Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

It was pretty straight forward as per the write up i got too much hose as well though.

did the initial bleed last night, bled it till no more bubbles. but decided to do it again this morning with some light!! and it was just trickling coolant out of the valve with no bubbles.

i think it will be a very good mod to have letting all the coolant flow through instead of it sitting behind that plate..

thanks mate

All good things come to those that wait, and tonight Andrew at AM Performance posted pictures on Facebook of my new intake.

post-34363-0-90270300-1354098789_thumb.jpegpost-34363-0-19941200-1354098808_thumb.jpeg

After originally thinking he'd need to make two versions, one for the airbox and one for my pod, Andrew ended up making one that suits both.

I'll be giving the whale her maiden voyage tomorrow night, and if everything goes well Andrew has a jig ready to go.

It's been a long two weeks but looking forward to driving Moby again! And not having to drive a mint green automatic Barina with pink seat covers anymore...

So, how does intake length impact performance?

More length (plus corners) would cause the air to take a few extra milliseconds to reach the turbo - that can't really be a big deal, or can it?

The reason I bring it up is that my intake would be a foot shorter....

Mate, there's no doubting it'll be sooo much better than the stock one. The question of length was simply me contemplating the universe, physics & automotive engineering (3 things I know pretty much nothing about, lol).

Interested to see how it goes Ryan, at what point along the intake is the reduction to 2.5"?

Leon, The extra length is additional volume effectively a "Plenum" area that the turbo can draw from, which doesn't hurt performance at all IMO.

I'm with you here Leon, don't know anything so relying on expert opinions! :P

Dale, Andrew has photos for me tonight so I'll be able to confirm, but apparently it steps up pretty much straight away from the turbo, but I wasn't aware the intake on the turbo was only 2.5".

Leon, The extra length is additional volume effectively a "Plenum" area that the turbo can draw from, which doesn't hurt performance at all IMO.

The old plenum in the intake trick (you have to say it like Maxwell Smart).

So if I route mine to the rear & back (8m) I'll get extra performance? See, now I'm being silly :P

The old plenum in the intake trick (you have to say it like Maxwell Smart).

So if I route mine to the rear & back (8m) I'll get extra performance? See, now I'm being silly :P

Somebody had to take it too far, didn't they?

The old plenum in the intake trick (you have to say it like Maxwell Smart).

So if I route mine to the rear & back (8m) I'll get extra performance? See, now I'm being silly :P

ever tried to drink through a really long straw???? just my thoughts.......

Car is back. Couple of things to fix before the SAUSA cruise on Sunday, but I'm confident it'll be right, and I'll be able to properly test out the intake.

After driving the car out of Andrew's workshop, I left it warming up, came back to find temps up to 120! Discovered it had dropped close to 5L of coolant - which doesn't sound like just the leak at the back of the block.

Topped up and temps seem ok - about 94 idle after 5-10 mins, but remember it's been close to 40 degrees ambient in Adelaide today, and wasn't much better tonight. Seems to be bled properly now too (although I thought it was before).

As for the intake, what a work of art. Andrew's work really is top notch. I asked him about the shape and it's basically that shape because he didn't want to lean on and cause damage to the air con hoses. He's found from other cars this doesn't cause a big issue. He's forwarding me through photos shortly, but the even the jig looks cool.

Only downside I can see so far is my intake temps seem to be higher. Not sure how much of this is because of the ambient being so high, but by the time I've sealed the pod in a heat shielded box we should be all good. Note I did change to a larger R2C pod at the same time, so I don't think this is the fault of the intake pipe.

Andrew also modded the fan shroud while I was there, so I've now got everything I need to overhaul the cooling system except the fan controller for the thermos.

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...