drdave88

iTrader: (3)

the reason i asked where these pics were is because you were going to put them on here tonight. i could go on and on about how i have a 3.4 that runs 375hp at the wheels, does it mean youll believe me? no, because its an insane thing to say WITHOUT PROOF. if youre going to talk big, be prepared to back it up and not just get all pissy w/ us when we keep hearing it and never see anything from you. damn man, you need to back up whatever kind of crap youre going to talk if its gonna be that far fetched.

V6sucker

what are you talking about, my car runs 475 HP, is 2 liters, runs on border line 10 sec 1/4's and gets 500 MPG...

now which of those do you believe?
Actually before I pulled it apart the engine would most certainly do 3 outta four of those statements.

1990 Eagle talon with a Cyclone intake, a T4E with full supporting mods including a big FMIC. It actually got about 24 MPG...

And yes flat out EMBARRASED LS1's...

wildponies3

first, duty is a B**ch(yea still in the navy) second, couldn't get a car to go to walmart for the pics. not bull***t prety soon most of you all are gonna be eating words that you can't swallow, and i will be the one laughing. i will get the pics as soon as i can get a chance, i am not going out of my way to do this though. i plan to have the car running by sunday, and have monday off. i will try to get them on around tuesday timeframe.

kretos

look, you obviously care what we all think because you are still posting, just get the pictues and shut us up, or don't and shut up yourself

V6sucker

you know, I was in the Navy...
We had 8 on 16 off 5 day hours.
At the worst (on duty section) it was 8 hour day, 12 hour standby maybe an 8 hour watch in 48 hours, and had to be reachable.
Once for a few months we went 12 on 12 off 4 day rotations. Personally, I loved that.

SO do not even try to blame Navy duty on YOU not being able to get pics...


and just how long does it take you to install an intake? it took me 50 minutes to pull the upper/middle intake just so I could pull and replace the valve cover gaskets.
***, I had to replace the distro once, and it still took me under a day. And that was including removing everything above plus resetting the motor...

If you had anything that you claim to have, you would have had pics up, if not to shut us up but to show your shnit off.

wildponies3

okay first off, i am on sea duty, and yea it is like 4 on 8 off for 24 hours at a time, you my friend had shore duty or were a airdale, not a engineer like me, but wait i had to go to the brig and drop someone off for some good ole bread and water.......(one of my "children")
second... i can have the intake off in like 30 mins, on in a hour and a half cause i always have problems with the injectors goin in......
third..... the intake and tb are already on the car and they have been for 3 weeks now.... that isn't why the car isn't running,
the clutch and fire are..... i still got to get wire loom for the wires, and a new clutch hose, then i can put the engine back in.....
please don't try to pull the whole "car isn't running cause of the intake....." cause that aint what is holding me up......

was and is are 2 totally different things!!!!

V6sucker

Oh, an engineer that gets to drop people at the Brig... some engineer...

And yes I was air wing, and knew plenty of squids that still had the same work shift.
Hell even when my sqadron was on the boat no one I knew aboard had 24 hour shifts why? you get burned out much longer than 12 hours. So that is where alot of shops call the stop edge.

SO your car had a fire... that is stopping you from taking pics of something that you claim is already installed? what about pics from the insurance co for the claim you filled for cost of repairs?

yeah thought so more excuses...

wildponies3

didn't claim it cause it would have cost less than 500$ to fix.
second come to the world of a engineer for a day... we work full workdays then stand 8 hours of watch durring and after, example: worked from 0700-1530 then watch from 1530-when i got relieved to take Fn to brig at 1730. was at brig from 1830-2230, got back to the boat at 2330 and got watch from 0330- turover at 0730.
i got the pics, heck camera is next to me on the desk. just got to go to walmart and have them download them for me.heck i got 21 of them.... 20 of the car, and one of buddy.

sorry engineers are up if there is work to do.... can't tell you how many days i spent literally 24hrs on a lathe or a mill or a combination of both.... 1,200#steam ships........hate em, wanna go back to amphibs......

why am i not sleeping right now,..... won't wake up if i go down for 2 1/2 hrs of sleep, so i will stay up and just suck it up....

we don't have the poeple to do shifts on my Duty section and i am the Duty Repair Officer as a E-5, yea a second class machinery repairman(yes i have my own desk and computer) i am also second in command in the shop(10 poeple including me)

wildponies3

i am responsible for taking care of my guys( repair division guys< fire party>) if they are in trouble, i got to go get them, or take them to the brig..... part of being a supervisor....


i know how the airdale world is, cause i used to be a AT, i just saw the light, and i love life now(except for duty days)
the entire ship stands a 24 hr duty day on the ship, unlike shore duty where you can go home at night, we can't we sleep onboard if we can..... my division, good luck.

