well every track night, i do about 10 runs and take the best time for that day, and if i cant get the car to go faster then my last time with my new mods i concider the mod a dud.
but yeah maybe i was a bit harsh on the dynos i understand its good for tuneing and all and seeing what it does, i have dynoed my car 2 times, and one day i will dyno the cavalier just for fun.
i just have has 2 experiences where my friend made 400 whp i invited my friends to go see hime run 13's and then he was stuck on high 14's.
my main point was that testing that intake manifold you need to take more then one run and get an average. that difference was just not enough to convince me that the mod is not good.
~1996 Cavalier LS 2.4L (auto)
question....will i benfit from a ho manifold and ho tb with my header back 2.5 " exhaust????
Thanks, Chris
2000 z24 Cavalier
AiRHEaD wrote:question....will i benfit from a ho manifold and ho tb with my header back 2.5 " exhaust????
Thanks, Chris
wow..wasnt that the point of this whole thread ?? did you actually READ any of it ??
i read most of it.... but haven't seen this question asked/ answered.... sorry if it was .......
-Chris
2000 z24 Cavalier
AiRHEaD wrote:i read most of it.... but haven't seen this question asked/ answered.... sorry if it was .......
-Chris
Me too, the question is not asked as well, some ones saids that is good some other saidīs not, who have the reason?
I believe if there was a tune to compensate fuel to the added air thrown into the motor there would be a big difference, and it wouldn't be fair to take parts off and on without tuning or driving around to let the ecu read everything and learn everything again, now if there was tuning with the H.O and l.o manifolds (since the stock on was tuned), then we could actually have better proof, I am running stock only cause we don't really have enough evidence to back up either side, throwing air into a motor won't yield much power if you don't have the fuel to help it out, hence the fuel to air ratio......some people may not like this statement but thats really the only way to go about it cause afterall our car is tuned for the stock manifold and not the other 2
"As I lay rubber down the street, I pray for traction I can keep, but if I spin and begin to slide, please dear God protect my ride." -Amen
thats why i just went ahead and used the WHOLE quad engine instead of parts of it...garunteed power!!
What you look for at the track is mph change not et, because many factors determine et but hp/tq gains/losses always show up as mph changes.
scott (section8cav) wrote:thats why i just went ahead and used the WHOLE quad engine instead of parts of it...garunteed power!!
Really now.... stop telling people this!
the last thing in want it all the "parts cars" to be raided when i get there.
LG0\W41>LD9
(and the intake too!)
Chris
'02 Z-24 Supercharged
13.7 @102.45 MPH Third Place, 2007 GMSC Bash SOLD AS OF 01MAR08
sorry
..i keep forgetting haha..its not like any of them would wise up and convert to quads anyway
Dale Young wrote:What you look for at the track is mph change not et, because many factors determine et but hp/tq gains/losses always show up as mph changes.
not really. if car A runs a 13.5 @ 105mph and car B runs a 13.5 @ 108 mph that just shows me that car B had traction problems like wheel spin
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
99redz24 wrote:Dale Young wrote:What you look for at the track is mph change not et, because many factors determine et but hp/tq gains/losses always show up as mph changes.
not really. if car A runs a 13.5 @ 105mph and car B runs a 13.5 @ 108 mph that just shows me that car B had traction problems like wheel spin
Thank you.
Generally you want to work on your 60 foot times as opposed to your et's.
Making adjustments in your launching as you gain power with tuning or mods is critical to keeping or decreasing your 60 foot times.
Misnblu.com
Newbie member since 1999
Thank you Dave and JBO! 
Misnblu wrote:99redz24 wrote:Dale Young wrote:What you look for at the track is mph change not et, because many factors determine et but hp/tq gains/losses always show up as mph changes.
not really. if car A runs a 13.5 @ 105mph and car B runs a 13.5 @ 108 mph that just shows me that car B had traction problems like wheel spin
Thank you.
Generally you want to work on your 60 foot times as opposed to your et's.
Making adjustments in your launching as you gain power with tuning or mods is critical to keeping or decreasing your 60 foot times.
oh no. i must thank you sir atleast someone on this site has enough sense to understand that traction is key to a good pass
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
No traction blows. 13.9 at 103 vs. 14.5 at 108.92. Can you guess what one had no traction until almost 3/4 the way through 3rd?
So i re-read this thread and was thinking of a few things.....
1) the head has to have some material removed as well as the intake manifold for a proper port match (head has B shaped ports, manifold is rectangular) and the manifold ports are bigger than the heads ports. IF there is any lip(s) in the intake port it will KILL velocity.................CORRECT ME IF IM WRONG
2) was the same intake used on the dyno test for both intake manifolds? intake length and diameter play a LARGE role in power production...
_________________________________________________________________
EFFICIENCY DETECTIVE
Fast cars. I respect them ALL. Brand elitism is for fanbois and benchracers
daily: 99 civic Si
deceased: 95 cavy '00 LD9 auto swap (vandalized)
mitdr774 wrote:No traction blows. 13.9 at 103 vs. 14.5 at 108.92. Can you guess what one had no traction until almost 3/4 the way through 3rd?
i dont play guessing games
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
Quote:
1) the head has to have some material removed as well as the intake manifold for a proper port match (head has B shaped ports, manifold is rectangular) and the manifold ports are bigger than the heads ports. IF there is any lip(s) in the intake port it will KILL velocity.................CORRECT ME IF IM WRONG
2) was the same intake used on the dyno test for both intake manifolds? intake length and diameter play a LARGE role in power production...
