large plenum based on HP numbers shoulnd't F1 engines should have massive plenums...
http://www.eng.vt.edu/sites/default/...o_Williams.pdf
From your source:

"In designing the plenum, it is important to achieve an even static pressure as this will cause the
cylinders to pull the same vacuum, leading to even flow in each cylinder. In order to achieve this goal, a
designer is typically faced with a tradeoff: even static pressures are easily achieved by larger plenum
volumes, however this not only becomes difficult to package, it affects throttle response as a larger
volume increases the amount of time for the system to reach an equilibrium pressure."


I am not arguing here btw I am enjoying this discussion. I want to see someone make a great manifold for this engine and get closer to the SG numbers. The guy in the dyno section hit like 320/330 with C9s. But he has a custom IM with a 90mm tb. He is the closest i have seen to SGs numbers. I want to see someone run the custom JWT cams SG was using...13mm lift or higher?

This is how we learn. Keep it going.


I guess the question that we're talking about here is what is "large". I believe that a volume of 1.5x the engine displacement is where you want to be. The carbotron manifold probably has at least 5 liters of volume.
The first thing that comes to mind is the manifold that a lot of Honda guys use.

http://www.realstreetperformance.com...e_manifold.jpg


Also, popping the top can also be thought of as giving it an infinite plenum volume with unrestricted flow. Thereby preventing each cylinder's vacuum from interfering with the one next to it.

I'm not saying plenum volume is more important than airflow, but I believe that the stock plenum is too small. That is why I simply didn't put a 3.5" elbow on the stock intake.

We kind of lost track of the main point here. What do you recommend to improve my design? I'm open to suggestions. I don't feel like doing a completely custom log setup though. I already have the stock plenum cut with the sides welded to it. I am willing to make some changes to my planned design with the elbow in the back. Maybe curved back or something?

Last edited by Unklejoe; 12-14-2012 at 09:12 AM.
Unklejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 10:17 AM   #132
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: RI
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
I guess the question that we're talking about here is what is "large". I believe that a volume of 1.5x the engine displacement is where you want to be. The carbotron manifold probably has at least 5 liters of volume.
The first thing that comes to mind is the manifold that a lot of Honda guys use.

http://www.realstreetperformance.com...e_manifold.jpg


Also, popping the top can also be thought of as giving it an infinite plenum volume with unrestricted flow. Thereby preventing each cylinder's vacuum from interfering with the one next to it.

I'm not saying plenum volume is more important than airflow, but I believe that the stock plenum is too small. That is why I simply didn't put a 3.5" elbow on the stock intake.

We kind of lost track of the main point here. What do you recommend to improve my design? I'm open to suggestions. I don't feel like doing a completely custom log setup though. I already have the stock plenum cut with the sides welded to it. I am willing to make some changes to my planned design with the elbow in the back. Maybe curved back or something?
fair enough

Any more pics of your progress?

This will mate to an 7th gen throttle body but what about after that? Tuned length 4'' with a velocity stack I assume like SurraTT? So you will reduce to 3.5'' pipe down to the 7th gen tb...Ever thought of using a 4'' pipe on the TB/Plenum side to hopefully increase the venturi effect even more?


If the elbow is going in the middle of the plenum there isn't much you can do imo. If it is going to connect to one side or the other anything you can do to curve the end of the plenum down will help keep up the air speed up at the farthest runners which is key. It is good if the plenum doesn't end at the last runner and there is an inch or so of space past it.

Are you running cams? If not what do you plan to run?
FastnFuriousMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 01:13 PM   #133
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Hayward, CA
Posts: 1,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
We kind of lost track of the main point here. What do you recommend to improve my design? I'm open to suggestions. I don't feel like doing a completely custom log setup though. I already have the stock plenum cut with the sides welded to it. I am willing to make some changes to my planned design with the elbow in the back. Maybe curved back or something?
if youre going to computer test before building, I would say look at relocating the intake to the end of the manifold rather than the middle.

