# 1.8T Intake Manifold design and construction.



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

This thread I will talk about how we are building the intake manifold for a 1.8T VW cylinder head. One of the many custom pieces going into the Jetta race car: http://shift518.com/showthread.php?t=20487




Starting with what pieces I know I wanted to run; AEB large port runners, 75MM throttle body I got to crunching some sketches in SolidWorks. Solid works is nice because it allows you to quickly design the manifold, see your ideas in 3D and catch any physical design flaws quickly, prior to eating up materials and time. Also included in SolidWorks is the Flow Simulation tool. This allows you to flow test the parts with many different variables, to get a good idea of how the manifold will act in the real world. You can animate it also, and with inputting the cam profiles, timing, RPM, etc. you can actually open and close the "lids" on each runner just as an intake valve would on a motor! 




Now to start this, I am by no means an expert at Solid Works, mechanical engineering, or intake design. This is the first manifold I will produce from scratch, so i am way behind the 8ball here, but I have been researching this for a few months now, and reading ALOT of information about this entire process. If anyone has even gotten the chance to use Solid Works, it will take you a week to make a simple bolt! Lots of seat time is required to fully understand it. BUT with some friendly tips from friends (BoxerSix and Mafdark) I am getting the hang of it.




So lets get to the good stuff.

Started off by going shopping. Ross Machine Racing sells all kinds of stuff to build an intake manifold from scratch. I picked up some 1/2" flat stock for the plenum floor, a 2 foot section of their 5" D shaped plenum, some 1/2" stock for the TB plate and a D shaped end cap.

I knew I would need an AEB intake manifold to start with. Idea is to simply use the German engineering they already put into it and hack the top off it! One pass across the band saw and i had just the runners left. After that we machined a slight recess into the 1/2" flat stock to position the runners in and help weld in position. 

At this point I had to design the plenum. Now allot of people out there just weld on the D shape plenum cap the end and slap a TB flange on it and call it a day. Sure this will increase the volume of the intake but how equal will the runners flow? Some good reading material with just this information is here to give you a good idea: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?3098525-***1.8T-Intake-Manifold-Test-Results***

Notice the Homebrew AEB lower + RMR D plenum. Total flow is much higher than stock but look at runner #1, its seeing far less flow than the other 3, and even they aren’t very close together. That would create a slightly richer combustion in cylinder 1.

So this is where SolidWorks comes into play. I designed the manifold with the AEB lower and the simple D plenum on top and added a 75MM TB to it for an inlet. This is what it looks like. The inlet boundary condition is set to 10lb/s and the outlets are set to ambient pressure.










Notice the turbulence and the uneven flow into the runners.


Now look at what just the tapered plenum after runner #2 and a .5 deg angle on the throttle body does for things.









Same taper on the plenum for the rest, just changing the throttle body angle +2 deg or so each time:

88 Deg










85 Deg










82 Deg










81 Deg










79 deg











You can see how there is a “happy medium” with the throttle body angle. I am thinking between the 85 Deg and the 83 Deg ones would be the best.

Here are the numbers for the surface goals I set too help prove the changes.



















I will pick this up in the next few days. I am finishing up the intake floor tonight by smoothing the transition into the runners and adding some material where its needed. Once that’s finished I am ready to make the final cuts and weld the rest of the plenum up. 

Please feel free to chime in if you see some flaws or think I am on the right path.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

PLEASE do the numbers with full radius bells raised off of the plenum floor


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> PLEASE do the numbers with full radius bells raised off of the plenum floor


Write down the dyno numbers or maybe some timeslips. They are the numbers that count. 

All these flow charts look good from an engineers standpoint but they do not take into account the starting and stopping of the air. Whats done to account for that?


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Build a bunch of manifolds to test changing on variable at a time and I will. I was going to but ended up not having the time at work to do it. I've got a list of about 12 different design variables floating around when you're ready to start cranking them out.

In the mean time, we can at least use what's posted here to get an idea of what works better than others.


