Alternative Port EFI IntakesThis board is for tech discussions and questions about aftermarket port EFI such as the HSR, MR, SR, BBK, FIRST, etc.
Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!
Originally posted by anesthes Grabbed a regulator outta a '99 grand prix in the junk yard. Well grapped the diaphram part of it. Installed it. FP is about 10psi higher. Thanks.
-- Joe
No Prob!
I "just happened" to know what the fuel pressure was for the newer 3800 SC due to the project that I'm working on at work. I'm swapping a 2003 3800 SC (complete powertrain) into a late 80's Buicl LeSabre T-Type. It's been on hold for a couple weeks, and I can't wait to get back to it and get it running! Should be a screamer! All that's left is the wiring (shouldn't be too bad, after I get a couple connectors for the bottom of the fuse and relay box) and a bunch of little things, like P/S lines, tranny cooler lines, and fuel lines. We're going to keep the '03 PCM and wiring under the hood. I would be nice to tune on the PCM in it though, since they do control the boost on it (actually the airlow into the SC.)
I "just happened" to know what the fuel pressure was for the newer 3800 SC due to the project that I'm working on at work. I'm swapping a 2003 3800 SC (complete powertrain) into a late 80's Buicl LeSabre T-Type. It's been on hold for a couple weeks, and I can't wait to get back to it and get it running! Should be a screamer! All that's left is the wiring (shouldn't be too bad, after I get a couple connectors for the bottom of the fuse and relay box) and a bunch of little things, like P/S lines, tranny cooler lines, and fuel lines. We're going to keep the '03 PCM and wiring under the hood. I would be nice to tune on the PCM in it though, since they do control the boost on it (actually the airlow into the SC.)
You know. Its kinda interesting.. Although the bpw in the prom is set so the blms are 128 everywhere, when the fuel pressure is around 50psi at idle, crank fire up is quicker, idle is smoother, and all around operation is more responsive.
Why do you think that is?
How does the new ones control airflow? Like a wastegate or ?
How does the new ones control airflow? Like a wastegate or ?
-- Joe
There is some sort of actuator inside the S/C or throttle body. I'll have to look when I get there (to work). It's vac (pressure?) operated, and the is PCM controlled. I'm thinking it is basically like a throttle blade(s).
Im jealous. I started before you, and mine still looks exactly like it did when I posted the pic. Of course, Ive painted the whole car, but my engine is no further. Great job, and you made great time too.
Hey Guys!
Wow, I just registered to this site. I thought I was the only one with a homemade single plane EFI setup in a 3rd gen! The pic is about 3 monthes old. The engine is actually in the car and running. I bought the fuel rail in a 3 foot section, and the throttle body from Force-Fuel Injection in Miami. I am running it with a Haltech E6GM.
I am using 30lb Motorsports injectors. This all sits atop a 4 bolt main 406 with ported 441 heads. Lingenfelter camshaft. Flat top speed pros. balanced stock crank, balanced rods with ARPs. Hoping it makes about 425 HP. Haven't really got on it yet, I am still running the stock TPI pump, and I am leaning the thing out under full load.
Want to be in the 12s in the 1/4. Will be running the car at an 1/8 mile track hopefuly next year.
It's the standard vic jr. If I used the "tall" version, I would have welded the rail mounts directly to the intake. The last intake I made was a holly street dominator, and the brackets holding the fuel rails down was pretty flimsy. I fought fuel leakage problems all the time. Can you say "fire extinguisher standing by?" I sort of over did it this time. The bracket acts as a 1/2" spacer. Then there is the 1" spacer on top of that so the throttle linkage clears the fuel rail. The newer throttle bodies have linkage that clears a bit easier. Needless to say, my hood is going to have a big ol hole in it until I can afford a 4" cowl induction hood.
Originally posted by 406GTA It's the standard vic jr. If I used the "tall" version, I would have welded the rail mounts directly to the intake. The last intake I made was a holly street dominator, and the brackets holding the fuel rails down was pretty flimsy. I fought fuel leakage problems all the time. Can you say "fire extinguisher standing by?" I sort of over did it this time. The bracket acts as a 1/2" spacer. Then there is the 1" spacer on top of that so the throttle linkage clears the fuel rail. The newer throttle bodies have linkage that clears a bit easier. Needless to say, my hood is going to have a big ol hole in it until I can afford a 4" cowl induction hood.
