Intake Option For Vortec Heads

qbnkiller

qbnkiller

Conflaguration Specialist
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

..thanks for the info John...missed you at M10 this year...

That setup looks very similar to what I am putting together, with the exception being the larger TB. From a flow standpoint, I can see what Rev is saying, but again, after speaking with a couple of engine builders, and calling a couple of porting shops, along with a few NHRA friends I know, the general consensus is that in a forced induction motor, laminar flow is not as essential....you area basically forcing it around any obstacles.

As I stated earlier in this thread, I have read about this mod being done before...I see this as a viable option to those of you looking for an option to getting your lower intake manifold welded and drilled. Couple this with a good tune, and as windedv6 said, it is a very nice winning combination. The 90mm TB would be awesome for those of you with big-port heads and big turbos on the far end of the track...

I will try to get the intake bolted on something really soon and send it to a dyno for some testing. I know that there are some things that are grey areas (tuning, engine build), but I will post absolutely everything I can, and let all of you decide on your own. The TB is easy to change out for a smaller one if necessary. I am trying to get it as cosmetically appealling as possible....I dont want to throw in a hacked-up job thing. I am also trying to make the fuel rails accept the AFPR's we (mostly) all use. It's going to be a nice piece of work...if not, I wont sell it. Plain and simple.

Thanks for the support to all those posing on here...everyone interested thanks you too!

Alex Esnaola
MAI TY #1600
 
M

MikeRenz

not stock
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

it doesn't look like it'll work for you john...you should just give it to me :lol:

The only thing i've ever wondered is air path for a carb intake vs. efi/boosted. I assume the carb intake is designed for optimum air flow anyway...so it should be find for efi/boost. The only thing i don't like about it is how the air flowing into the intake hits the flat bottomed intake. I imagine it doesn't matter as much under pressure....but would love to see some real world air flow dynamics studies done under boosted conditions.
 
Windedv6

Windedv6

Ty n 10s
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

I can tell you where some of the biggest gains will be over the stocker. I had my stocker sent to Flowtech along with my vortec heads to port and match flow everything as best they could. They welded up the runners to match the vortec heads port matched everything, etc. The end result was at 20-22# boost the spark plugs all read about the same. That was good. After that they started to read differently. The higher the boost, the worse it got. Some plugs were getting rich enoungh that I knew those cylinders were down some on power. A couple were lean enough that I felt I was pushing my luck...and did. I popped the driver's side head gasket a couple of times. The AFR was showing fairly constant around 11.8-12.1 with timing at 24*. The problem is that the richer cylinders were probably in the high 10s to low 11s AFR while the lean cylinders were probably pushing high 12s or worse.

When I switched to the single plane center load intake the spark plugs all read the same. Here what this tells me. It is not so much how much the intake flows, as the boost can overcome some of the restriction of smaller intakes, but rather the distrubution. Running 30# of boost on my ported stocker had to feed the heads, to some degree, close to max (for vortecs). But 30# of boost with the new intake setup got me from 11.3s to into the 10s. I firmly believe that it got me all the way into the 10.8 range because the different tires and some suspension got me the rest of the way to the 10.6s. I now can run 12-12.3 afr at 30# boost and 27* timing on 110 octane.

I think you are going to find out that the setup you are trying will do something similar. I stayed with the 75mm TB as the 9mm is a little hard to adjust off idle. Opening the blade a small amount lets in a lot more air than the smaller dia. 75mm. That's a good reason to use a dual TB, helps idle and off idle tuning. I don't think you will find a lot of difference in the WOT performance between the two as the 75mm can more than feed our bigger low rpm builds...maybe the 90mm, if you are going the odd-fire route and high rpms. I also like the 3" tubing vs the 3.5" you need to run for the 90mm. Maybe the velocity is better on the smaller dia. which may or may-not help...but in any event, it is easier to plumb and 3" dia seems to more than flow my needs.

John
 
THEMADTYPH00N

THEMADTYPH00N

Active member
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

Revolution said:
I have to throw in my two cents but you should really allready know this. That intake and that elbow will not be worth a spit unless you are pushing a massive amount of boost and huge injectors to flow that throttle body. It's like a midget farting in a 60 gallon drum.. I have allready done preliminary flow testing due to the fact I too am working on manufacuring that intake. But I am using a much smaller throttle body and a totally diffrent setup to keep the air from crashing down and causing too high a static loss when the air crashes against the bottom of the plentum.

All I will say is if you are using anything larger than 65 mm T.B. You better be moving some serious air though those heads. And from my experience with the S10 clan.. I only know a few and this is a very small few that have done it. If you have good port work which alot of sy ty guys do.. you might be able to take advantage of this. But I still can't calc out volumetric efficency for a 90 mm throttle body on an engine barely close to 300 ci.

Thats my .02
Click to expand...


Revolution said:
Im not saying the combo does not work. Let me clarifiy this.

