# My new intake manifold.



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Which side should I put the throttle body? The last one I built for the car had it on the passenger side and that seemed to work well but im trying to clean up the engine bay.


----------



## MonkeyBusiness (Jun 11, 2009)

are you going to be running your current turbo manifold? If so why not stick with what you have?


----------



## tdogg74 (Mar 1, 2002)

I always suggest driver's side. Air doesn't like 90' turns. Relocate your battery.


----------



## VeeDoubleYouGuy (Nov 4, 2003)

nice coolant tank :thumbup: 
nice coil pack setup :thumbup:


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

MonkeyBusiness said:


> are you going to be running your current turbo manifold? If so why not stick with what you have?


 Actually Im selling it all. I would like to keep it as a package because it all works so well together. The ABA here made 373whp and 325wtq on ~21lbs. I will be using the money from the sale of this to push the streetable ABA over 500whp.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

So then everyone agrees this is a good style?


----------



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

I would say flip the plenum so the angled part goes to the head and the flat portion (where the runners are now) is at the front of the runners to equalize the distance between bell mouth and plenum wall, but that's just how theory goes.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> I would say flip the plenum so the angled part goes to the head and the flat portion (where the runners are now) is at the front of the runners to equalize the distance between bell mouth and plenum wall, but that's just how theory goes.


Im a little confused by where your going with this. Move the throttle body?


----------



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

If you're going with a small plenum or runners whose plenum wall is within 2x their diameter then this design will help to equalize the effective pulses between cylinders (ex: so cyl1 isn't more powerful than cyl4)










If you go with a "tall" plenum going towards the rad support that shouldn't as much as a concern (like this but with the opposite side plenum wall closer to the radiator)









Or just go with a dual-plenum style and get the best of all worlds


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> If you're going with a small plenum or runners whose plenum wall is within 2x their diameter then this design will help to equalize the effective pulses between cylinders (ex: so cyl1 isn't more powerful than cyl4)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The only reason you would ever want to limit yourself with a dual plenum manifold on a turbo car is if you are forced to use a restrictor plate. The slots in a dual plenum manifold are designed to be most effective at one certain flow level. More then that they choke the system and less then that they add more turbulence and dont really do much else. 

Im really not sold on having velocity stacks sticking up into the flow either. I think they do more harm then good by creating more turbulence in the plenum.


----------



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

See the area on the connection on dual plenum is never less than 100% of tb area. Plus the physics at 1atm is the same as 2atm.

There's a guy modeling up manifolds in Nub_VR's thread. Maybe I can see if he can whip up a couple designs real quick.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> See the area on the connection on dual plenum is never less than 100% of tb area. Plus the physics at 1atm is the same as 2atm.
> 
> There's a guy modeling up manifolds in Nub_VR's thread. Maybe I can see if he can whip up a couple designs real quick.


Putting another restriction in the path of the airflow is going to cause turbulence and extra restriction and loose power. The only thing that modeling of an intake will do is point out a really poor design where you have one of the runners hiding around the corner from the throttle body. You can do the same thing by bolting on the throttle body and peeking in to see if you can see all the holes


----------



## Dave926 (Mar 30, 2005)

Just run it on crome w/honda management.
/thread


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Dave926 said:


> Just run it on crome w/honda management.
> /thread


Dont get all salty dave or I will tell them you were over here and they will get jealous and ban you again


----------



## tdogg74 (Mar 1, 2002)

TIGninja said:


> Im really not sold on having velocity stacks sticking up into the flow either. I think they do more harm then good by creating more turbulence in the plenum.


Wrong. Stacks elevated from the plenum floor increase your air velocity into the bell mouth 2-3% over bell mounts flush to the plenum floor. What also shows an increase is the use of a bell mouth with a (machined) rounded edge as opposed to a bell mouth with just a simple pressed radii. 

And that pic is _not_ a dual plenum manifold....this is....


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

tdogg74 said:


> Wrong. Stacks elevated from the plenum floor increase your air velocity into the bell mouth 2-3% over bell mounts flush to the plenum floor. What also shows an increase is the use of a bell mouth with a (machined) rounded edge as opposed to a bell mouth with just a simple pressed radii.
> 
> And that pic is _not_ a dual plenum manifold....this is....


Where did you get this info? And 2-3% doesnt justify the extra cost as far as im concerned. 2hp on your NA car is not worth $200 plus labor.

High HP cars very seldom use dual plenum (formula1 cars).Why is that? Because its not worth the trouble. The dual plenum showed up about the same time as the restrictor plate and it was meant to make the most out of limited flow.


----------



## tdogg74 (Mar 1, 2002)

Its called reading books on the subject. (aka: research)

And I posted that pic of my old manifold to provide an example of a dual plenum manifold. 

Not trying to call anyone out here, just trying to provide accurate info. :thumbup:


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

tdogg74 said:


> Its called reading books on the subject. (aka: research)
> 
> And I posted that pic of my old manifold to provide an example of a dual plenum manifold.
> 
> Not trying to call anyone out here, just trying to provide accurate info. :thumbup:


Its called hypothesis and to make it accurate into need to pass theory and then requires some sort of testing to become fact 

The whole idea is to equal out flow in a bad manifold design. You will see gains over a bad design but if you have a good design to begin with not so much. My old manifold for instance has the TB turned to the runners and then has tapered runners with a nice radius on the plenum floor. I think this design would be pretty tough to beat and it shows on the dynos.


