Ajax’s intake manifold

Post by **Ajax** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:31 am

Just reloaded the dynos. Still a little tough to see due to light graphics, but at least its big enough to see the lines.

Post by **IanS** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:33 am

Here I am to chime in again.

I got to go for a ride in Dave's car today, and let me tell you. It pulls, Ive never felt another NA 4 cylinder car that pulled with the same ferocity regardless of RPM. It honestly feels more like a tuned V6 than an I4, it is a torque monster.

The drive ability seems pretty darn good to, cruising around, I felt almost no issues.

That being said, I think there is a great deal more power hidden in tuning. An S-AFC can only do so much. I think with a true standalone ECU the car could get a great deal faster. Not only could the fuel be fine tuned better, but the ignition timing could be tweaked. The other benifit of a standalone would be the removal of the MAFS. Switching to a MAP based system would also make a ITB setup would be more viable.

Dave, have you ever thought about supercharging?

Post by **a_ahmed** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 1:41 pm

Get Nistune...

Post by **Ajax** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 2:02 pm

Supercharging is more in my mind than turbo. Don't know why, just seems more like an enhancement of power rather than a turbo's change of power (this opinion not based on fact- just the image in my head- Turbo=big swell in HP, Super=higher curve- I know this is not necessarily the case)I went into photo bucket and added some lines to help reading the dyno.Woo-hoo! 1000 posts!!!

Post by **Bigvinnie** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:28 pm

The torque band is definitely more potent then the 2.4 liter stroke. Fully counter weighted cranks tend to have this bulk torque at very early RPMs,1 because it's heavier than the half weighted, and 2 it's balanced better to handle harmonics.No doubt it can get off the line, the question is can it get to a point to where it can yield more HP than the stock crank shaft. In theory it should, because of how it's balanced, the weight shouldn't hold the crank back in rev range, it should just rotate slower under MOI (moment of inertia).HP numbers however for now are disappointing, but looking at the torque band the engine definitely has potential.Whether it's the cams placement, ecu tuning, or manifold that is holding back on the HP potential I think eventually Ajax will figure it out.Now I have to give Ajax props, because you have to have alot of balls, and cash on the line to build something like this, experiment with it and figure out what works and what doesn't. It's very rare, and beyond being different I think it will lead to something original, and Ajax should definitely take the credit to be one of the first few to pioneer this stroked concept. All the kinks will eventually get worked out, but it definitely won't happen over night.

Post by **GTLegend** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:38 pm

bigvinnie is a goddamn dumbass hater. he has all this "engineering talk" but if he was a motherf***ing real engineer, the drive train+mods, hp, and torque data would all make sense to him, but nOoo he's a know-it-all! who need to go back to school and take some more engineering classes. you can't win with know-it-all cuz they can't see the answers when its right in front of them. think about it really hard next time vinnie then it might make sense, or do some research before you open your mouth with theory..

Post by **Ajax** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 4:03 am

That was uncalled for, GTLegend. There's been debate about these engines plenty enough, and you're welcome to continue debating, but please don't just start insulting people.

Post by **seang** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 4:51 am

When did bigvinnie say he knew everything?

Post by **GTLegend** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:07 am

you know what.... i'm sorry, i take it back.. i was being an a-hole..

Post by **Ajax** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:29 am

Now if you have some specific critique of what's been written, by all means post it. I love to hear ideas from different people.

Post by **Bigvinnie** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:30 am

GTLegend wrote:bigvinnie is a goddamn dumbass hater. he has all this "engineering talk" but if he was a motherf***ing real engineer, the drive train+mods, hp, and torque data would all make sense to him, but nOoo he's a know-it-all! who need to go back to school and take some more engineering classes. you can't win with know-it-all cuz they can't see the answers when its right in front of them. think about it really hard next time vinnie then it might make sense, or do some research before you open your mouth with theory..

Ajax wrote:That was uncalled for, GTLegend. There's been debate about these engines plenty enough, and you're welcome to continue debating, but please don't just start insulting people.

I just ignore e thugs it doesn't bother me. Just makes him look dumb that he can't present anything factual.

Just for your information GT legend I port extrude and hone stock manifolds. I have people that have bought these manifolds claiming anywhere from 6 to 10 WHP gains from stock for there NA build. One of my customers is in the process of dyno tuning his car within the next week, and if he gives me consent I'll have a dyno for you. This isn't theory this is actual research and almost 2 years of work that has gone into improving the flow of the stock mani. With a basic concepts and knowledge of how things work you can tell what works from what doesn't. I started No Joke Tuning in January of this year which is a head and manifold porting shop. I get constant emails with people wanting one of these manifolds, so until you get your head out your a** your comments don't bother me one bit.

