4.6 intake manifold?
- Thread starter Bluextc
- Start date
Mr Jones 4.6
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2007
- Messages
- 707
- Reaction score
- 0
Im looking into the Trickflow for future mods. I love the way it looks too!! Either way if I was to get one I would port match and do a little polishing just to get even more out of it why I was at it.
Im still waiting for a perfect intake to come out for N/A motors.....hehehehe
Keyword = "waiting"
Im still waiting for a perfect intake to come out for N/A motors.....hehehehe
Keyword = "waiting"
Jrgunn5150
Post Whore
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2007
- Messages
- 12,273
- Reaction score
- 2
bLuE x said:
Jeff and I both volunteered our car's fot testing on that month's ago, neither one of use was even contacted, and I literally lived like 30 minutes from them. They are blowing smoke. Get the P51, but remember you need new fuel rails with it. That's why I like the Trickflow, and it looks cool :coolsmiley:
I am looking into the Logan Motorsports intake manifold. http://loganmotorsports.com/logan_manifold.html It is pricey like the P51 but everything I have read about folks that have used, they are making really good power.
Jrgunn5150
Post Whore
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2007
- Messages
- 12,273
- Reaction score
- 2
The owner posted his Dyno sheet with 11:1, VT stage II cams, long tubes and that intake, he was at like 325 rwhp. Not too shabby, and sheetmeteal intakes = :boink:
Here is a thread on ModularMisfits.com about one the combos that they offer for NA motors. http://www.modularmisfits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5006
We have set this package up to be just as durable as the average head/cam 2V. The camshaft is not excessive, with lift at only .545 and the lobe only slightly more agressive than say, a Comp 278 grind. The heads are also different from the average ported PI heads, basically we profiled the port and chamber to be more effective above 6000 rpm. The engine tested here is stock displacement, to represent the worst case scenario power wise. The engine has alittle over 12:1 compression, and was tested on 100 octane Mobil.
This is a comparison graph of a bone stock 5-speed PI GT to the engine mentioned above. I did this to give a referance point, as I have seen stock dyno pulls of PI GTs that claim 230 whp. On our dyno it made 203 rwhp and 259 lb-ft, so you can see it is conservative. Our engine combination made 376 whp and 339 lb-ft. Notice the large 1800 rpm spread between peak horsepower and peak torque, and the engine is still making 368 whp at 7500 rpm. It is also suprisingly strong in the low to middle RPM ranges, making 280 lb-ft by 3100 rpm. It is impressive that a head/cam/intake/exhaust package made 173 more whp and 80 more lb-ft without adding a single ci. The test car still had a stock crank damper, stock steel flywheel, stock T-45 trans, stock driveshaft, and stock 8.8 rearend with 4.30 gears. From a cost standpoint it really starts to bring into question the idea of building a 4V. Although this setup isn't really cheap, it's also much cheaper than doing a 4V. With the lack of good 4V intakes you wouldn't make much more power than this unless you went with an FR500 or a Sullivan, both of which require big RPM to make power. That means more breakage and more expensive valvetrain parts. Titanium locks and retainers for a 4V aren't cheap at all. Factor in the reduced weight on the nose of the car, lower center of gravity, and recuced repair costs and it starts to really make sense.
Also think about the performance potential. You are probably talking about 11.20's-11.30's in a decent 3000lb mustang, and probably high 10's in a well set up car. It also means that there is potential for well over 400 rwhp with more displacement and more aggressive cams. This is without resorting to expensive and rare SVO parts and without sacrificing durability. Hell, you could pedal it to the local cruise night on 93 octane if you just pull some timing out of it and don't beat on it (trust me, we did it).
We have set this package up to be just as durable as the average head/cam 2V. The camshaft is not excessive, with lift at only .545 and the lobe only slightly more agressive than say, a Comp 278 grind. The heads are also different from the average ported PI heads, basically we profiled the port and chamber to be more effective above 6000 rpm. The engine tested here is stock displacement, to represent the worst case scenario power wise. The engine has alittle over 12:1 compression, and was tested on 100 octane Mobil.
