2000 VI is now on and running on my 96
05-21-2004, 03:36 AM
#201
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 217
Originally Posted by IceY2K1
Three words...YOU ARE CORRECT~!!!!!
Anyways, I'm GOING to take pics, I just have to find a digital camera and figure out a way to get clean shots.
Anyways, I'm GOING to take pics, I just have to find a digital camera and figure out a way to get clean shots.
Bottom line the 2000,2001 intake does NOT have 2 runners. Period. Doesn't look like any maxima does.
2001 + (3.5L) Pathy does have 2 runners/CYL. Anyone know if G35 or 350z does. The shape of the intake makes me think it doesn't.
05-21-2004, 04:05 AM
#202
Father of the 00 VI
Thread Starter
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: amsterdam ,new york
Posts: 3,330
Originally Posted by Big D
Why don't we all just ask VSAMAYLOV or whatever he's called what went into swapping the DE-K into the 4th gen? He said there was barely any modifications needed, moving the thermostat and stuff like that.
05-21-2004, 04:06 AM
#203
Father of the 00 VI
Thread Starter
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: amsterdam ,new york
Posts: 3,330
Originally Posted by IceY2K1
Three words...YOU ARE CORRECT~!!!!!
First, I'd like to say WOW, what a fascinating, yet simple design. Explaining it withOUT pics will be tough, but I'll try.
There are two plenums, I'll call primary(behind throttle-body) and secondary(box underneath). The primary feeds the six LONG runners you see on top. These runners terminate into the lower intake manifold six ports. However, before they do, there is another path exiting the secondary plenum that merges, which is blocked by the power valve. The power valve is a long rectangular shaped rod which rotates somewhat like a vacuum cleaner brush, ie every section wall has a round O-ring, except it only turns 90-degrees. If the power valve is closed, it closes off the secondary plenum from any air entering or leaving, however inside it's ONE big open box, ie all six runners are connected.
When the power valve is closed, the primary plenum feeds the long runners and they dump into the lower intake manifold, nothing special.
Now, for the fascinating part, which I *THINK* I have figured out, but I could be wrong. When the power valve is open, the current cylinder performing an intake stroke draws from the closest source, ie secondary plenum, which the OTHER runners are now feeding. So, instead of the intake stroke drawing through a SINGLE long runner/primary plenum like under 5000rpm, it's now drawing through an effectively much LARGER volume contained in the secondary plenum, other FIVE long runners, and the primary plenum.
I don't have proof or anything, yet, however I'd be willing to bet this is a form of dynamic supercharging called "tuned-intake tube charging" or another version. Per my SAE handbook, tuned-intake tube charging is defined as:
Anyways, I'm GOING to take pics, I just have to find a digital camera and figure out a way to get clean shots.
First, I'd like to say WOW, what a fascinating, yet simple design. Explaining it withOUT pics will be tough, but I'll try.
There are two plenums, I'll call primary(behind throttle-body) and secondary(box underneath). The primary feeds the six LONG runners you see on top. These runners terminate into the lower intake manifold six ports. However, before they do, there is another path exiting the secondary plenum that merges, which is blocked by the power valve. The power valve is a long rectangular shaped rod which rotates somewhat like a vacuum cleaner brush, ie every section wall has a round O-ring, except it only turns 90-degrees. If the power valve is closed, it closes off the secondary plenum from any air entering or leaving, however inside it's ONE big open box, ie all six runners are connected.
When the power valve is closed, the primary plenum feeds the long runners and they dump into the lower intake manifold, nothing special.
Now, for the fascinating part, which I *THINK* I have figured out, but I could be wrong. When the power valve is open, the current cylinder performing an intake stroke draws from the closest source, ie secondary plenum, which the OTHER runners are now feeding. So, instead of the intake stroke drawing through a SINGLE long runner/primary plenum like under 5000rpm, it's now drawing through an effectively much LARGER volume contained in the secondary plenum, other FIVE long runners, and the primary plenum.
I don't have proof or anything, yet, however I'd be willing to bet this is a form of dynamic supercharging called "tuned-intake tube charging" or another version. Per my SAE handbook, tuned-intake tube charging is defined as:
Anyways, I'm GOING to take pics, I just have to find a digital camera and figure out a way to get clean shots.
05-21-2004, 04:47 AM
#204
Originally Posted by krismax
So did I waste my time doing this?
