That's a bitch. All show and less go lol.
Autech Pulsar GTi
- Thread starter Dale
- Start date
i'm shocked, really shocked
but it really does go to show the wizardry involved in intake manifold design and specs
on the up side, can't wait to see you waste joe and everyone on the 1/4 now :lol: should be easy with gains back to that blue curve. I mean like you say 8whp peak is a lot, but the area under the curve is mahooosiv. I can't quite believe that, who'd have thought it!
but it really does go to show the wizardry involved in intake manifold design and specs
on the up side, can't wait to see you waste joe and everyone on the 1/4 now :lol: should be easy with gains back to that blue curve. I mean like you say 8whp peak is a lot, but the area under the curve is mahooosiv. I can't quite believe that, who'd have thought it!
Damn.. Gutted!!
But then why is that on Aldon's dyno there was gains?
Or was there?
But then why is that on Aldon's dyno there was gains?
Or was there?
I dont know Ammar, I think Aldon's dyno has skewed up the numbers.
The things i do know are:
1) when i fitted the intake manifold i lost torque and the car felt slower, fact.
2) When i degreeed the cams, i gained some power back.
3) I was suprised when i came away from Aldon with an extra 20hp.
4) My quarter mile terminal speed was lower than i expected.
I remember saying to joe when i took it in to Aldon that i was fully expecting to have lost power....but i ended up with much more power supposedly. The car did feel fast though, and had a big kick of power after 5,000rpm, but now i see that actually id just lost loads of power under 5,000rpm.
The things i do know are:
1) when i fitted the intake manifold i lost torque and the car felt slower, fact.
2) When i degreeed the cams, i gained some power back.
3) I was suprised when i came away from Aldon with an extra 20hp.
4) My quarter mile terminal speed was lower than i expected.
I remember saying to joe when i took it in to Aldon that i was fully expecting to have lost power....but i ended up with much more power supposedly. The car did feel fast though, and had a big kick of power after 5,000rpm, but now i see that actually id just lost loads of power under 5,000rpm.
Yeah i think the intake manifold length is too short, as its designed for 8K+, im sure it would work fine up there if i was revving high enough with a matched header. But the lower RPM (below 7K) is suffering too badly.
I think the inlet runner diameter is fine, its the length...needs to be about 2" longer (13" total), and my header needs to be about 8"shorter.
For now, the stock intake manifold works better with the mazworx header and my current RPM limit, as they are both designed for peak torque around 5500rpm.
I think the inlet runner diameter is fine, its the length...needs to be about 2" longer (13" total), and my header needs to be about 8"shorter.
For now, the stock intake manifold works better with the mazworx header and my current RPM limit, as they are both designed for peak torque around 5500rpm.
The runners are stock diameter.
The old 186 whp setup peaked torque at 5900, the 180whp KSR intake setup peaked torque at 6400.
The header is too long, but matches the stock intake manifold, which is also too long.
I just want to make power to 8500rpm without sacrificing loads of torque...right now im not even close.
The old 186 whp setup peaked torque at 5900, the 180whp KSR intake setup peaked torque at 6400.
The header is too long, but matches the stock intake manifold, which is also too long.
I just want to make power to 8500rpm without sacrificing loads of torque...right now im not even close.
So you would ideally shorten the intake runners to shift your peak torque up the rev range and change to a different (shorter) exhaust manifold? Or better match the exhaust to the intake you've got. Interesting to see how much difference these things can make in the upper eschilons of DE tuning.
i did try to say aldon is shit but.......................
*shit - inconsistent
sorry ot hear of the bad news, butt dyno ftw it would seem.
map seem FAR off looking @ those afr's with the big inlet manifold - rich
david
*shit - inconsistent
sorry ot hear of the bad news, butt dyno ftw it would seem.
map seem FAR off looking @ those afr's with the big inlet manifold - rich
david
Seeing as the head is BTCC spec and they had 8000rpm limits to adhere to, maybe it is designed to make the power band peak at lower revs, but without really thinking about it, I cant see why?
I don't think you can really compare this to a BTCC engine. The head has improved flow but, as seen in the N1 rebuild on here, improved flow causes shifts in the powerband/torque curve. It will release more power but it all ha to be balanced with proper inlet and outlet designs. Bearing in mind this head would have been based on use of ITB's and totally different exhaust manifold design.
plus the fact that the head is from the era where Nissan finished last in btcc
... --- ...
... --- ...
^Lol, this is true. The head really isnt part of the equation right now though, my top end powerband issue has been the mazworx header all along.
The KSR intake was part of the plan to be matched with a different header for higher RPM, but since the intake's causing massive losses lower down, ive had to rethink things.
Im going to sort out a different header while using the stock intake and we'll be good im sure.
The KSR intake was part of the plan to be matched with a different header for higher RPM, but since the intake's causing massive losses lower down, ive had to rethink things.
Im going to sort out a different header while using the stock intake and we'll be good im sure.
The oversized valves played a major part in that
That's kinx of what I was getting at with improved flow. That build and this one are both using new parts, or new configurations of parts so it interesting to see how it all effects the power delivery and torque curves. As I'm still in the process of deciding what the hell I'm going to do with all the parts I've collected,which should add up to a similar engine to this (same head, similar exhaust) it's very useful from an R&D point of view.
Sorry to crap up your thread Dale.
You make a good point, perhaps you know more.
We arent sure at all,everything i've read suggests the BTCC used the 54C GTiR head and block and later used the VE head. So even if this is a BTCC head, its a VERY old one.
Looking back at some pics, maybe it was staring me in the face the whole time, check out the stampings, note the F2 in there.