What's your opinion on accounting for the starting and stopping of air? BTW, isn't the only time air isn't moving through the manifold is when it's off?


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Build a bunch of manifolds to test changing on variable at a time and I will. I was going to but ended up not having the time at work to do it. I've got a list of about 12 different design variables floating around when you're ready to start cranking them out.
> 
> In the mean time, we can at least use what's posted here to get an idea of what works better than others.
> 
> ...


These flow paths dont account for the valve closing and slamming into the back of the manifold or the redirection to a valve that is open. Its not totally worthless but its nothing I would base a design on.

The most efficient manifold would have a TB on one end of a plenum thats the same size as the volume you intend to have for your displacement. On the other end of the plenum there is a funnel that goes to the back side of the valve with a length that resonates to accent the power in the range of RPM you intend to make power at.

Now go build it (hell build me one too  ).


----------



## weiRtech (Jan 17, 2006)

as mentioned, i'd add some velocity stacks in the plenum as well. i'd also look at adding a transition cone from the tb flange into the plenum. also, add some taper to your runners. all good things!


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

As mentioned I have been using SolidWorks for 3 months. Not NEARLY long enough to understand, gather the needed data, compute and assemble a transient flow simulation. Thats what you are all talking about when it comes to fully simulating the actual flow of an intake manifold with the valves opening and closing, in firing order across the runners.

*
Since your calling me out, I will call you out too. I will pay someone $20 paypal, for them to give me the excel sheet for the transient flow analysis data needed to run the simulation. Firing order, RPM, cam specs and what ever else you need i have.*



Anyways, the correct way to flow test a manifold on a computer, you need the cylinder head also, as well as some length of charge pipe ahead of the throttle body... here is the throttle body.


































































If anyone has an AEB head designed in SW, :wave: maybe kindly pass it on?!?!? :laugh:


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> PLEASE do the numbers with full radius bells raised off of the plenum floor



I can do that and take another snapshot for you.:thumbup:


----------



## weiRtech (Jan 17, 2006)

read through this thread, i'm sure you'll find some good info:
http://forums.hybridz.org/index.php/topic/61549-turbo-intake-plenum/page__hl__+intake++manifold


----------



## otti (Jun 30, 2007)

you get better results when you angle the backplate, check out how i did it


----------



## weiRtech (Jan 17, 2006)

no offense, but that design is pretty awful, you didn't even radius the runner mouths at the plenum floor.

here is the one i am building for my car. the reason for the turndown is hood clearance issues, but the transition cone from the flange to the plenum flows smoothly with no sharp corners.


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

weiRtech said:


> no offense, but that design is pretty awful, you didn't even radius the runner mouths at the plenum floor.
> 
> here is the one i am building for my car. the reason for the turndown is hood clearance issues, but the transition cone from the flange to the plenum flows smoothly with no sharp corners.



No offense, but having a radius isn't enough to KILL an intake design. Yes air will hit a sharp edge and create a low pressure circle of air just under the drop but its not horrid. 

Also your design is using a velocity stack, a different deal than just a radius in. 2 different principals. 




Man there is so much hate out there when it comes to homebrew intake manifolds!


----------



## Bryoc (Apr 24, 2009)

amazing build opcorn:


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

kkkustom said:


> No offense, but having a radius isn't enough to KILL an intake design. Yes air will hit a sharp edge and create a low pressure circle of air just under the drop but its not horrid.
> 
> Also your design is using a velocity stack, a different deal than just a radius in. 2 different principals.
> 
> ...


I like about 1/2" radius around the runners. From what I have seen it works very well and there is no obstruction sticking into the plenum. I have also started messing around with tapered runners and this seems to work very well. I havent dynoed both back to back but I will as soon as I finish my trans.


