intake manifold modification
05-01-2010, 07:21 AM
#41
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Drew, ironically enough, I spent about two weeks in Olympia during my last Pacific Northwest tour, real cool place. As far as work, I guided at some high rise zip line tours for a good chunk of time that allowed me to make enough money to put away and live off of for the last while while floundering a bit. I'm moving back to home city where I will be able to start the whole craigslist flipping of cars and the like. I'm not too concerned with the benji's and yet they still seem to find a way of finding me. They wanna be around happy people in my mind.
08-30-2010, 10:19 AM
#42
Registered User
Thread Starter
ok guys, for those of you that are still subscribed and watching, i have a question. i understand that in order for a "high rise intake manifold" to work porperly, the longer intake runners must be BELOW the injection area for the fuel..... on a carburated rig, this would be uner the carb. on the 3vz, this would mean raising the injectors up, and placing the spacer between the heads and the bottom part of the lower intake manifold... SO...... the alternative(which was my origional plan) was to place the spacer between the upper and lower halves of the intake manifold, to try and get more torque out of the engine. since this doesn't affect the fuel mixture with the air, it would act as more of a "velocity stack" persay.... is this going to help performance at all, or will it affect anything at all?
back to the top!
back to the top!
09-07-2010, 01:34 PM
#46
Registered User
I'm no expert on this type of stuff but from my 5.0 days, if you want to increase torque you want to lengthen the intake runners. To decrease torque you want to shorten the runners.
What many did in the early days was cut the manifold across all the runners and remove about a 1 inch section then weld the manifold back together. People wanted to reduce torque because of running superchargers. Just the opposite could be done to increase torque.
As far as raising the lower intake that would lead to a whole lot of other issues. One thing I can think of off the bat is the #2 idler pulley, by raising the lower intake it raises the pulley reducing the amount of belt wrap on the timing belt. Placement of the fuel injectors would also probably need to be changed. Phenolic material would work well as spacers or spacer.
What many did in the early days was cut the manifold across all the runners and remove about a 1 inch section then weld the manifold back together. People wanted to reduce torque because of running superchargers. Just the opposite could be done to increase torque.
As far as raising the lower intake that would lead to a whole lot of other issues. One thing I can think of off the bat is the #2 idler pulley, by raising the lower intake it raises the pulley reducing the amount of belt wrap on the timing belt. Placement of the fuel injectors would also probably need to be changed. Phenolic material would work well as spacers or spacer.
09-22-2010, 01:24 PM
#48
Registered User
Thread Starter
NO OTHER INPUT AT ALL?!?!?!?! Well then how many 3.0 owners would be willing to try it out and let me know how the spacer helps their performance?
11-28-2010, 07:15 PM
#51
Registered User
Thread Starter
Small Update
sorry for the long space between updates yall!
so, after finally getting some time to fool around with my modeling software at school, i cam up with this simplified model of what i have in mind for this project. since i had a free 3.0 given to me(unknown interior damage, likely a broken connecting rod) i can use the intake manifold halves to take measurements and test fit the spacer. what you think?
so, after finally getting some time to fool around with my modeling software at school, i cam up with this simplified model of what i have in mind for this project. since i had a free 3.0 given to me(unknown interior damage, likely a broken connecting rod) i can use the intake manifold halves to take measurements and test fit the spacer. what you think?
11-28-2010, 07:57 PM
#52
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f2/m...ake-heh-44379/
I know you meant 3VZ-E, but you should have corrected yourself before I had to.
sorry for the long space between updates yall!
so, after finally getting some time to fool around with my modeling software at school, i cam up with this simplified model of what i have in mind for this project. since i had a free 3.0 given to me(unknown interior damage, likely a broken connecting rod) i can use the intake manifold halves to take measurements and test fit the spacer. what you think?
so, after finally getting some time to fool around with my modeling software at school, i cam up with this simplified model of what i have in mind for this project. since i had a free 3.0 given to me(unknown interior damage, likely a broken connecting rod) i can use the intake manifold halves to take measurements and test fit the spacer. what you think?