Naft

thanks for the full report on your navy duty. it has totally changed my opinion of you, and i now fully believe you are the most responsible most trustworthy person i have ever heard speak.

on a different note:

do you know the stroke of a 3.4, the bore size? answer: no.

stock stroke for a 3.4 is 3.31" very very close to the maximum possible stroke on a 60*v6. the maximum stroke is so little larger that no one has ever even thought of making a stroker crank. you would gain like 50 cc with .060 bore. stock bore on a 3.4 is 3.62". MAXIMUM bore on an aluminum bowtie block? 3.582". you are ****ing retarded. the largest possible displacement from an aluminum block is 199 cu in with a stroke of 3.31(and an overbore of .080) 3.4 stock is 204 cu in, maximum 212 with an overbore of .070. yeah, thats what i thought . . .



i'm not saying reuse the stock upper, that would be pure idiocy, i dont think its anywhere near possible to port that thing enough to rival pretty much any aftermarket or custom intake. but the stock middle is just a straight shot to the head ports, if you had the heads ported, and ported the intake runners to match, the middle intake woud be flowing equal to the heads. fabricating a new upper is simple because you dont need to worry about coolant ports, distributors, fuel rails, or any of that. the only reason i can see to ditch the stock middle is if you couldnt make it work for your desired runner length. and a port job of the stock middle would be dirt cheap. there is hardly any bend whatsoever. just my opinion though, im not saying no one should ever buy an aftermarket intake, im just saying you can outperform that one for $650 no problem. half that if you were good. some people would much rather pay more for someone to do it all for them, and i can respect that. im just saying that just because someone does something first, it doesnt necessarily mean they did it right.

wildponies3

here's one for you naft, you bore a 3.4 out to .06 over and tell me how much sleeve you got before you run into the cast iron, now bore tha .01 more and you are telling me that that engine is gonna run without turning the cylinder sleeves into accordians. dude let me tell you something, if you did that, those walls would be smaller than your brain, and lemme tell you, you need a freggin electron microscope to see that.....
see your last post, you are so so nieve that it isn't funny, save me, and everyone else that is reading this post the problems and stick your lip over your head and swallow.... seriously....


i see alot of poeple nitpicking a product about it's supposed flaws but i don't see anyone getting off their lazy a$$ and making one

this is a world where B/s walks and actions talk.....
you all think i haven't got anything done, well while you have been bussy working your mouths, i have been working the engine over, you talk about making horsepower, but you do nothing to make it, i make it, and you all don't believe me, thinking i just got all the time in the world to go and get pics downloaded.......

ya know in about a month, the dyno test will be done, and we'll see who's laughing when the numbers come out..... personally i would love to come and see each one of you bashers, so you each can bend down and kiss my bare A$$ when the numbers are posted..... wait you will prolly try to find a loophole in there too....... you all have way way way too much time on your hands and remind me of my freggin 73 year old grammother and her sisters the way they always try to tear everything down using what little 1950's highschool education they got......
all of you need to grow up and get a reall job.

drdave88

iTrader: (3)

all were (and have been) saying is show us some proof. youve been talking this crap for months on here and if you tell me that in the past few months you havent had time to get pictures, just stop posting on these boards. no one is EVER that busy to not get pictures developed and uploaded in a few months. if youve got this much time to post your rants and raves on here, youve got time to get those pics. if it really is that great and really is that modded, then shut us up, show us all up, just stop running your mouth until you can, were all sick and tired of it.

86BLUEBIRD

the maximum bore of the aluminum GMPP aluminum block is 3.582(91mm) up from the stock 3.504(89mm). the 3.4 STOCK is 3.62(92mm). the STOCK stroke of a 3.4 is 3.31(same as the 3.1). the MAXIMUM DESIGNED stroke of the aluminum block is 3.2!! im not really seeing much benefit here for the aluminum block. i think shannon had the right idea with working over a good 3.4. all ur getting outta the aluminum block is lighter weight.