Atleast with all this theory stuff you say is crap talk, at least I do things in reality that just make you look dumb for your comments.

Some pics of my work.

64.5 mm ported opening for 64~60mm TB

44mm runner opening improved to 45mm opening for improved flow and competition VS 45mm ITB set ups.

Extrude hone, and port using a flex hone brush, and die grinder flex shaft.
Modified by Bigvinnie at 9:53 AM 9/17/2009

Post by **GTLegend** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:39 pm

hahahahha! any one with a hand and rotary tool can do that. any wow 2 years congrats with your dremel.. serious nice work... but have you ever wonder why intake manifolds have those "little tiny bumps" inside, that you grind away. find out and tell me why. seriously! hint: has something to do with fluid flows and mixtures.

Post by **Bigvinnie** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:30 pm

GTLegend wrote:hahahahha! any one with a hand and rotary tool can do that. any wow 2 years congrats with your dremel..

Right? It takes more then a dremel, each manifold takes about 18 hours of work, a steady hand, $100 in die grinders and flex hone. Not to mention it takes alot of patience.

As far as what you were saying about lumps? There is only one lump in runner 3 that protrudes into the runner further than any other runner, this is the same casting shown in OBD1 intake manifolds, and it doesn't seem to disrupt flow when it is ground down.

Post by **GTLegend** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:14 pm

i'm talking about all those little bumps from casting mann. you can bore and hone all day long, but is that effort worth the the gains if any(might be counter productive). you can have runners the size of god knows what. but the intake port/valves can only flow so much, and the stock runners are good for 200+hp(using some rough clac.) without any dermel. so why waist the effort. i was talking to guy at Pdm and he said the same. and how many n/a ka's you know with more than 200whp.

that flat torque of curve killed ajax's topend b/c tq is a derivative of power. esp with that extra long piston stroke(killed top end),. just from reading the first page anyone would know he wasn't gonna make over 180whp.

that motor was meant for turbo son!

Post by **Bigvinnie** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 5:02 am

GTLegend wrote:
that flat torque of curve killed ajax's topend b/c tq is a derivative of power. esp with that extra long piston stroke(killed top end),. just from reading the first page anyone would know he wasn't gonna make over 180whp.

that motor was meant for turbo son!

I completely disagree. I think because BC doesn't make a cam set for it's new rod stroke ratio, its at a loss of about 10~20 HP. A new cam spec can be made that is 10% longer in duration and 5% taller in lift. Shorter cam specs always yield massive torque gains because the intake velocity in the lower RPM is strong enough to make alot of power with atomiztion. Good example is the stock 232/232 vs the 240/248 cam specs. 232 yields a better torque band while the 240 yeilds a longer RPM hp range. Not to mention I highloy doubt that the intake cam he has opens 1 degree prior to TDC.

Any hoo even in the turbo world theres been complaints with the excessive manifold.

As far as die grinding manifolds its worth it if you can get a few apprentices at $12.00 an hour to grind them. the way the markets been going I've had people screaming for a job. That's the only way to keep the manifold within a price range that is cheaper than liquid grit extrusion.

I offered Ajax a manifold for $155 I make nothing to see him succeed.My ported/extruded/honed mani's sell for $365, that's still cheaper than the excessive manifold and its proven to work, so is it worth it? Depends on the power and performanmce your asking for. Just like a performance header people will spend anywhere from $150 to $375 for a well built header I don't see what makes an intake mani any different.

Modified by Bigvinnie at 11:52 AM 9/18/2009

Post by **GTLegend** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:56 am

i'm done you are all over stressing the whole idea of power. if you want to learn how power is made, or what power consist of, pic up a goddamn book instead of your dremel, and don't waist your time.(fluids, thermo, dymanisc, statics i donno what ever floats your boat) and you love saying "atomiztion" don't you hahah.

i'm not gonna sit here and waist my time. honestly!

you all think bigger this, adding that, will make more power, but that far from true many times.

and if you can't see what makes an intake mani different from, and exhaust mani. then i donno what to tell your man, just keep doing what you do best!

Post by **Ajax** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:10 pm

Well that was apointless set of posts. Can we get a mod to clean out some of this garbage?Ian???

Post by **Bigvinnie** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:14 pm

Ajax wrote:Well that was apointless set of posts. Can we get a mod to clean out some of this garbage?Ian???

My bad dude didn't mean to muck up your thread. I apologize.