----------



## Powdered Toast Man (Feb 16, 2010)

kkkustom said:


> Man there is so much hate out there when it comes to homebrew intake manifolds!


man people are ignorant haters.

here is a video of that homebrew manifold in question, the one being hated on. here it made 522 WHP @ 7800 rpm and 28psi with a 35R. otti modified it to suit his needs...... does it work? sure it does. could someone make a better one? sure they can. but can you beat it FOR FREE???? i dont think so.

i happen to know otti very well, and the guy who gave that manifold to him for free sounded like a pretty cool guy too. 

sure, maybe it could have done better, maybe not. but that manifold was made in the earlier 2000's or so. it first was in a Corrado with a 1.8T swap. it made ~325 whp with an all stock motor and 57 trim, and we all know that turbo sucks balls by todays standards. 

so hate on. when you DO something, put it up. but until then, SHUT IT UP.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

If you ask an engineer it will take the latest very expensive software and alot of very expensive hours to build a intake manifold. If you ask your welding supply people what it will take they will tell you that you need a very expensive welder. If you ask your welder it will take hundreds of hours of labor. yea you get the picture :facepalm:

In the end are your results going to be worth the extra cost and complexity? Thats up to you to decide. 

I have an intake manifold thread in another part of the forum and a few people came in bashing what I was doing and I have shown proven results with the way I build my intake manifolds. I was displeased.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Ahem, you were asking for suggestions, input, and criticism and that's what you got. When you heard something you didn't like, you completely dismissed it without any real explanation. You're not the only one who was disappointed


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Ahem, you were asking for suggestions, input, and criticism and that's what you got. When you heard something you didn't like, you completely dismissed it without any real explanation. You're not the only one who was disappointed


I asked for suggestions and you made your case. I told you why I was not going to do it that way. Then you and one other guy jumped in and tried to tell me I was doing it wrong because I wasnt doing it the way you suggest.

The main issue that I have with this type of testing (as well as flow bench testing in general) is that the air does not flow in a continuous manner.The starting and stopping and the backing up into the runner and plenum isnt accounted for. There is more going on here then flow.


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

Powdered Toast Man said:


> man people are ignorant haters.
> 
> here is a video of that homebrew manifold in question, the one being hated on. here it made 522 WHP @ 7800 rpm and 28psi with a 35R. otti modified it to suit his needs...... does it work? sure it does. could someone make a better one? sure they can. but can you beat it FOR FREE???? i dont think so.
> 
> ...


Exactly. I listen to the people that produce results, and laugh at the ones that bench race, and mos tliley have a CIA and exhaust and think they made 50whp+.



TIGninja said:


> I asked for suggestions and you made your case. I told you why I was not going to do it that way. Then you and one other guy jumped in and tried to tell me I was doing it wrong because I wasnt doing it the way you suggest.
> 
> The main issue that I have with this type of testing (as well as flow bench testing in general) is that the air does not flow in a continuous manner.The starting and stopping and the backing up into the runner and plenum isnt accounted for. There is more going on here then flow.


I understand completely. I do realize that the runner length also has a lot to do with the wave that bounces back off the closed valve, up to the plenum and back down hopefully when the valve is back open. I am just not to the point in my knowledge or resource container to put that into my design yet.



As for the transient flow stuff. You took a good leap from your seat and keep bringing that up, yet I still don't believe that you can back up your statements with data. My offer stands, I will pay you for the spread sheet for the data to properly accomplish this. If you always compute this information to test your designs, if I were in your shoes, I would have a nice simple spreadsheet where all I need to do is input the RPMS, pick a firing order, change the cam profiles, etc and spit out the information. Seems like easy money if that were the case. :wave:


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

kkkustom said:


> Exactly. I listen to the people that produce results, and laugh at the ones that bench race, and mos tliley have a CIA and exhaust and think they made 50whp+.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


All the data means nothing. The question you need to answer is how much? How much poower does this gain and is it worth the extra cost. I have two dynos here in the shop and I will give you some actual spreadsheats with some real data that is applicable to what your doing.

Dont get me wrong I think you have a good start but I dont believe you have made any case at all to justify the extra cost.