V6sucker

amen...

Stop the excuses, put up pr shut the hell up.

no need to respond... post up or shut up.
Period.

We are calling your bullshnit out.
SO either prove us wrong, or go away.

CC_HotRod

They have been so please let it drop.

V6sucker

woohoo baby...

ok I will drop it...

kdrolt

This should be my one and only post in this thread. The intake appears to be an improvement over the factory one because the runners are larger so they can move more air. The kinks in the plumbing could be (obviously) smoothed by revising the design. The debate here isn't that they offer a power gain, but rather that the intake would work better in aluminum than in steel, and that the cost is excessive.

I'll deal only with the material chioce because the answer of which material is better can only be answered by heat transfer.

From heat transfer, a course usually taken as a Mech Eng student:

thermal conductivity k in Watts/(meter*degKelvin):

aluminum 236
steel 43
cast iron 51
plastics approx 0.5

and the relevant thermal conduction formula:

tempChange = k*thickness*tempDifference

I used F.M. White's "Heat Transfer" book as the source for this post.

Assume an underhood engine compartment at 65 deg F (cold, 18.3 deg C) or 120 deg F (hot, 41 deg C) and an engine block at either 65 deg F (cold) or 170 deg F (hot, 77 deg C). Assume three different manifolds, all about the same size & dimensions, except that the plastic one is 4 times thicker than the metal ones (for strength). All manifolds will transfer heat mostly from the connection to the engine block more so than they will from the underhood heat.

From a cold startup, and using only the k*thickness parameter (because the tempDifference from block to air is the same for each material --- it only depends on choosing a cold start or a hot start):

plastic intake 0.5*4 = 2.0
Iron/steel 51*1 = 51
Aluminum 236*1 = 236

So plastic heats up the least, iron/steel around 26 times faster than plastic, and aluminum 118 times faster than plastic.

So the aluminum one will get hotter, faster, than either the iron one or the plastic one. But eventuallly they all get to the same temp because the boundaries heating them (engine block, underhood air) are at the same temperature for all three material types. So the only case where the plastic one, or the iron one, would be better than the aluminum one is when the engine was stone cold and you just started it up to race--- so it would take longer time for the intake to completely heat soak. That's why people often ice-bag an intake manifold to overcome existing heat soak, or also to precool the intake before a drag run. And the above demos one reason why plastic intake manifolds work bettter (better insulated from engine heat). The other reason is manufacturing ease & cost.

Aluminum intakes replaced cast iron ones mostly due to lighter weight -- both can be cast easily so it wasn't so much a matter of manufacturing as it was less weight // better fuel economy.

NONE of the above matters if the engine is already hot, and the intake heat soaked.

What is heat soak? All three materials above (aluminum, iron, plastic) have an internal capacity to store heat. The relevant engineering property is the coefficient of specific heat Cp. The p denotes constant pressure; the other way to measure it, for a gas for example, is at constant volume, so it's often written as Cv.

For the materials listed above, Cp in Joules/(kg degK):

aluminum 880
steel 7800
iron 7300
plastic 1200 to 2200

So based on the material alone, iron & steel can store more heat (thermal energy) than either aluminum or plastic can. To see what the actual energy storage is we need the density for each material row in kg/(m^3):

aluminum 2700
steel 7800
iron 7800
plastic 1500 to 2000

row*vol(ume) = mass

So thermal energy stored = mass*Cp*T

All the intakes will get to the same final temperature but they store different amounts of heat because the product mass*Cp is different for each.

aluminum: 2700*vol*880 = 2.376e6*vol
iron/steel: 7800*vol*7300 = 56.94e6*vol
plastic: 1800*4*vol*1700 = 12.24e6*vol

So aluminum stores the least total heat, plastic stores roughly 5 times more than aluminum, and iron stores 24 times more than aluminum. So the aluminum stores the least amount of heat (which is good) but it also is the quickest to heat (by the conduction factor above). So alum will get to it's final steady temp, after a cold start up, before either of the other two. This isn't really good, because it means the alum one will get hot enough to burn your hand the soonest of the three, so it will be able to more quickly transfer heat into the intake air (by forced convection) the soonest.

