Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

no...but it does make spark plug changes sooooo much easier :rofl:

hell yeah, depending on the particular intake / car some other stuff may have to be moved around (battery??)to accomodate the repositioned tb

but it would be worth it just for the better accesss to plugs/ignition coils

When the AUD was trading at USD55c and Greddy and Nismo plenums were extremely expensive a cut and shut might have made sense to someone.

Today you can buy a buckchoy front facing plenum for a round of drinks.

hopefully the quality will have improved with time, id be annoyed if i spent hours fitting up a china intake just to have the bastard leak on me

It's not mines but I got the picture online. The one below is my friend car. Rb25. He literally beats his car. Drifting, burning out and he also daily the car. No problems so far. 3rd year it's like that

Did he notice significant or any improvement at all?

Maybe we need a pro and cons list.

pros

less pipe work

easier to change plugs

cons

unknown effect on air distribution

better chance of a defect

then it's just a matter of weighing it up.

  • Like 1

I guess the best way is if someone goes on dyno with normal plenum and then does the C&S job and see difference. Highly doubt there would be any volunteers.

I also add to SUPERBEN's con list that it could lean cylinders out although we have no proof of this thus far

sigh.

Don't worry mate, I agree with your sentiments exactly.

If people want to screw up their cylinder balance that's their prerogative. It is just a big flashing RUN AWAY sign if I see a car like that, I instantly know the owner has taken many other shortcuts.

Mostly I just feel sorry for the car. Nissans deserve better.

but bro, my mate Habib said it would be fully sik and give me 20kw more powah!

how can you argue with THAT.

but bro, a bunch of internet people just told me it wouldn't work with no factual evidence to back up their claims..

how can you argue with that?

reading through some toyota forums and they have the same arguments on there about the old 7m intake and the jz ffp...now it looks to me the JZ just put the throttle body on the front of the plenum...there was no dramatic changes to the runners or anything its all the same shit...but the TB is on the front now....maybe they realized it makes no difference whatsoever where the TB is when the charge supplied is under pressure...Thats what a plenum is for to accumulate and store the intake charge..the cylinders will then suck in what they need, when they need it..maybe it would make a difference on a NA that has to draw the air in itself..but a boosted car has a plenum full of boosted air...there is plenty there for everyone...

now i imagine the internet theorists are now saying but the forced air is getting pushed to the back cylinders more which is causing it to lean out there...but by that theory one would have to assume the stock design is just forcing more air into the middle cylinders in which case the end cylinders would still be leaning out

So while I do agree it looks like balls...I'm not convinced it is a bad idea.....its just an ugly one and we have all been balls deep in an ugly one before..

  • Like 1

but bro, a bunch of internet people just told me it wouldn't work with no factual evidence to back up their claims..

how can you argue with that?

reading through some toyota forums and they have the same arguments on there about the old 7m intake and the jz ffp...now it looks to me the JZ just put the throttle body on the front of the plenum...there was no dramatic changes to the runners or anything its all the same shit...but the TB is on the front now....maybe they realized it makes no difference whatsoever where the TB is when the charge supplied is under pressure...Thats what a plenum is for to accumulate and store the intake charge..the cylinders will then suck in what they need, when they need it..maybe it would make a difference on a NA that has to draw the air in itself..but a boosted car has a plenum full of boosted air...there is plenty there for everyone...

now i imagine the internet theorists are now saying but the forced air is getting pushed to the back cylinders more which is causing it to lean out there...but by that theory one would have to assume the stock design is just forcing more air into the middle cylinders in which case the end cylinders would still be leaning out

So while I do agree it looks like balls...I'm not convinced it is a bad idea.....its just an ugly one and we have all been balls deep in an ugly one before..

I think thats the most plausible response on the topic thus far

The only down fall I see with a cut & shut is the way the air travels. If looking a stock manifold from the side, it makes a flow able loop from TB to head ports. No hard hitting junctions. When I see the cut & shut manifold, I see the air damning in the back before it starts making a loop around. Looks like extra work for the air flow. I think the Greddy version helped with that hiccup while gaining air volume for less restriction. But then again it still rams the back. If you also compare to Honda motors which are insanely mechanical marvels making a 100hp per liter N/A, it has the same style of engineering as a Greddy style manifold from factory. Just my thoughts. It does seem like a lot of work though to gain easier access to the plugs and coils. But I must admit it does look unique. First time I've seen that to be honest. But that is what is so cool about this engineering stuff with motors, it just might work better than a Greddy. It'd be awesome if someone had some dyno tests done between the different styles. Low, mid, and high end lost or gains.

but bro, a bunch of internet people just told me it wouldn't work with no factual evidence to back up their claims..

how can you argue with that?

reading through some toyota forums and they have the same arguments on there about the old 7m intake and the jz ffp...now it looks to me the JZ just put the throttle body on the front of the plenum...there was no dramatic changes to the runners or anything its all the same shit...but the TB is on the front now....maybe they realized it makes no difference whatsoever where the TB is when the charge supplied is under pressure...Thats what a plenum is for to accumulate and store the intake charge..the cylinders will then suck in what they need, when they need it..maybe it would make a difference on a NA that has to draw the air in itself..but a boosted car has a plenum full of boosted air...there is plenty there for everyone...

now i imagine the internet theorists are now saying but the forced air is getting pushed to the back cylinders more which is causing it to lean out there...but by that theory one would have to assume the stock design is just forcing more air into the middle cylinders in which case the end cylinders would still be leaning out

So while I do agree it looks like balls...I'm not convinced it is a bad idea.....its just an ugly one and we have all been balls deep in an ugly one before..

agree with this 100 percent..funny as..maybe its not worth doing..i agree with that....will it lean out cylinders..i highly doubt it, have a funny feeling you

have more problems with tapered plenums in that regard, but i have no factual evidence to back that up

cheers

darren

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

    • just an update to this, poor man pays twice  Tried sanding down the pulleys but it didnt do the trick. Chucked another second hand alternator in the na car which I got for free off my mate and its fixed the squelling. Must have been unlucky with the bearings.    As for my turbo car, I managed to pick up a cwc rb alternator conversion bracket + LS alternator for 250 off marketplace, looked to be in really good nick. Installed it , started the car and its not charging the battery.... ( Im not good with auto elec stuff so im not sure if this was all I needed to do but I verified such by using a multimeter on the battery when the engine was running and I was only getting 12.2v )   I had to modify the earth strap for the new LS alternator , factory earth strap was a 10mm bolt which did not fit the bolt on the LS alternator which was double the size so I cut it off , went to repco bought some ring terminals that fit, crimped it onto the old earth strap and bolted it up to the alternator , started the car and same issue. Ran like shit and was reading 12.2 at the battery.  For a "plug and play" advertised kit thats not very plug and play but alas.  My question is , am I missing something ? Ive been reading that some people recommend upgrading the stock 80 amp alternator fuse to a 140 amp but I dont see how that would stop the alternator charging especially at idle not under load.  Regardless ive pulled it out and am going to get it bench tested by an auto elec tomorrow but it would be handy to know if ive missed something silly or have done something wrong.   
    • My wild guess is that you have popped off an intake pipe....check all of the hoses between the turbo and the throttle for splits or loose clamps.
    • Awesome, thanks for sharing!
    • To provide more specific help, more information is needed. What Android screen? What is its wiring diagram? Does the car's wiring have power at any required BAT and ACC wires, and is the loom's earth good?
    • So, now all you need to do is connect the 2 or 3x 12v feeds into the unit to permanent 12v, ACC 12V and IGN 12V that you can find in the spot behind the stereo, and the earth, and then it will switch on with the car.
×
×
  • Create New...