S4 stock exhaust manifold VS headers
11-20-2015, 04:45 PM
#61
11-20-2015, 05:50 PM
#62
Nordschleife Master
11-20-2015, 07:03 PM
#63
11-21-2015, 01:38 PM
#64
11-22-2015, 10:32 AM
#65
Pro
It's sitting on the stove top to dry the paint a little faster. Slow cure on low.
Performance improvement is as I described above. Couldn't believe it on the first drive. No more long slow accelerator action. Slightest dab and the car jumps. Point-and-shoot now. 928 grin is back.
11-22-2015, 10:41 AM
#66
Pro
(C'mon will you Someone. Hurry up).
11-23-2015, 12:26 AM
#67
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Upfixen,
I think the problem was that you threw an intake manifold into a discussion on headers vs an exhaust manifold. The OP didn't ask what was the best way to improve breathing.
Although your suggestion may be helpful, this forum has a bad habit of going off in the worst directions when someone interjects off topic.
I for one am interested in breathing in general and would encourage you top start a separate thread on your intake manifold design, or resurrect one that already exists.
I took a look at your curve it takes some time as I have to convert units, it is interesting you seem to have improved low end torque.
I'd like to understand if the 2 pulls are before and after, etc etc, but this is not the thread to do that. I look forward to more on a dedicated thread, and I'm sure others are as well.
Lance
I think the problem was that you threw an intake manifold into a discussion on headers vs an exhaust manifold. The OP didn't ask what was the best way to improve breathing.
Although your suggestion may be helpful, this forum has a bad habit of going off in the worst directions when someone interjects off topic.
I for one am interested in breathing in general and would encourage you top start a separate thread on your intake manifold design, or resurrect one that already exists.
I took a look at your curve it takes some time as I have to convert units, it is interesting you seem to have improved low end torque.
I'd like to understand if the 2 pulls are before and after, etc etc, but this is not the thread to do that. I look forward to more on a dedicated thread, and I'm sure others are as well.
Lance
11-23-2015, 10:43 AM
#68
...at first glance, your pics got me confused a little bit, since I too tought it was a unusual exhaust type of somekind...Yes, this might be a 32V exhaust thread, like wpgshark says, but I think you made a point by highlighting the other end of the airflow process, e.g., the breathing part of the equation.
Now, the questionning that naturaly arises is: did you test your mod with stock exhausts? Would it be better if you added headers? From what I understand, your mod WILL require remapping of the ignition timing & if you don't want to go too lean, there should be more fuel comming in...
Have you ever tought of using your modify intake and use it as a plug or model to make a mold for a carbon fiber intake?
By the way, has anyone developped a carbon fiber exhaust man proto? R-Royce already used some in their gas turbine, so would'nt it be suitable for exhst mainifolds??...wonder what the turbo guys comments would be??
11-23-2015, 02:12 PM
#69
Pro
Upfixen,
I think the problem was that you threw an intake manifold into a discussion on headers vs an exhaust manifold. The OP didn't ask what was the best way to improve breathing.
Although your suggestion may be helpful, this forum has a bad habit of going off in the worst directions when someone interjects off topic.
I for one am interested in breathing in general and would encourage you top start a separate thread on your intake manifold design, or resurrect one that already exists.
I took a look at your curve it takes some time as I have to convert units, it is interesting you seem to have improved low end torque.
I'd like to understand if the 2 pulls are before and after, etc etc, but this is not the thread to do that. I look forward to more on a dedicated thread, and I'm sure others are as well.
Lance
I think the problem was that you threw an intake manifold into a discussion on headers vs an exhaust manifold. The OP didn't ask what was the best way to improve breathing.
Although your suggestion may be helpful, this forum has a bad habit of going off in the worst directions when someone interjects off topic.
I for one am interested in breathing in general and would encourage you top start a separate thread on your intake manifold design, or resurrect one that already exists.
I took a look at your curve it takes some time as I have to convert units, it is interesting you seem to have improved low end torque.
I'd like to understand if the 2 pulls are before and after, etc etc, but this is not the thread to do that. I look forward to more on a dedicated thread, and I'm sure others are as well.
Lance
But, since it it's a performance thread, and since, IMHO there been no really "great" performance gains being made despite the dyno hours, software analyses, (and not decrying any of that) and $$$ spent on exhaust steel, in the cold grey light of morning, when faced with the reality of Bang for $Buck benefit (yeah - definite improvements have been achieved), IMHO they don't stack up. Which is why I've never bothered with any (although I would like UK x-over design + hotdog per leg upstream (Powerbombs in the 4-stroke motocross world)).