This all boils down, finally, to forced convection --- which is the effect that the cold intake air being pulled through the intake plumbing, will be heated because the intake manifold is warmer than the air passing through it.

The heat transfer is governed by a convection constant for airflow h, the wetted inside area of the pipe the air is flowing through, the hot pipe wall temperture Twall, and the initial air temp Tair:

q = h*area*(Twall - Tair)

Notice that this formula doesn't depend at all on the material of the intake. It only depends on the wall (pipe) temp, the air temp, and the inside wetted area the air flows through.

There are only two cases that need to be considered:

1. cold startup.

2. hot startup.

At cold startup, convection heating of the intake air is negligible because the intake maniifold hasn't been heated by the head (conduction) or by being bathed in hot underhood air (external convection heating). So Twall is close enough to Tair and there is no transfer of heat by the intake manifold pipe to the induction air.

At hot startup, there will be transfer of heat because Twall is now greater than Tair (the intake has been heated by the head & underhood air). All three materials will convect heat from the wall to the air the exact same way.... because the Twall and Tair are the same for all three in a hot startup case (temps are the same but the energy stored in each is not), and the flow areas are the same for all three, and the value h is also the same for all three (assuming the same wall roughness for all three). Obviously the one with the most stored heat (steel, iron) will take the longest amount of time to cool.... but in 16 secs or less, it might not mattter that the iron/steel one has more thermal energy stored.

So to avoid heating the induced air, you want to keep as much heat out of the intake manifold as possible. That's why the Airgap manifolds sold by Edelbrock work so well because they eliminate heating of the manifold by removing the engine coolant.

So which material is better to use? Based on thermal issues alone, the plastic one. It has the smallest conduction constant so it doesn't want to heat quickly..... and for most of us that means not heating significantly in 16 secs or less. Plastic also weighs the least so from the standpoint of less-mass more acceleration, plastic is better. Plastic also allows simple casting of complicated runners, and is fairly inexpensive... though not as strong nor as durable. And it's heat capacity is not as large as steel or iron, and it's on-par with aluminum. That's all the reasons why the LS1 intake is plastic btw.

What about iron(or steel) vs aluminum? Steel is a better insulator because it doesn't conduct heat as well as aluminum does. But iron (steel) weigh much more (which is bad), but it stores more heat (good for cold startup, bad for heat soak), so the tradeoff between these two would have to be answered by comparing the power lost in heat transfer by the aluminum intake vs the better acceleration given by the lighter alum manifold. Since a v6 intake manifold is fairly smalll, and if the intake were thin wall... then the added weight of steel (or iron) would be negligible as compared to the aluminum equaivalent. Since the iron/steel version would transfer less heat after a cold start, then it should perform better than the aluminum one. So it's not a bad choice, and not nearly as bad as many here believe (with no science reason for backup).

But how much better?

In less than 16 secs (1/4 mile race), probably not enough to ever make a diffference on the track.... so long as we are talking about a cold startup run (or an iced intake run). FWIW I could do the actual analysis, with real numbers, to show this but it's a job bettter left for a gearhead engineering student.... not me.

In a hot start case, the iron/steel manifold will take longer to cool down (because it stores heat so well) so it would heat the intake air for much longer than the aluminum would. But in less than 16 sec, both alum and steel will dumpp heat into the intake... and the slight advantage of alum (less heat stored) might nevver be realized into a gain. The race is too brief.

The summary, from the standpoint of using engineering heat transfer analysis, at least a nearly mathless TGO version of heat transfer, is that there will be very little difference between identically sized manifolds of either tubular steel or tubular aluminum construction, either from cold start or from heated temp soaked start. The steel should work better from a cold start but any cold start won't have much manifold heating anyway -- and the weight difference between alum and steel is small compared to the weight of the car. So there isn't much merit in the alum vs steel /iron debate in terms of performance, IMO because the gain of one vs the other is small based on heat transfer effects. YMMV.

A plastic intake should work better than either metal versions, but again not by a huge amount in the cold start case. In the soaked case, I think there would be a measureable (but small) gain. Example: plastic intake pipes have been used (as DIY mods) on the 94-96 Bcars (Caprice, Impala SS) and shown by both engineering analysis and by direct IAT measurements to give a 5-7 hp gain vs an equivalant-size metal pipe, after a hot soaked start. At cold start, there was no hp difference, consistent with the heat transfer math. FWIW, HTH.

kretos

not to sound like an ***, and what a great post you made.
this debate never had anything to do with plastic intakes, so that shouldn't of been in there anywhere, its strictly alum vs steel

BMmonteSS

BINGO!!!!! This is your answer right there. Take it or leave it.

