Custom Intake Manifold

[kwhauck]

as long as you put in longer bolts and aligned it properly (camber kit if need be) your steering and everything would line up and work fine.. using a ~2" spacer to lower the sub fram would still be higher then mine with lowering springs and low profile tires.. my 17's are noticable shorter then the stock tires.. not a big deal honestly.

Pshhhhhh intercooler, smintercooler... only need to worry about that if your winding the piss out of the charger (pushing it past its efficentcy point).. the charger hes using will be just fine w/o a intercooler. and if not, add a little meth and a little Juice and your good to go!

S

I like juice, but seriously i think my car is low enough as it is, i will have to see, i haven't measured it since the last time I messed with the coilover height......

[RedZMonte]

as long as you put in longer bolts and aligned it properly (camber kit if need be) your steering and everything would line up and work fine.. using a ~2" spacer to lower the sub fram would still be higher then mine with lowering springs and low profile tires.. my 17's are noticable shorter then the stock tires.. not a big deal honestly.

Pshhhhhh intercooler, smintercooler... only need to worry about that if your winding the piss out of the charger (pushing it past its efficentcy point).. the charger hes using will be just fine w/o a intercooler. and if not, add a little meth and a little Juice and your good to go!

S

[kwhauck]

RedZMonte is the shop corvette connection?

If you lower the subframe, the engine/tranny will lower with it so axles would stay in the same relation with it all. It would suck ground clearance wise. If I had a Vette, I think I would rather stick with a side saddle setup. It sounds a lot safer and it would be easier to intercool that way At least they got 2 good effects from it.

1. top mount S/C w/ stock hood
2. lower center of gravity- but what good would that do you when those bolts break because they don't have as many threads to bite into to hold the subframe to the body?

It is an interesting concept to squeeze an extra inch of clearance out of the setup, if you just bought longer bolts, I really don't see any problem other than the top of the struts, and maybe some steering issues. The n-body i believe is 6 or 8 bolts holding the subframe on with two being the real big major ones.

Me personally I have a 2 in cowl that I could probably use for clearance issues with my setup, have to wait until I pick up my extra set of 3500 heads from storage and bolt them to a junk block to do some good measurements.....

[pocket-rocket]

If you lower the subframe, the engine/tranny will lower with it so axles would stay in the same relation with it all. It would suck ground clearance wise. If I had a Vette, I think I would rather stick with a side saddle setup. It sounds a lot safer and it would be easier to intercool that way At least they got 2 good effects from it.

1. top mount S/C w/ stock hood
2. lower center of gravity- but what good would that do you when those bolts break because they don't have as many threads to bite into to hold the subframe to the body?

[Weatheralls Auto]

Would have to lower the complete suspension as well or the halfshafts wouldn't last too long I wouldn't think.

[RedZMonte]

ok so after a little more thinking, i know how you can increase hood clearance.. there is a local performance shop to me that uses a top mounted twin screw on C5/C6 vettes and kept stock hood, its their newist design (previously had side saddle setup) Somehow or another they actually lowered the subframe of the vehicle (spacers), which inturn lowered the engine and gave them more clearance for the S/C.. i dunno if they had to add a camber kit or something to make the wheels straight again or what. you may want to investigate that as an option you can give yourself more room to build a intake manifold..

S

[kwhauck]

Have you priced out one of Hogan's typical manifolds?! I hope we can produce something that is much cheaper, but we will see...

As far as my thoughts... Well, my initial thought is to still have a 2 piece manifold, but quite different that the current setup, therefore allowing for many more top-end options, from a typical runner setup, to an SC setup, and possibly even a carb setup (for the RWD guys who want to keep it simple, but want the benefit of the alum heads).

Yes I have, from what we have discussed on the phone, a full setup with fuel rails, coolant bypass, etc, for about $3k

and for you, PM sent

check this out:

http://www.modularfords.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68838

you would need to make it low profile like this to fit under your hood. I would also assume you would need some sort of chamber with a little bit of Volume to provide equil pressure to all cylinders... you dont want he boost to dump into a offset intake manifold and feed the back 2 cyl more air then the front 4, would cause them to lean out and cannot correct it with tune without making everything overly rich..

Honestly i would look at doing a front mounted S/C like your eaton setup, easier to intercool and also you will get even boost pressure, not to mention allot less fab work, no coolant bypass ect..

I still think you will need to make a little clearance in the hood... here is a M90 top mounted on a LQ1, not even close to fitting. I wouldnt rule out the votech personally...
Dave96Z34 on mymonte, has a few pics of the build.. the problem he ran into is the 60* V6 is so tight its hard to make anything fit down inside between the heads.

I have read through that build on modular fords probably 20 times at least.....lol

I think it would fit if you build it right, the m90 is a lot bigger than the 1600ax I have.