I tried to explain it before but didnt do a good enough job, move the runner inlets away from the manifold boundary by welding the manifold further back on the runners behind the inlet, as shown by my incredible mspaint skills below. I dont know how well it would work because of the way the stock manifold is designed with all the runner inlets basically cast together, but the coanda effect is not friendly to intake flow


Gemner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 01:32 PM   #134
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: RI
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gemner View Post
if youre going to computer test before building, I would say look at relocating the intake to the end of the manifold rather than the middle.

I tried to explain it before but didnt do a good enough job, move the runner inlets away from the manifold boundary by welding the manifold further back on the runners behind the inlet, as shown by my incredible mspaint skills below. I dont know how well it would work because of the way the stock manifold is designed with all the runner inlets basically cast together, but the coanda effect is not friendly to intake flow


I agree, even if you use the stock runners if you could put the intake at one end and taper the other end you should see better results from my understanding of manifold design.

BTW your ms paint skills > mine.

Was there a second picture only one showed up?

I wish I had the time/skills to fabricate...

I still don't understand why no one copied sparks manifold exactly(not the most complicated design) or why NMEXMAX never posted a dyno after using Sparks mani for a year or two now. It all leads me to believe the sparks mani didn't make the power he said it did.

****ing scammer. the least he could do is pay off the people he owes money to to clear his name.
FastnFuriousMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 07:33 PM   #135
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastnFuriousMax View Post
why NMEXMAX never posted a dyno after using Sparks mani for a year or two now. It all leads me to believe the sparks mani didn't make the power he said it did.
Hmm... Actually he just taking his time. Just patient. But sparks ALREADY has proven make power 18 peak whp and 50 whp at redline just sssim with full bolts-on.

Do you want make serious intake plenum build on your maxima for make more power or just enjoy to watch on it? I would make one for my altima se-r but I've no time with this one. I'm NOT want to make crazy power on my car. My car still have complete stock just add kn filter. That's all. Also I just enjoying on it.
MIKERNM1990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 10:06 PM   #136
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gloucester County NJ
Posts: 1,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastnFuriousMax View Post
fair enough

Any more pics of your progress?

This will mate to an 7th gen throttle body but what about after that? Tuned length 4'' with a velocity stack I assume like SurraTT? So you will reduce to 3.5'' pipe down to the 7th gen tb...Ever thought of using a 4'' pipe on the TB/Plenum side to hopefully increase the venturi effect even more?


If the elbow is going in the middle of the plenum there isn't much you can do imo. If it is going to connect to one side or the other anything you can do to curve the end of the plenum down will help keep up the air speed up at the farthest runners which is key. It is good if the plenum doesn't end at the last runner and there is an inch or so of space past it.

Are you running cams? If not what do you plan to run?
Stock cams. And I am running the 7th gen throttle body with a 3.5" elbow into the manifold. I don't think I'll be able to squeeze a 4" elbow between the firewall and the manifold. The good thing about the 3.5" pipe is that it mates up pretty cleanly to the 75mm throttle body. I can grind the taper down so it is pretty smooth. From the throttle body, I am running a 3.5" pipe to a 3.5" MAF to an AEM dryflow filter with a 6" velocity stack. My setup is pretty much 3.5" all the way through with the smallest part being the 75mm 7th gen throttle body. I see what you're talking about with the side entrance. Basically, I want it to taper down towards the furthest side from the inlet. The only reason I like the back entrance idea is because I don't have to worry about the taper angle as much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gemner View Post
if youre going to computer test before building, I would say look at relocating the intake to the end of the manifold rather than the middle.

I tried to explain it before but didnt do a good enough job, move the runner inlets away from the manifold boundary by welding the manifold further back on the runners behind the inlet, as shown by my incredible mspaint skills below. I dont know how well it would work because of the way the stock manifold is designed with all the runner inlets basically cast together, but the coanda effect is not friendly to intake flow


I know what you're talking about now. Basically, make the runners extrude into the plenum to keep them away from the wall (where air velocity is zero). The problem like you said is that all the runners are cast together on the back plane. What I did however was make the plenum a little wider so that there would be some room on the sides of the runners. I read that you don't want the runners too close to the wall for the reason stated above. I wanted to make the plenum taller and have some space before the top of the runners but hood clearance was a concern. As far as the bottom side, I can't go any lower as it is almost touching my rear valve cover already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastnFuriousMax View Post
I agree, even if you use the stock runners if you could put the intake at one end and taper the other end you should see better results from my understanding of manifold design.