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

TIGninja said:


> All the data means nothing. The question you need to answer is how much? How much poower does this gain and is it worth the extra cost. I have two dynos here in the shop and I will give you some actual spreadsheats with some real data that is applicable to what your doing.
> 
> Dont get me wrong I think you have a good start but I dont believe you have made any case at all to justify the extra cost.


I dont understand the "extra cost". I am sure like yourself, the labor is free for personal projects. If not I have a hefty bill coming my way! lol Materials are my only cost. Dyno time, machine work, welding... I have at my disposal. My intentions here are not max dyno hp, its knowledge and experience. I have some specific goals ahead of me, and NONE of them have to do with a dyno!

What spreadsheets might you be willing to share? And by the way, please don't take any of my responses are coarse. I am just a simple, say it how it is kind of guy. I get to the point quickly to progress forward. :beer:


----------



## weiRtech (Jan 17, 2006)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> Ahem, you were asking for suggestions, input, and criticism and that's what you got. When you heard something you didn't like, you completely dismissed it without any real explanation. You're not the only one who was disappointed


exactly. pointing out flaws and offering pictorial suggestions on how to improve = hating? wtf?

i'm fed up with trying to offer help to people on forums and getting a slap in the face for it.

i'm done.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

weiRtech said:


> exactly. pointing out flaws and offering pictorial suggestions on how to improve = hating? wtf?
> 
> i'm fed up with trying to offer help to people on forums and getting a slap in the face for it.
> 
> i'm done.


And when I told him why I wasnt doing what he (and others) suggested I do why I wasnt going to do that they got very upset and took offense and went hunting for "proof" they were right and came here for that purpose. And here we are.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

kkkustom said:


> And by the way, please don't take any of my responses are coarse. I am just a simple, say it how it is kind of guy. I get to the point quickly to progress forward. :beer:



Im the same way :beer:


----------



## ALLGORIMSHOW (Jul 1, 2002)




----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

thanks for the useful reply douche


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

kkkustom said:


> thanks for the useful reply douche


Canadians are just pissed off because they always get their asses kicked in the olympics.


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

TIGninja said:


> Canadians are just pissed off because they always get their asses kicked in the olympics.


ROFL... must be their oval shaped floppy heads with black beady eye's.


----------



## ALLGORIMSHOW (Jul 1, 2002)

TIGninja said:


> Canadians are just pissed off because they always get their asses kicked in the olympics.


The only Olympic sport that matters is hockey and I need say more.


----------



## a2lowvw (Dec 17, 2000)

bashing seems to be the not so new trend on many forums. for a while it was okay in the tech forums but even here its no longer safe. people have different ideas and often it comes to a bigger dic contest


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

a2lowvw said:


> bashing seems to be the not so new trend on many forums. for a while it was okay in the tech forums but even here its no longer safe. people have different ideas and often it comes to a bigger dic contest


And now you know why I always win.


----------



## a2lowvw (Dec 17, 2000)

nobody cares about the size of your tig


----------



## Powdered Toast Man (Feb 16, 2010)

TIGninja said:


> And now you know why I always win.


big to Phillipino women. anything looks big to their tiny hands  :laugh:


----------



## zippy_109 (Jun 11, 2002)

Bummer.. Just found this thread and really liked how it started. Sorry to see it decomposed into BS.


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

Annnd boom goes the dynamite 













































































Welding inside was a bitch. I need a stubby gas lenses bad. with the stubby back cap I had just enough room in there to get it done. I am jealous of the watercooled Pyrex torch setups that are all of about an 1.5" long total! 

Either way, this thing is a beast wont blow apart under pressure and will work well. I also might get it flow benched for the heck of it from the shop putting the head together for me. 

Now I can get the fuel rail, and all the plumbing, IC pipes going and inter cooler placement rolling in the car. 

BTW its for sale. $650 :laugh:


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

kkkustom said:


> btw its for sale. $650 :laugh:


 ssssssssh!