Post by **seang** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:08 pm

Ajax, I think your car is remarkable among 240's and I know you want to focus on aspects other than performance for the time being, but for the record I wanted you to see this thread. I think it could pertain to your setup, considering you stay NA (you should). IDK if you ever read it before, but it seems significant to me. zerothread/113477

Post by **a_ahmed** » Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:15 am

So any actual updates heh

Post by **Ajax** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:13 am

You went searching for that one didn't you?I vaguely remember seeing that at one time. I'll be winterizing this weekend, and then probably not touch it until Feb due to my next show.The AEM EMS is a very attractive option for the future, but I'll need to get the exhaust situation worked out first (custom header will be expensive I'm sure). Once exhaust is done, then I can start experimenting with the adjustable cam gears and more tuning.

Post by **a_ahmed** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:21 am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjQJxWSEgHE

Post by **90's250sx** » Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:31 pm

hey man i have wanted to go with an N/A build also for a long time but just got my car done after 2 years nothing special just pistons with cams springs and sometime in future a small turbo nothing serious. but can you look and see what i posted just recently zerothread?id=483743

im wanting to go n/a "in time" and i have read some of stuff on here including your whole thread. want to get what i want/need and need to play with so i can have idea then get the funds. i dont see why you cant get more squeezed from it check it out and let me know what you got for parts on your motor!! thanks man

Post by **Ajax** » Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:28 am

Just posted in your thread 90's250sx.Might as well update people on my car.Currently struggling with disassembly of my BBS rims and trying to figure out where my money goes first- transmission rebuild, custom header.I yanked my OBX piece of crap header since it needs to be modified to allow me to turn right at speed (S14 headers don't fit properly in S12s- imagine that... long story about bad mechanic). I took some measurements and wow- I knew the OBX was a crappy design, but seeing the actual numbers... holy crap that design is horrible. I will be sending all of my engine specs, etc to Burns Stainless to use their X-design program which will give me specs on what I should design my custom header around.OBX design- primaries- #1- 9", #2- 14", #3- 11", #4- 15.5" lengths; secondaries- #1,4- 29", #2,3- 19". This would be known as "anything-but-equal-length design" and I plan to remedy that within the year with a well-designed, equal-length, 4-1 merge-collected, custome header

Post by **90's250sx** » Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:06 am

vinnie you sound like you know what your talkin about pretty well with the velocity. i am wanting to go all motor also with time. its all in idea right now but got to have a plan to start getting the funds so what kind of compression can you run on pump 93 gas does it have to be non ethanol or regular gas? ethanol raises the octane by 1 or 2 points does it not? the only problem i really see with all motor is the intake manifold and throttle body. in my opinion i think the throttle body needs to be slightly bigger than the stock one 5 to 10mm and with port and polish and bigger valves check my forum out man. zerothread?id=483743

Post by **Ajax** » Wed Mar 17, 2010 8:17 am

FYI, this thread is a bit old, don't know how often Vin will check in. You could email him of course.I don't think I've heard of anyone running pump gas on anything higher than 11:1 or so- AMS built my engine and recommended 10.5:1 to keep it safe on the pump.

Post by **yellowcar** » Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:18 am

Hey Ajax, don't want to Jack your thread but thought you might be interested to see what I finally decided to do for my motor. I updated my build thread with the new pictures.

Post by **Ajax** » Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:23 am

Yeah, yeah, rub it in. I may eventually go ITBs, but not until after my custom header- screw this OBX crap!

Post by **yellowcar** » Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:13 pm

Yea, well, I better at least wait until my car actually runs before I start thinking I'm cool or anything

It'll be interesting to hear what Burns comes up with for the header.I did a full custom header for my Yellow 510 based on a Rebello design.But for this one since I hear that the tri-y - hotshot - OBX design works well for these motors I plan to start with an OBX 240 header and mod it to fit. It is actually really close to fitting out of the box.

I am kinda surprised that you are doing a 4 into 1. You planning to move all your power up top?

Post by **Ajax** » Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:19 am

Well, if you notice my dyno mid-page, you'll see that I've got plenty of torque down low already- shifting the powerband higher will only make this car faster. Besides, 4-1 does not necessarily mean top-end- depends on a lot of other things- primary length and diameter, merge collector design, having equal lengths...

Ajax’s intake manifold

FN-QR

Re: FN-QR (FlatBlackIan)

Re: (Ajax)

Re: (Bigvinnie)

Re: (Ajax)

Re: (Ajax)

Re: (Ajax)

Re: (Bigvinnie)

Re: (GTLegend)

Re: (Bigvinnie)

Re: (GTLegend)

Re: (Bigvinnie)

Re: (Ajax)

Re: (Bigvinnie)

Re: (seang)

Re: (Ajax)

Re: (Ajax)

Re: (Bigvinnie)

Re: (Ajax)

Re: (Ajax)

Nissan Forums

Infiniti Forums

Datsun Forums

Technical Forums

Classifieds / Marketplace

Nissan Motorsports

General Forums