BTW your ms paint skills > mine.

Was there a second picture only one showed up?

I wish I had the time/skills to fabricate...

I still don't understand why no one copied sparks manifold exactly(not the most complicated design) or why NMEXMAX never posted a dyno after using Sparks mani for a year or two now. It all leads me to believe the sparks mani didn't make the power he said it did.

****ing scammer. the least he could do is pay off the people he owes money to to clear his name.
I thought I remembered nmex dynoing his car and making mid 260's or something through an auto. I have no idea if that was with this mani or not though...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MIKERNM1990 View Post
Hmm... Actually he just taking his time. Just patient. But sparks ALREADY has proven make power 18 peak whp and 50 whp at redline just sssim with full bolts-on.

Do you want make serious intake plenum build on your maxima for make more power or just enjoy to watch on it? I would make one for my altima se-r but I've no time with this one. I'm NOT want to make crazy power on my car. My car still have complete stock just add kn filter. That's all. Also I just enjoying on it.
I don't know what you mean by "watch on it" but I think you're trying to ask if I'm just doing this for looks or for performance and the answer is performance. I could care less how it looks.


I plan on doing another flow analysis with the pipe coming in from the side/rear again with the long side tapering down and checking out which flows better. I'll keep this updated...
Unklejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2012, 01:04 AM   #137
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
I don't know what you mean by "watch on it" but I think you're trying to ask if I'm just doing this for looks or for performance and the answer is performance. I could care less how it looks.
yep. You said that,"not care about how it looks." Your custom intake plenum look fine to me but you made more torque than hp, it's look like VW golf gti, wrx, ralliart, and more for make more torque than hp. They only have turbo. But you still use na motor with more torque. I love it! Actually I'm very impressive with you! stay tuned! 6 out of 5 star rated. lol
MIKERNM1990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2012, 08:21 AM   #138
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gloucester County NJ
Posts: 1,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIKERNM1990 View Post
yep. You said that,"not care about how it looks." Your custom intake plenum look fine to me but you made more torque than hp, it's look like VW golf gti, wrx, ralliart, and more for make more torque than hp. They only have turbo. But you still use na motor with more torque. I love it! Actually I'm very impressive with you! stay tuned! 6 out of 5 star rated. lol
Lol thanks. I'm not happy with it yet so I'll be making some changes
Unklejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2012, 01:39 PM   #139
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
Lol thanks. I'm not happy with it yet so I'll be making some changes
I understand. sir.
MIKERNM1990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2012, 08:01 PM   #140
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 263
**Interested in taper effects**
Finchum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 07:56 AM   #141
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: RI
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finchum View Post
**Interested in taper effects**
Like why to taper it?
FastnFuriousMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 02:44 PM   #142
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Murfreesboro TN
Posts: 263
Interested in the results of changing the elbow characteristics. How would flow, velocity, ect improve
Finchum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2012, 06:23 PM   #143
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gloucester County NJ
Posts: 1,147
Small update. I decided to go with my original plan of just moving the inlet to the rear for simplicity's sake. I didn't feel like spending more time and money on materials to test a tapered design so this is how it looks as of now:

Name:  738204_109834605857496_480289622_o.jpg
Views: 57
Size:  68.3 KB

Name:  577778_109838365857120_1340193743_n.jpg
Views: 58
Size:  67.3 KB

Name:  2012-12-30182641.jpg
Views: 59
Size:  163.8 KB

Name:  2012-12-30182659.jpg
Views: 57
Size:  146.9 KB

Name:  2012-12-30182622.jpg
Views: 54
Size:  176.7 KB

I will be running my 09 throttle body on this manifold as well...

I feel like this HAS to flow better than the side entrance considering the inlet is blowing directly on to the runner's inlets.