Speaking as an engineer, everything in the above post is absolutely correct. If you guys would like I'll do the math and let you know exactly how much the air temp will change as it goes through the intake, I'll need the actuall running temps of the manifold, runner length, and diameter. I'll calculate how fast the air is moving through the manifold.

Persanity

ok, this is my idea for a upper intake manifold, its very rough but i cant draw so at least its in 3D......

have the 6 tubular runners converge into a single plenum that looks something like a 6 tubed header collecter, that would extend upwards a little to give the plenum some volume, then a single stock Throttle Body could be mounted on top,run the egr crossover pipe straight through the middle of the 6 runners, turn the TB coolant plate around and run metal coolant lines, make a weather proof cover for the TPS and IAC electronics, maybe do mechanical linkage for throttle,cruise and trans kick down instead of cables, i think itd be very mad max looking and give the ablility to run cold air from outside the hood, most likely can use a motor cycle carb air cleaner or customise something

Persanity

damn

Project: 85 2.8 bird

and look where it has gone.

really.


I've been here a decent amount of time, and have seen multiple ideas brought up on v6 performance improvements, and just about all of them sh*t upon. Frankly, I'm suprised teh Pace Setter headers got done, especially after the camaro hunter d headers failed, & the PFE (i think that correct) header debates/argyments. Now we have an aftermarket manifold that doesn't require a stock manifold to be modified and we basically have 5 pages of posts trying to basjh a product that's being used on teh same engines, jsut facing sideways.

kdrolt

I know. But many modern intakes are coolant-free and made of plastic, so it was an easy thing to deal with the iron/steel (equivalent materials from heat xfer viewpoint) vs aluminum by adding plastic for comparison. The heat xfer analysis shows why plastic is (thermally) better, so it gave the post a more solid foundation than just the alum vs steel alone.

EDIT: from the almost math-less summary using heat transfer concepts, the answer is that it won't make that much difference if the intake is made from aluminum or steel. Steel weighs more but it's not a big cast iron v8 intake manifold -- it's tubular thinwall.

So weight isn't really an issue. The aluminum one will heat up (from the head much faster than the steel one (via conduction), and it will take the least time to reach thermal heat storage steady-state, which means it will be the first to dump excess heat into the airstream. On that basis, aluminum is the worst choice BUT in a short run (quarter mile) with a cold engine, there won't be much difference between the steel and the aluminum.

The hot running comparison should show the same basic result (no significant difference) because all intake types will be at thermal equilibrium based on the heat source (same heated head), underhood heat (same convection external heating), and the same (mass) rate of airflow through the intake, which behaves as a coolant for the intake manifold.

BmonteSS is going to actually run the numbers (using math similar to what I posted), if someone provides him with

1. underhood air temp
2. head temp (or water coolant temp is a good substitute)
3. inlet air temp at the air filter (if different from underhoo air temp)

kretos

oh your post was fantastic, but if we start giving more variables to the equation this will never get answered.i'd love a plastic intake, i'd love for this intake to be aluminium, i'm trying to give the maker a chance to justify the cost of the intake, out of the material made

V6sucker

been here a while too, and I will say if I ever make something for may car, it will be the only one, and only shown, not discussed.

BMmonteSS

Any one care to post up the info I need to do the calculations? I just need the runner length and some surface temperatures at various locations on the manifold. These can all be guestimates for the purpose of this exercise. If you want I can do some calcs with some pure theoretical numbers just to get an idea of how much heat is actually transfered to the intake charge as it moves through the intake.

AM91Camaro_RS

i figure around 15 inches on the runner length. i don't remember if i had come up with the number including the ports in the heads too, or not. they're probably about 3 inches, though. for temps, as i posted before; (surface) on mine i got about 77* F on the upper...about 110* F on the stock mid. so, i would assume that the stock upper would probably be in the same ballpark as the stock mid section... as for numbers on the steel one...nobody has posted anything, yet. i don't know if it'll make any difference or not but mine has much larger runners that the stock or trueleo intake. "surface area" on one runner of mine is about 2.578 sq. inshes and on the trueleo its about 1.538 sq. inches. i don't have the numbers handy on the stock one.

wildOne87

am91, where did you get the measurements on the trueleo intake? just wondering?

