Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

nothing stops the power its just like anything, once you start doing good numbers, you can design something that will suit the purpose better. As an example back in the 90's every hi-po vl was pushing 400rwkw from a 68mm ford throttle body. As another example at 10inches of water a 50mm round hole can flow 250cfm, a 65mm hole can flow 450cfm. Your intercooler will be a resriction well before a plenum or throttle body will; a good 300x600 core flows around 300cfm!!!

However this said once you are doing the numbers, it can be improved on, mainly the fact the standard item is so heavy on the middle cylinders in airflow.... I have not seen any strong evidence to this day that will suggest the standard plenum has a limit on how much power it will support....but as I mentioned you can always improve on things so if you have built the motor, got a top notch management system, big turbo and the right auxillary's then look at some plenum upgrades.. Probably a waste of time till then

Cheers

Edited by Fitzpatrick Speed Works

so how bad is the heat soak in the piping crossing the engine? Has anyone ever tested the standard piping route to see just how much it heats the intake charge ?

That and the lesser lag would motivate me to go for a front facing plenum.

Would the effects be negligable considering after a good bit of hot running I can still quite comfortably leave a hand on that intake piping just infront of the throttle.

This subject has been covered so many times. Sydneykid once laid out all the calculations of the speed of the air as it goes through you piping and the air is in the hot pipe for such a tiny amount of time that it doesn't have time to take on any of the heat.

For some reason I don't understand the length of the runners has an effect on torque, particularly, the longer the better for low down torque and I suppose the shorter the better up high. Can anyone confirm this?

There are engines, I think some ford 6's, that have variable length runners for this reason.

waste of money.

When you can make over 300rwkw on the stock one

why change it? Doesnt pose a restriction or hinder the car at all

standard reply once again aye

to you, yes its a waste of money

to others, no its not

some people actually like their engine bays to look good and like to have easier access to spark plugs, injectors, etc

im not going for over 300kw and im getting a front facing plenum made i think its the best mod i could make to my engine bay cause the stock one looke like absoloute shit

believe it or not some people are after a bit more than "bang for your buck" perfomance

Of course its a standard reply, funnny that i tested the standard item and proved it to work quite fine, as have many others

So i'll use my standard response as much as i like, i did the R&D with RPM, i'll use the results from a performance perspective.

Do your rocker covers you have nicely coated give a performance gain?

No, they just look good, and thats fine for you if thats what you want.

Same as the plenum.

You have money to burn, so your buying one for looks. Thats your choice.

Im not interested in looks, and im not made of money, and when performance beats rice in my version of paper, scrissors, rock... performance gets the focus.

Hence if the stock one does the job it gets the vote from me.

People appreciate information (generally) thats all im providing, is there an issue with that?

Also remember, most people on this forum are from a certain demographic. 18-24.

Not all have a fortune, so the majority wanna see bang for buck for thier 5-7k they have worked hard for.

Have you considered the fact that if you just change the position of the Throttle body you are risking blowing your engine, through it leaning out in Cylinder 6?

They're designed to be fed from the side and as such have all the airflow paths made to suit, ensuring that all cylinders get enough air..

If you just simply cut and weld the throttle body to to front you will lack are in some cylinders..

Doesn't more air = leaner and less air = richer?

so having less air at cylinder 6 would mean more fuel to air ratio.....

Using that example, there is much more air going into 3 and 4 on the stock plenum?

A standard plenum provides significantly more air to the cylinders 3 and 4 thus they will be more likely to run lean. In a front facing plenum design believe it or not number 6 will receive the most airflow even though it is furthest away it is the most inline with the incoming air, cylinders one and 2 for example must draw the air to change its incoming path whereas 6 get it shoved down its throat figuratively speeking. standard plenum modified to be front facing will be a lot more of performance disadvantage and riskier at over 300rwkw than a standard item.

Cheers

Have you considered the fact that if you just change the position of the Throttle body you are risking blowing your engine, through it leaning out in Cylinder 6?

They're designed to be fed from the side and as such have all the airflow paths made to suit, ensuring that all cylinders get enough air..

If you just simply cut and weld the throttle body to to front you will lack are in some cylinders..

Is that tru?

agreeing with Fitzies post about the cylinders...when my mate made up the custom plenum he was very particular with how cylinder 1 and 2 would get air flow, this is why alot of flow testing was done etc to make sure the cylinders were recieving almost equal ( negligable difference between all 6) air flow...

also with his post about the numbers can always be improved, if ur chasing the best possible figure for ur aplication then go for it, thats what i did. no point spending big money on a great motor, only to skimp out on something that can give u even more gains...

modifying the stock one is not an option i wanted to do or would recommend...

i have no doubt in my mind that in my application the intake plenum has helped with response, flow..eliminated an ugly engine bay.

ben...

When I blew my engine by accidentally putting way too much boost into it, 3 and 5 pistons were stuffed and 4 was in pretty bad nick. I suppose this is partially due to the middle ones getting more air, thus being leaner at the time.

If you have a PFC you can put more fuel in particular cylinders but I'm not sure what the potential side effects of this is. Can anyone answer that?

Eg, if you did a dodgy cut and shut with the stocker, could you add fuel to 5 and 6 to compensate for extra air?

Yep, there is individual cylinder trim on the PFC.

Mine is set to give a little more fuel to cylinder 6 as it's a problem even on stock plenums.

I have a 2% variance between 1 and 6 and a nice slope in between.

Have you considered the fact that if you just change the position of the Throttle body you are risking blowing your engine, through it leaning out in Cylinder 6?

They're designed to be fed from the side and as such have all the airflow paths made to suit, ensuring that all cylinders get enough air..

If you just simply cut and weld the throttle body to to front you will lack are in some cylinders..

This is almost common sense imo.. Would be interested to see some sort of flow test results for confirmation though.

Nissan spent big $$$ on these plenums getting the flow characteristcs right. Is it not ignorant to think that completly changing the direction and angle of incoming air will not effect how the plenum feeds the cylinders?

Edited by Drift_Limo
  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
    • Can you also make sure the invoices on the box (And none exist in the boxes) are below our import duty limits... I jest, there's nothing I need to actually purchase and order in. (Unless you can find me a rear diff carrier, brand new, for stupidly cheap, that is for a Toyota Landcruiser, HZJ105R GXL, 2000 year model...)  
×
×
  • Create New...