Intake air flow modification - Page 6 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 03-24-2006, 03:00 AM   #51
Registered Member
 
JanGeo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,442
Country: United States
Send a message via Yahoo to JanGeo
map

Now you can see where you should be going!
__________________

JanGeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2006, 10:30 AM   #52
Registered Member
 
GasSavers_Ryland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,325
Country: United States
Send a message via AIM to GasSavers_Ryland
Re: hi ryland (welcome to the

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaX

If turbulence from the throttle plate is a drawback, then the claims from devices like the Turbonator are definately bunk, as these types of devices do just that - create turbulence.
you need turbulence to mix the fuel and air, an example of that is the intake mainfolds on some carburated engines have a sort of corkscrew like piece of tin in there, AFTER the carburator, there is no point in creating unneeded turbulence befor the carburator, or fuel injectors, of course the finer the mist of fuel you can get, the less turbulence you are going to need as well, but you still need some just to get the fuel mixing, altho, the valves should do some of that as well.
you can get multi barral carburators, and they are great at cutting down turbulance, the wider open they are, the more openings they have, but for a carburator to work, they need restriction, and that is where fuel injection is amazing, it doesn't need the restriction to work properly.
I once tride to make a throttle valve out of a camera iris, I never finished it, but if you could hook that to your TPS and calibrate it, I think it could work great, also useing a thrttle slide, insted of a butter fly valve could work, like motorcycle carburators use, only hook that to a TPS as well, the idea being to keep the throttle opening as smooth, and round as possible, another idea that I had was useing something like a piece if inertube, and air or water presure to close and open the inside of it, thus creating an extreamly smooth opening for your throttle body.
__________________

GasSavers_Ryland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2006, 02:01 PM   #53
*shrug*
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 6,195
Country: United States
Quote:you need turbulence to

Quote:
you need turbulence to mix the fuel and air, an example of that is the intake mainfolds on some carburated engines have a sort of corkscrew like piece of tin in there, AFTER the carburator, there is no point in creating unneeded turbulence befor the carburator, or fuel injectors, of course the finer the mist of fuel you can get, the less turbulence you are going to need as well, but you still need some just to get the fuel mixing, altho, the valves should do some of that as well.
you can get multi barral carburators, and they are great at cutting down turbulance, the wider open they are, the more openings they have, but for a carburator to work, they need restriction, and that is where fuel injection is amazing, it doesn't need the restriction to work properly.
I once tride to make a throttle valve out of a camera iris, I never finished it, but if you could hook that to your TPS and calibrate it, I think it could work great, also useing a thrttle slide, insted of a butter fly valve could work, like motorcycle carburators use, only hook that to a TPS as well, the idea being to keep the throttle opening as smooth, and round as possible, another idea that I had was useing something like a piece if inertube, and air or water presure to close and open the inside of it, thus creating an extreamly smooth opening for your throttle body.
This reminds me of somender singh's head grooving for FE by swirling up the ****.
SVOboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2007, 03:14 PM   #54
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 113
Country: United States
If flow restriction outside of throttle body is more efficient, does this mean that a dirty air filter would _increase_ FE (at the expense of WOT performance)?
__________________
GasSavers_Bruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2007, 09:29 PM   #55
Registered Member
 
GasSavers_Ryland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,325
Country: United States
Send a message via AIM to GasSavers_Ryland
my main question is, when you are doing all this stuff with changing the air intake duct work, are you reducing the size of the duct in just one area, or are you changing the size of the whole thing? because just like exaust, the air intake is tuned, that is why the d15z1 engine has a smaller throttle body, and air intake, is it's running at a lower speed most of the time, requring less air, and you want to keep that air velocity high, this is a very key point in air box, and intake manifold design, in an ideal world, your whole air intake would change in langth, and diametor as your engine speed changed.
GasSavers_Ryland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2007, 07:27 PM   #56
Registered Member
 
kwtorbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 168
Country: United States
I plan on testing this theory on my '97 civic HX with a d15z1 intake manifold. I need a VX intake because I want to maintain the EGR valve.

