Another HA intake cut-open and flowed

[SloGN]

Well one thing is for sure that your intake is way different than the champion . So you really can't say all gutted style intakes have the same problem .

Also how did the xfi log the egt did you just use one and make several pulls or did you have 6 . Cause I thouht the xfi can only handle 4 inputs .


Well its time to put your old intake on and make the same pulls to compare data.

 

[SloGN]

we arent sure where my motor will make peak power. problem is i dont want to put out all kinds of info when im testing items to see if they work or dont. i dont want someone to buy anything that might hurt performance. once i know what works best i will let you know

Why you say that cause It's not in the car . Or is it

 

[Boost231]

im running 6 egts,

my motor is at the engine shop. im not sure what the peak power will be since cam designs are always changing. we are testing lots of items. i can go on and on about stuff where testing but that will be for a thread i creat about my car later down the road. till then i will hold onto the info. the intake info is good. just want to keep on topic

 

[Boost231]

if u want to talk more about this you can call me anytime. 5202480793 that goes for anyone.

 

[HighPSI]

Also how did the xfi log the egt did you just use one and make several pulls or did you have 6 . Cause I thouht the xfi can only handle 4 inputs .

Patrick, the XFI can log 8 EGT's and an additional 8 analog inputs (which could also be EGT's or WBO2's if you wanted to). It only has 4 AUX OUTPUTS.

I don't want any of my posts to come across as criticizing the intake design. I appreciate innovation, and think you did a great job.

I was wondering if the air coming out of the turbo is uneven, perhaps spiraling out. If so, it could possibly exit at a diferent location as the airflow changed. I have no idea if this is the case just trying to make sense of what I saw. You know you can always call me if you want to discuss any of this.

 

[SloGN]

im running 6 egts,

my motor is at the engine shop. im not sure what the peak power will be since cam designs are always changing. we are testing lots of items. i can go on and on about stuff where testing but that will be for a thread i creat about my car later down the road. till then i will hold onto the info. the intake info is good. just want to keep on topic

well since your on the subject of testing different things then so why not test your old gasket ported intake then test a champion intake and see what the inherent problems are between the three.


Also you mentioned that the alky helped mask the problem. please explain this. If there is a air distribution problem the alky flows in the air so it should make the problem worse not mask it.


Cal thanks for the info on the XFI i only thought it could handle 4 inputs.

 

[SloGN]

Patrick, the XFI can log 8 EGT's and an additional 8 analog inputs (which could also be EGT's or WBO2's if you wanted to). It only has 4 AUX OUTPUTS.

I don't want any of my posts to come across as criticizing the intake design. I appreciate innovation, and think you did a great job.

I was wondering if the air coming out of the turbo is uneven, perhaps spiraling out. If so, it could possibly exit at a diferent location as the airflow changed. I have no idea if this is the case just trying to make sense of what I saw. You know you can always call me if you want to discuss any of this.

Cal

Your not criticizing my intake design. I didn't design anything . The gutted /ported cut-up HA intake have been around for a long time. Just recently Champion now offers a ported HA intake.

The intake in question thats on brents engine is entirely different than any of the intakes that i have ported/gutted or how champion does theirs.

The intake thats on brents engine has a very small plenum area due to having hard block put in the roof area and has some baffles in it from what i could tell when looking into the ports with a camera. this a completely diffrent from my intake( the intake in the start of thread) or champions.




FWIW I too will donate some cash for testing the other type of intakes.

 

[Boost231]

well since your on the subject of testing different things then so why not test your old gasket ported intake then test a champion intake and see what the inherent problems are between the three.


Also you mentioned that the alky helped mask the problem. please explain this. If there is a air distribution problem the alky flows in the air so it should make the problem worse not mask it.


Cal thanks for the info on the XFI i only thought it could handle 4 inputs.

i would love to test it, but thats not something i currently have the time for. once i get the car out to cally i will have more time. i believe the intake i have now is a better design. without having cal here and doing back to back testing it would be hard. if i had another car to do this on i would for sure.

i didnt say the alky masked the problem, i said i think the alky masks the problem, i think the alky is making its way to the leaner cylinder helping them stay alive and not detonate. just a thought. thinking out loud

 

[Boost231]

my intake volume is pretty close to a gutted stocker. we only blocked off a very small section at the top to keeep it level with the port. other then that it should be pretty close. i would think maybe a 1/4 inch is closed up at the top. either way my intake and the champion flow pretty damn close on the bench. mine is even closer if i remember right over the spread. also i have a small deflector in the intake but who knows how that effects flow. either way we need to see more testing. if someone want to dontate a champion intake i will test it in time. right now its not going to happen. i will also have to mod the intake to fit my turbo setup.


man data collection is fun

 

[Nick Micale]

this is proof in the pudding. Disturbing the insides is causing turbulence. The swirling action of the air towards the ports is interfering with the flow to the ports next to it. what seems like a mass increase in flow is negated buy the intakes own inability to process the extra air properly.

the air makes 3 turns before its at the ports. open or not it wont flow........