Justin
Haha..
I'm using street dominator. Used angle alum brackets to hold the rails on. No leaks.
Unfortunately, it detonates from lack of injector around 6600rpm, and I need that to get to the end of the track. So I can only run about 85% of the track, then I have to stuff it in neutral. (running high gears, small tires).
Anyway, in street trim, with the above mentioned problem:
12.50 @ 112mph
Now, I'm thinking, if I could get a *complete* run in, we're talking 11s at like 125 or so mph.. (based on the RPM at which I have to dive into neutral in 4th.) I think I actually hit around 125 but slow back down.
Those are good times. That's about what I was running on the motor with 700R4, 2.73s, homemade MPFI, MAF165, 383, N/A. You should be able to pick up some more once you work with it a bit.
Originally posted by chriswtx Finished product....
Not meaning to nitpik, and only as a reference, when you taper the rear of the plenum down like you have, at the rear wall, that has a tendency to lean out the rear two cylinders. By example, if you look at a HVAC design book, they'll show that at the end of a column of vents, that the wall at the end of the feeding column is 1.5x the width of the last vent. Other wise the last vent outflows the others.
While the distributor gets in the way, removing some of the floor would help. Object being just having a volume of air to act as a cushion, past the last runner walls.
The car ran 12.40 @ 114mph last night with 21d advance. I kept detonating at 26d, regardless what I did.. 21d worked, but at the slow et.
Unfortunately, I think I blew a piston after my last run. Cars got a crazy skip now. Pulled all the plugs and they all look fine. Checked all the wires, they're all sparking. oh well.
The odd thing is, with the 21d after my run a few primaries were glowing red. This would normally indicate a really rich condition, or that I retarded timing too much. Maybe 23-24d woulda been the magic number, but I gotta find out why it's skipping now. Maybe I burnt a valve..
I have been researching converting a cab manifold to EFI lately. The main thing turning me away from the idea is the cost of the throttle body. After looking for some time I found a cheap throttle body that should work great. The throttle bodies off new and old V8 Dodge Dakotas, old V8 90’s jeep Cherokee, and are mounted horizontally on the manifold like a carb. Some pictures of what they look like can be found at these auctions: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=7929418942 http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=7929884982
I am sure you could pick up one at the junk yard for 20 bucks. I saw one in person on my friends 95 Jeep Cherokee it has a Holley cast into it so Chrysler must of paid Holley to make them for them it had twin 48mm throttle blades. All the electronics seemed easily interchangeable. Another plus is it has the same top like a carburetor so you should be able to mount a carb air filter right on it.
Originally posted by 89 Iroc Z I have been researching converting a cab manifold to EFI lately. The main thing turning me away from the idea is the cost of the throttle body. After looking for some time I found a cheap throttle body that should work great. The throttle bodies off new and old V8 Dodge Dakotas, old V8 90’s jeep Cherokee, and are mounted horizontally on the manifold like a carb. Some pictures of what they look like can be found at these auctions: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=7929418942 http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=7929884982
I am sure you could pick up one at the junk yard for 20 bucks. I saw one in person on my friends 95 Jeep Cherokee it has a Holley cast into it so Chrysler must of paid Holley to make them for them it had twin 48mm throttle blades. All the electronics seemed easily interchangeable. Another plus is it has the same top like a carburetor so you should be able to mount a carb air filter right on it.
Thanks for the post.
Only concerns I would have is how wide it is..
Personally I dig monoblade bodies. But this is an option for some folks.
Ran real well. The car felt like a big block on the street.. EXTREMELY torque.
Infact it would maintain 430RWTq Threwout the powerband and peak at 455. It would only make about 390 rwhp peak though.
That type of blower is HP limited due to its abiatic effeciency.