With that background I threw my intake mods into the mix to say - "Listen - you're all looking for performance (and not getting much) - what about this?".
IMHO, if U spend $$$ on performance improvements, they should make you react with an "oh yeah", somewhere in/across the rev range, rather than having to squint your eyes as the revs pass 4157 and say "ohh oooh yeah - can feel a bit extra there".
My discovery was fortuitous, serendipitous etc, in that:
(a) I had long been examining vehicle aerodynamics, including intake manifold flows via computer flow dynamics images. (CFD).
(b) When I saw my manifold in this light I was aghast at the crudeness.
Decided it would not be difficult to correct to meet CFD flow graphic profiles using basic materials and hand skills, and viola - there it was.
Had no idea of expected flow improvement, if any, but from my engineering perspective, it at least looked satisfying and 'proper', and should result in some sort of gain.
In truth, I thought there would at least be some improvement, but did not expect what I finally got. Wheee.
Here is my original thread posting:
https://rennlist.com/forums/928-foru...o-results.html
Nearly forgot: the dyno charts are before / after pulls.
I was so taken with the SoTP result that I spent $180 to quantify it on the (same) dyno.
As I've said many times, what is not shown on the charts is the now 'instant' throttle response. None of this long, slow, accelerator "ohhh ... who me? ... ohhh ok" response stuff.
Touch the accelerator now and the engine jumps. Drifting anyone? Hee hee.
Cheers
UpFixen
PS: here's the main point: as this mod lets the manifold flow much more freely, the benefits of any other well designed performance mods will be enhanced via the extra airflow.
11-23-2015, 02:58 PM
#70
Pro
no offence UpFixen, just teasing you a little...at first glance, your pics got me confused a little bit, since I too tought it was a unusual exhaust type of somekind...
Yes, this might be a 32V exhaust thread, like wpgshark says, but I think you made a point by highlighting the other end of the airflow process, e.g., the breathing part of the equation.
Now, the questionning that naturaly arises is: did you test your mod with stock exhausts? Would it be better if you added headers? From what I understand, your mod WILL require remapping of the ignition timing & if you don't want to go too lean, there should be more fuel comming in...
Have you ever tought of using your modify intake and use it as a plug or model to make a mold for a carbon fiber intake?
By the way, has anyone developped a carbon fiber exhaust man proto? R-Royce already used some in their gas turbine, so would'nt it be suitable for exhst mainifolds??...wonder what the turbo guys comments would be??
...at first glance, your pics got me confused a little bit, since I too tought it was a unusual exhaust type of somekind...Yes, this might be a 32V exhaust thread, like wpgshark says, but I think you made a point by highlighting the other end of the airflow process, e.g., the breathing part of the equation.
Now, the questionning that naturaly arises is: did you test your mod with stock exhausts? Would it be better if you added headers? From what I understand, your mod WILL require remapping of the ignition timing & if you don't want to go too lean, there should be more fuel comming in...
Have you ever tought of using your modify intake and use it as a plug or model to make a mold for a carbon fiber intake?
By the way, has anyone developped a carbon fiber exhaust man proto? R-Royce already used some in their gas turbine, so would'nt it be suitable for exhst mainifolds??...wonder what the turbo guys comments would be??
Well you'd be right, so go for it. :-) LOL
The other end of the breathing process is exactly the point: while it's a thread directed at exh manifold etc performance benefits, these will be of limited benefit unless there is matching intake free flow (not forgetting intake runner / cylinder filling air velocities).
My S4 is stock in all other respects. (Giving weight to the conclusion re terrible flows within the S4/GT/GTS manifolds).
So - let in more air at the front and everything else (well designed) will benefit downstream: headers, cams, careful port profiling, Sharktuning/chipping.
Re your comments re re-mapping: yes - I should do some detonation counts, but to be honest, the engine now spins so freely to the redline (unlike previously when it felt, by comparison, like it was working for the last 1500rpm), and has shown no temp issues, there are no red flags at the moment, but I take your point.
Re using a plug model for a CF manifold? Oh yes, but it look nothing like the current S4 manifold (it really is an airflow disaster).
At the start of this year I anticipated having a working CF proto by May/June, but, as they say, Life happens. For me was a mix of a couple of health dramas that has wiped me out for months. Never mind - tentatively on the way up.
But hey, every S4+ engine will benefit from this, even the forced induction lot. The thoughtful one's among them will realise this.
