Intake manifold flow bench shootout
03-15-2006, 11:18 PM
#32
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Armpit of East TX
Posts: 9,342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone remember who it was that had the saying, 'I've got moe horsepower on my floor than you'll ever have'??? Grippy is starting to take on that role. 
Good info to say the least! I would like to see the difference in the rear cylinder and the front one on a single side of either manifold, preferably the truck. I'd expect them all to be similar in design and net similar results in that area. I think doing just one would suffice.
Good info to say the least! I would like to see the difference in the rear cylinder and the front one on a single side of either manifold, preferably the truck. I'd expect them all to be similar in design and net similar results in that area. I think doing just one would suffice.
03-15-2006, 11:26 PM
#33
Originally Posted by Flyer
Anyone remember who it was that had the saying, 'I've got moe horsepower on my floor than you'll ever have'??? Grippy is starting to take on that role.
things take time....yada yada yada 
should be finishing up the exhaust this weekend and I will be moving forward with new mods soon
03-15-2006, 11:45 PM
#34
FormerVendor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Reseda, CA
Posts: 1,853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 1slow01Z71
Do you think there is any way you can get your hands on a FAST intake?
Richard
03-15-2006, 11:47 PM
#35
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dallas, North Mexico
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mjhoward
Richard covered that real world testing at the track and dyno could yield different results. I seem to recall that someone recently on here picked up .4 secs in the 1/4 with a regular LS1 intake swap which flows less than the truck on the flowbench. Reguardless, it is still good info. The flowbench can't measure the total flow of 8 runners and the change in dynamics as rpms increase. An intake works as a harmonius unit rather than an idividual runner like a head can be measured.
Take a dozen identical sheet metal intake manifolds and flow them. then add 1inch to each of the runners of the first runner. add 2'' to the second manifold's runners. Add 3'' to the 3rd and so on.
Flow them, I bet they will be extremely close, especially after considering flow bench variation from "pull to pull"
I bet the one with the best CFM doesn't flow the most.
Take another 12 and vary the cross section.
Take another 12 and vary the plenum volume
Take another 12 vary the shape of the plenum
Then take those 48 and place them on a 4.8 with 12 different cams
Then get 12 different sets of headers and make 144 combinations with the 12 different cams. Then get a 4.8, 5.3, 5.7, 6.0, 6.2 etc and do the above to all of those.
Suddenly you realize you have nothing but a measure of major and minor head losses.
Richard, I'm not sure what kind of data acquisition tools you have available, but what WOULD be excellent would be to run each manifold on an engine driven by a dynamometer (no spark or fuel) and measure the flow rate in a given port (preferably every port). Even if you couldn't give a number but could show a chart with voltages or stagnation pressures (read: if you don’t have time to calibrate a MAF to an intake port, which I doubt you do). Given that the geometry of each port is similar and air characteristics wont change much, I don’t think there would be too much confusion in interpreting the results.
I guess it would basically be some kind of flow meter in the intake port and the engine is driven by a dynamometer that linearly increases speed at a rate of say... 500 rpm per second.
do this for each manifold and it would be awesome. If you feel ambitious, do it on different engines sizes or even different exhaust setups.
Now those would be some interesting numbers!
Yeah, I know- easier said than done
If anyone has a spare engines and manifolds kicking around, I bet I could convince my university to let me do this as an independent study. Ls7 are preferred, and non-returnable, given the nature of the test.
03-16-2006, 02:49 AM
#36
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Decatur, AL
Posts: 5,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by treyZ28
So by having real world results completely contradictory to these results, proving my point that "Engines are way to dynamic to rate intake manifolds by flow bench results," it is good information
Take a dozen identical sheet metal intake manifolds and flow them. then add 1inch to each of the runners of the first runner. add 2'' to the second manifold's runners. Add 3'' to the 3rd and so on.
Flow them, I bet they will be extremely close, especially after considering flow bench variation from "pull to pull"
I bet the one with the best CFM doesn't flow the most.
Take another 12 and vary the cross section.
Take another 12 and vary the plenum volume
Take another 12 vary the shape of the plenum
Then take those 48 and place them on a 4.8 with 12 different cams
Then get 12 different sets of headers and make 144 combinations with the 12 different cams. Then get a 4.8, 5.3, 5.7, 6.0, 6.2 etc and do the above to all of those.