For the last week or so I'd decided to not even do the MEVI on the DE-k. Now I want to try it so we can see the gains that are hidden in the engine itself (if any).
05-21-2004, 07:43 AM
#205
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 217
Originally Posted by krismax
So did I waste my time doing this?
Only a dyno will tell.
05-21-2004, 07:51 AM
#206
No IMO, but honestly, I can't say. It's up to you whether the gains over a MEVI are worth it or not. We don't have enough data to compare the MEVI vs DEK, yet. Until we get a few dynos especially with the DEK over 6400rpm, it's unknown. I'd bet even then, it's still a personal question if all the extra hassle is worth a few hp/tq here or there over the "bolt-on" MEVI.
You were the PIONEER and your PROTOTYPE cost you way more then the MEVI would. However, people who find a DEK for ~$400 in a junkyard then sell say $200 back for the short-block/heads and spend another $XXX on custom fab parts, it could be far cheaper. Then don't forget about the composite plastic vs. aluminum heat transfer advantages. Also, the DEK fuel system has MUCH cheaper alternatives for injectors to those that are considering boost.
Anyways, Thaniel was correct that there is NOT two different length runners inside the DEK manifold. However, it's still a "Variable Intake", I'd like to call it a two-stage intake with tuned-intake tube charging vs. variable intake though.
We just didn't know HOW the DEK manifold worked, but we sure knew it works. I'd still be willing to bet it's superior to the MEVI, but only time will tell. Others who follow in your footsteps will help determine whether it's a worthwhile difference.
You were the PIONEER and your PROTOTYPE cost you way more then the MEVI would. However, people who find a DEK for ~$400 in a junkyard then sell say $200 back for the short-block/heads and spend another $XXX on custom fab parts, it could be far cheaper. Then don't forget about the composite plastic vs. aluminum heat transfer advantages. Also, the DEK fuel system has MUCH cheaper alternatives for injectors to those that are considering boost.
Anyways, Thaniel was correct that there is NOT two different length runners inside the DEK manifold. However, it's still a "Variable Intake", I'd like to call it a two-stage intake with tuned-intake tube charging vs. variable intake though.
We just didn't know HOW the DEK manifold worked, but we sure knew it works. I'd still be willing to bet it's superior to the MEVI, but only time will tell. Others who follow in your footsteps will help determine whether it's a worthwhile difference.
Originally Posted by krismax
So did I waste my time doing this?
05-21-2004, 07:53 AM
#207
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 217
DE-k Manifold pics
Here is a Pic of the manifold (before cut)
I sketched on some lines showing what a cross section would look like.
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3250_IMG.JPG
Here is the manifold cut up. Don't ask why, just know I did it.
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3253_IMG.JPG
Here is looking into the cut end of the manifold (from the T/B side of the runner) manifold top would be to the right
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3265_IMG.JPG
Here is looking into the hole where the "power valve" would be. Top is to the right. Bottom left is where would bolt to the lower intake manifold.
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3270_IMG.JPG
Same orientation but close up
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3271_IMG.JPG
Same orientation close up different lighting. Trying to show you that on the T/B side of the chamber there are not any openings.
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3272_IMG.JPG
I feel kind of cheated. I was mislead to believe that the 2000 was a 2 runner system. I read the literature I have for the 2002 maxima and it is missleading also. The pic of the valve doesn't show enough to realize it isn't a 2 runner system.
The variable intake still is better than a fixed intake but makes me wonder how good is that pathy intake with 2 runners. Anyone have dynos of stock pathy 3.5 vs maxima vs 350z?
Thaniel
I sketched on some lines showing what a cross section would look like.
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3250_IMG.JPG
Here is the manifold cut up. Don't ask why, just know I did it.
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3253_IMG.JPG
Here is looking into the cut end of the manifold (from the T/B side of the runner) manifold top would be to the right
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3265_IMG.JPG
Here is looking into the hole where the "power valve" would be. Top is to the right. Bottom left is where would bolt to the lower intake manifold.
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3270_IMG.JPG
Same orientation but close up
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3271_IMG.JPG
Same orientation close up different lighting. Trying to show you that on the T/B side of the chamber there are not any openings.
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3272_IMG.JPG
I feel kind of cheated. I was mislead to believe that the 2000 was a 2 runner system. I read the literature I have for the 2002 maxima and it is missleading also. The pic of the valve doesn't show enough to realize it isn't a 2 runner system.
