2GNT.com Forums - Viewing message

Interested In Advertising with 2GNT?

Printer-friendly copy

Email this topic to a friend

3 Users in Chat

Top

2GNT Technical

Turbo/Nitrous Tech

topic #106387

View in linear mode

Subject: "RE: new /"

Previous topic | Next topic

bullettdsm	May-10-09 09:51 AM
Donating 2GNT member 2676 posts,

#106412, "RE: new /"
In response to In response to 24
May-10-09 09:54 AM by bullettdsm

Let me see if I can field these;

Originally posted by Black Cotton
the cuts u did on the stock manifold, to mate to the plenum looks similar to what i origionally tried on my first shot. however i had clearance issues with the alternator bracket and my upper plenum.

Yup, we had conversations about that bracket. An area of concern, but judging from the NA intake, I think we'll be fine. If not then time to "clearance" heh heh.

Originally posted by Black Cottonwhat is the volume size of that plenum, roughly in Liters.

Good questions. This is an area where we are slightly apart (Mike and I). We've got 3.7 liters, which is a litle big for me. In comparison terms, the OBX is 4.0 liters (like the Venom) But different runner config and flow characteristics. Also, my thought processes are with my NA head

. But boost flow/theory/characteristics are a bit different. So that's a "we'll see how she works in real life" position.

Originally posted by Black Cotton also i questioned the removal of the injector vorex' because the were origionally designed to allow the injector pintles enough time to get a wide enough spray pattern before air divergences collapsed the atomization. so no knocking just curiosity as to power lost or gained. for my manifold i was abled to carbide flex hone all the runners to 68mm and leave the injector vortex' in the manifold, only becuase i wasnt 100% of their actual real world efficiency. however if you have some experience insight on why they dont have to be there, then the port job you do, seems fantastic!

I'm a firm proponent in removal of the humps. This is done on a regular basis on the Neon application (of course that, in itself, doesn't mean all that much). I see the narrowing of the channel (especially in a boosted application) as being more of a hinderance to the movement of the air than a problem for atomization. As I understand it with our heads, a lot of the "swirl" need to generate the small airborne particles of gas, is designed within the head intake port/chamber. I understand your concern for atomization, but I think they are overplayed (not your concerns but the necessity of retention). But I can see the thought process behind it (and I'll throw in for good measure that a guy by the name of Eddie Fierro does this with his heads. So I'm figuring "good company", lol)

And Mike, I didn't say it before but she looks beautiful. Looking forward to trying it on for size

Also, If I spoke out of turn on any of this Mike, please correct me.

Captain Caveman

96 RS Turbo 11.414 @ 119.62 MSNS, Crower 2 NA cams, BW366, 10.5 comp, UDP, 60mm TB, W/A intercooler, 3.55 tranny 567.9whp 430tq
97 RS NA 13.188 @ 103.87 MSnS powered 12.5 comp, Crower 3's and 219.4whp with 175tq
98 RS DD 12.5 comp on stock ECU, LTH, Crower 2's, Koni, GC, Hypercoil, DG hats
99 OZ 5sp Stocker 15.856 @ 85.97
99 GS stocker auto 17.7@77mph!

wiki home page:http://www.2gnt.com/index.php?d=bullettdsm

Report This Post to Admin

Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote