Outer Limits 4x4 Board

Onya swaffie.
At least you post what you know.
NS has posted over at another forum that he was guessing(even here too).
NS has then posted that what another guy found( and I have the utmost respect for the guy) years ago (22 from memory) that it backs up his guessing.
This doesn't quite do it for me, sorry NS.
NS, the first thing you ever ask for is a boost and AFR chart to back up a dyno run.
How about you back up what you talk about with your own data?
It's a simple request, and I would think we are entitled to that after listening to some of your waffle this year!

marty wrote:Onya swaffie.
At least you post what you know.
NS has posted over at another forum that he was guessing(even here too).
NS has then posted that what another guy found( and I have the utmost respect for the guy) years ago (22 from memory) that it backs up his guessing.
This doesn't quite do it for me, sorry NS.
NS, the first thing you ever ask for is a boost and AFR chart to back up a dyno run.
How about you back up what you talk about with your own data?
It's a simple request, and I would think we are entitled to that after listening to some of your waffle this year!

Marty he's tested hundreds of turbos and stuff on TD42's so I'm sure he has some screen shots or raw data to provide us with

Or maybe it's an assumption AGAIN :(

marty wrote:Onya swaffie.
At least you post what you know.
NS has posted over at another forum that he was guessing(even here too).
NS has then posted that what another guy found( and I have the utmost respect for the guy) years ago (22 from memory) that it backs up his guessing.
This doesn't quite do it for me, sorry NS.
NS, the first thing you ever ask for is a boost and AFR chart to back up a dyno run.
How about you back up what you talk about with your own data?
It's a simple request, and I would think we are entitled to that after listening to some of your waffle this year!

What data do you want? Just AFR before and after a manifold change?

It is a simple request and Im always happy to put info up for anyone who asks.

Actual AFR's or EGT's for the different cylinders.

I'm not saying there won't be difference but you made a statement earlier as if it was fact, then went onto say later you were guessing.
And most people would assume you have your OWN data to back it up.

What is guessing about it? Just because I take data and do the math's on how something performs doesnt mean its a guess...

If you fit a manifold and it leans the AFR off, the EGT will be lower. Its a simple scientific fact.
If you have seen any flow bench data on a standard manifold you will know exactly what I mean.
It doesnt take a genius to figure out how bad the standard manifold is even without testing. So im not really sure what your posts are trying to achieve?

Do you not believe any upgraded intake manifold will even the airflow out through the cylinders, lower EGT and give a leaner AFR?

If your referring to my post where I put up Temp figures, please read it again...

And as for OldMav putting up his actual test figures, it showed my estimation of actual temps was well short of what he found anyway. Massive temp spread due to seriously low airflow through some cylinders.

Anyhow. We have a couple of big builds coming up so I am more than happy to do the testing again and post it up. EGT per cylinder, AFR per cylinder will be much to hard due to the size of the sensor vs size of the port.
What else would people like tested?

Northside 4x4 wrote: What else would people like tested?

What about pressures and temps on the inlet sde of things ????
Maybe actual flow figures for individual cylinders ????

5inchgq wrote:

Northside 4x4 wrote: What else would people like tested?

What about pressures and temps on the inlet sde of things ????
Maybe actual flow figures for individual cylinders ????

Well temps are highly dependant on turbo and intercooler setup, I can give before and after on the setup I build, but it wont be anything close to any other setup.

I will get a few different manifold designs flow benched again and post the results up. Waiting on our new design to be finished before I get them all tested though.

Would be good to log intake temps on each cylinder on standard manifold. Not exhaust temp of cylinders. Old mavs testing was done 22yrs ago with not so desirable equipment.

Wats the new manifold look like?

I rekn that individual intake temps will tell the sory of inlet manifold flow as measuring individual cylinder temp is dependant on injector flow, actual cc spread of pump, injector line length (thats a little fussy but) .

Having said that im really not that sure if we will gain anything from it as Pete has done the basic testing and we all know they are shit STD and most aftermarket manifolds will give the required flow to all cylinders. Its not as critical in a diesel for AFR control as it is in a petrol that will detonate an engine at the slightest hint of airflow/fuel mismatch.

MAtt

Yes MaTt I agree.
But the purpose of my question to be HONEST had little to do with the TD42.

I, and most folk here are not some bumfucks who you can bullshited.
I asked a simple question and he could not answer straightly, I give up to be honest!

Northside 4x4 wrote:What is guessing about it? Just because I take data and do the math's on how something performs doesnt mean its a guess...

If you fit a manifold and it leans the AFR off, the EGT will be lower. Its a simple scientific fact.
If you have seen any flow bench data on a standard manifold you will know exactly what I mean.
It doesnt take a genius to figure out how bad the standard manifold is even without testing. So im not really sure what your posts are trying to achieve?

Do you not believe any upgraded intake manifold will even the airflow out through the cylinders, lower EGT and give a leaner AFR?

If your referring to my post where I put up Temp figures, please read it again...

And as for OldMav putting up his actual test figures, it showed my estimation of actual temps was well short of what he found anyway. Massive temp spread due to seriously low airflow through some cylinders.

Anyhow. We have a couple of big builds coming up so I am more than happy to do the testing again and post it up. EGT per cylinder, AFR per cylinder will be much to hard due to the size of the sensor vs size of the port.
What else would people like tested?

Surely you don't won't me to gather all your waffle here do you?
Do you want me to bring a quote over from patrol4x4 were you say that sort of backs up what you were saying?.( or some crap like that)>
As a old drag racer I can bench race with the best of them from what I know, not what I believe/or have been told to be true.
My back ground is 1/4mile 9sec naturally aspirated 6cly red motor sling shots and 8sec flat tapett 2600ib small block sedans.
I don't for a minute pretend to be a expert diesel man.
But I am a realist.
Figures based on someone else's 22 year old numbers do not cut it idiot. Its that simple.
You said you would supply any numbers requested, well where are they?
You cannot back peddle and say you have projects in the line. That is a cop out.
I think what you tend to forget/acknowledge is that there is alot of backyarders that can acheive what you do.
Sure we can't build pumps but like you we can tinker with them ya tool.
So a good piece of advice to you NS ,be humble and not self absorbed.

easy to measure AFRs per port with a big sensor.
have it in an external pot connected by a pipe venting some exhaust to atmosphere. the wastegate is venting some exhaust anyway.

marty wrote:

Northside 4x4 wrote:What is guessing about it? Just because I take data and do the math's on how something performs doesnt mean its a guess...

If you fit a manifold and it leans the AFR off, the EGT will be lower. Its a simple scientific fact.
If you have seen any flow bench data on a standard manifold you will know exactly what I mean.
It doesnt take a genius to figure out how bad the standard manifold is even without testing. So im not really sure what your posts are trying to achieve?

Do you not believe any upgraded intake manifold will even the airflow out through the cylinders, lower EGT and give a leaner AFR?

If your referring to my post where I put up Temp figures, please read it again...

And as for OldMav putting up his actual test figures, it showed my estimation of actual temps was well short of what he found anyway. Massive temp spread due to seriously low airflow through some cylinders.

Anyhow. We have a couple of big builds coming up so I am more than happy to do the testing again and post it up. EGT per cylinder, AFR per cylinder will be much to hard due to the size of the sensor vs size of the port.
What else would people like tested?

Surely you don't won't me to gather all your waffle here do you?
Do you want me to bring a quote over from patrol4x4 were you say that sort of backs up what you were saying?.( or some crap like that)>
As a old drag racer I can bench race with the best of them from what I know, not what I believe/or have been told to be true.
My back ground is 1/4mile 9sec naturally aspirated 6cly red motor sling shots and 8sec flat tapett 2600ib small block sedans.
I don't for a minute pretend to be a expert diesel man.
But I am a realist.
Figures based on someone else's 22 year old numbers do not cut it idiot. Its that simple.
You said you would supply any numbers requested, well where are they?
You cannot back peddle and say you have projects in the line. That is a cop out.
I think what you tend to forget/acknowledge is that there is alot of backyarders that can acheive what you do.
Sure we can't build pumps but like you we can tinker with them ya tool.
So a good piece of advice to you NS ,be humble and not self absorbed.

You can gather and post up what ever you like to be honest.
If you looked at dates and times of the post, you will see my figures were up before OldMav posted his data up anyway. So your assumption of me using his data is not true.

As I said, with the builds coming up I will test everything you have asked for. But of course thats not good enough for you, because you want the data now...

Im not really sure why your questioning honesty for a start, or the data I post up.
Just about Everything I post up has a significant amount of data with it. AFR curves, boost curves, temp's, torque, power, explanations of how things work etc...

Your no different to all the other guys out there that have a dig because I sell 2.5" exhaust's on modern CRD 2.5L engines. Even after I post up temps, backpressure, power, torque etc.. they still refuse to believe it can outperform a 3" system.

Hehehe how'd we get onto 2.5 crds exhaust.


Trying to change the subject

Lucky we got them afr curves.

tye1986 wrote:Would be good to log intake temps on each cylinder on standard manifold. Not exhaust temp of cylinders. Old mavs testing was done 22yrs ago with not so desirable equipment.

Wats the new manifold look like?

I cant see the inlet temps being very different to be honest.
End cylinders may be slightly higher due to longer soak time in the manifold. Its not something I have bothered testing in the past but I can do a basic cylinder 1 and 3 and 6 test to see if there is a spread between the shortest and longest length's.

New manifold will be from scratch, going to do away with milling the top off standard manifolds as soon as possible.

tye1986 wrote:Hehehe how'd we get onto 2.5 crds exhaust.


Trying to change the subject

Just proving a point. Im used to getting raged at for going against the grain.

Dam

Northside 4x4 wrote:

tye1986 wrote:Would be good to log intake temps on each cylinder on standard manifold. Not exhaust temp of cylinders. Old mavs testing was done 22yrs ago with not so desirable equipment.

Wats the new manifold look like?

I cant see the inlet temps being very different to be honest.
End cylinders may be slightly higher due to longer soak time in the manifold. Its not something I have bothered testing in the past but I can do a basic cylinder 1 and 3 and 6 test to see if there is a spread between the shortest and longest length's.

New manifold will be from scratch, going to do away with milling the top off standard manifolds as soon as possible.

Dam you haha. Ive laser cut out a flange but waiting on me welder to get back from repair to start. Getting the runner the same shape as the port is a bit of a pain tacking heating hammering.

tye1986 wrote:Dam

Northside 4x4 wrote:

tye1986 wrote:Would be good to log intake temps on each cylinder on standard manifold. Not exhaust temp of cylinders. Old mavs testing was done 22yrs ago with not so desirable equipment.

Wats the new manifold look like?

I cant see the inlet temps being very different to be honest.
End cylinders may be slightly higher due to longer soak time in the manifold. Its not something I have bothered testing in the past but I can do a basic cylinder 1 and 3 and 6 test to see if there is a spread between the shortest and longest length's.

New manifold will be from scratch, going to do away with milling the top off standard manifolds as soon as possible.

Dam you haha. Ive laser cut out a flange but waiting on me welder to get back from repair to start. Getting the runner the same shape as the port is a bit of a pain tacking heating hammering.

What your doing is a perfectly fine way to do it. The problem I face is its impossible to make each one identical. And there is no way I can charge enough to cover my costs even on a modified standard manifold, let alone fabricating a complete custom one as you are doing.

But, the benefits to making one from scratch are significant. Port length, tapered diameter changes down to the valves and plenum volume all make big differences to how well it works.

Been farming rd with the mill with a reasonably thick flange plate I can get it from port shape 2 a circle that made it alot easier.

I think you will over capitalize by making them from scratch when the market doesn't need it nor will it support the costs of making or developing one !

An hours labour milling it off max , some plate and a good tig welder an your done!

If your looking at it for a business venture I would put my money into something that will sell easily and is more marketable than something 25% of punters will want!

Just my 2c

MAtt

UGOTNUFN wrote:I think you will over capitalize by making them from scratch when the market doesn't need it nor will it support the costs of making or developing one !

An hours labour milling it off max , some plate and a good tig welder an your done!

If your looking at it for a business venture I would put my money into something that will sell easily and is more marketable than something 25% of punters will want!

Just my 2c

MAtt

I appreciate your input Matt.

The only reason I am doing it is because I sell every intercooler with a manifold + all the single manifolds I sell also. So its a 2 person full time position wasted just in cutting/welding etc..With pre folded tanks. Even with two full time fabricators the back log of orders grows uncontrollably (remember I make kits for alot of other vehicles apart from Patrols)
Yes the cost may be significant initially, but in the end the amount of labour saved will be worth it, and every single one will be perfectly identical and exactly how I would like them to be.
We have never been targeting marketable and profitable items, just concentrating on making sure what we do sell is the best you can buy.

"Northside 4x4 ,We have never been targeting marketable and profitable items, just concentrating on making sure what we do sell is the best you can buy.

Well you must be going to sell our fuel pumps and matt's turbochargers then .... LoL...

Lets get back on track about intake manifolds, and not just trying
to push your product like always NS .The thread is not what is
profitable to make or produce its about intake manifolds and
different peoples ideas !

Swaff

look here. http://forums.tdiclub.com/showpost.php? ... stcount=14" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tapered log slot feeding a second chamber with bellmouths in. slot cross section is about 130% of the intercooler outlet.

conveniently the tapered log section could be replaced with a laminova assembly.

discuss.

I quite like the barrel idea too, been working on this but not for a TD 42.



TD42 look like this,



Results

http://advancedhbintercoolers.com/graphs/graphs.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No you misunderstand Matt. I'm talking about exploiting the Laminar flow outlet of the laminova cores to ensure even slot feeding of air into a secondary plenum so the pressure is even all the way along,

You'll see the point if you visualise each cylinder breathing in turn out of the secondary plenum.

the point of the taper in the primary plenum on the dual plenum is to try to evenly distribute the air through the slot into the secondary plenum. the laminova cores will acheive this function far better than a tapered pipe.

take the top of your second picture off that is the primary plenum, make it feed the secondary plenum. which is what the original manifold is at the bottom, but the coupling between the two has some design to feed evenly all the way along. a big fan shape... a trapezoidal thing when looking from the side.

rebuild the factory lower half with curved bellmouth shapes into the secondary plenum.

this is what the insides look like. Not a well constructed example but it illustrates the concept. People are using these on TD5 VW motors.

I still think we are trying to overcomplicate something that doesnt really require this amount of attention.

As Swaffie has said its about "show us your intake manifold" and a lot of people have made there own and im sure whatever style you design and make will be an improvement over the STD version and if we show whats around people can make an informed decision on what they would like to use and will suit there own personal application.

A simple high mount tapered centre design or log style for the front mount guys is fine and i am sure the cylinder head and camshaft and given RPM of a TD42 wont care too much for a scientifically designed inlet manifold when there are other efficiency areas that need attention.

I mean have a look at Nizpro manifolds for the petty circle, they support huge power and are restricted by vehicle application (as in engine bay design) .

Lindsay by all means tear up some $$$$$$$ doing it but i would hate too see a lot of time and $$$$ wasted for not much gain.

MAtt

MikeH wrote:No you misunderstand Matt.

Looking at this the gains would be more for saving space and been able to move the plenum, Performance gains would be minimal. Possibly improve response time if the TD has a T/B too.

It all helps a little, more even air flow into the 2nd Plenum. The feed into my intercooler does not suffer with the issue the above is trying to over come as it come in the centre rather than the end.

But have to agree a lot of work for little gain other than space.

One key thing a lot forget is your not filling all of the cylinders at the same time with air.

matt.mcinnes wrote:I quite like the barrel idea too, been working on this but not for a TD 42.

I'd thought of something along those lines as well Matt.
Potentially you could run massive boost pressures as a cylinder gives the maximum strength rather than a flat surface.
What's your thinking? To feed air in from one end and collect it around the outside circumference so it exits at 90 degrees to the inlet air feed?
Or do it the other way and feed it from the side and collect it in the middle?
Cheers Andrew.

awill4x4 wrote:

matt.mcinnes wrote:I quite like the barrel idea too, been working on this but not for a TD 42.

I'd thought of something along those lines as well Matt.
Potentially you could run massive boost pressures as a cylinder gives the maximum strength rather than a flat surface.
What's your thinking? To feed air in from one end and collect it around the outside circumference so it exits at 90 degrees to the inlet air feed?
Or do it the other way and feed it from the side and collect it in the middle?
Cheers Andrew.

The exit can be either way as you have suggested but I was also allowing for straight in straight out as the water feeds are all at the same end as the centre feed, the other send is blind and just a return, if you look closely you will notice the sectioned end plate is out of phase with its counter part.
This means four water inlets/outlets only.