The variable intake still is better than a fixed intake but makes me wonder how good is that pathy intake with 2 runners. Anyone have dynos of stock pathy 3.5 vs maxima vs 350z?
Thaniel
05-21-2004, 08:29 AM
#211
Originally Posted by Thaniel
Here is a Pic of the manifold (before cut)
I sketched on some lines showing what a cross section would look like.
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3250_IMG.JPG
I sketched on some lines showing what a cross section would look like.
http://homepage.mac.com/smith_wesley...2-3250_IMG.JPG
It looked to me to be TOTALLY sealed, yet it had two drain plugs underneath and a gasket that seals it from the vacuum canister.Still wondering WTH that is.
The variable intake still is better than a fixed intake but makes me wonder how good is that pathy intake with 2 runners. Anyone have dynos of stock pathy 3.5 vs maxima vs 350z?
Thaniel
Thaniel
Here is the TOP half 350Z manifold:
Here is the BOTTOM half 350z manifold:
Here is the 350Z LIM, rail, injectors:
05-21-2004, 08:53 AM
#213
Not DAVEB the parts guy
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,555
I could be completely wrong about this, but it appears the DE-K manifold is just a reversed version of the MEVI. Instead of the resonance chamber being on top of the manifold, the resonance chamber is on the bottom. Man, I've totally mislead into believing the DE-K manifold was a true dual runner setup too. It's variable alright, but it's resonance tuned.
Dave
Dave
05-21-2004, 09:01 AM
#216
Man, I swore I had a pic of iansw MEVI with the cover off. Put basically think of it this way, it's like the USIM with a tank on top of it, that has a set of runners attached to the main runners going into the tank. At the top of the runners in the tank, you have the flaps that open up to the rest of that tank......does that help a little? I'll try to dig for the pics.....I hope that doesn't sound confusing.
S
S
05-21-2004, 09:40 AM
#220
Supporting Maxima.org Member
iTrader: (38)
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Near Archer High School, Ga
Posts: 6,451
Originally Posted by Conrad283
I remember you telling me that the FI guys are gonna want your car after you're done with it. I think you're right 
Hell naa not me, count me out. Great job bolting that thing up. I would like to see a dyno sheet of that car. I am predicting between 199-220HP to the ground with that 8k RPM limiter
05-21-2004, 10:43 AM
#222
Originally Posted by Thaniel
I feel kind of cheated. I was mislead to believe that the 2000 was a 2 runner system. I read the literature I have for the 2002 maxima and it is missleading also. The pic of the valve doesn't show enough to realize it isn't a 2 runner system.
The variable intake still is better than a fixed intake but makes me wonder how good is that pathy intake with 2 runners. Anyone have dynos of stock pathy 3.5 vs maxima vs 350z?
Thaniel
The variable intake still is better than a fixed intake but makes me wonder how good is that pathy intake with 2 runners. Anyone have dynos of stock pathy 3.5 vs maxima vs 350z?
Thaniel
Where does it say that the 2000-2003 Maxima's are two runner intake designs? I see where it says variable intake runner design, but no where do I find two/dual runner intakes being advertised. I think the problem is that some of you thought variable meant dual, or had some other idea as to what was involved with variable intake design. I don't feel as if I was misled...but perhaps I haven't seen all the literature on it.
05-21-2004, 11:33 AM
#223
Originally Posted by Dave B
I could be completely wrong about this, but it appears the DE-K manifold is just a reversed version of the MEVI. Instead of the resonance chamber being on top of the manifold, the resonance chamber is on the bottom. Man, I've totally mislead into believing the DE-K manifold was a true dual runner setup too. It's variable alright, but it's resonance tuned.
Dave
Dave
Same idea, just improved the design. The DE-k manifold may be a smoother path for the air when it's closed at low rpm's.
05-21-2004, 12:45 PM
#226
All it said about the DEK was:
REDUCTION OF AIR LEAK OF VARIABLE INTAKE SYSTEM –
In the VQ30DE, the air leak in the variable intake system has been reduced by adopting a labyrinth structure for the rotary valve, which is used as the inertia adjustment valve. Since the inertia effect can be utilized more effectively, volumetric efficiency is improved.
In the VQ30DE, the air leak in the variable intake system has been reduced by adopting a labyrinth structure for the rotary valve, which is used as the inertia adjustment valve. Since the inertia effect can be utilized more effectively, volumetric efficiency is improved.