AM91Camaro_RS

their website says "The inner diameter is about 1.4"." then, i did the math to find "surface area".

wildOne87

am91,I, a close personal friend of mine(shaun) has one of the 2 that were made for the F-bodies, and i was standing there when he measured them with a set of telescoping guages.... measured at 1.625..... if i remember correctly,

V6#20

Yeah, And I just fell off the turnip truck.

Naft

i hear wildone87 has a turnip truck that has an enclosed bed and flies. looks like you're just not up to par dean. bummer. his second cousin( piloted it to outer space yesterday, becoming runner up for the x-prize. i think you should owe him a cookie.

waaaait . . . .

looks like you forgot to erase all of the first way you were going to say it.

lets break it down grammatically:

am91, --- here he addresses the person he is speaking too)
I, --- now this is the part that doesnt fit
a close personal friend of mine(shaun) has one . . . --- here he continues the sentence he started by addressing am91.

what is that extra "I," doing?

its simple, he was originally going to say "I have one of the 2 that were made for the f-bodies . . . ", but then he decided he might have better credibility if he wasnt 87blueracr, but instead 87blueracr's close personal friend.

sorry 87, you lose again.

AM91Camaro_RS

shaun, that's what their website says. that's ID, also, not OD. i did those measurements for the inside, not the inside and the thickness. anyways, that number you gave is still only 2.07 sq. inches. that's still smaller.

drdave88

iTrader: (3)

if youre a close personal friend of shaun then maybe you can get some pics of his "monster car" and post them since he never delivered.

V6sucker

Why even bother?
I think he knows he is the laughing stock right now...
and his credibility on here is right next to nill.

redraif

Well here are some pics I threw up...
intake

Thats as far as we have gotten thanks to the county! They slapped me with a citation for having untagged cars on the property. Had to get them tagged or moved. We talked to them and got a pass for the Dually (state has tag) and Pulsar (one allowed on property in back yard). That left the Fiero. Well was running and only had to pass emissions for a tag! Well got it going to get a catalytic convertor to pass emissions so I could get tag. Well then the clutch disintegrated on the way. Yes died on the side of the road. Towed and took apart. (Got 5 extra days from county to fix!) there is nothing left of the clutch... anyway fiero has to be fixed and tagged by 14th or off property... so its first then intake! Ugh! If its not one thing its another!

So hopefully have more progress in a few days! Must have it going by this wkend (17th)!

V6sucker

if it is on private property, and not on the road, or being driven... how can they tell you to do anything with them, unless it looks like a junk yard...

redraif

The county has ordinances that they can enforce whenever they want! Like no working on anything more serious then routine maitenance... so intake swap breaking ordinance, clutch repair is too. Lady was nice about it and said she was going to pretend she did not hear what I said I was doing on sight. Heck all cars were in paint and looked like they were drivable. The cars in primer are in a storage unit!

I'm with you... your crap, your property... its not on the road, so who cares!

eric17422001

Kind of off the topic, but basicaly the intent of those "unregistered vehicle" ordinances is to prevent what happend to a friend of mine- try and sell your neat house with a nice landscaped yard when the house across the street has five, non-running cars on four flats with junk piled on them where the lawn would be if there was one (save for the few noxious weeds) and the siding is falling off the house. There is a difference between something that's a work in progress or down for a little while and a car that will never, ever move owned by a crazy recluse!

That being said, many places have ordinances to where if it is "out of sight" it's ok.

Also, I rented my 1br. garage apartment to some dirtbags who left me four pickup loads of crap to haul to the dump when I finally got them out of there. Your perspective changes when you become a property owner.

Anyway Raif, sorry to hear about your problems. Will you and LT1guy be at the GA F body shootout?

redraif

Plan to be there (shootout)! You can be my intake witness! see how hot it gets on race day!

The funny thing... the cars looked drivable. Good paint... clean. Not sure who called. Not my direct neighbors either side or across street. They knew the deal. cars there for temp only... month or 2... and we asked first! would they have issue.