This is a comparison graph of a bone stock 5-speed PI GT to the engine mentioned above. I did this to give a referance point, as I have seen stock dyno pulls of PI GTs that claim 230 whp. On our dyno it made 203 rwhp and 259 lb-ft, so you can see it is conservative. Our engine combination made 376 whp and 339 lb-ft. Notice the large 1800 rpm spread between peak horsepower and peak torque, and the engine is still making 368 whp at 7500 rpm. It is also suprisingly strong in the low to middle RPM ranges, making 280 lb-ft by 3100 rpm. It is impressive that a head/cam/intake/exhaust package made 173 more whp and 80 more lb-ft without adding a single ci. The test car still had a stock crank damper, stock steel flywheel, stock T-45 trans, stock driveshaft, and stock 8.8 rearend with 4.30 gears. From a cost standpoint it really starts to bring into question the idea of building a 4V. Although this setup isn't really cheap, it's also much cheaper than doing a 4V. With the lack of good 4V intakes you wouldn't make much more power than this unless you went with an FR500 or a Sullivan, both of which require big RPM to make power. That means more breakage and more expensive valvetrain parts. Titanium locks and retainers for a 4V aren't cheap at all. Factor in the reduced weight on the nose of the car, lower center of gravity, and recuced repair costs and it starts to really make sense.
Also think about the performance potential. You are probably talking about 11.20's-11.30's in a decent 3000lb mustang, and probably high 10's in a well set up car. It also means that there is potential for well over 400 rwhp with more displacement and more aggressive cams. This is without resorting to expensive and rare SVO parts and without sacrificing durability. Hell, you could pedal it to the local cruise night on 93 octane if you just pull some timing out of it and don't beat on it (trust me, we did it).
Jrgunn5150
Post Whore
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2007
- Messages
- 12,273
- Reaction score
- 2
Well now I wanna know why he doesn't run that combo on his own motor? Kinda fishy to me. I'm gonna ask him I guess, since I don't think he's registered here.
Schiffy
Well-Known Member
I didn't read through this post, as it's a lot of stuff, and i'm lazy, but i will comment... I partook in building a H/C/I '04 GT, the Typhoon was used(even though i said not to) and the power output was absolutely worthless... I would go out on a limb to say you're stock intake will flow better than the Typhoon.
My question is, whats wrong with the Bullitt? the Bullit intake is a BEAST! a little port and polish and it will flow as good or better than any other intake made for a daily driver 2V mod motor car. it's reliable(as you've seen over the last 7 years) it's still a little pricey, but all in all. it's good performance, it's not going to explode like a stock one would, and with a little P&P it will flow some great numbers...
My question is, whats wrong with the Bullitt? the Bullit intake is a BEAST! a little port and polish and it will flow as good or better than any other intake made for a daily driver 2V mod motor car. it's reliable(as you've seen over the last 7 years) it's still a little pricey, but all in all. it's good performance, it's not going to explode like a stock one would, and with a little P&P it will flow some great numbers...
Schiffy
Well-Known Member
The thing about the Bullitt is it's hard to find, or expensive. but if you get your hands on one... it's worth it in the end.
Jrgunn5150
Post Whore
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2007
- Messages
- 12,273
- Reaction score
- 2
jfor441 said:
I know, but his own car is N/A, that combo they are hocking seems a little extreme for a DD, even though i recall them billing it as such.
I'm not bashing him, he's a helpful guy, I'm just questioning is all.
J.R. said:
He specifies that the build is for racing.
"Something that say, a bracket racer or a modular muscle racer would be interested in."
He doesn't even mention it as a DD, but he did mention you could drive it to the track if you take out timing and don't get on it.
Your use of your car needs to be chosen, or you have to decide how much performance in each area you are willing to give up. How much road manners are you willing to sacrifice for a car that does pretty good on the track but not as good as it could?
For the road you need an engine that can fill the cylinders efficiently at low and mid RPM. To do this you need to maintain air flow velocity. This is what gives you torque to pull out into traffic and a good idle with vacuum to run vacuum actuated accessories, if your car uses them. In a high RPM race engine you need to be able to flow a volume of air in a short amount of time in order to fill the cylinders. This requires a larger intake flow, in cross section, to be able to move a greater volume of air in a shorter amount of time. This is where top end power comes from. Low RPM torque is lost as the velocity needed cannot be achieved. The flow path is not efficient at low RPM.
Think of it as when you buy a Pepsi from a fast food restaurant. Some places have large diameter straws take forever for you to get a mouthful of pop while you suck all the air out of it. Other straws are narrow and seem to rocket the liquid to the back of your throat, almost choking you. Same thing with your intake manifold and heads, N/A.
These are the physics you have to account for when choosing how you are going to build your engine. That's why there is no engine combo for low end torque and high end HP. There are physics that cannot be discounted.
Another choice you may have is getting your intake extrude honed. This will open up the runners and still maintain the geometry of the runners. Just a thought.
Steve
I used that in another forum and it really seemed to help put it into perspective for people. I've got 3 kids so I am used to finding things people can relate to in order to understand a new concept. 
I forgot to mention, the extrude honing would only be for an aluminum intake.
Steve
I forgot to mention, the extrude honing would only be for an aluminum intake.
Steve