On the topic of this thread, what you're ultimately doing there is increasing the intake manifold volume. Which is effectively much like increasing the plenum chamber/lower intake volume by P&P, but more like adding a throttle body spacer. Throttle body spacers are available for many engines(5VZ-FE), but not for the 3VZ-E unfortunately. Porting and polishing a 3VZ-E plenum has been done(see linked thread above). Porting and polishing the lower intake has also been done(search through Chickenlover's posts). Both have proven to be worth the while as performance enhancements. What hasn't been mentioned here, unless I missed it, is increasing the throttle body bore. It's going to be of some benefit too. If you were to apply a 6mm OS throttle body(DOA), you would have a "velocity stack" effect right there. Even if you didn't enlarge/blend much more than the area just behind where the TB mounts to the plenum.
That's how I sees it. You know if you look hard enough it's been postulated that you could even make a hybrid S/C 3VZ-E/3VZ-FE/5VZ-FE if you play your cards right. Just keep your eye out, do some searching, and things will start to appear.
Oh yeah BTW, google is a tuner's best friend.
I'm a die-hard 3VZ-E fan. And I've left some V8s in the dust with mine too. You just have to know how to tune it!
Last edited by MudHippy; 11-29-2010 at 11:08 AM.
11-28-2010, 09:36 PM
#53
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Alberta
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very good post, there is information out there in calculating intake design. However they do not always agree. Below are calculations from one site I found, all theory of course.
Intake Diameter (notice smaller runners gives lower peak)
3000RPM 1.02” 25.9mm
3250RPM 1.1” 27.9mm
3500RPM 1.19” 30.3mm
4000RPM 1.36” 34.5mm
Intake Length 10K -4.3cm/1K L=84,000/RPM
(longer runners lowers peak torque, note the differences in the two formula's, believe length is from chamber to back of intake valve)
3000RPM 47.9cm 18.8” 28”
3250RPM 46.825cm 18.43” 25.85”
3500RPM 45.75cm 18.01” 24”
4000RPM 43.6cm 17.17” 21”
Intake Ram Diameter
6500RPM 2.25”
Or 25% bigger than TB 64mm plate side requires 2.8” diameter
60mm plate requires 67mm tube 2.63” diameter
Intake Ram Length
3000RPM 18.1”
3250RPM 17.7”
3500RPM 17.25”
4000RPM 16.4”
Stock TBI is 60mm (2.36”)
Intake Manifold Gasket 1.5” diameter hole estimate 1.4”, Length
So it would appear that we would need long (18") x small diameter (1") intake runners. Chamber good be bigger (50 to 100% of engine displacement) Turbo should have 150% of displacement. Side walls should be 2" past last runner, chamber should reduce in size towards each end. Runners should protrude into chamber, slowest moving air is always along the walls. Intake runner should also be 18" with a 2.4" bore, so adding a TBI spacer will lower peak power; spacer doesn't increase power but lowers peak output. Lower peak would feel like you had more power.
Hopefully this helps
Intake Diameter (notice smaller runners gives lower peak)
3000RPM 1.02” 25.9mm
3250RPM 1.1” 27.9mm
3500RPM 1.19” 30.3mm
4000RPM 1.36” 34.5mm
Intake Length 10K -4.3cm/1K L=84,000/RPM
(longer runners lowers peak torque, note the differences in the two formula's, believe length is from chamber to back of intake valve)
3000RPM 47.9cm 18.8” 28”
3250RPM 46.825cm 18.43” 25.85”
3500RPM 45.75cm 18.01” 24”
4000RPM 43.6cm 17.17” 21”
Intake Ram Diameter
6500RPM 2.25”
Or 25% bigger than TB 64mm plate side requires 2.8” diameter
60mm plate requires 67mm tube 2.63” diameter
Intake Ram Length
3000RPM 18.1”
3250RPM 17.7”
3500RPM 17.25”
4000RPM 16.4”
Stock TBI is 60mm (2.36”)
Intake Manifold Gasket 1.5” diameter hole estimate 1.4”, Length
So it would appear that we would need long (18") x small diameter (1") intake runners. Chamber good be bigger (50 to 100% of engine displacement) Turbo should have 150% of displacement. Side walls should be 2" past last runner, chamber should reduce in size towards each end. Runners should protrude into chamber, slowest moving air is always along the walls. Intake runner should also be 18" with a 2.4" bore, so adding a TBI spacer will lower peak power; spacer doesn't increase power but lowers peak output. Lower peak would feel like you had more power.