I took the blower off about a month and a half ago in favor of a Vortech T-Trim with aftercooler. It makes less under the curve power but it makes about anthor 100 more HP at the same boost.
Originally posted by rooster433 Ran real well. The car felt like a big block on the street.. EXTREMELY torque.
Infact it would maintain 430RWTq Threwout the powerband and peak at 455. It would only make about 390 rwhp peak though.
That type of blower is HP limited due to its abiatic effeciency.
I took the blower off about a month and a half ago in favor of a Vortech T-Trim with aftercooler. It makes less under the curve power but it makes about anthor 100 more HP at the same boost.
I was thinking about upgrading my S-trim to a t-trim this spring.
I have question for you guys, I was shoping around for an intake to use to make my home brew FI setup, and I was looking at some links in this thread and found some flow numbers for the performer RPM intake VS. alot of the other FI intakes that are availabe, along with the HSR. The performer RPM flowed better than any of these intakes. This really surprised me considering it's a dual plane.
So what would be some of the down falls of using a dual plane for a FI intake? I understand there is no reason for the runner pairing with port injection, but will it drastically hurt anything to use a dual plane? I have an extra RPM air-gap intake being given to me for some work I'm doing for a friend, I'm trying to talk my self out of hacking it up, but i'm starting to think it would be a perfect canidate for injector bungs. Having a flat bottom it would be easy to "chuck" up in the mill.
Originally posted by BMmonteSS I have question for you guys, I was shoping around for an intake to use to make my home brew FI setup, and I was looking at some links in this thread and found some flow numbers for the performer RPM intake VS. alot of the other FI intakes that are availabe, along with the HSR. The performer RPM flowed better than any of these intakes. This really surprised me considering it's a dual plane.
So what would be some of the down falls of using a dual plane for a FI intake? I understand there is no reason for the runner pairing with port injection, but will it drastically hurt anything to use a dual plane? I have an extra RPM air-gap intake being given to me for some work I'm doing for a friend, I'm trying to talk my self out of hacking it up, but i'm starting to think it would be a perfect canidate for injector bungs. Having a flat bottom it would be easy to "chuck" up in the mill.
The idea behind a dual plane is to increase runner lenth. More torque, lower rpm band.
A singleplane is not for everyone. I rev my motor over 6k, so it was the ideal solution. If your cam is around 220-224 degrees of duration, a dual plane might make more sense for you.
On a boosted application, the dual plane would just be a restriction IMO.
Part of why people want to shy away from a single plane intake on a port injection project, is because of experiences or horror stories with a single plane carb engines. In a carb situation, at idle or low RPM, the incoming air is lazy. The gas tends to puddle at the bottom of the manifold. Or it will stick to the intake walls. When the throttle is suddenly opened, gas starts tearing off in sheets and now you are way too rich. With port injection this no longer is an issue, because the intake is now a "dry" system. I do not know of anyone who has used a dual plane yet. There are guys out there that are using a single plane set up with their rock crawlers. That is a good indication that a single plane makes useful torque at low rpm when port injected.
Also, before you go milling out your intake, attach it to the mill carb side down and mill from the bottom. It is a lot easier to line things up. (trust me on this) Also, instead of buying injector bosses, you can make your own pretty easy in a metal lathe. with 3/4 round alum stock. I can't remember the exact size of bit I userd, but it was slightly bigger than 1/2 inch. Those things are a rip if you have to buy them. I get my fuel rail from Force Fuel Injection. www.force-efi.com. They sell by the foot. You will need about 3 feet. $10 per foot, it is a steal. Don't cheap on fuel fittings you will regret it later. Go all AN.
Originally posted by 406GTA Part of why people want to shy away from a single plane intake on a port injection project, is because of experiences or horror stories with a single plane carb engines. In a carb situation, at idle or low RPM, the incoming air is lazy. The gas tends to puddle at the bottom of the manifold. Or it will stick to the intake walls. When the throttle is suddenly opened, gas starts tearing off in sheets and now you are way too rich. With port injection this no longer is an issue, because the intake is now a "dry" system. I do not know of anyone who has used a dual plane yet. There are guys out there that are using a single plane set up with their rock crawlers. That is a good indication that a single plane makes useful torque at low rpm when port injected.