----------



## tdogg74 (Mar 1, 2002)

Whatever works for you. :thumbup:


----------



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

TIGninja said:


> My old manifold for instance has the TB turned to the runners and then has tapered runners with a nice radius on the plenum floor. I think this design would be pretty tough to beat and it shows on the dynos.


See you can't claim that HYPOTHESIS without testing different designs changing one variable at a time 


The dual plenum is to help equalize flow using a side entrance. I fail to see how decreasing the plenum diameter from the throttle body diameter to a fixed point while redirecting it in to an area with more surface area than the original inlet is a restriction.

Here's an interesting picture showing a side entrance manifold with the reverse plenum taper I was talking about 
http://blogs.cobbtuning.com/christian/?p=15

and again here (top of page AND bottom of page)
http://www.motorworldhype.com/tag/intake-manifold/


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> See you can't claim that HYPOTHESIS without testing different designs changing one variable at a time
> 
> 
> The dual plenum is to help equalize flow using a side entrance. I fail to see how decreasing the plenum diameter from the throttle body diameter to a fixed point while redirecting it in to an area with more surface area than the original inlet is a restriction.
> ...


And all the dual plenum 2l manifolds that were built. Wheres the power? Whos making power with these overly complicated and very expensive manifolds? My manifold is making power but I still think there is more there.


----------



## tdogg74 (Mar 1, 2002)

:wave: I did.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

tdogg74 said:


> :wave: I did.


How much?


----------



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

145 na stock compression, right?

You saying you're making power with your manifold is like saying Q is making power with his, and you saw his "bells" right? Love ya Q


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Pat @ Pitt Soundworks said:


> 145 na stock compression, right?
> 
> You saying you're making power with your manifold is like saying Q is making power with his, and you saw his "bells" right? Love ya Q


I did it at 21lbs with a much smaller turbo.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

And 145na is very inpressive.


----------



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

it's still apples to oranges. i was just saying look at his runners and the power he's making


----------



## tdogg74 (Mar 1, 2002)

142whp
Stock size valves and bore
10.7:1 CR
288* cam profile


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Here are some of mine. I know I need to turn up the boost but I was out of fuel because the stock fuel pump was done.


----------



## Dave926 (Mar 30, 2005)

hows the seatbelt ticket?


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

tdogg74 said:


> 142whp
> Stock size valves and bore
> 10.7:1 CR
> 288* cam profile


Do you still have this car? Im curious to see what a better flowing manifold will do.


----------



## tdogg74 (Mar 1, 2002)

Lol


----------



## Dave926 (Mar 30, 2005)

Its mad crispy yo!:laugh:


----------



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

I thought the manifold was floating around the classifieds for a while


----------



## tdogg74 (Mar 1, 2002)

It was. Don't know if it ever got sold again. Wish I had it back in my posession though.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Well here is the start anyways.


----------



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

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...-2.0-ABA-(tdogg-s-last-one)&highlight=aba+sri


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

I got some more work done on my manifold last night after work. I will post up some more pics after work today.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)




----------



## tdogg74 (Mar 1, 2002)

Why no ram-pipe???


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

tdogg74 said:


> Why no ram-pipe???


How much of a gain does this give?


----------



## tdogg74 (Mar 1, 2002)

Seriously? You didn't put any thought into the design of this thing, did you?

http://www.grapeaperacing.com/tech/inductionsystems.pdf


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

tdogg74 said:


> Seriously? You didn't put any thought into the design of this thing, did you?
> 
> http://www.grapeaperacing.com/tech/inductionsystems.pdf


Again I am going to ask you the same question. Can you prove that this will add anything and if so how much?


----------



## tdogg74 (Mar 1, 2002)

Of course it will....its part and parcel to the design of an SRI. How much gain depends on how you design it around your power goals. Its just one part in many in designing one of these things.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Are they worth spending the money on? How much HP will this gain?


----------



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

eleventy billion


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

I have heard 2% is the number passed around. How much is 2-3hp worth?


----------



## Zorba2.0 (Jan 28, 2005)

6000rpm = 13" ram pipe? So for my peak rpm of 7k I should have a 11.3" ram pipe. Yikes.

I guess you could always mount your throttle body 10" ahead of the manifold in the middle of the boost tubes, lol.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Zorba2.0 said:


> 6000rpm = 13" ram pipe? So for my peak rpm of 7k I should have a 11.3" ram pipe. Yikes.
> 
> I guess you could always mount your throttle body 10" ahead of the manifold in the middle of the boost tubes, lol.


Dont forget your carb spacer.LOL


----------



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

Zorba2.0 said:


> 6000rpm = 13" ram pipe? So for my peak rpm of 7k I should have a 11.3" ram pipe. Yikes.
> 
> I guess you could always mount your throttle body 10" ahead of the manifold in the middle of the boost tubes, lol.


Don't forget you have just over 3" inside the head. That 13/11.3" is from the opening of the bell/trumpet/whatever to the valve face. 9.5" isn't too bad.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

The ram pipe goes from the TB to the plenum.


----------



## TIGninja (Mar 21, 2010)

Ok for anyone whos actually paying attention here. This manifold is designed with a total intake runner (includes head) of ~ 9.5in,1.5" dia intake runner and 2.5l plenum. The stock manifold is ~ 12in runner,1.3" dia and 1l plenum.

The stock manifold seems to be tuned in the 4000- 4500rpm range in every calculator I can find.Take the 1.75 inches per 1000 rpm formula Add 1400rpm on the stock rpm and thats where this manifold will peak resonance.


----------



## readytosoar (Dec 9, 2007)

tignija is the wizard with the best sleeve. sell me crap


----------