Hopefully this helps
11-29-2010, 07:00 AM
#54
Registered User
Thread Starter
my idea for the spacer was going to be simple for the time being haha. i didnt know all this information as in the previous posts, so thanks for the great info JR and MudHippy. based off all this information, if i were to put a 2 inch tall spacer between the two halves, and keep the stock diameter of the runners, would i even net any difference at all? (good or bad)
11-29-2010, 09:19 AM
#55
Well, as I understand it you may lose some torque output at lower rpms, say below 3000 rpm. That will be determined based on throttle position and the VE of the engine too though. If it wants more airflow at lower rpms, then giving it that by lengthening the intake manifold run will yield more power output. But lengthening the intake run is still very likely going to be effective for power gains at higher rpms, above 3000 rpms regardless. To put it simply, you may need to do other mods to get the most benefit from it at low rpms. Such as adding high-performance camshafts, OS intake/exhaust valves, a low backpressure exhaust system, etc..
A similar concept of boosting power output by lengthening the intake run at high rpms was utilized by Toyota when they designed their VLIM systems, T-VIS and ACIS. ACIS has been used on many of their engines, including the 3VZ-FE. Others with that system are the 1MZ-FE, 7MG-GE, 2JZ-GE, and 1GZ-FE. T-VIS has only been used on a few, the 4A-GE, 3S-GE, and 3S-GTE.
ACIS, or Acoustic Control Induction System, is what's known as a Variable Length Intake Manifold system(VLIM). What it does is to vary the length of the intake manifold run by opening or closing an intake air control valve when the ECU determines that the throttle is open/closed a certain percentage when the engine rotation speed(rpm)is above a certain threshold. I'm not too familiar which the mechanics of the system, but I've read a little bit about it. The main problem noticed among users is a lack of mid rpm range torque output. Which has led many to seek benefit there by modifying the system so that the valve is closed ealier/at lower rpms, which is what effectively lengthens the intake manifold run. Most say that their engines perform better when the intake manifold run is made longer sooner. Very few say leave it as Toyota intended and let the ECU decide when to lengthen it. Of course this will vary between engines based on other modifications to it that improve it's VE(volumetric efficiency).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acousti...duction_System
The other system is the T-VIS, or Toyota Variable Induction System. It's similar in function to ACIS, but is slightly less sophisticated. Because it only uses the engine rotation speed(rpm)threshold as the determining factor for when it's open or closed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-VIS
There's alot of discussion on Toyota's VLIM systems on various websites.
http://www.toyotanation.com/forum/sh...d.php?t=249287
http://www.toyotanation.com/forum/sh...d.php?t=258530
http://www.6gc.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=61995
More info on VLIM systems in general can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variabl...ntake_manifold
A similar concept of boosting power output by lengthening the intake run at high rpms was utilized by Toyota when they designed their VLIM systems, T-VIS and ACIS. ACIS has been used on many of their engines, including the 3VZ-FE. Others with that system are the 1MZ-FE, 7MG-GE, 2JZ-GE, and 1GZ-FE. T-VIS has only been used on a few, the 4A-GE, 3S-GE, and 3S-GTE.