I see your point as to why created, but sometimes its just stupid. When it is not an eyesore, and they are being moved and fixed and are clean, what is the harm? Liek the can't fix a tranny @ own house... well what the heck u supposed to do... let is sit and grow weekds? HEHEHE

No I understand property owner... but i also understand bad landlord too. Leave his crap at house you are renting. never fix stuff so you can get roomate... one coin 2 sides. Believe me I understand!

V6sucker

that is why I said, if the yard looks like a junkyard, please by all means do something.
But if they are parked neatly, on the side or in the back yard and are in "good" condition, what the hell, go away and eat a donut..

V6#20

Still no temp readings...humm.... I wonder why?

I guarantee the guy that was going to do it was so curious he already has long ago, but won't bother posting the results.

To Kdrolt, Your theory is full of holes-Why?-

Because if in fact aluminum heatsoaked and would eventually run the same temps as steel, THEN TELL ME THIS-

Why can you run higher compression on pump gas with aluminum heads than you can with iron heads?

Ummm, Maybe because the aluminum heads run at a lower temp to avoid predetonation? So does this mean that aluminum does not heatsoak as much as steel or iron?

Yeah

Disscussion ender, thank you.

V6#20

Almost forgot, I got a good chuckle out of Kdrolt's first post on physics.
Somewhere in there he was trying to explain to us how a car making a 16sec pass doesn't have enough time to warm up its intake as fast as the aluminum one because the run is over too quickly....so...

Tell me this.... What moron turns his car on and immediately blasts it down a drag course giving it all its got without pre warming up his engine to tolerances?

So people just don't think before they post nonsense

Thats why there's "booksmart" people and then those who live in the real world and actually do things first hand.

Don't answer to this post in a petty attack way, answer the real question above as to why aluminum heads can run higher compression than iron heads.

And to the moderator with the trigger finger- Open your eyes and understand the logical debate we are having here and how it is beneficial information to anyone spending hard earned cash. I am debating the responses givin in a contructive factual manor. If anyone else is going to jump into this topic and givve their 2 cents, they had better be ready for hard core facts and someone ready to challange their non sense. CChotrod, got news for you, everyone understands the mockery I make of you moderators everytime you bann me for simple little crap and them I come right back with another little name game- Everyone knows who I am regardless of my name.

BMmonteSS

Aluminum heads can run more compression because aluminum transfers heat better resulting in even combustion chamber temps. In a cylinder head you have 1000 deg temps seperated from 200 deg water by a 1/2" of either iron or aluminum this is where the added heat x-fer properties are benificial. Aluminum and iron heads run at the same temperature, but iron heads have a tendency to get hot spots (sharp edges) and retain heat near the surface during extended periods of WOT. Some of the DIY tuning guys have realized that a timing retard based on amount of time at WOT is beneficial. Intakes are different because there isn't any coolant running through them and temps that they are exposed to are fairly constant once the engine is warmed up.

I think what your going to see is that the aluminum and steel intakes are going to be the same temp near the head, and depending on how hot your underhood temps are the steel intake may or may not be hotter the further you get away from the head.

Even if there is a 50deg difference in intake temps your not going to see a huge power difference, because the intake charge is not going to pick up enough heat to really matter. Guys are barely getting a tenth by cooling their intakes down to the 40-50 deg range from the150 deg range. The air is moving so fast through the intake your may only see a 10 deg difference in intake temps with the steel intake. Thats 1% power difference which is a whopping 1.5 hp on your engine. I'm willing to do the math to prove how much your intake charge temps are really influenced by the intake temps.

Then again this would just be theory mumbo jumbo and it's really not worth anything....right Dean?

I'll be burning my degree if any one wants my input.

kdrolt

Physics (and engineering) are the tools that got your car & engine designed, built and tuned. Are your chuckling because you don't understand them?

I answered this already. Warm engine, chilled intake manifold (ice bag, or dry ice for the really serious v6 owner).

I find that the more ignorant the writer, the more inflamatory the prose.

BMmonteSS already answered it, and you should have been able to figure this out without asking.

Aluminum has a MUCH higher coefficient of heat conduction (as above in my chuckles-full physics post) than iron does, so aluminum heads pulls heat (and therefore reduces cylinder pressure) more than irons ones do... and that reduces the power output of the engine.