If you calc for displacement and the volume of each runner passage.. 90 MM is too large for a 4.3 unless it is making serious power. IE over 650 flywheel. You have to understand what I am saying from an air flow to volume comparrison. This is what I am getting at. You don't take a Dominator Carb and throw it on a V6 and just jet it down to work. Fuel is no issue with this intake. The fuel system works fine. I am telling you that the airflow is where I see problems if the combo is going to be sold as advertised. What will happen with that large throttle body is the air is going to tumble and hit hard and crash on the inside of the plentum. Why? the velocity is lower. When you open up the size of the inlet the velocity pressure reduces.. it's fairly simple air flow calcs. I do this for a living. I am a certified Air and hydronic engineer and I hold an associates in mechanical engineering. The reason I am bringing this to light now is so that before this thing goes on anyone's truck they realize what is going on. the starting point for that intake should be.. like the one I am deveolping a smaller throttle body with a greater taper to the venturi so the air does not crash coming out of the elbow. I am also not using a wilson elbow. I am CAD designing a nicely transitioned tapered adapter to allow the air to smoothly roll into the intake while keeping velocity at it's peak. The reason behind this... If your air crashes you get pockets in the air stream not allowing the valvetrain to be as efficent as the headwork that they are based on. This falls in suit with you cam shaft profile and with what kind of air charge you are supplying the intake with.

Bottom line so it is crystal clear I am not starting an argument. Only saying..
Bigger is not always better.

This is exsactly why 4 years ago wheel to wheel did not just make up an intake like this.. They welded up a plentum on a stock 4.3 intake and drilled it out made some rails and tested the theroy..

The wilson idea has been out there for a while anyone who sits around the pro 5.0 boards knows this.. or anyone who goes to turbo mustang.com
Click to expand...

Ok so, say the air does crashs into the bottom of the plenum and cause this high static loss. What happens then? Are you going to loose horsepower? Whats the detriment to performance?
 
dgoodhue

dgoodhue

BuSTeD 4.3
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

MikeRenz said:
well Nick made 452hp and 602ftlbs (if i remember correctly) w/ that pictured setup above.
Click to expand...

This is what he wrote

"Built motor, 0.30 over, four bolt mains
412 cam, vortec heads lightly ported, 2.02 and 1.6 valves
Edelbrock 4.3 carburated lower intake converted to EFI, custom made fuel rails
83# injector, FAST, ATR 3" exhaust, T-63 with .83 housing running 19-19.5# of booste
DeQuick dual core I/C with piping coming in on the drivers side, 85-90mm throttle body
Mustang style upper intake/ plenum

Truck made 455 hp and 660 lb/ft at 19# the way it sits, that was with the TC locked.
It's still running rich and timing is still rather low like 18-20 deg."

I believe those numbers are at the wheels as well.
 
dgoodhue

dgoodhue

BuSTeD 4.3
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

Windedv6 said:
I can tell you where some of the biggest gains will be over the stocker. I had my stocker sent to Flowtech along with my vortec heads to port and match flow everything as best they could. They welded up the runners to match the vortec heads port matched everything, etc. The end result was at 20-22# boost the spark plugs all read about the same. That was good. After that they started to read differently. The higher the boost, the worse it got.
Click to expand...

I have always noticed that most SyTy's with modified motors usually run upto 25psi of boost. With GN and similiar turbo it seems like most run 30psi+ (and Buick intake also has air distribution issues) It seems like this air flow distribution issue may have a lot to do with it.
 
qbnkiller

qbnkiller

Conflaguration Specialist
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

..you mean using the stock intake manifolds, right? This is one of the reasons why I am looking into this as a viable option...
 
windowlicker

windowlicker

nihil
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

I would love to see a unit like this actually in production :tup:

Good luck qbnkiller and I'm looking forward to seeing your finished product.
 
qbnkiller

qbnkiller

Conflaguration Specialist
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

...just picked up the latest HOT ROD magazine. In it (besides a pic of the PRO-TOURING Tahoe Campbell's in Canada is building...) is a 3.8L V-6 built by Kenny Dutweiller. If you read the build-up, he built a 700HP motor, using the same Wilson 90mm TB. I know a statement was made that this was too much for our 4.3's, but I'm sure that if it's good enough for a max-effort 3.8, it should be enough for one of our engines.

As I stated before, I am hopefully going to have a prototype unit on an engine here real fast, and be testing it.

It is also my intention to offer something for those of you NOT doing VORTEC conversions. It would just entail a different manifold and maybe a smaller TB.

...TO BE CONTINUED!!
 
THEMADTYPH00N

THEMADTYPH00N

Active member
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

qbnkiller said:
...just picked up the latest HOT ROD magazine. In it (besides a pic of the PRO-TOURING Tahoe Campbell's in Canada is building...) is a 3.8L V-6 built by Kenny Dutweiller. If you read the build-up, he built a 700HP motor, using the same Wilson 90mm TB. I know a statement was made that this was too much for our 4.3's, but I'm sure that if it's good enough for a max-effort 3.8, it should be enough for one of our engines.

As I stated before, I am hopefully going to have a prototype unit on an engine here real fast, and be testing it.

