intake manifold

2002_lincolnLS

2002_lincolnLS

Custom User Title
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Messages
3,665
Reaction score
29
Location
canton
So I was playing with Inventor this past weekend and i came up with a sweet design for a Fabricated Intake Manifold. It would look pretty beastly under the hood.

Really a lot of the parts can be bought here then just require cutting and welding. http://www.spturbo.com/onlinestore/

anyways check it out.

I made the runners from CF, just because, probably would not in real life.

I plan to work on it some more this week and see what I can come up with

front intake.jpg


front close.jpg


back.jpg


plenum.jpg
 
Except it would have NO low end torque and make the car even more of a dog
 
Intake manifolds are tuned, not just air-delivery systems.
 
I don't know that, that would be an issue. From what I understand as long as your intake manifold volume is not more than doubling your engine displacement you are good, as well as long as it is not quite less than about double there shouldn't be an issue with starving the motor. I mean if you have knowledge about Intake manifold design please share it.
 
2002_lincolnLS said:
Where's Hite when you need him he could probably make this
Click to expand...

Send me the project file and anything can be done...for a price! Pretty sweet design but you forgot the IAC and intake temp sensor as well as the valve cover breather tubes in your design....i'm just sayin...
 
2002_lincolnLS said:
I don't know that, that would be an issue. From what I understand as long as your intake manifold volume is not more than doubling your engine displacement you are good, as well as long as it is not quite less than about double there shouldn't be an issue with starving the motor. I mean if you have knowledge about Intake manifold design please share it.
Click to expand...

There is ALOT more to an intake manifold than meets the eye.. Runner length and volume are critical for each application..

It's one thing to make an intake to make max power at 7000 rpm, but it is a whole different ballgame to get it to make torque down low as well. This is why many car's have IMRC's which are butterfly valves that shut off part of the runner length at higher rpm to give you a short runner, while they stay open normally to give you longer runners..

Like I said, the science behind it is incredible.. There are more variables that directly relate such as cam timing as well, which is why a camshaft it so closely tied to intake manifold choice.


But cool looking design :) Looks very viper-esque
 
Learned in the past month that engine/car component design is an art form as much as it is engineering.
 
I don't know about anyone else's car but my IMRCs stay closed until 3500ish rpms. Deletes can be used which eliminates the IMRCs entirely and keeps the pathway open at all rpms but steep gears and a tune are pretty much essential unless you want the car to fall flat on its face at the low-end. Adding a stall converter would even further minimize the effects of the deletes. Actually a decent amount of power can be made at the top end with deletes and no noticeable effects down low if it is done right and properly tuned.
 
hite337 said:
Send me the project file and anything can be done...for a price! Pretty sweet design but you forgot the IAC and intake temp sensor as well as the valve cover breather tubes in your design....i'm just sayin...
Click to expand...

Yeah, not complete yet, this is just the general concept. Really the TB's and a couple other parts are generic and only there to show you there will be one there.

The prefab parts aren't to expensive from that site I posted, so if it is a total flop oh well. I plan to research some more about this stuff as i by no means know everything about it.

Hoping more people here can chip in with actual knowledge of this stuff. I can make just about anything in Inventor (few years of experience) this only took me a couple days so a redesign based on new knowledge is no issue.

Once I have the general concept made with the proper design and function, i will then spend a decent amount of time making it perfect to the engine dimensions and so on, this as a concept is just very close, not perfect.

I am going to try to go to pull a part when it gets warmer and get an OEM intake manifold to use for dimensions.
 
blwnbyu said:
There is ALOT more to an intake manifold than meets the eye.. Runner length and volume are critical for each application..

It's one thing to make an intake to make max power at 7000 rpm, but it is a whole different ballgame to get it to make torque down low as well. This is why many car's have IMRC's which are butterfly valves that shut off part of the runner length at higher rpm to give you a short runner, while they stay open normally to give you longer runners..

Like I said, the science behind it is incredible.. There are more variables that directly relate such as cam timing as well, which is why a camshaft it so closely tied to intake manifold choice.


But cool looking design :) Looks very viper-esque
Click to expand...

I was reading about this the other day, from what I understand a longer duration cam will need to result in a smaller plenum as the loss of vacuum will make it take too long to fill the plenum when under load. I figure I won't have much to deal with this as there are no cams available, and the cost to make a set wouldn't justify the increase, although perhaps matched to a nice intake it may.

This may be what we want to look at.

Thanks, I enjoy the look as well
 
IIRC the original SHO Yamaha V6 had 2 sets of runners. The shorts were effective for high rpm power while the longs were for the low end torque. I don't remember when it switched over but that engine was somewhat Jeckyll and Hyde and had a big dead spot in the curve during certain conditions. There should be plenty of literature on the workings of that setup on the net. Not sure but I think the LS V6 borrowed some of the concepts.
 
LS4me said:
Interestingly, the 3.0L in the '96 Sable we owned had the dual intake runners and the '00 LS does not.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think they found some other way to do it. May have been VVT or something.
 
So I am thinking, does it really need IAC's what did the Gen II do to over come the need of the IAC. If I can just use the TB of my choice, I can upgrade to a larger one. The key part of that will be to find one that I can work with in regards to the TPS sensor.

Also I am thinking I should optimize for low end torque, seeing as that is where I would use the power the most, if I take it to the strip, that is what I will use most. That is also where the car can benefit the most
 
so looking at other designs, I see some have runners that actually go up into the Plenum, I am not entirely sure what the benefit would be other than fitting a longer runner in a small space.

manifold-1.jpg


Intake-Manifold-Design3.jpg
 
2002_lincolnLS said:
So I am thinking, does it really need IAC's what did the Gen II do to over come the need of the IAC. ...
Click to expand...

Yes, you need an IAC, and if you split the intake (bad idea, but that has been mentioned), you'll have to have some way to evenly divide the air from the IAC.
Gen II avoids having an IAC because of the electronic throttle. At idle, the throttle itself is opened and closed slightly to control engine idle speed.
 
Joe,

Thank you, was just wondering. Perhaps a single plenum design would be better. I will be doing more research.


Found this info

The way that I understand it is that in a tuned intake system A pulse or wave of compressed air is created when the intake valve closes, which bounces off of the closed valve and travels back up the intake runner. This wave then reflects back off the inside of the plenum and travels back down the intake runner. The idea is to tune the manifold so that this reflected pulse arrives at the intake valve just as it is opening thus improving cylinder filling.

The wavelength of the reflected pulse is determined by the runner length among other things, with longer intake runners yielding a longer wavelength. This results in the wave hitting the valve at a lower RPM thus improving low end torque. While a short runner design decreases the pulse duration making it coincedent with the valve opening at a higher RPM thus moving the torque further up into the power band.

This is how I understand it and it may not be completly accurate, so feel free to correct me. I am designing a FFIM right now and my philosophy is to use the bottom part of the stock manifold, since the runner length was designed to be length it is based on dyno testing by Toyota. I am also looking to keep the same plenum volume as stock, although I don't think this is as big of an issue. Basically I plan to keep the fairly long runners because the 7M doesnt operate at very high RPMs anyway, and it seems best to have it tuned for a RPM range that is in the usefull powerband.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 296 (members: 0, guests: 296)
Back
Top