Vulcan Turbo, LLC wrote:Hmm, my design just misses it. Is it threaded or anything? It might be better for you guys to drill it slightly larger to a size R drill bit, then tapping it to a 1/8NPT and threading a fitting in! Not to mention that is a very small PCV vent for a boosted engine.
Also, was that 2.4L head ported?
It is not threaded at all. That hole lines up with passages in the stock 2.4 intake gasket to allow for manifold vacuume to be applied to the PCV system. If you are using a turbo on a stock manifold you will be pressurising the crankcase through this hole.
The bottom head is a 2.3L "753" head, stock ports.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:01 AM
Yes well we wouldnt want to pressurize the crankcase, that will only encourage more problems, i feel it would be best too drill it larger and tap it so a fitting could be put in it then run to a catch can or something.
On my HO intake I drilled a hole and tapped it for a 1/8 NPT fitting. From there I used some fuel line to go to a fuel filter (old carb motor style that is clear) and then a check valve. From the check valve it went into the plenum. That way when the turbo was doing its job teh check valve would step in and block the pressure. At all non boost times the PCV port would function correctly.
That would work best, just drill the head out bigger and tap that to a 1/8NPT. Also for the garolite spacer, they will probably sell for about $100+shipping including longer intake manifold studs/nuts. I will only sell them as they are in stock since i have no way of being able to guarantee getting more when sold.
WOW, $1020 for a manifold is kind of steep. I was thinking in the range of $600-700 max. Is there a reason for the price being so high. I am not trying to be rude or anything, Just asking a question.
http://www.overkillengineeringmotorsports.com/
Its not just a manifold, its pretty much everything needed to make an m62 work except the sc and a tb which you are getting an adapter for as well.
IMO, this is very cheap considering the potential. I just wish it would have happened sooner
Basically what icemike said... first off these manifolds are not being mass-produced which drives the price up. Second, it will be the manifold and throttle body adapter, and third it will ensure fitment the way it comes including an idle pulley if needed + the list of exactly what else would be needed. And also the price may be slightly higher once fully released. The biggest part of price is how few are to be made at a time.
The GMPP kit doesn't have a hole in the flange for the PCV as far as I remember... why are we worrying about making one?
2001 Olds Alero (LD9)
636 whp / 543 ft-lb
@turboalero
The M45 kit does in fact maintain the PCV port.
mitdr774 wrote:The M45 kit does in fact maintain the PCV port.
This is true. There is a small vaccum hose running from a small metal tube on the m45's flange to the intake tract of the sc near the throttle body.
Tapping the spacer is a great idea. I would like to see the barbs included too. Where are you thinking of putting the other end for the vaccum source. The bottom side of theTB spacer would be my suggestion.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Sunday, November 02, 2008 6:07 PM
FORGET GIRLS GONE WILD WE HAVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING GONE WILD!
Damn, true. Been a while since I looked. (Also... gah... M
P45. M45 was the older less efficient generations
)
2001 Olds Alero (LD9)
636 whp / 543 ft-lb
@turboalero
[ion wrote: C2]Damn, true. Been a while since I looked. (Also... gah... MP45. M45 was the older less efficient generations )
LOL I know. I had a bad feeling you were going to comment on that too. I am just used to calling them M45 or M62 as more of a reference to the size.
FORGET GIRLS GONE WILD WE HAVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING GONE WILD!
Well the paperwork that came with mine clearly stated M45 and not MP45. Honestly I could give two @!#$s if it was a MP45 or just a M45. It is still to @!#$ small for the 2.4L.
Lucky for me the intake flanges have not yet been cut... I quick changed the design and sent the updated file over to the laser shop, they are schedualed to be cut first thing in the morning, good thing you guys caught that. Ill have to get new spacers cut as well. I will be welding on a small tube that can be routed to anywhere, probably before the supercharger compressor.
^^ Design print
mitdr774 wrote: Honestly I could give two @!#$s if it was a MP45 or just a M45. It is still to @!#$ small for the 2.4L.
Somehow I doubt anyone in this thread is going to argue with you on that.
FORGET GIRLS GONE WILD WE HAVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING GONE WILD!
Wade Jarvis wrote:mitdr774 wrote:The M45 kit does in fact maintain the PCV port.
This is true. There is a small vaccum hose running from a small metal tube on the m45's flange to the intake tract of the sc near the throttle body.
Tapping the spacer is a great idea. I would like to see the barbs included too. Where are you thinking of putting the other end for the vaccum source. The bottom side of theTB spacer would be my suggestion.
That is a good idea depending on the manifold design and probably the easiest. I think the M62 is already tapped by the tbody, but I think it is an 3/4"bar. ( unless we are going to put the brake booster line there ). I am going to have to pickup an Ecotec TB to see what the vacuum port setup is
What are we going use for gasket ??
Edited 2 time(s). Last edited Monday, November 03, 2008 6:05 AM
Jason
99 Z24 Supercharged
157hp/171tq - NA
190hp/170tq @ 6psi
LD9 for Life
Blwn LD9 wrote:Wade Jarvis wrote:mitdr774 wrote:The M45 kit does in fact maintain the PCV port.
This is true. There is a small vaccum hose running from a small metal tube on the m45's flange to the intake tract of the sc near the throttle body.
Tapping the spacer is a great idea. I would like to see the barbs included too. Where are you thinking of putting the other end for the vaccum source. The bottom side of theTB spacer would be my suggestion.
That is a good idea depending on the manifold design and probably the easiest. I think the M62 is already tapped by the tbody, but I think it is an 3/4"bar. ( unless we are going to put the brake booster line there ). I am going to have to pickup an Ecotec TB to see what the vacuum port setup is
What are we going use for gasket ??
As for the gasket ...using the stock 2.4 one most likely will not work out since it is roughly a 1/4 inch thick and we will need a gasket on both sides of the spacer. Vulcan will seee what we mean about how thick it is when they take the intake off their mock up car.
On the 2.4 GM sc setup they use 5 orings one to go around each port and then one for the little PCV hole. The head was unchanged so it was still flat as seen in the pic posted. The flange of the sc had the groves machined in to it for the orings. The orings can be kind of a PITA to keep in place when slipping the sc into such a tight space. I used a little dab of black RTV to hold them in place.
Vulcan: Is there any way you can get actual gaskets cut too? Oh and when you get the tb can you post some pics of it. I am not sure what we are working with as far as vaccum ports, not that that is a big deal.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edited Monday, November 03, 2008 7:47 AM
FORGET GIRLS GONE WILD WE HAVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING GONE WILD!
there will be an evep port on the gm kit adapter as while as a single vaccum port, so i'm pretty sure the design he's getting from Md LD
as it on there.
You may have to just use a thin layer of RTV on the flange... Ill have to see if i can get a grove cut in for a OEM gasket to fit.
Vulcan Turbo, LLC wrote:You may have to just use a thin layer of RTV on the flange... Ill have to see if i can get a grove cut in for a OEM gasket to fit.
See what you can do cause I am NOT using RTV to make an intake gasket!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Monday, November 03, 2008 9:46 AM
FORGET GIRLS GONE WILD WE HAVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING GONE WILD!
Hmm ill have to think something out for a gasket, would a copper gasket be reasonable?