Also, before you go milling out your intake, attach it to the mill carb side down and mill from the bottom. It is a lot easier to line things up. (trust me on this) Also, instead of buying injector bosses, you can make your own pretty easy in a metal lathe. with 3/4 round alum stock. I can't remember the exact size of bit I userd, but it was slightly bigger than 1/2 inch. Those things are a rip if you have to buy them. I get my fuel rail from Force Fuel Injection. www.force-efi.com. They sell by the foot. You will need about 3 feet. $10 per foot, it is a steal. Don't cheap on fuel fittings you will regret it later. Go all AN.
I totally understand the problems associated with a singl plane and a carb, and how port injection basically nulifies all of that. What really surprised me was the flow numbers I saw on the stealth ram site.
Holley stealth ram manifold.......runners......6.26"
Edelbrock performer RPM .........runners ....6.00"
Edelbrock Victor Jr ....................runners .....5.50"
With the runner configuration of the dual plane put aside the only difference between these intakes is the runner lenrth and plenum size. The only place I see the performer RPM falling behind is the plenum size. Just how important is plenum size? Carb engines seem to get along fine without big plenums. I need some good reading on intake design, any suggestions?
Just comparing the Victor Jr. to the RPM, In every dyno test I've seen the RPM makes more torque below 4000 rpm, the same HP to 6200 rpm and then the Jr. makes about 10 hp more above that. So for a smaller more street oriented motor the RPM seems to have the best balance in runner length and still has the ability to breathe. In fact it out flowed every intake tested. Grant you they only tested each port individually without the plenum having any effect. Seems like to me the RPM is just a more condensed HSR with slightly better flow numbers.
I'm still trying to visualize a dual plane setup for FI, it just doesn't have the wow factor of a big single plane or HSR.
From what I understand, and I think this may have been discussed earlier in this post, or in another, when running a boosted application, the plenum size isn't all that much of an issue, but with N/A, port FI, you need to have enough air in the plenum to feed each cylinder in reserve, or something like that. I just know that there's a required volume, and I think it was sensitive to the RPM range.... Try a search for plenum volume, and it should come up, since I can't remember .
Originally posted by JP84Z430HP From what I understand, and I think this may have been discussed earlier in this post, or in another, when running a boosted application, the plenum size isn't all that much of an issue, but with N/A, port FI, you need to have enough air in the plenum to feed each cylinder in reserve, or something like that
Actually, no.
With a none N/A engine you want to maintain, PMP. Peak Manifold Pressure. That means alot of plenum area, so that each cylinder instantly starts to fill. You don't want much reversion or self egr'ing happnin. Well, until you get to high boost, and running alot of overlap for cylinder cooling. But that takes like 60+ PSI to need to really worry about that.
Look a Lingenfelter's Cavalier. From the Turbo to the TB was designed to min the PMP loses.
And, runners and cross sectional area, don't matter much since while they help in some limited areas, the can hurt in others, and typically your non N/A or much more torquey then their N/A counterparts.
On a N/A engine you want to have the plenum size such that the wave motions involved can generate a few K/Pa more then atmospheric. The runner volumes, cross sectional areas are all part of the wave tuning.
Oh, and you want to watch the manifold sizing, since when run dry, since you don't have fuel displacing some of the air. So an engine that had best filling at say 3,500 RPM, might move up to 4,000. And be kinda lazy off idle since you need even more AE, or pulling out some timing.
Originally posted by Grumpy Oh, and you want to watch the manifold sizing, since when run dry, since you don't have fuel displacing some of the air. So an engine that had best filling at say 3,500 RPM, might move up to 4,000. And be kinda lazy off idle since you need even more AE, or pulling out some timing.
When I first started with $58, my TPI setup I had to remove TONS of ae.
When I switched to the singleplane I had to add TONS of ae back in. I was getting crazy lean pops and weirdness.
Thanks for clearing that up Grumpy! That's what I remember reading, about the PMP..... I also remember the wave tuning talk, but that's a bit over my head at this point!!!