1) Close. The head port on the 2.4 is larger on the sides than on the HO manifold. Even with the 'B' shape. The outer humps are larger than on the HO mani.
Its kinda hard to explain.
That's why I'm glad the HO mani I used in this test (and am using) is port matched to the head.
2)Because of space restraints, you can't use the same intake piping between manifolds.
Its possible to get the same pipe 'lengths' but you have to do some tom-foolery to do it.
-M
Remember....syringes go in the RED waste basket.
My point is traction or not unless you are spinning the tires the entire 1/4 or lift before the finish line, the car with the higher trap speed is making more hp/tq. I had a Camaro once that ran 113mph in the 1/4 consistantly, then one day the mph dropped to 108 and it was because a head gasket had blow causing a drop in hp/tq which showed itself as a lower mph.
Mastin wrote:Quote:
1) the head has to have some material removed as well as the intake manifold for a proper port match (head has B shaped ports, manifold is rectangular) and the manifold ports are bigger than the heads ports. IF there is any lip(s) in the intake port it will KILL velocity.................CORRECT ME IF IM WRONG
2) was the same intake used on the dyno test for both intake manifolds? intake length and diameter play a LARGE role in power production...
1) Close. The head port on the 2.4 is larger on the sides than on the HO manifold. Even with the 'B' shape. The outer humps are larger than on the HO mani.
Its kinda hard to explain.
That's why I'm glad the HO mani I used in this test (and am using) is port matched to the head.
2)Because of space restraints, you can't use the same intake piping between manifolds.
Its possible to get the same pipe 'lengths' but you have to do some tom-foolery to do it.
-M
i understand the manifold is port matched, but is the head port matched as well? both have to be modified to get proper smooth transition from manifold to head so the port floor and roof are smooth
So the HO manifold dyno run was done with an Open throttle body and the stock manifold with an intake? If so theres HP loss right there
_________________________________________________________________
EFFICIENCY DETECTIVE
Fast cars. I respect them ALL. Brand elitism is for fanbois and benchracers
daily: 99 civic Si
deceased: 95 cavy '00 LD9 auto swap (vandalized)
mitdr774 wrote:14.5 @ 108.92
i figured that. i just misunderstood your post
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
delslo9 wrote:Mastin wrote:Quote:
1) the head has to have some material removed as well as the intake manifold for a proper port match (head has B shaped ports, manifold is rectangular) and the manifold ports are bigger than the heads ports. IF there is any lip(s) in the intake port it will KILL velocity.................CORRECT ME IF IM WRONG
2) was the same intake used on the dyno test for both intake manifolds? intake length and diameter play a LARGE role in power production...
1) Close. The head port on the 2.4 is larger on the sides than on the HO manifold. Even with the 'B' shape. The outer humps are larger than on the HO mani.
Its kinda hard to explain.
That's why I'm glad the HO mani I used in this test (and am using) is port matched to the head.
2)Because of space restraints, you can't use the same intake piping between manifolds.
Its possible to get the same pipe 'lengths' but you have to do some tom-foolery to do it.
-M
i understand the manifold is port matched, but is the head port matched as well? both have to be modified to get proper smooth transition from manifold to head so the port floor and roof are smooth
So the HO manifold dyno run was done with an Open throttle body and the stock manifold with an intake? If so theres HP loss right there
Hell a different intake can net 10 hp...So if the intake was a different length and diameter then the results will be skewed.
When switching to this manifold, to make it work properly, you should port match the head to the manifold, which requires removing material from
BOTH the head and the intake manifold. So if u want to make the switch to HO or LO then it should be permanent
_________________________________________________________________
EFFICIENCY DETECTIVE
Fast cars. I respect them ALL. Brand elitism is for fanbois and benchracers
daily: 99 civic Si
deceased: 95 cavy '00 LD9 auto swap (vandalized)
Quote:
i understand the manifold is port matched, but is the head port matched as well? both have to be modified to get proper smooth transition from manifold to head so the port floor and roof are smooth
So the HO manifold dyno run was done with an Open throttle body and the stock manifold with an intake? If so theres HP loss right there
Ummm, you just said the same thing I think.
The openings on the runners is a 1 to 1 match to the head.
A whole new piece was welded on the front end, so everything matches up perfectly.
Take a look at Induction Dynamics cad files and pics and see how they did it.
And you'll get the indea of how mine is set up.
Quote:
When switching to this manifold, to make it work properly, you should port match the head to the manifold, which requires removing material from BOTH the head and the intake manifold. So if u want to make the switch to HO or LO then it should be permanent
Yup,
And on the other HOs I did on my own, that's what I had to do.
But I got a gem in the the HO manifold I have now.
Both in price and quality of work.
I'll just to try to get better pics up again one day.
-M
Remember....syringes go in the RED waste basket.
Mastin,
Who ended up with that head I ported, polished and built for you? I am wondering if it was ever installed anywhere, or if it is still in the closet. I am wondering how it worked out for whomever is running it. I believe I matched that one to an HO mani gasket...or was it just the standard 2.4L gasket. I can't remember.
-da chinchilla