And being easier to intercool i'm not so sure, with a top mount an easy sandwich intercooler like the gtp and any other top mount supercharger including that a4 saleen kit. With the front mount you have at least 3 or 4 custom mounts to have cnc'd plus a custom snout, not to mention the mess of pipes to route the w2a intercooler setup.....

hell your in littleton, Come up and see me lets just turbo it..

you see my dyno post? 7psi 331hp

S

I was in littleton, like 4 years ago, lol, I moved up to Hartsel for 2 years and moved back to SD at the beginning of this year.

I appreciate the offer for help for a turbo kit, but I said no turbo 3 years ago. I had some turbo headers actually and sold them because I decided I wanted a twin-screw. But i will be down at bandimere as will my friend greg, (he is always there) with the white alero.

[RedZMonte]

hell your in littleton, Come up and see me lets just turbo it..

you see my dyno post? 7psi 331hp

S

[RedZMonte]

check this out:

http://www.modularfords.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68838

you would need to make it low profile like this to fit under your hood. I would also assume you would need some sort of chamber with a little bit of Volume to provide equil pressure to all cylinders... you dont want he boost to dump into a offset intake manifold and feed the back 2 cyl more air then the front 4, would cause them to lean out and cannot correct it with tune without making everything overly rich..

Honestly i would look at doing a front mounted S/C like your eaton setup, easier to intercool and also you will get even boost pressure, not to mention allot less fab work, no coolant bypass ect..

I still think you will need to make a little clearance in the hood... here is a M90 top mounted on a LQ1, not even close to fitting. I wouldnt rule out the votech personally...
Dave96Z34 on mymonte, has a few pics of the build.. the problem he ran into is the 60* V6 is so tight its hard to make anything fit down inside between the heads.

[bszopi]

Have you priced out one of Hogan's typical manifolds?! I hope we can produce something that is much cheaper, but we will see...

As far as my thoughts... Well, my initial thought is to still have a 2 piece manifold, but quite different that the current setup, therefore allowing for many more top-end options, from a typical runner setup, to an SC setup, and possibly even a carb setup (for the RWD guys who want to keep it simple, but want the benefit of the alum heads).

[kwhauck]

Could you at least give some hints or pictures as to what you are doing, even if by pm, this is a project that will go underway by me.....I just thought i would get a little informative discussion going, like, 1. I believe I would get move the power steering via an electric hydraulic power steering from a 91 toyota mr2. I, myself do not have the skills to build it, but from a price standpoint the intercooled supercharger setup top mount would not be much more that a front mount supercharger similar to the old EM setups.

I have been talking a little bit with hogans racing manifolds....

you would have hood clearance issues with a roots/twin screw charger... why not consider a Centrifigual charger (vortec). easy to mount, lower intake temps over Roots, easily intercooled, fits under stock hood, easier on trans, less traction issues and you can get different variations (like Turbo Trims), and most importantly more efficent....

True Roots/Twin screw will make larger TQ number.. other then a Eaton you will have to rig up some sort of bypass valve (3800 guys have been screwing with this on the whipple trying to get it right).

You can still design a better flowing intake 1 piece manifold to be used with the Vortec as well... without relocating anything...

Just a few thoughts on the topic. I think this is why RSM did the Vortec's.... lol when they where around.

I would have to argue about the efficiency of a vortech supercharger vs. a twin screw, there was a reason i got rid of the roots blower. It was limited for power and was a total heating problem at high boost levels, not to mention that the roots blower just pushes air where-as the twin screw actually compresses it, my 1600ax is actually smaller than the m62 and outflows it almost 3:1

I have a bypass valve and I really don't understand what the problem has been for the GTP guys, it seems fairly straightfoward.....

this guy incorporated a bypass into his custom manifold

http://www.corneltechweb.com/superchargerweb.htm

[RedZMonte]

you would have hood clearance issues with a roots/twin screw charger... why not consider a Centrifigual charger (vortec). easy to mount, lower intake temps over Roots, easily intercooled, fits under stock hood, easier on trans, less traction issues and you can get different variations (like Turbo Trims), and most importantly more efficent....

True Roots/Twin screw will make larger TQ number.. other then a Eaton you will have to rig up some sort of bypass valve (3800 guys have been screwing with this on the whipple trying to get it right).

You can still design a better flowing intake 1 piece manifold to be used with the Vortec as well... without relocating anything...

Just a few thoughts on the topic. I think this is why RSM did the Vortec's.... lol when they where around.

[bszopi]

Well, 1, that isn't what he is working on and 2, that still isn't what he is referring to

QFT!!

[SappySE107]

Well, 1, that isn't what he is working on and 2, that still isn't what he is referring to

[kwhauck]

I saw some of your old pictures, and

1. runners are super long and not meant to mount a supercharger
2. you are just doing a UIM, i want to replace the upper and lower with just one manifold.......