----------



## BARELY LEGAL (Jul 2, 2009)

Was it really necessary to weld the inside? Seems like more hassle than just working on penetrating more. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## weiRtech (Jan 17, 2006)

650 for what? there are pin holes all over the edges of your welds on the plenum floor plate at the runners. your welds are cold. there are sharp edges on every transition on the inside. i wouldn't pay more than $50 for that so i could cut the head flange off it and start over.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

weiRtech said:


> 650 for what? there are pin holes all over the edges of your welds on the plenum floor plate at the runners. your welds are cold. there are sharp edges on every transition on the inside. i wouldn't pay more than $50 for that so i could cut the head flange off it and start over.


Its just too small of a machine. Maybe a preheat would help?


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

weiRtech said:


> 650 for what? there are pin holes all over the edges of your welds on the plenum floor plate at the runners. your welds are cold. there are sharp edges on every transition on the inside. i wouldn't pay more than $50 for that so i could cut the head flange off it and start over.


thanks for the comments.

- Please take one of the pics and circle the pin holes, because I don't see any. maybe I am missing something?

- only cold welds would be the one inch spot in the center where the 3 edged met at the T.. and that was a second pass cover because I had ****ty fitment at that point. The rest are 185 amps, 350+ temp on the entire manifold, if anything the beads are too wide and spaced, I somewhat rushed my work I will admit it on this one. You photobucked failed on the other few posts I saw you made so i cant see any more of your work... but http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?4583033-intake-manifold-i-built from the far away pics your welds are just about the same as mine. Mine like i said on this are a little farther spaced, but not cold all over the place. I would trust this thing up to 60psi easy.

- Sharp edges on the transition inside? again I must be missing something, kindly point that out too. The runner entrances are smooth, see bellow for another pic. The only sharp transition edge is the TB plate bore dumping into the plenum... not much I can do about that.

not even going to fight back on the $50 comment. :sly:




TIGninja said:


> Its just too small of a machine. Maybe a preheat would help?


It was preheated to 350 in the oven, and it was done on a 185 TA ArcMaster. Butt joints were beveled too. I welded the inside too for a little extra. meat. prior to the inside welding it was well penetrated. But yeah a 250+ would have been nice.



BARELY LEGAL said:


> Was it really necessary to weld the inside? Seems like more hassle than just working on penetrating more. Just my 2 cents.


see above. :beer:


----------



## BARELY LEGAL (Jul 2, 2009)

Thanks, just wondering.


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

BARELY LEGAL said:


> Thanks, just wondering.


NP. its just best practice I guess. A little more reassurance that it wont split under 35+ psi we will run, and it really isnt that awful to get in there with a short tig back cap, and a stubby lense cup. Liquid cooled micro torch would be ideal though.


----------



## A2 16v Gli (Oct 14, 2002)

If you look at INA's first intake manifold test. you can see the highest flowing cfm manifolds have the angled throttle body plate. 

Good work:thumbup:


----------



## 1.8TRabbit (Nov 15, 2004)

Hey KKK, So is the adjustment with the 88* the most efficient then? Or am I looking at it incorrectly? :thumbup:


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

1.8TRabbit said:


> Hey KKK, So is the adjustment with the 88* the most efficient then? Or am I looking at it incorrectly? :thumbup:


thats what it seems like to me, with the taper i designed in the plenum. I like the smooth flow, not too much turbulence, and a decent velocity increase into runner 3&4. Data for the outlet mass flow were are dayum even. so thats what I went with. :beer:


----------



## 1.8TRabbit (Nov 15, 2004)

kkkustom said:


> thats what it seems like to me, with the taper i designed in the plenum. I like the smooth flow, not too much turbulence, and a decent velocity increase into runner 3&4. Data for the outlet mass flow were are dayum even. so thats what I went with. :beer:


Just making sure I understood the flow patterns, etc. :beer::beer:


----------



## kamahao112 (Nov 17, 2007)

i got a couple of manifolds i can send to you if you wanna flow/bench test against yours :thumbup:


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

what TB flange is on there? Once my car is up and running I would take you up on that offer. I have unlimited dyno resources and would love to test them and get some hard facts.


