![]() |
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 1,367
|
How to get more flow from 993/964 plastic intake
How can I get more high rpm flow from above intake? Motor is 3.8 rsr p/c, 51.5 intake, 43?exh, in 964 heads with some porting on intake, 993 rsr cams. at this point torque starts to drop at 6k, max hp at 6.6k, and out to 7.7k hp has dropped ~25-30hp.
Would a larger throttle body help? I'm not sure what limiting factor is on these intakes at higher rpm. |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
|
I made a IPD like diffuser in the air intake on my (previous) 993. Instead of the T-shaped plenum just below the throttle body, it was Y-shaped, dividing the flow to each side more efficiently. I used an aluminum sheet, and formed it to fit inside. Look at the shape of a typical IPD plenum, and you will see the difference. A bigger throttle body would be good too. You can bore out your existing one.
I also flipped the whole intake 180 degrees, so the TB and MAF sensor was pointing rearward, and cut the plastic between the TB plenum ad the resonance plenum, so I could rotate the TB plenum. In this way I could fit a cone filter and velocity stack to the MAF sensor body, and tuck everything under the RS spoiler that I had on my 993. I also made a box around the cone filter, to scoop cold air directly from the spoler. I never dynoed the engine, but there must have been some gains, even if the internals were stock 3.6L. And it sounded awesome!
__________________
1985 928 S3, 5-speed 1987 Carrera, current project 2012 Jaguar XF 5.0, Wife's d.d. 2009 Boxster,sold, 2000 Boxster, sold, 1995 993, sold, 2004 Maserati, sold, 2000 996, sold, 1971 914, my college car, 1966 911, sold way too cheep, Lots of VW's... |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 870
|
Is the inlet runner diameter 51.5mm, as you say the ports are?
Sent from my Nokia 7.1 using Tapatalk |
||
![]() |
|
Chain fence eating turbo
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 9,117
|
Individual throttlebodies.
Anything else will be a choke point IMO
__________________
Cory - turbo'd '87 C3.2 Guards/Blk, 3.4, 7.5:1 CR P & C's, 993SS cams, Borg-Warner S366 turbo @ 1.2-1.5 bar, depending on mood ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 1,367
|
Fly911... Do you happen to have a pic of what you did that you could post?
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 870
|
There is another post on here somewhere where someone put an 80mm tb and got good results. No documentation though.
Sent from my Nokia 7.1 using Tapatalk |
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 106
|
If after asking nicely, the intake doesn't want to flow more air... I suggest using a few extra atmospheres worth of brute-force feeding
![]() In all seriousness though, the 964 intakes flow well and based on your mod list, you might've outgrown them altogether. I think ITB's as Tippy mentioned is the only remaining choice. Everything else would be a compromise with your displacement and cam choice.
__________________
"Frankenstein" - 964 C4 chassis/driveline - 993 widebody/Speedster look - VEMS standalone - twin plug high compression 3.6L N/A engine - 945cc cc/min injectors - Bosch 044 pump - GT45 @ 1bar/14psi - non intercooled/wingless - E85 fuel - turbo inlet water meth inj. - 3.5" exhaust - GT3RS clutch + LWFW |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 1,367
|
Yea, maybe... but I'm not looking for some step function in hp. I race in hp to wt, so just looking for something that may carry more torque higher in the rpm band to keep hp more flat rather than it going down.
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 484
|
Have you considered a 996 GT3 intake manifold? The runners are pretty big and you will probably need to have lowers custom machined to get the right taper from manifold to the heads intake ports. These manifolds were working on 3.6l engines running 8000rpm plus.
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Woking, McLaren-land
Posts: 681
|
Quote:
__________________
Shirish 1987 Carrera, Granite Green |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 1,603
|
The 964 intake runners are significantly longer than the GT3 intake runners. And as we know, longer runners = lower peak torque RPM.
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 912
|
i have a larger throttle body on my 964, works well. no AFM, is aftermarket ECU. just waiting on final dyno tune for numbers to compare to the ITB's it had prior.
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 484
|
Dannobee,
don't forget that with custom made lower intakes, you can make them any length you want. |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 1,367
|
Clutch Monkey -- what size did you use and could you post some pics?
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 1,603
|
Exactly! It's been too long since I've had to calculate these, but if you want peak torque to occur at 6500, the intake tract (from valve to end of the stack) needs to be around 10.5". Theoretically, of course. There's a reason why the GT3 runners are so short.
|
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 1,367
|
yea... did not realize the 996 cup ones were so short. I was think'n maybe shorten mine, but the resonance cross pipe is just about hitting top of fan shroud. interesting how on cup one res cross pipe on same plane as throttle hole.
What is ID of 996 cup throttle? Anyone know what the OD is of the cross pipe openings and the intake runner ends? ![]() Last edited by JoeMag; 10-02-2019 at 01:13 PM.. |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 912
|
Quote:
it's still running in (fresh build) so will have dyno to compare it to in a few hundred km's. had PMO ITB's on before this. will find the spec for the throttle body when i get it back on dyno. ![]() Last edited by clutch-monkey; 10-02-2019 at 04:01 PM.. |
||
![]() |
|
Registered
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 491
|
Sam,
Why the change from the ITB's back to the standard plenum? |
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 912
|
the PMO's were worn out, and i wasn't keen on replacing them, but jenveys are expensive and cannot justify it at the moment.
in the heat here, on track, the plenum is going to be safer also, no throttles to go out of sync and cause a lean cylinder etc. engine builder said the hp will be the same, maybe more than before. my other 3.6 has jenveys on it though but the engine is not as built. |
||
![]() |
|
Chain fence eating turbo
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 9,117
|
It'd be silly not to run ITB's on a 7700 RPM 3.8 if a racecar IMO!
__________________
Cory - turbo'd '87 C3.2 Guards/Blk, 3.4, 7.5:1 CR P & C's, 993SS cams, Borg-Warner S366 turbo @ 1.2-1.5 bar, depending on mood ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Rate This Thread | |
|