Finishing it up tomorrow.

Last edited by Unklejoe; 12-30-2012 at 06:31 PM.
Unklejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2012, 10:37 AM   #144
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: RI
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
Small update. I decided to go with my original plan of just moving the inlet to the rear for simplicity's sake. I didn't feel like spending more time and money on materials to test a tapered design so this is how it looks as of now:











I will be running my 09 throttle body on this manifold as well...

I feel like this HAS to flow better than the side entrance considering the inlet is blowing directly on to the runner's inlets.

Finishing it up tomorrow.
Looks good, before an after dyno?

Even if the 'box' flows just as well you should have decent the gains from the much larger intake pipe and hopefully a venturi effect w/ the small TB and larger piping on either side.

What size is the elbow 3.5'' OD or close to it?
FastnFuriousMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2012, 03:45 PM   #145
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gloucester County NJ
Posts: 1,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastnFuriousMax View Post
Looks good, before an after dyno?

Even if the 'box' flows just as well you should have decent the gains from the much larger intake pipe and hopefully a venturi effect w/ the small TB and larger piping on either side.

What size is the elbow 3.5'' OD or close to it?
Yup. The intake is full 3.5" OD. But it was also 3.5 on the previous design. Just by looking at this one, it appears that it will flow better because it enters right behind the runners.

Didn't get a chance to dyno yet. Actually just got the car running 20 minutes ago lol

And the good thing about the 75mm tb is that it isn't THAT much smaller than the rest of the intake pipe. The car feels strong but it's pretty hard to say if it gained any power considering we're talking like 10 whp here
Unklejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2013, 09:26 AM   #146
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: RI
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
Yup. The intake is full 3.5" OD. But it was also 3.5 on the previous design. Just by looking at this one, it appears that it will flow better because it enters right behind the runners.

Didn't get a chance to dyno yet. Actually just got the car running 20 minutes ago lol

And the good thing about the 75mm tb is that it isn't THAT much smaller than the rest of the intake pipe. The car feels strong but it's pretty hard to say if it gained any power considering we're talking like 10 whp here
Did you notice a change in your AFR at all?
FastnFuriousMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2013, 11:21 AM   #147
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gloucester County NJ
Posts: 1,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastnFuriousMax View Post
Did you notice a change in your AFR at all?
Yup. Just did a few pulls. The AFR on the original custom manifold was a solid 12.9 all the way to limiter. On the first pull I just did with the redesigned manifold, the AFR was all the way up to 14.0 at 6500. I'm guessing because it is flowing better. I assumed the MAF would accommodate for this but I did not. Maybe because of the slightly different angle of the pipe.

This manifold went from 6000RPM to 6290RPM in 660msec in 3rd gear. The original custom one with the side entrance took 840msec for the same RPM range. Not sure how significant that is but 180msec seems like a good increase for only 290 RPM.
Unklejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 10:55 AM   #148
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: RI
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
Yup. Just did a few pulls. The AFR on the original custom manifold was a solid 12.9 all the way to limiter. On the first pull I just did with the redesigned manifold, the AFR was all the way up to 14.0 at 6500. I'm guessing because it is flowing better. I assumed the MAF would accommodate for this but I did not. Maybe because of the slightly different angle of the pipe.

This manifold went from 6000RPM to 6290RPM in 660msec in 3rd gear. The original custom one with the side entrance took 840msec for the same RPM range. Not sure how significant that is but 180msec seems like a good increase for only 290 RPM.
Sounds like you def are making more power! What are you reving out to 7200 on stock cams & head right?
FastnFuriousMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 11:33 AM   #149
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gloucester County NJ
Posts: 1,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastnFuriousMax View Post
Sounds like you def are making more power! What are you reving out to 7200 on stock cams & head right?
Completely stock motor revving to 6600 rpm. No good way to raise my limiter
Unklejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 12:12 PM   #150
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: RI
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
Completely stock motor revving to 6600 rpm. No good way to raise my limiter
Utec or a Haltech are the only ways on an 02-03 right?
FastnFuriousMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:32 PM   #151
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gloucester County NJ
Posts: 1,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastnFuriousMax View Post
Utec or a Haltech are the only ways on an 02-03 right?
yeah or technosquare which doesnt really exist anymore. you can kind of do it with the emanage but its ghetto