Suddenly you realize you have nothing but a measure of major and minor head losses.
Richard, I'm not sure what kind of data acquisition tools you have available, but what WOULD be excellent would be to run each manifold on an engine driven by a dynamometer (no spark or fuel) and measure the flow rate in a given port (preferably every port). Even if you couldn't give a number but could show a chart with voltages or stagnation pressures (read: if you don’t have time to calibrate a MAF to an intake port, which I doubt you do). Given that the geometry of each port is similar and air characteristics wont change much, I don’t think there would be too much confusion in interpreting the results.
I guess it would basically be some kind of flow meter in the intake port and the engine is driven by a dynamometer that linearly increases speed at a rate of say... 500 rpm per second.
do this for each manifold and it would be awesome. If you feel ambitious, do it on different engines sizes or even different exhaust setups.
Now those would be some interesting numbers!
Yeah, I know- easier said than done If anyone has a spare engines and manifolds kicking around, I bet I could convince my university to let me do this as an independent study. Ls7 are preferred, and non-returnable, given the nature of the test.
Take a dozen identical sheet metal intake manifolds and flow them. then add 1inch to each of the runners of the first runner. add 2'' to the second manifold's runners. Add 3'' to the 3rd and so on.
Flow them, I bet they will be extremely close, especially after considering flow bench variation from "pull to pull"
I bet the one with the best CFM doesn't flow the most.
Take another 12 and vary the cross section.
Take another 12 and vary the plenum volume
Take another 12 vary the shape of the plenum
Then take those 48 and place them on a 4.8 with 12 different cams
Then get 12 different sets of headers and make 144 combinations with the 12 different cams. Then get a 4.8, 5.3, 5.7, 6.0, 6.2 etc and do the above to all of those.
Suddenly you realize you have nothing but a measure of major and minor head losses.
Richard, I'm not sure what kind of data acquisition tools you have available, but what WOULD be excellent would be to run each manifold on an engine driven by a dynamometer (no spark or fuel) and measure the flow rate in a given port (preferably every port). Even if you couldn't give a number but could show a chart with voltages or stagnation pressures (read: if you don’t have time to calibrate a MAF to an intake port, which I doubt you do). Given that the geometry of each port is similar and air characteristics wont change much, I don’t think there would be too much confusion in interpreting the results.
I guess it would basically be some kind of flow meter in the intake port and the engine is driven by a dynamometer that linearly increases speed at a rate of say... 500 rpm per second.
do this for each manifold and it would be awesome. If you feel ambitious, do it on different engines sizes or even different exhaust setups.
Now those would be some interesting numbers!
Yeah, I know- easier said than done
If anyone has a spare engines and manifolds kicking around, I bet I could convince my university to let me do this as an independent study. Ls7 are preferred, and non-returnable, given the nature of the test.treyz28- if you could pull it off it would be awsome.
03-16-2006, 04:18 AM
#37
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Dallas, North Mexico
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mjhoward
Yeah Richard, don't you have 6 months to work on this non profit research study?
treyz28- if you could pull it off it would be awsome.
treyz28- if you could pull it off it would be awsome.
It was obviously a bit sarcastic, but 6 months? You work in a union shop?
You wouldn't even have to wire up an engine. Just instrument a manifold.
I'll happily propose it if I can get the engines and manifolds. No way my school would fund an independant study like this. Since I have a free elective left for my last semester, they wouldn't care much considering I can take ANY class like.... pottery 101 and it would be ok.
10-31-2006, 10:26 PM
#38
So whats the word on any of the dynamometer testing with a real world engine were you able to set it up Trey?
How about test the manifolds attached to the heads?
What gets me is the Vic JR. it outflows all at low lift and on an engine it doesnt make more power until after 6000 rpms wonder whats going on there?
How about test the manifolds attached to the heads?
What gets me is the Vic JR. it outflows all at low lift and on an engine it doesnt make more power until after 6000 rpms wonder whats going on there?
Last edited by 02sierraz71_5.3; 10-31-2006 at 10:31 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