So the manufacturer (GM for example in the alum head vs iron head LT1 engine) uses typically 0.5 point higher CR to put the cylinder pressure back where it should be on the alum head to that the output is on-par with the iron version. They do this so long as the marginal tolerance to detonation is still the same for the iron and aluminum versions.

Doward

I will only say this much (based on my experience)

As far as heads go, Fe heads will produce more power at a given CR. BUT - Al heads will allow a higher CR, allowing more power.

I don't think it's the actual material that makes some of us want aluminum vs steel or iron (intakes or heads)

Let us not forget the weight difference. My Al heads are BOTH lighter than ONE Fe head.

Irregardless of whether I get a marginal difference of power between the two heads, the 30-40lbs shaved off the nose WILL increase total performance.

I think some of you guys (I am pointing ZERO fingers, as everyone here seems to be guilty in varying degrees) are focusing too much on the details, and missing the big picture.

Aluminum will weigh less, and retain less heat than steel. Argue about the heat issue all you want - at the price of the Trueleo intakes, you should be getting aluminum. The fact is, the aluminum intake equipped car WILL OUTRUN the steel intake equipped car, all other factors being equal - the aluminum simply weighs less. Power/weight is the name of the game, right? Aluminum offers if not more power, then less weight. Sounds good to me.

V6#20

Chuckles still- now you have to ice down the Trueleo intake before you want to use it each time in order to get the gains.

Isn't that what I have said from the start? Yeah

Kdrolt, "I" was the first here to post the coeifficient transfers of aluminum and iron- or did you forget that. I do not need a physics lesson.

As for the intakes, they get their heat from the heads, so what ever temps the heads are yeilding will transfer partly into the intakes. Since the intake is still attached to the base of the head, it will "hotspot" just the same as the iron heads will hotspot inside the chambers as the head temps rise and fall because it does not absord and disperese quickly and evenly like aluminum- so goodby injectors and the other sensors that unlike what Rob said, I have sensors that have failed on my car many times over the years from the lower heat it soaks and retains now at the base of them.
You guys are trying to BS a BSer and you are not seeing the simple logic that whats good for the heads is good for the intake.

As for iron heads making "more" power and energy at the same CR Not true at all, in fact tests prove they are virually identical and it only varies 1-2% based on machined surfaces vs casted surfaces. NOW with the aluminum head, you can run high CR to get more power out of the motor with the same pump gas than you could with iron heads- aluminum wins.

Read this for a factual reference since my words are not trusted-
http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/te...38/index3.html

kdrolt

It's more than just the conduction coefficient: all the thermal effects have to be considered and you didn't include them. It's conduction from the head, it's natural convection from underhood air, and it's forced convection (intake airflow through the tubing), along with the thermal storage capacity of the intake (m*Cp). You don't need a physics lesson, you need a course in heat transfer. I took that course, BMmonteSS took it more recently, and so has Tom400cfi.

The only BS I know is the one I got in undergrad engineering school, and the logic that I follow is based on what I learned taking heat transfer.

I know how to read too; the heads weren't identical. From the article you cited:

"We still believe that given true identical iron and aluminum heads, the difference would have been 1 or 2 percent in favor of the iron heads."

A thermal analysis of the combustion chamber would show that the BMEP is not as high for the aluminum head as for iron because of the heat transfer, assuming identical chamber/flow heads, because less combustion heat retained in the chamber means a smaller rise in cylinder pressure. The BMEP is the avg cylinder pressure that becomes torque and power. All of that is in Taylor, Heywood, and others that you've probably never seen nor read.

This argument is going the way of many that I've seen: engineering & physics from people that have studied it and do it for a living vs someone who hasn't.

V6#20

Ok, for sake of their HYPOTHETICAL "we still BELIEVE...", I will give your senerio the best possible conclusion of a 2% gain. They are dealing with a 408hp motor- THATS 8hp difference btween 408 and 416 MAX senerio.

Now take that aluminum head 408 HP motor and bump the compression one full point on the same pump gas 91oct and you are going to get about 25HP increase and maybe even as high a 35hp best case senerio

You getting any of this? This is about the 30th time were are saying this.

V6#20

Look, would someone post the damn temp reading of a trueleo intake after drivng it for 30 mins.

I still may want to buy one. What I would like to have is one partially built. I want one with just the middle section base and the runners welded into place with the fuelrail provisions and injector provisions attached, but no plenum or TB neck. And no coatings.