Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
All good mate.
On a boosted application I am not surprised that there wasn’t much in it – lets face it, 1.6hp/ci for a turbo application isn’t exactly wringing the neck out of it and the banana manifold kinda suits a boosted application with it’s big plenum.
There’d be a fair bit more in a DP manifold for a NA application which was kind of where I was going with my line of thinking for those guys that want the (NA) factory look.. but I guess that’s outside of the Southridge’s design intent for his project.
Anyway, it’s a cool little project indeed and I look forward to seeing some more progress..
My point is if someone wanted the stock look of the banana manifold, they could replicate what he’s done in terms of DP manifold, elbow and TB covered with a gutted banana top and stock engine covers..
This car used a dual plane manifold with elbow and single throttle body covered up with the gutted top of an original banana manifold… (and a turbo to run 9.9’s)
-
This reply was modified 8 years ago by
Hoopstar.
Looking good.. you must be excited it’s getting so close.
Out of interest, what’s been done to the engine?
Yup, no problems doz..
‘My’ modules are just rebuilt units as per above. No silly claims about extra power – just a much more reliable unit that works as per the factory’s intended design which is more than enough for most applications.
PM for details.
Paul
So loving this project and the progress, albeit it too slowly for me… I just find myself checking in for updates.
And I love how the end result and plan includes your wife and you cruising Oz in something you built.
Pity I didn’t see this earlier Manta as I repair these modules – $70 for most units.
I perform an initial inspection and bench test, then stripped down the unit, the PCB is ultra-sonically cleaned, all solder joints reflowed and wearing parts replaced and a new MOSFET driver transistor fitted. Good for another 20+ years.
The units this guy is sells are unfortunately nothing more than ‘snake oil’ using the same PCB design with a common replacement MOSFET for the obsolete Bosch part.
Claims like “the multi-spark emulation has been optimized to provide a longer spark ensuring a more complete fuel burn on each combustion cycle” is complete crap.
Using the same coil with the same dwell time makes no difference in spark energy. You can swap some of the timing components in the original design and use a HEC coil (as opposed to a MEC coil) for SLIGHTLY more spark energy but not noticeable on the street.
If you want more bang for buck, stick an ignition box (MSD6AL, Hi-6 or ICE 7) unit driven from the OEM unit on your car, give the setup a birthday with a new cap, rotor button, leads and gapped plugs are you’re about as good as you’re going to get for the money.
Oops… well mum is a nice lady and a smart move staying your folks.
I love the VS..!!
Many thanks Exec24..!! Exactly what I was looking for..
On another note, you’re lovely wife noted that it was a good thing you weren’t home to see my VK or “you’d want another car and your already have 2”
As much as I love pouring over big $$ builds, I have to admit I prefer these ‘nuts and bolts’ builds where the guy gets in there and does it all himself.
It inspires all off us and confirms we can all make our car our own.
Fantastic effort and work mate. I love it..!!!
Sorry I cant help myself, but I reckon if you gave the boys (Grant or Chris) at Norwood Autos a call and said I put you onto them they could probably give you some help (08) 8234 5199
+1 for Grant (and Chris).
Grant’s built all my transmissions, converters and even rebuilt my diff center over the last 25 years..
Hell, come to think of it, my first trans was built at his house before he went pro
You’ll fret a little less about denting the extractors after watching this…
Out of interest , what is the size of each bore on the 1375cfm throttle body?
-
This reply was modified 8 years, 1 month ago by Hoopstar.
Just thinking out loud, is it possible to remove the linkage between the two shafts and just operate on one pair of butterflies in the current set up then go the full 1375cfm once you need it later on? Might be dumb ass, just thinking your would more or less double the air speed through the two throttles which might be happier at the lower power needs?
Funny, I was speaking with Craig from Torque Power about this exact thing just the other day.
During some back to back track testing he did exactly what you’re suggesting and disconnected the secondaries in a 1000cfm TB and found the car ran no slower. His suggestion was to run one of CRD’s 750cfm throttle bodies.
Theoretically a 1375cfm throttle body will support enough air for a 304 turning at over 15,000rpm with 100% VE or a 355 at 13,000+ rpm.
Interestingly a 304 turning at 7,500 rpm and a 355 to 6500 rpm only require around 660cfm (at 100% VE) – around the same as just running the primaries only . If you do the calcs with a more realistic 85% VE of a nicely matched street engine, the 660cfm throttle body will support 8800 rpm (304) & 7500 rpm (355).
Just some food for thought and would certainly be worth some testing..
Let me know if this is still available.
Some companies even make a slip in adapter that slides in like the factory metal hose, if tapping or welding a Bung on isn’t your thing
Where do you get these from?
Any fittings will need to be welded on as there’s not enough material in the fuel rail to tap.
By the time you’ve bought the fittings and had the rails modified, it’d be cheaper to use something like this:
$160 – cheap and cheerful but quality unknown..
or
$180 – Chinese made but better quality and used by lots of guys.
but it’s only air. Won’t the engine only use what it can take. Efi is dry induction compared to carby
Two words: air speed.
Too large a TB will slow air speed and reduce cylinder fill (effectively reducing VE) resulting in less power.
Those calcs above were @ 100% VE. Things get worse at ‘real world’ VE’s seen on street engines.
The other thing is an engines air requirements versus rpm tend to be fairly linear but airflow versus throttle position is more logarithmic so a TB that is too large becomes worse as the blades open more and more and air speed drops.
..And there lay another problem – the size of most throttle bodies are 1000cfm and more which is way too big for a 304 or 355.
Even with 100% VE, a 355 turning at 7500 rpm only requires a TB that flows 770cfm.
This reduces air speed and makes less torque in the mid-range.
1000cfm with 100% is nearing 10,000rpm
CRD Engineering make a 750cfm TB which is a great match for a well tuned 355.
Like the HR in you profile pic, that yours?
Yes mate, it is mine..
That’s why I said should LOOK INTO….
</span>
Cava, sorry mate I wasn’t having a go… apologies if you took it that way..!!
It’s just that the Harrops don’t tend to suffer the (entire bank) fuel distribution the Edelbrock AG seems to possess.
Milling out that section tends to hurt light throttle response and a bit of torque, so you’d avoid it if at all possible. I am just not sure what the reason is he’d need to “look into” it.. especially since it appears he doesn’t even have it bolted on the motor yet.
-
This reply was modified 8 years, 3 months ago by Hoopstar.
-
This reply was modified 8 years ago by
