Landseer

Here is a functional fit-up on an 84 Euro S.

It and its 85 and 86 Euro S brothers, for those who might not be familiar, uses the same round MAF as the 32 valve cars.

I really like the way the intake fits and looks on both AFM- and MAF-equipped 16V cars.

In both cases, it opens space behind the spiderpipes for access and cooling. That space is usually packed-full with the factory airbox.

inactiveuser1

These are the dimensions within 1/2 inch or so as the Y pipe vary alittle in the radius but overall they are 30.25 to 31inch max.
The setup allows the 4inch tube to go right up to the 3 1/2 inch.
Look at the id of the filter it is about 3" id when inside a 4inch tube
and the Y pipe is only about .1id larger per side so the flow is going right in and can be joined together with the rubbers.
The overall can vary 30 to 31inch max.
The rubber setup saves space 1inch per side as they will go right together as pictured without the rubbers on.
Lower cost with 4 inch tubes instead of 4 inch canisters if that is what they are using?
There is also no longer a need to buy the canisters.
Rubbers insert are under $9 a side.
Canisters are more $
Cobra heads more $
Y pipe welding on ends is more $
The entry into the canister is alot smaller too into the filter cone area.
The system you have is good but this is something you could try to build them for less money so
others can afford them easier.
Are they 4 inch canisters?If so then this may work.

Jadz928

Thanks M928. Yes, they're 4" filter housings.
I believe I understand what you've suggested. Suggestions noted.

This is just a prototype and cost structures may not be as apparent as you make them them out to be.

It is quite possible, the cobraheads may not be used.
It is quite possible the end design may only resemble this prototype, but general construction may utilize different methods.

Part of what makes this design work is it is "stockish", looks good, and has a high level of mfg. method flexibility.
I hope that it flows nicely too.

I'm going for something a little more cohesive than assembly a semi-elaborate group of pipes/adapters/reducers - no offense to anyone.
Ultimately it's for Roger to choose how he wants the project to develop. I'm just out here having fun, trying to create something befitting a modified 928.

inactiveuser1

You're welcome Jim,
I have been looking for a way to shorten the system up also and came across the inserts.They were 1.25 long having them trimmed back to about .75 wide which will be flush at the end of the Y pipe.Once that goes over the Y pipe just slide the 4inch rubber sleeve over it and clamp it,that brings the 4inch pipe flush to the 3 1/2 Y pipe.The filter still flows into it as it is alittle smaller id than the opening of the Y pipe.
You only need about 1/2 on the Y pipe as the worm clamp is that width.
I was going to weld a 1/2 inch wide 4inch collar on the Y pipe on each end but going in toward the center which would do the same save more space but going to use the rubbers for now.Marked picture about welding collars inward, also then regular 4inch clamp there might be easier to fabricate on welding it on?
Its just an idea before for Roger gets into making them.

Another reason why I like this setup is right before the raidus of the elbow the filters go into the straight of the elbow only(without entering it)part of the filter nose cone is now into the straight of the (4" id rubber) which allows more flow around the nose cone as its in the 4inch id instead of internal 3.8inch id tube.
Inserts are at:
http://intakehoses.com/Merchant2/mer...egory_Code=RIS

Bill Ball

Have any of you yet run the system with the filters right up against the Y? The reason I ask is that I saw some idle surge problems with a supercharger intake that had some diameter transitions and 90 degree bends right next to the MAF. My theory was that this created a turbulent flow that confused the MAF. If I removed the intake tubing the idle stabilized. The filter could cause a fair amount of directional flow change and turbulence to the intake air. If it were further away from the MAF it would have more opportunity to settle down. Just wondering.

inactiveuser1

Bill,
Haven't tried it yet you may be right thou on the airflow maybe more so under pressure with supercharger etc?On the 4 inch pipe with the filter in it,the filter is 3" id outlet going into around 3.25" id on the Y pipe so only 1/8inch per side difference but won't be able to test that out till spring.

Imo000

I had this same exact problem when building my S/C system. I was scratching my head for two weeks before someone (maybe it was you) that mentioned the turbulance at the MAF. So I made the transition a little further away and the car started idled and running so it was drivable.

Bill Ball

I saw it with just the intake piping while the SC was detached. This was with much more dramatic change in pipe diameter than you have. However, you do have that cone filter to mix up the air. It looks like others may have already run the car this way. If there are no idle or low speed surge issues, great, no problem then.

inactiveuser1

Bill,
Took some picture to show what the filter looks like inside the 4inch tube and how it looks from inside the Y pipe.
Those filters are about 3inch id on the outlet.It may also possible to put a chamfer on the rubber of the filter to really blend it if needed.
It dumps right into the Y pipe not sure if it will effect idle.The rubber on the right pipe is to show the reducer which let me shorten the systemup.
It can be made to under 30inches.The left pipe is 7inch and the filter cone is even with it not into the elbow.
With the (3 1/2 to 4 inch rubber that I had)the system was 1 inch longer per side and the filters would go into the elbows thats why the use on the reducer rubbers which put the filter flush to the Y pipe.I had to get the filters out back in order to setup the fan system.This is to just let Roger know what I am trying incase he makes changes later
on also on the later models with filters out back.

sweet928

Did an OB version ever get made?

Jadz928

Prototype stage. Developed for L-jet (80-84 US), and LH-Jet (84-86 Euro).

Sorry bud, packaging for the CIS OB's is a bugger due to the major "jog" to get from the airbox to the air-meter plate.

IrishLegend

What about a U.S. '85 version?

Jadz928

Brian,
That was the first one the prototype was developed for, however the the major issue was cornering the "pipe organ" intake around the back corners.
It will require a very special elbow which is not in the near-term development plan.
Long-term development shows it as quite a possibility.

UncleMaz

+1 with cracking tubes and box tops and no replacements....

Jadz928

Capital expense for custom corners for 85-86 US.... $2-4K.

I have some interesting design configurations using carbon fibre, but will have to develop capital first.

Will have to start off with the simpler design, and work our way into something more elaborate.