My original thread:
https://rennlist.com/forums/928-foru...o-results.html
No - the bits don't look production line-finished - but that's proof-of-concept prototyping for you, as well as illustrating the simplicity of implementing the aero principles. |:-\
Cheers.
UpFixen
11-23-2015, 03:12 PM
#71
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I think everyone is on the same page now.
I'll read your linked thread when I have a little more time.
I think the dyno curve very much translates into more kick in the butt, either from standstill or for non downshift acceleration. Not only have you increased the torque, you've also moved the initial peak torque to lower RPMs.
On your first pull you had 340 NM at 2100 RPM with the modification just over 350 at something under 2000 RPM, this would be something you could feel off of the line. Power would come on faster and harder.
Neat stuff, thanks. I may have to look for a good intake manifold, I'm putting some of the porKen chips into the 89, really the wife's car but she likes power too, already planning on doing some dyno work. Might be worth doing a modified manifold pull stock and with chip, just for science and all
Thanks,
Lance
I'll read your linked thread when I have a little more time.
I think the dyno curve very much translates into more kick in the butt, either from standstill or for non downshift acceleration. Not only have you increased the torque, you've also moved the initial peak torque to lower RPMs.
On your first pull you had 340 NM at 2100 RPM with the modification just over 350 at something under 2000 RPM, this would be something you could feel off of the line. Power would come on faster and harder.
Neat stuff, thanks. I may have to look for a good intake manifold, I'm putting some of the porKen chips into the 89, really the wife's car but she likes power too, already planning on doing some dyno work. Might be worth doing a modified manifold pull stock and with chip, just for science and all
Thanks,
Lance
Last edited by wpgshark; 11-23-2015 at 03:15 PM. Reason: typo
11-23-2015, 06:17 PM
#72
Hey demetan: Teasing??? U think teasing on such a world-changing discovery is funny? GRRRRR.
Well you'd be right, so go for it. :-) LOL
The other end of the breathing process is exactly the point: while it's a thread directed at exh manifold etc performance benefits, these will be of limited benefit unless there is matching intake free flow (not forgetting intake runner / cylinder filling air velocities).
My S4 is stock in all other respects. (Giving weight to the conclusion re terrible flows within the S4/GT/GTS manifolds).
So - let in more air at the front and everything else (well designed) will benefit downstream: headers, cams, careful port profiling, Sharktuning/chipping.
Re your comments re re-mapping: yes - I should do some detonation counts, but to be honest, the engine now spins so freely to the redline (unlike previously when it felt, by comparison, like it was working for the last 1500rpm), and has shown no temp issues, there are no red flags at the moment, but I take your point.
Re using a plug model for a CF manifold? Oh yes, but it look nothing like the current S4 manifold (it really is an airflow disaster).
At the start of this year I anticipated having a working CF proto by May/June, but, as they say, Life happens. For me was a mix of a couple of health dramas that has wiped me out for months. Never mind - tentatively on the way up.
But hey, every S4+ engine will benefit from this, even the forced induction lot. The thoughtful one's among them will realise this.
My original thread:
https://rennlist.com/forums/928-foru...o-results.html
No - the bits don't look production line-finished - but that's proof-of-concept prototyping for you, as well as illustrating the simplicity of implementing the aero principles. |:-\
Cheers.
UpFixen
Well you'd be right, so go for it. :-) LOL
The other end of the breathing process is exactly the point: while it's a thread directed at exh manifold etc performance benefits, these will be of limited benefit unless there is matching intake free flow (not forgetting intake runner / cylinder filling air velocities).
My S4 is stock in all other respects. (Giving weight to the conclusion re terrible flows within the S4/GT/GTS manifolds).
So - let in more air at the front and everything else (well designed) will benefit downstream: headers, cams, careful port profiling, Sharktuning/chipping.
Re your comments re re-mapping: yes - I should do some detonation counts, but to be honest, the engine now spins so freely to the redline (unlike previously when it felt, by comparison, like it was working for the last 1500rpm), and has shown no temp issues, there are no red flags at the moment, but I take your point.
Re using a plug model for a CF manifold? Oh yes, but it look nothing like the current S4 manifold (it really is an airflow disaster).
At the start of this year I anticipated having a working CF proto by May/June, but, as they say, Life happens. For me was a mix of a couple of health dramas that has wiped me out for months. Never mind - tentatively on the way up.
But hey, every S4+ engine will benefit from this, even the forced induction lot. The thoughtful one's among them will realise this.
