billseph Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 ^ I'd tend to think that for the cost of that piece that the $$ would be better spent elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 I don't have one on mine, and unless you're tracking it...it's questionable it's benefits. A smaller diameter steel tubing shaft may have lower MOI, and therefore accelerate faster than and aluminum unit of larger diameter. I dynoed in SoCal, and ran the 1/4 mile first on my 1st gen G-Tech (which was close to my actual dyno run results) and then made a series of track passes in SanAntonio Texas where the track has a certified scale so I got an actual as-run track weight to do the hp calculations from the 1/4 mile times and trap speeds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger280zx Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 Wow, that really is some great info. I wonder why I haven't seen that thread before... Definitely a lot to think about. Thank you for letting me know about that thread. Because you don't know how to search. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluDestiny Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 My stock L28 spun 147 on a dyno. The 1/4 mile times say "more" (15.50 @ 89.XX) So tune till you hit that point...call it your "baseline" and go from there. I have a baseline for my 260z, it had an L26 and put out 145 to the hubs with SU carbs. So yes this is very achievable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 Absotively! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justforkicks Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 Because you don't know how to search. + that! A guy who is "always here" need to get under the hood and get dirty ( O no) to get results. Or there is the dream on way of doing it, where one just gets more and more proven ideas, then bashes them with " I read" ...... Thanks to all the contributors who give proven and useful ways to remedy an issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connor280ZX Posted September 15, 2014 Author Share Posted September 15, 2014 This thread is a year old... Don't bump it with criticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 Oh Oh... catfight! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69sroadster Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 So how is this car running now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connor280ZX Posted October 27, 2014 Author Share Posted October 27, 2014 She runs pretty good, but still stock. Tweaked/tuned everything I could to squeeze every last bit of power out of the engine. Looking into putting a Turbo intake manifold on the car, shave the mount for the AACV, and mill/tap the plenum for the cold start valve. 6% more air than N/A manifold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger280zx Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 What evidence is there that the turbo intake flows 6% more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connor280ZX Posted October 27, 2014 Author Share Posted October 27, 2014 According to BRAAPS EFI Bible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger280zx Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Well if Paul says so then it must be; although, I have never seen that kind of bump from swapping over to one. Not sure why one would go through the trouble of swapping and modifying a stock intake manifold, yet not modify it to make power. There is an awful lot of flow to be had inside those stock runners and plenum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connor280ZX Posted October 27, 2014 Author Share Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) Well if Paul says so then it must be; although, I have never seen that kind of bump from swapping over to one. Not sure why one would go through the trouble of swapping and modifying a stock intake manifold, yet not modify it to make power. There is an awful lot of flow to be had inside those stock runners and plenum. I'd rather swap to a slightly free-er flowing manifold than spend nearly $500 for someone to port my only manifold, only mildly (1-1.5mm per runner). I'm not looking for huge gains, but just enough to get my car running low 14's. I am very limited with the stock EFI upon how much i can port. The problem is, i have no choice but to stick with the stock EMS in order to stay street legal (Cali Smog laws). Edited October 27, 2014 by Connor280ZX Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) Optimal port diameter is 35mm and it will flow 200+ CFM. If you make a hole bigger than 35mm, you screwed up if you're using stock-sized valves! The "restriction" in the stock manifold comes from it's bends, shorten it and a stub stack at 35mm will flow enough to surprise you. Bigger is not necessarily better. Edited October 28, 2014 by Tony D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misterstag Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 Thanks for this thread, just got my 82 s130 and I know where to start now before I think of addin turbo to the car. Which I hope not too. Awesome thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.