ACIS, or Acoustic Control Induction System, is what's known as a Variable Length Intake Manifold system(VLIM). What it does is to vary the length of the intake manifold run by opening or closing an intake air control valve when the ECU determines that the throttle is open/closed a certain percentage when the engine rotation speed(rpm)is above a certain threshold. I'm not too familiar which the mechanics of the system, but I've read a little bit about it. The main problem noticed among users is a lack of mid rpm range torque output. Which has led many to seek benefit there by modifying the system so that the valve is closed ealier/at lower rpms, which is what effectively lengthens the intake manifold run. Most say that their engines perform better when the intake manifold run is made longer sooner. Very few say leave it as Toyota intended and let the ECU decide when to lengthen it. Of course this will vary between engines based on other modifications to it that improve it's VE(volumetric efficiency).
Acoustic Control Induction System, or ACIS, is an implementation of a Variable Length Intake Manifold system designed by Toyota.
Simply put, the ACIS system uses a single intake air control valve located in the intake to vary the length of the intake tract in order to optimize power and torque, as well as provide better fuel efficiency and reduce intake "roar".
The engine control unit (ECU) controls the position of one or more air control valves based on input signals from throttle angle and engine RPM. The vacuum switching valve (VSV) which controls the vacuum supply to the actuator is normally closed and passes vacuum to the actuator when it is energized by the ECU. By energizing the VSV vacuum is passed to the actuator, closing the air control valve. This effectively lengthens the intake manifold run. By de-energizing the VSV, vacuum to the actuator is blocked and trapped vacuum is bled off of the actuator diaphragm. Toyota ACIS is an On/Off system. The valve (or valves in newer models with multiple valves to create more than 2 lengths) is either fully opened or fully closed. An example of early single-valve ACIS programming would be the 3.0L 3VZ-FE engine. The ECU actuates the VSV to close the valve when the throttle position is 60% or greater and engine speed is 3,900 RPM or greater.
Simply put, the ACIS system uses a single intake air control valve located in the intake to vary the length of the intake tract in order to optimize power and torque, as well as provide better fuel efficiency and reduce intake "roar".
The engine control unit (ECU) controls the position of one or more air control valves based on input signals from throttle angle and engine RPM. The vacuum switching valve (VSV) which controls the vacuum supply to the actuator is normally closed and passes vacuum to the actuator when it is energized by the ECU. By energizing the VSV vacuum is passed to the actuator, closing the air control valve. This effectively lengthens the intake manifold run. By de-energizing the VSV, vacuum to the actuator is blocked and trapped vacuum is bled off of the actuator diaphragm. Toyota ACIS is an On/Off system. The valve (or valves in newer models with multiple valves to create more than 2 lengths) is either fully opened or fully closed. An example of early single-valve ACIS programming would be the 3.0L 3VZ-FE engine. The ECU actuates the VSV to close the valve when the throttle position is 60% or greater and engine speed is 3,900 RPM or greater.
The other system is the T-VIS, or Toyota Variable Induction System. It's similar in function to ACIS, but is slightly less sophisticated. Because it only uses the engine rotation speed(rpm)threshold as the determining factor for when it's open or closed.
Toyota Variable Induction System, or T-VIS, is a variable intake system designed by Toyota.
It is intended to improve the low-end torque of high-performance, four-stroke internal combustion engines - by changing the geometry of the intake manifold according to the engine rotation speed. The system uses two separate intake runners per cylinder, one being equipped with a butterfly valve that can either open or close the runner. All valves are attached to a common shaft which is rotated by a vacuum actuator outside the manifold. T-VIS does not actually keep one of the intake valves from opening or seal off the port for one valve.
The engine control unit (ECU) allows vacuum into the actuator by powering a solenoid valve when the engine rotation speed is low. At higher engine speeds (e.g. 4,200 rpm), vacuum is cut off and a spring inside the actuator causes the butterfly valve to fully open. The idea behind the system is that in the lower engine speed band, the speed of the intake air will be increased because the intake runner cross section per cylinder is smaller. However, when engine speed increases, the second runner is opened, decreasing airflow speed, but increasing the airflow volume, better matching the engine's airflow needs at higher rpms. With modified engines it may be desirable to have the T-VIS open earlier than stock, because modifications that improve an engine's power output may do so by increasing airflow per engine revolution, resulting in a high airflow at a lower rpm.