My original thread:
https://rennlist.com/forums/928-foru...o-results.html
No - the bits don't look production line-finished - but that's proof-of-concept prototyping for you, as well as illustrating the simplicity of implementing the aero principles. |:-\
Cheers.
UpFixen
I also took a peek at your link & indeed, it cought my interests sensors...still think you should consider making a 'plug' with it & start developing a CF patch that could be fitted (bolted or expoxy glued) after machining part of the plenum you modified & keeping the rest of it the way it is...would be easier than to conceive a whole CF plenum...(no I'm not a krayzee mate!!!)
11-25-2015, 06:30 AM
#73
Pro
I think everyone is on the same page now.
I'll read your linked thread when I have a little more time.
I think the dyno curve very much translates into more kick in the butt, either from standstill or for non downshift acceleration. Not only have you increased the torque, you've also moved the initial peak torque to lower RPMs.
On your first pull you had 340 NM at 2100 RPM with the modification just over 350 at something under 2000 RPM, this would be something you could feel off of the line. Power would come on faster and harder.
Neat stuff, thanks. I may have to look for a good intake manifold, I'm putting some of the porKen chips into the 89, really the wife's car but she likes power too, already planning on doing some dyno work. Might be worth doing a modified manifold pull stock and with chip, just for science and all
Thanks,
Lance
I'll read your linked thread when I have a little more time.
I think the dyno curve very much translates into more kick in the butt, either from standstill or for non downshift acceleration. Not only have you increased the torque, you've also moved the initial peak torque to lower RPMs.
On your first pull you had 340 NM at 2100 RPM with the modification just over 350 at something under 2000 RPM, this would be something you could feel off of the line. Power would come on faster and harder.
Neat stuff, thanks. I may have to look for a good intake manifold, I'm putting some of the porKen chips into the 89, really the wife's car but she likes power too, already planning on doing some dyno work. Might be worth doing a modified manifold pull stock and with chip, just for science and all
Thanks,
Lance
Porken chips:
Love the way you think Lance.
Before and after measurement, one change at a time, is the way to build our knowledge base.
Happy to guide you through the steps of my mods.
Cheers.
UpFixen.
11-25-2015, 07:11 AM
#74
Pro
Hey hey hey, I read your first version before this one (gotcha!!!) but you got to admit that your first manifold pic looks a tad like a klingon creation...
I also took a peek at your link & indeed, it cought my interests sensors...still think you should consider making a 'plug' with it & start developing a CF patch that could be fitted (bolted or expoxy glued) after machining part of the plenum you modified & keeping the rest of it the way it is...would be easier than to conceive a whole CF plenum...(no I'm not a krayzee mate!!!)
I also took a peek at your link & indeed, it cought my interests sensors...still think you should consider making a 'plug' with it & start developing a CF patch that could be fitted (bolted or expoxy glued) after machining part of the plenum you modified & keeping the rest of it the way it is...would be easier than to conceive a whole CF plenum...(no I'm not a krayzee mate!!!)
It's called 'proof of concept' prototyping. Meaning you use what you have in the junk box to build what's needed to fulfil a given function. While it looks s***e it works very well.
Re CF constructions, runner plugs etc:
- firstly, I didn't expect such performance gains, given the basic horse's *** factory design.
- the stock S4+ manifold can be a thing of beauty, and many many ppl want to retain that look in their engine bay ... sooo ... they will welcome any reasonable bang-for-$$$ performance gain that does not compromise their immaculate engine bay appearance.
- I have mentally well developed intake manifold CF design concepts, but sidelined during last year or so by @!&&$% health issues.
- forgetting resonance aspects, the stock manifold contains two intake runner paths that are next to un-salvagable re flow performance c/- their geometry, while the remaining six do a reasonable job.
So the benefits of a fully re-designed (whatever that means) CF system may not yield the multiple-x expected gains. Ohh carp.
Since any re-design will naturally incorporate only the airflow gains resulting from the straightening of only two intake runner paths ... you think ...? ):-]
More to follow ...
11-25-2015, 09:26 AM
#75
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Upfixin,
Ask the mod to move the last bunch of posts to the end of your previous thread and get it resurrected.
My guess is that there are more members interested in a modified intake than in headers, strictly on a cost benefit basis.
Lance
Ask the mod to move the last bunch of posts to the end of your previous thread and get it resurrected.
My guess is that there are more members interested in a modified intake than in headers, strictly on a cost benefit basis.
Lance