On Brent's intake we spent many man-hours bench testing for equal flow to all 6 ports, and to minimize air swirling or turbulence in the plenum.

Even Cal was pleasantly surprised to see how the ETS's were lower and closer than he expected, especially at higher RPM!

 

[esinger]

I saw in another post that Cal was able to get the exhaust temps to match each cylinder within the lower 20's. How much cylinder correction was needed to achive that. Do you mind posting each cylinder's correction?

 

[HighPSI]

I saw in another post that Cal was able to get the exhaust temps to match each cylinder within the lower 20's. How much cylinder correction was needed to achive that. Do you mind posting each cylinder's correction?

Those values changed as boost changed. At 20 psi the spread was 8%

 

[SloGN]

On Brent's intake we spent many man-hours bench testing for equal flow to all 6 ports, and to minimize air swirling or turbulence in the plenum.

Even Cal was pleasantly surprised to see how the ETS's were lower and closer than he expected, especially at higher RPM!

I'm sure that there was some time devoted into that intake.


Nick can i ask what was the method used to test the intake to compare the flow in each port. what type of bench was used.

here is the results that i obtained when i flowed that intake.

Brent ( 84/85) HA The average flow was 199

1-199 2-193

3-204 4-196

5-200 6-200

here is the flow numbers on his old intake that he sold to mark s


1-134 2-148

3-153 4-117 -----124 after doing some extra porting

5-156 6-146




Also one thing to remeber how did the cylinder heads flow since that plays a part on how the intake port flows. so that can become another variable.

 

[SloGN]

Those values changed as boost changed. At 20 psi the spread was 8%

Cal

Is this something that you see on the 86-87 cars? Or perhaps on other turbocharged applications? 8% is really not that big of a change.

Cal do you remember what cylinder was needing the the extra fuel and the cylinder that didn't

did you have the take any fuel away?

from the flow#'s it would appear that #2 needs the least amout and that #3 needs more. ( see above post)


Also what was the target EGT ?


so 8% would net a possible difference of 120-130 degrees diffrence in temps before the correction. if the target was 1600 degrees.

 

[HighPSI]

Cal

Is this something that you see on the 86-87 cars? Or perhaps on other turbocharged applications? 8% is really not that big of a change.

Cal do you remember what cylinder was needing the the extra fuel and the cylinder that didn't

did you have the take any fuel away?

from the flow#'s it would appear that #2 needs the least amout and that #3 needs more. ( see above post)

I tune individual cylinders all the time. What was diferent about this, was how much it changed as airflow changed. On other applications with an intercooler, the individual cylinder correction won't change much once you figure it out. This is why I was thinking the turbo is the variable that is changing as airflow changes. On other applications, there is an intercooler and piping to even things out. Even on non-intercooled turbo applications ther is piping between the turbo and throttle body

I took the most fuel out of #4 and added the most fuel to #5. The variance was worse at lower boost and got better at higher boost. 8% variance at 20 psi was much better than the 19% I had at 14 psi.

 

[SloGN]

I tune individual cylinders all the time. What was diferent about this, was how much it changed as airflow changed. On other applications with an intercooler, the individual cylinder correction won't change much once you figure it out. This is why I was thinking the turbo is the variable that is changing as airflow changes. On other applications, there is an intercooler and piping to even things out. Even on non-intercooled turbo applications ther is piping between the turbo and throttle body

I took the most fuel out of #4 and added the most fuel to #5. The variance was worse at lower boost and got better at higher boost. 8% variance at 20 psi was much better than the 19% I had at 14 psi.

Cal
Thanks for the info. I wonder if the size of the turbo could play a part in this? a larger turbo at lower boost may be causing some compressor surge.. I have seen where this is a problem on I/C at lower boost so the problem could be way worse here. it's somw thing to think about,

I think the next intake i do is gonna have a defusser under the turbo to help stop the swirling of the air as it comes of the turbine wheel. to see if this is part of the problem.









Brent
was those injectors flowed? not only for max flow but at different pulsewidths? i have seen some injectors flow correctly at max but low flows be way low or way high.

Also did the richest injector get put into the highest flowing port and the least flowing get put in the lowest flowing port.

These are some other considerations as to why there is a diffrence in egt's

 

[esinger]

I think Pat might have a good point. Cal have you tuned/seen individual cylinder EGTs on 120 lb or 160 lb injectors. I seem to remember a conversion where these larger injectors have problems controlling fuel delivery that smaller injectors don't.

 

[SloGN]

Also the stock intake along with the chapion and my intake they still retain the spliter at the base of the turbo near the egr that could help reduce the swirl of the air.

Just thinking out loud

 

[Boost231]

can tell you much about the injectors. they where purchased from cal.

also my intake still has a spliter at the bottom of the intake. slightly different design then the factory one but its there

 

[esinger]

Just out of curiosity, is this just an anomaly or is this causing problems for you Brent? I feel pretty confident that my intake or EGTs aren’t dead on and have variances too. However I’m not really sure now much sleep I should lose on account of this.