----------



## kamahao112 (Nov 17, 2007)

both are 80mm hemi tb flanges .. :thumbup:


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

kamahao112 said:


> both are 80mm hemi tb flanges .. :thumbup:


Big gulps huh boys..... little Super Troopers humor




I have one of them kicking around. look out for a PM in a few months once the cars runnin!


----------



## mk4ko4 (Aug 3, 2010)

i was just wondering what head you are going to put behind that manifold? Great job by the way, i rele enjoyed the tread


----------



## kamahao112 (Nov 17, 2007)

kkkustom said:


> Big gulps huh boys..... little Super Troopers humor
> 
> 
> 
> ...


do i look like a cat meow ?????


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)




----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

Saw this over on HT. Any input? 


















http://www.honda-tech.com/showthread.php?t=2770869


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

nice work TIGNinja... did you bend that on a break yourself? what thickness material?


that stepped one looks cool, but i would think with the drop down on each step its going to create a circle of air falling off it, just looks rather turbulent in there thats all. air flow doesn't like edges bends or steep drops.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

kkkustom said:


> nice work TIGNinja... did you bend that on a break yourself? what thickness material?
> 
> 
> that stepped one looks cool, but i would think with the drop down on each step its going to create a circle of air falling off it, just looks rather turbulent in there thats all. air flow doesn't like edges bends or steep drops.


Its 1/8". We have a big break at the shop and this is the thickest stuff I dared try to bend


----------



## kkkustom (Jun 5, 2007)

TIGninja said:


> Its 1/8". We have a big break at the shop and this is the thickest stuff I dared try to bend


i hear yeah. we have a lil Grizzly break, need to put a lil more nutt behind it to bend 1/8th but it will do it.

what do you use for ac settings for 1/8th if you dont mind sharing? I usually crank the freq up high to keep a stable arc no pulse and about 28% cleaning, 3/32 #8 gas lenses gold tungsten around 125 amps about continuous the whole time.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

kkkustom said:


> i hear yeah. we have a lil Grizzly break, need to put a lil more nutt behind it to bend 1/8th but it will do it.
> 
> what do you use for ac settings for 1/8th if you dont mind sharing? I usually crank the freq up high to keep a stable arc no pulse and about 28% cleaning, 3/32 #8 gas lenses gold tungsten around 125 amps about continuous the whole time.




Yea about 125 amps. I use regular cups for aluminum and usually whatever size is closest to the machine im using (im lazy  ). As far as settings goes I dont really care. Whatever the machine is set at :laugh:

I know all the welding nerds think there is some sort of magical machine setting for everything but if you know how to weld it will turn out good no matter what the machine is set at.


----------



## syntax (Oct 26, 2010)

totally a left field question, but is there any particular reason nobody smooths the welds on their custom manifolds? I'm not aluminum fabricator by any means, but that's the first thing I did with mine. but that's probably because my car will never be fast, so I make it pretty instead.


----------



## Pat @ Pitt Soundworks (Nov 14, 2008)

1) smoothing welds is purely cosmetic. I, for one, like the look of a good weld bead. 
2) if you don't weld both sides of the intake manifold (most don't), the reinforcement adds a little extra strength.


----------



## A2 16v Gli (Oct 14, 2002)

ya the pyrex gas lense i have measure a heavy inch and a half.. and i put flat cap on back of torch and i can get in anywhere.. plus the pyrex you can see through.. makes a difference i think


----------



## kamahao112 (Nov 17, 2007)




----------



## rabbit_gti (Jan 14, 2004)

That's an old project I'm about to finish... Composite intake ; lost mandrel for inner smoothness, it's for a 16V but I'll do one for AEB if the shape turns out to be a good design.

I just need to machine the flanges than i'm ready to flow bench it


----------



## kamahao112 (Nov 17, 2007)

wow very nice:thumbup:


----------



## rabbit_gti (Jan 14, 2004)

Thanks


----------



## kandst (Mar 10, 2008)

sick intakes


----------