I will port match the head to manifold ports. Then I will either port the TB area out to accept the larger HX throttle body and use HX injectors and sensors (may need to make an adapter which I can do with a drafter friend of mine and his machinist friends), or I will use the smaller VX TB and the smaller VX injectors and sensors (but then I worry about compatibility of the electronics).

Ford 5.0 guys install larger mass air flow sensors, TBs, and fuel injectors for more horsepower; why not install a smaller TB and injectors for better FE?

The theory I am going off of is Q=VA. mass flow=velocity*area. The VX has smaller runners so the same mass of air with move with a higher velocity. I believe this may increase FE, but I know it will increase my torque and HP at lower rpms and decrease my overall horsepower and torque which is found at higher rpms in a 4 cylinder.

From personal porting experience on mopar 318ci heads to the port size of 360ci heads, I know that heads with smaller ports provide better FE and a lower rpm powerband, while ported heads provide better high rpm power but kill low end performance. This is the reason racers use high stall torque converters and steep gears with massively ported heads and large lift camshafts.

If nothing else I believe my d16y5 will have better low rpm power.

Any suggestions on VX throttle body vs. HX throttle body and there abouts are greatly appreciated.
kwtorbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2007, 11:35 AM   #57
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 64
Country: United States
any updates

Quote:
Originally Posted by rh77 View Post
I'm hoping that more throttle and the choking effect has an impact on power production, as opposed to what the air is really doing, to reduce the need for fuel. I may be way off, but less air would require less fuel for Stoich, right?

RH77
Any updates on this experiment RH77? Wondering if you have tested and what the results have been?
jeffreymccoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2007, 09:00 PM   #58
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,978
Country: United States
Test Results

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreymccoy View Post
Any updates on this experiment RH77? Wondering if you have tested and what the results have been?
Well, it's been a while -- a few conclusions...

I attempted to reduce the airflow by reducing the intake diameter, but it seemed like the PGM-FI controller (on the Honda engine) became confused with the lower Manifold Pressure vs. the Throttle Input. No improvement was noted over several months -- in fact, it seemed to slightly reduce FE performance.

On another note, it was noticed throughout the test that 90-100F intake air temps resulted in optimum FE. I ran 91-octane fuel for 140+ air to prevent detonation, but again, no improvement was noted, and more money was spent on the higher grade fuel.

Too cold, or too hot = decreased FE. First, check a shop manual for IAT response (cold temps force a rich situation -- but too hot: the fuel charge needs cooled to prevent pre-ignition, which equals more fuel injected) -- and each engine design is different. At the same time, hotter engine operation than stock (in my case) has resulted in a a mechanical advantage to increase FE (including a hotter thermostat).

Quicker-to-normal temps from the Block Heater get the engine to closed-loop, and increased efficiency with the automatic transmission. Tightening the throttle-transmission cable has increased hydraulic pressure, quickened and tightened shifts, and increased the torque converter lockup response (places the engine in the optimum RPM range for FE, sooner). Some vehicles, on the contrary, will be quick to downshift with this mod, and decrease FE. Mileage will vary -- only tests can confirm results.

Geez, I think I just summarized most of my major engine experiments

RH77



The conclusion was that each engine series is different. I encourage experimentation and the data
__________________
rh77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2007, 06:01 AM   #59
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 64
Country: United States
Great summary - Thanks RH!
jeffreymccoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2007, 11:01 AM   #60
|V3|2D
 
thisisntjared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,186
Country: United States
Send a message via AIM to thisisntjared
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreymccoy View Post
Great summary - Thanks RH!
bro you are doing really well with your f150!!! congrats! when any newb with a truck is asking how to get better mpg with their v8 i am going to point them to you!
__________________

__________________
don't waste your time or time will waste you
thisisntjared is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best Diesel in N. Texas? JudisJetta General Fuel Topics 7 05-28-2010 09:55 AM
Incorrect Milage Calcuatlion PatM Fuelly Web Support and Community News 4 07-17-2009 08:21 PM
Gallons per Mile? nerb Fuelly Web Support and Community News 1 11-12-2008 04:33 AM
Need way to indicate a missed fuel-up entry exists silente Fuelly Web Support and Community News 7 08-20-2008 08:46 AM
Throttle spring...pedal vs RPM? ZugyNA General Fuel Topics 17 08-01-2006 05:17 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.