Custom intake runner help??

[djacks222]

So now I'm going to do some things to my intake and attempt to make dual runners on my v8 sho.

This will be for the trial stage so I'm going to use spectre intake accessories for now until I figure it all out.

I'll start with this..
http://www.spectreperformance.com/mobile/product.aspx?prod=9290
And use my dremel to cut the aluminum and give me four 2" holes on each side.
Then I'll get me the adapters.
http://www.spectreperformance.com/mobile/product.aspx?prod=87511
And then a 3" pipe and get this to adapt it to a 3 1/2" then to a 4" then split it off to a single throttle body with this
http://www.spectreperformance.com/mobile/product.aspx?prod=9778
And get this for the maf sensor so it'll mount to my t.b.
http://www.spectreperformance.com/mobile/product.aspx?prod=8146
Now an 45 bend for my filter and a few straight pieces to complete it.



Does anyone have any advice for me? Good or bad
The current intake piping of snakes are like 2" or something like that and I think if I have the intake ports criss cross so where each runner provides 2 cylinders on each head with air that it would be twice if not way better than each runner providing air for that head.



This project will take a month or so to do. As I still don't have all the parts to do it with but it's all coming in the mail....

 

[GEN 3 SHO FAN]

Are you trying to recreate the mythical dual intake ? If yes, I rode many (almost all) posts here and on V8SHO.com and you're probably the first to try a such thing... A very few people will be able to help you with that (on the pratical way at least).

If you give a lot more air to motor, don't forget that : you modifiy your torque curve like this :

At low rpm, you will have a little loss of power. Many people in the past have the computer tuned to don't have this loss (and to gain some hp). But another thing you can do is keeping the secondaries in working condition with your new intake just like the Gen 2 (not sure where you will be able to put it however). Then, you will have the best part of the 2 curves if I understand correctly all I rode. Maybe some veterans can help us ?

Another thing in the intake part, you probably already saw it, you have parts shaped like trumpets, some guys tryed to retreive this part and the motor reacted differently, resulting in a loss of power and erratic behavior. I can't explain it precisely but this thing is related with resonance and vibration of air in motor and control the speed of air entering in combustion chambers. The length of these things is the balance between hp and torque. (I forgot which is : the longer they are, the more hp you gain but you lose torque and same thing for the reverse, torque gain for hp loss). These parts must be tuned very precilely and I think it's the major wall in this project that the few who have tryed never climbed it because you will have to "hand made" these parts. You can make a search by word with "trumpet" on this forum to have a better idea.

But if you resolve this (you seem very good in mechanic), you will have a big hp and torque gain (like 20 or 30 hp, based on the 1995 rumors).

Good luck and keep us informed !

 

[shomethe$$$]

You got guts for attempting this, although I have a gen2, it took me four months working 5-6 hours a week, you can see it in my avatar.



I started with this concept



and taking a lot from the Boss 290 intake



I change it a little bit and ended up with this:




we had a lengthy discussion here:

http://www.shoforum.com/index.php?threads/anyone-running-without-butterflies-plates.103665/page-3

The only thing I would do differently is just weld an inlet since mine was supercharged, no need to make a throttle body mount, if possible make the runners go across across but I couldn't do that since the whole idea was to close the hood.

 

[GEN 3 SHO FAN]

I'm wondering if this project can be built with 2 stock V8 surge tanks like the first prototype... (?)




http://www.ford-taurus.org/taurusinfo/Concepts/G3SHO.php

Some blueprints exist for this intake. Maybe it can be usefull to have.

 

[shomethe$$$]

Probably could but that stock V8 tank looks bulky unless you can cut or block half the openings. A surge tank like the prototype would be better, I'm sure other cars have tanks which can be disassembled and some custom piping could be attached to it. Even two 4-cylinder engine intakes could work as a surge tank. If you're going that far might as well add two throttle bodies.

 

[Nuke]

Alright, I have thought about this at length, and I will either come across as a total idiot, or a mad genius. Maybe a little of both.

First off, I will say this is something I have wanted for as long as I knew the prototype existed. For years. I have lots of ideas, and am very rarely able to carry them out. This one has me stumped. There are so many things that go into designing an intake for this type of application. This isn't like bolting a Holley Double Pumper on an old 302.

First, the things I think will pose issues. You said you wanted critiques both ways.
I want to know, do you plan on doing dual length runners like the prototype intake? If so, how do you calculate the length of each runner? Or its size? I saw in your other posts you removed your IMRC controls and butterflies, so I am going to assume not. If that is the case, then I am guessing that you are simply going to hook the front bank of cylinders to a new intake setup.

With the removal of a bank of cylinders from the back and the addition of a new plenum on the front, how would you calculate the proper size for the surge tank(s)? Another very critical consideration is making each set of runners identical front to back. Different lengths will affect the flow on one bank as compared to the other.

And as mentioned above, you have the venturis in the manifold. How would you deal with that in relation to the front intake set? I understand you could find a whole nother set of them and use them in the front, but I wonder how they would perform with half the air flow through each. But that is where I would start. We know the design is right for the motor.

It seems to design one form scratch you would nearly need a degree in fluid dynamics. After hearing about removing the venturis out of the intake, and the talk of it being because of frequency and resonance, that a good area of study would be into a Helmholtz resonator. I am sure the stock intake has taking that sort of thing into account, and is probably partly why it is shaped the way it is.

Now for the middle ground. Here are some of the things I have considered in my quest for something like this. While you may have considered many of my ideas, I thought I would share them, as 2 heads are better than one. These are considerations I have given, and obstacles I would have to overcome.
You would want to match airflow on the front and back bank. Anything you do, you need to mirror front to back. Next, if the IMRC is gone, there is no need to do dual length runners. For that to be beneficial, you would have to reinstall the IMRC control, and then design a dual length intake setup. It seems unnecessary for all out power production. One thing I would not do is design it to fit under the stock hood. I believe that will result in constraints that are not in the best interests of producing an optimal design. Cowls are not difficult to build. Since we are going to all the effort to build something from near scratch, I would recommend dual throttle bodies. Sure you could use one, but truthfully I think it would be easier to design with duals. Make one a master, and one a slave. You only need one TPS between the two. Just use the front one as the secondary TB. On that note, even with twin TBs, I would run them to a single air meter. I believe there are cars with dual MAFs, but the Ford ECU probably can't be made to accommodate that. I would imagine you would need a standalone EMS for that. And even if you did duals, there would have to be some way to cut all the values in half that the ECU receives, since each meter would only flow half the normal amount of air. Unlike the TB, there would be no way I see to make sure they were metered in tandem with the current programming. I think it would be easier to run 2 pips to a MAF than to split the intake after a single TB.
Another thing I am sure you understand is you will need a tuner. And probably not just a basic hand held. Modifications of this drastic a change will require a good tuner, and someone who knows how to use the program. For as much as should be gained, there is no way the stock programming will be happy in any way, shape or form.

Lastly, the good stuff. I think you are on the right track. They are restricted, and more air is always better. I think that doing away with the IMRC and dual runners will simplify the project and is the correct choice. Looking at the prototype manifold, it has been done before, and I wholeheartedly believe if it was done once, it can be done again. And probably better as technology progresses. I think using as much of the stock stuff but mirrored would be a good way to go.
If you are a true glutton, there are the blueprints for the prototype manifold. Replicate it. We all know that works. Otherwise, you are on the right track with what you are doing. There is a lot to be gained. If the first design doesn't work, don't give up.

Otherwise, if you want to go completely bonkers, run ITBs, and stick the intake trumpets out the hood. That would look cool.