REDUCTION OF INTAKE RESISTANCE –
Intake resistance has been reduced in the VQ30DE by adopting a plastic intake manifold so as to reduce surface roughness .
Intake resistance has been reduced in the VQ30DE by adopting a plastic intake manifold so as to reduce surface roughness .
05-21-2004, 01:25 PM
#228
You'll just need to put the 2K fuel rail/injectors/upper&lower IM on, ie
Then talk krismax into making another IACV adapter, ie:
Or BETTER yet, you could figure out how to make the 2K throttle-body work?!?!?!? Since you're running a DEK ECU, you most likely could.
How did you get the 5th gen ECU to work with a 4th gen IACV?
Then talk krismax into making another IACV adapter, ie:
Or BETTER yet, you could figure out how to make the 2K throttle-body work?!?!?!? Since you're running a DEK ECU, you most likely could.
How did you get the 5th gen ECU to work with a 4th gen IACV?
Originally Posted by vsamoylov
great job guys. now i want to attempt this on my 2k engine.cant wait. what had to be changed? plus i am a auto. how will the computer handle that? also how did you get rid of your rev limiter?
05-21-2004, 01:52 PM
#229
So basically, like Dave said the DE-K and the MEVI are both variable intakes but work on a reverse basis. While the DE-K uses more volume for low-end RPMs(better for low TQ) the MEVI uses less volume for lower RPMs(hence the 8-10hp loss without the ECU). Quick, someone mount the MEVI upside down and see if there's any difference.
j/k
I'm still very interested in doing this. VSAMAYLOV needs to tell more of what went into the swap of the block.
j/k
I'm still very interested in doing this. VSAMAYLOV needs to tell more of what went into the swap of the block.
05-21-2004, 03:16 PM
#231
Guest
Posts: n/a
who said that i am running a 5th gen ecu? i am running a 4th gen ecu. the only problem that i am stock on is the idle control on the 2k maxima. it is different then the 4th idle control. saslo what kind of injectors are you using? 5th gen? i know the fuel rail has to be 2k. and is the 2k throttle body bigger than the 4th gen one? man i really want to try to get it on my car but how will the 4th gen computer act with the VI?
05-21-2004, 03:22 PM
#232
Since you've got the 4th gen ECU, you'll just need krismax IACV spacer, see above.
Originally Posted by vsamoylov
who said that i am running a 5th gen ecu? i am running a 4th gen ecu. the only problem that i am stock on is the idle control on the 2k maxima. it is different then the 4th idle control. saslo what kind of injectors are you using? 5th gen? i know the fuel rail has to be 2k. and is the 2k throttle body bigger than the 4th gen one? man i really want to try to get it on my car but how will the 4th gen computer act with the VI?
05-21-2004, 03:27 PM
#235
I believe he just removed the IACV from the stock 4th gen manifold and then CNC'd a plate with proper holes and welded on an attachment bracket.
I can have more of them duplicated probably, IF I can get krismax to make me one.
I can have more of them duplicated probably, IF I can get krismax to make me one.
05-21-2004, 03:49 PM
#238
You could probably use the 2K throttle body, but you'd have to still use krismax IACV adapter with the 4th gen IACV, since it's ECU controlled, at least on the 5th gen. That would require a 5th gen ECU.
The variable muffler is for sound, nothing performance about it.
The variable muffler is for sound, nothing performance about it.
Originally Posted by vsamoylov
See I want to use the 2k throttle body instead of the Pathfinder one. And I wonder if I get the VI put on the car, I should be making a couple horses shy of what the 2k-2k1 maxima made because I dont have the Variable muffler ?
05-21-2004, 03:57 PM
#239
Actually, adapting the 4th gen IACV with the DEK throttle body would be a lot simpler, since you'd just use the DEK bolts.
I just need a 4th gen IACV and I think I could make this. I'll see what I can dig up.
krismax, what's that nipple on the bottom for?
I just need a 4th gen IACV and I think I could make this. I'll see what I can dig up.
krismax, what's that nipple on the bottom for?
05-21-2004, 03:58 PM
#240
Originally Posted by IceY2K1
You could probably use the 2K throttle body, but you'd have to still use krismax IACV adapter with the 4th gen IACV, since it's ECU controlled, at least on the 5th gen. That would require a 5th gen ECU.
The variable muffler is for sound, nothing performance about it.
The variable muffler is for sound, nothing performance about it.
If some people dont want the Pathfinder TB he has to make a different adaptor with a different bolt pattern.