It is intended to improve the low-end torque of high-performance, four-stroke internal combustion engines - by changing the geometry of the intake manifold according to the engine rotation speed. The system uses two separate intake runners per cylinder, one being equipped with a butterfly valve that can either open or close the runner. All valves are attached to a common shaft which is rotated by a vacuum actuator outside the manifold. T-VIS does not actually keep one of the intake valves from opening or seal off the port for one valve.
The engine control unit (ECU) allows vacuum into the actuator by powering a solenoid valve when the engine rotation speed is low. At higher engine speeds (e.g. 4,200 rpm), vacuum is cut off and a spring inside the actuator causes the butterfly valve to fully open. The idea behind the system is that in the lower engine speed band, the speed of the intake air will be increased because the intake runner cross section per cylinder is smaller. However, when engine speed increases, the second runner is opened, decreasing airflow speed, but increasing the airflow volume, better matching the engine's airflow needs at higher rpms. With modified engines it may be desirable to have the T-VIS open earlier than stock, because modifications that improve an engine's power output may do so by increasing airflow per engine revolution, resulting in a high airflow at a lower rpm.
There's alot of discussion on Toyota's VLIM systems on various websites.
http://www.toyotanation.com/forum/sh...d.php?t=249287
http://www.toyotanation.com/forum/sh...d.php?t=258530
http://www.6gc.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=61995
More info on VLIM systems in general can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variabl...ntake_manifold
Last edited by MudHippy; 11-29-2010 at 10:58 AM.
11-29-2010, 09:27 AM
#56
This is a good idea. I had something like that on my built Hyundai Tiburon. I called it a plenum spacer. It was about a half inch thick and went below the plenum runners and on top of the heads. I got it dyno'd before and after and i gained about 7-8 horsepower. No, it's not a lot but that's not bad. I think it had to do with keeping the plenum cooler. Anyway, even though i have the 22-REally slow, i'm looking forward to how this comes out.
-Just my .02
-Just my .02
11-29-2010, 10:38 AM
#57
Registered User
I started researching ways to get more hp out the 3vz afew yrs ago and what I came up with was..no shortage of speed parts and tech..it all comes down to $$$ and time and effort. It averages more on all fronts and u still dont have the power or economy that puting a 4.0 1uz or the 3.4 in there. My plan was to build an intake to carburate it but the electronics were more than a thoussnd alone.
11-29-2010, 05:10 PM
#58
Registered User
Thread Starter
@ mudhippy-
so, if i were to lenghten the runners by, say, 2 inches, BUT reduce the size of the runners by some small degree, the would i be getting the preformance of both worlds, or would i be at ths same starting point as the stock motor? make sense?
i have been thinking cams and valves for when the motor needs a reduild, along with a bore out, what valves/ cam company do you suggest?
thank you guys for all the input! i didnt realize somethin so simple could be so complex!
so, if i were to lenghten the runners by, say, 2 inches, BUT reduce the size of the runners by some small degree, the would i be getting the preformance of both worlds, or would i be at ths same starting point as the stock motor? make sense?
i have been thinking cams and valves for when the motor needs a reduild, along with a bore out, what valves/ cam company do you suggest?
thank you guys for all the input! i didnt realize somethin so simple could be so complex!
11-29-2010, 06:37 PM
#59
That's going a little too far into the realm of hypothesis and mathematical estimation for me. I don't want to speculate too much on either idea really(2"L x X ID, or 2"L x Y ID). I just don't want to promise you something, and then have you find out later I was wrong(or worse WAY wrong). It's not like I have any experience in the matter, it just interests me. I like reading about it I guess you might say. I can't really say for sure what you should do specifically design wise. I'm not even good enough at math to be sure I could get that much right. Anything I've said thus far is just a guess, and a poorly educated one at that. And in all honesty, I really don't know what I'm talking about on this. I'm just as baffled by it as you are, if not more so.