btw i will be selling this manifold. going to be asking $450 the way it sits right now. going to start a new project soon
Unklejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:57 PM   #152
Banned
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: RI
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
yeah or technosquare which doesnt really exist anymore. you can kind of do it with the emanage but its ghetto

btw i will be selling this manifold. going to be asking $450 the way it sits right now. going to start a new project soon
That is a fair price. If you could prove HP gains I am sure you could sell a few of these for that price or higher. SFR has crappy gains and they charge $1,100.00. Yours should outflow/perform easily.

GLWS
FastnFuriousMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 04:08 PM   #153
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gloucester County NJ
Posts: 1,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastnFuriousMax View Post
That is a fair price. If you could prove HP gains I am sure you could sell a few of these for that price or higher. SFR has crappy gains and they charge $1,100.00. Yours should outflow/perform easily.

GLWS
Thanks. I can't prove gains but I did make 260whp with the old design and I could only assume this design flows better considering the MAF voltage is a tad higher in the upper RPM's.
Unklejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2013, 08:53 PM   #154
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: South Florida
Posts: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unklejoe View Post
Stock TB. I have the 09 one just sitting in my garage though.

Well, I'm kind of pissed.

My highest run was 256hp @ 5350 rpm (269tq @4600 rpm).

The first run was only 232hp @ 5300 rpm (249tq @4500 rpm). Mind you there was NO tuning in between runs, so I have no idea why I picked up like 20whp between my first and second run.

Can someone please explain to me how I made more torque than horsepower?????? WTF

Also, power appears to REALLY drop off on the dyno after 5500 rpm. At 6250 rpm, I made about 150whp!

There is NO way my car is making that little power at 6250 rpm. It FEELS faster with this manifold than it ever did all motor and I would definitely notice if power dropped in half at redline...

It feels consistent all the way to limiter so I have no idea what is going on here.

I was running 92oct fuel and I normally run 93, so maybe that's it? I did a third gear pull on the way home and it had some knock after 6000 rpm so I am going to assume that either the dyno is straight up wrong or that I was knocking on the dyno due to low airflow (hood was shut).


Who knows. Guess my 3.5" intake, LRMAF, custom manifold, hotshot headers, 3" y-pipe, 3" catback, e-manage ultimate tuned Maxima makes less HP at red-line than a stock auto 4th gen Maxima...


When you dyno tested your custom manifold, did you have the electronic part of the stock VIAS still connected with a vacuum source? I'm wondering if that's why the power just fell off in the higher RPM. StormzUSMC had a similar problem when he installed a NWP plate without keeping the VIAS solenoid plugged in with a vacuum source.

Look at his thread. He doesn't find the answer until post 107 on page 3. http://forums.maxima.org/5th-generat...dyno-fail.html

Here's where he re-dyno'd after re-installing the electronic part and the vacuum canister of the VIAS. http://forums.maxima.org/dyno-discus...sis-fixed.html
mikehawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2015, 07:01 PM   #155
Newbie - Just Registered
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 15
I know this is an old thread, but did the OP ever get an 87mm, TB to work?

Seems like the thread jumped off into making intake manifolds.

Is there anyone who has cracked the code on how to use the GM 90mm Hitachi TB?
M-train is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Can I replace fuel filter? bumpypickle 4th Generation Maxima (1995-1999) 10 09-20-2015 09:22 AM
Failing Ignition coils, starter, or injectors? 97_GXE 4th Generation Maxima (1995-1999) 5 09-15-2015 07:47 AM
Leaking hose followthadollar 4th Generation Maxima (1995-1999) 9 09-13-2015 10:55 AM
intake upgrage Maxboy23 5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003) 9 09-09-2015 11:37 AM
modification suggestions Maxboy23 5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003) 6 09-04-2015 07:04 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:40 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.