It is also my intention to offer something for those of you NOT doing VORTEC conversions. It would just entail a different manifold and maybe a smaller TB.

...TO BE CONTINUED!!
Click to expand...

Its nice that Revolution came up with this effect of air crashing. But since he can't seem to post a response to my question of what the detriment to preformance is if that effect even happens, I wouldnt be worried about it.
 
George Blake

George Blake

DONATING MEMBER
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

I called up Lingenfelter(they are the ones who designed the plenum adaptor).
They did design that 74882 part. In 1990 they sold ALL of the designs, in stock parts and molds to ACCEL(Mr Gasket). About 5 years ago, they discontinued the part. That would be a REALLY nice option for the guys to run their stock throttle body with the new vortec 2114 manifold. It figures as soon as the heads and manifold became available, the adaptor would go out of production. That adaptor, when it was available was $300 though. :tdown:
Maybe Jeff Scott could add this to the already time consuming list of parts he makes :tup:
 
Last edited:
R

Revolution

New member
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

I just came back on the board to make a reply. You will have to excuse my absence My fullsize got broken into last week and all my work equiptment was stolen so things have been in a little bit of disaray.

Now if you don't want to worry about my statements and think I am blowing smoke that's your call. The performance loss is such. I will put it in laymen's terms so you understand it. The pressure loss and the change in air flow pattern has a drastic effect on the laminar airflow entering the combustion chambers though the runners. The port work is going to have to work twice as hard to make this an efficent combo to overcome the massive amount of air going in. You have to undersand something. This is an edelbrock performer manifold. Not a high volume sheet metal runner intake. In order for this unit to become efficent it needs to be ground out to a single plane and the pressure going into it to make it flow properly for a boosted engine has to be pretty substantial. You can laugh off what I have said and you can test it for yourself. If you want to pay for an oversized throttle body and spend more time tuning it than it's worth then go for it. The same can be said about the Dutweiller engine.

You are not putting apples to apples here. This is a 60 degree v6 and the combustion chambers and runner lengths of the heads are diffrent. STS sells rear mount turbos. They make huge numbers on the dyno but don't run for crap at the track.

If you belive everything that hotrod magazine prints then I really think I best find another forum to talk to guys about boosted 4.3's because I have worked closely with hot rod, street rodder and currently been talking to Tim Foss Editor for the same publications as well as chevy high perf. If you don't realize that 90% of those articles are written to sell parts you really need to wake up because your coffee is way past overdone.

I am done trying to prove my point. I allready have a test truck in the works and right now it is being stripped to do chassis work. I am not going to reveal the combo on the truck untill springtime, But I will say it is boosted with alot lower pressure than you guys are running and it is not using a huge throttle body and it is going to put down some good numbers. They have allready proven themselves on the flow bench.

I brought up a valid point from a technical standpoint.

If bolting together a bunch of mustang parts works that well why weren't guys doing it 5-6 years ago? The parts were readily available then.

The last company I knew that made outrageous claims about 4.3's with things bolted on that truely did not belong on the engines.. well they folded up and are pretty much a dirty word amongst the s10 crowd.. Mach performance made huge claims on putting f-1's on 4.3's and huge claims from 60mm turbos.. that never did anything.. but maybe blow headgaskets and kiss valves..

More has to go into research and deveopment than bolting parts on and calling it done.
 
M

MikeRenz

not stock
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

I'm all for a lower pressure build making more power. As far as "why haven't people used the mustang parts before..." - simple, people sometimes just try new/different things to see what will happen.

Not everyone has access to flow benches/engine dynos/etc...and just have to build it to try it. What kind of power are you considering "good numbers" btw?
 
warmpancakes

warmpancakes

New member
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

George Blake said:
I called up Lingenfelter(they are the ones who designed the plenum adaptor).
They did design that 74882 part. In 1990 they sold ALL of the designs, in stock parts and molds to ACCEL(Mr Gasket). About 5 years ago, they discontinued the part. That would be a REALLY nice option for the guys to run their stock throttle body with the new vortec 2114 manifold. It figures as soon as the heads and manifold became available, the adaptor would go out of production. That adaptor, when it was available was $300 though. :tdown:
Maybe Jeff Scott could add this to the already time consuming list of parts he makes :tup:
Click to expand...


Its comming back Accel has them in casting right now.
 
warmpancakes

warmpancakes

New member
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

as far as the TBs go I tried several different sizes on a dyno and in a vehicle the 90mm is huge, tip in off traffic light sucks but it pulls like a beast at top end. If you have a motor you can spin far a 90mm is great but sucks for daily driving. I went with a 70 because it was a good compromise and the motor made great power and had excellent driveability. Thats the one thing I demanded out of the build it had to drive like a OEM cal but with stoopid power up to 1/2 throttle its great after that the turbo is going well and all bets are off.
 
George Blake

George Blake

DONATING MEMBER
Re: Intake Option For Vortec Heads

Can you PM your contact so I can check in on that every now and then and see when it actually happens? I'm going this route instead of doing the welding but I want to use my stock throttle body. I won't need the TV cable bracket anyway :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top