I can understand you're wanting someone to steer you in the right direction. But I'm probably not qualified at this point is what I'm meaning to say. I'm just famliliar with what's been done before. And I've never heard of this being done on a 3VZ-E, or any other engine for that matter, before you brought it to my attention.
Speaking of which, it sounds like Swimmerboy2112's your man. He's atleast done something like this on another engine. I can guarantee you he knows more about it than I do, just based on that experience alone.
On the cams, I can maybe help a little there. AFAIK there's nobody selling cams for the 3VZ-E anymore except DOA racing. And that dude's got a horrible reputation. The only other place that I've heard of that will even do them on a special order basis is Crower, or possibly Colt. I can't tell you for sure that either of them even still will. But that's what I'd heard, a few years ago. It used to be Sea2Skytuning/Weasy2K or forget about it. Then someone mentioned talking to Crower and saying that they would do some regrinds for a reasonable price too.
Here's the thread where that conversation took place:
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f116...s-3vze-108840/
ToyotaPerformance.com says they have them, but only when you buy their 3VZ-E Street Performer engine with them in it. They don't list them for sale in their online catalog. But may be worth calling and seeing if they could do some special order as well. I've thought about it, just haven't done it yet.
On the valves, lots of places sell those. Who's got the better/best ones? Beats me. I'd say get the stainless steel type from whomever sells them cheapest. They're probably all from the same source anyway.
Good luck!
I can understand you're wanting someone to steer you in the right direction. But I'm probably not qualified at this point is what I'm meaning to say. I'm just famliliar with what's been done before. And I've never heard of this being done on a 3VZ-E, or any other engine for that matter, before you brought it to my attention.
Speaking of which, it sounds like Swimmerboy2112's your man. He's atleast done something like this on another engine. I can guarantee you he knows more about it than I do, just based on that experience alone.
On the cams, I can maybe help a little there. AFAIK there's nobody selling cams for the 3VZ-E anymore except DOA racing. And that dude's got a horrible reputation. The only other place that I've heard of that will even do them on a special order basis is Crower, or possibly Colt. I can't tell you for sure that either of them even still will. But that's what I'd heard, a few years ago. It used to be Sea2Skytuning/Weasy2K or forget about it. Then someone mentioned talking to Crower and saying that they would do some regrinds for a reasonable price too.
Here's the thread where that conversation took place:
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f116...s-3vze-108840/
ToyotaPerformance.com says they have them, but only when you buy their 3VZ-E Street Performer engine with them in it. They don't list them for sale in their online catalog. But may be worth calling and seeing if they could do some special order as well. I've thought about it, just haven't done it yet.
On the valves, lots of places sell those. Who's got the better/best ones? Beats me. I'd say get the stainless steel type from whomever sells them cheapest. They're probably all from the same source anyway.
Good luck!
11-30-2010, 08:10 AM
#60
Registered User
Thread Starter
then i shall experiment!
haha the motor in my truck right now has 295,XXX miles on it, so any performance increase should be easy to feel, right? or should i fab a few up and ship them to someone with a fresh 3.0 and get them to compare the different setups?
i certainly will have to refine my spacer design to specifically fit the intake, since the pic i posted up was just a simple rendition....
on a side note, i just got off the phone with toyota performance.com, their cams are ground by webcams, and per set, they are 850 per set from toyota performance......
haha the motor in my truck right now has 295,XXX miles on it, so any performance increase should be easy to feel, right? or should i fab a few up and ship them to someone with a fresh 3.0 and get them to compare the different setups?
i certainly will have to refine my spacer design to specifically fit the intake, since the pic i posted up was just a simple rendition....
on a side note, i just got off the phone with toyota performance.com, their cams are ground by webcams, and per set, they are 850 per set from toyota performance......
