Notices
Engine Performance This section is for discussion on all engine building related questions.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: KPower

New Miata Junk 2 Intake

Old Dec 17, 2017 | 04:19 PM
  #281  
Zsanz's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 163
Total Cats: -11
From: Derpsville
Default

Is it safe to presume that the as pictured manifold was the one recorded and it did not have the Plenum Spacer?
Are gains negligible with FI?
Reply
Leave a poscat -5 Leave a negcat
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 04:21 PM
  #282  
turbofan's Avatar
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,146
Total Cats: 1,087
From: Lake Forest, CA
Default

Did you read the thread? Derpsville indeed.
__________________
Ed@949Racing/Supermiata
www.949racing.com
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 04:34 PM
  #283  
Zsanz's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 163
Total Cats: -11
From: Derpsville
Default

Originally Posted by turbofan
Did you read the thread? Derpsville indeed.
no, JUST HERE 4 DA PIX
Reply
Leave a poscat -5 Leave a negcat
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 04:50 PM
  #284  
18psi's Avatar
VladiTuned
iTrader: (76)
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 35,821
Total Cats: 3,482
Default

say something stupid again
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 05:41 PM
  #285  
Zsanz's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 163
Total Cats: -11
From: Derpsville
Default

It was more sarcasm, I was being genuine though towards not seeing mention of gains with use of the plenum spacer on FI applications. Guess I’ll just have to get one of my guys to CFD flow characteristics
Reply
Leave a poscat -1 Leave a negcat
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 05:46 PM
  #286  
turbofan's Avatar
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,146
Total Cats: 1,087
From: Lake Forest, CA
Default

RTFT.
__________________
Ed@949Racing/Supermiata
www.949racing.com
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 05:54 PM
  #287  
18psi's Avatar
VladiTuned
iTrader: (76)
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 35,821
Total Cats: 3,482
Default

Originally Posted by Zsanz
It was more sarcasm, I was being genuine though towards not seeing mention of gains with use of the plenum spacer on FI applications. Guess I’ll just have to get one of my guys to CFD flow characteristics
Everyone and their mother is "planning" to do all sorts of testing and post all sorts of results.

So far, less than a handful of people posted anything even close to data, and of those only two showed some semi-decent a/b comparo's.

So you're more than welcome to contribute.
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 07:37 PM
  #288  
emilio700's Avatar
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 7,626
Total Cats: 2,618
Default

Originally Posted by Zsanz
It was more sarcasm, I was being genuine though towards not seeing mention of gains with use of the plenum spacer on FI applications. Guess I’ll just have to get one of my guys to CFD flow characteristics
CFD doesn't tell you squat about power potential in a manifold unless your engineer can model the harmonics and complex interactions between each cylinder pressure waves and how they take turns pulsing through the throttle body.

Just like a a shiny hogged out intake port might show wacky CFM gains but make less power everywhere than a lumpy, tiny, OEM port full of sharp edges.

That the S2 appears to only make a tiny bit more power in a very narrow band is testament to this. Looks like it should make more power everywhere. Doesn't.
__________________


www.facebook.com/SuperMiata

949RACING.COM Home of the 6UL wheel

.33 SNR
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 07:37 PM
  #289  
viperormiata's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (24)
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,110
Total Cats: 283
From: Key West
Default

I'm just upset the developer of the product didn't perform the testing.
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 08:11 PM
  #290  
Lokiel's Avatar
All-round "Good Guy"
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,036
Total Cats: 266
From: Brisbane, AUSTRALIA
Default

Originally Posted by viperormiata
I'm just upset the developer of the product didn't perform the testing.
Maybe they did!
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 08:19 PM
  #291  
Zsanz's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 163
Total Cats: -11
From: Derpsville
Default

Originally Posted by emilio700
CFD doesn't tell you squat about power potential in a manifold unless your engineer can model the harmonics and complex interactions between each cylinder pressure waves and how they take turns pulsing through the throttle body.

Just like a a shiny hogged out intake port might show wacky CFM gains but make less power everywhere than a lumpy, tiny, OEM port full of sharp edges.

That the S2 appears to only make a tiny bit more power in a very narrow band is testament to this. Looks like it should make more power everywhere. Doesn't.

Appreciate the reply,
Was curious if S2 released the spacer "because they can" aligned with the aformetnioend results for if its truly a band-aid that fixes some aspect of the volumetric distribution/efficiency.
Maybe ansys will know, maybe Ill have to wait to dyno back to back for closure.
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 10:05 PM
  #292  
Savington's Avatar
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,106
From: Sunnyvale, CA
Default

Originally Posted by Schroedinger
So I wouldn't be misinterpreting that graph if I observed that the VTCS is the better manifold everywhere except >6000rpm?
I am highly incredulous of any chart which shows a stock 01-05 manifold holding a flat torque peak to 6,000rpm. Use FM's comparison to judge between the two, but forget about the scales. Neither is accurate to what you would see at sea level.
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 11:33 PM
  #293  
18psi's Avatar
VladiTuned
iTrader: (76)
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 35,821
Total Cats: 3,482
Default

Originally Posted by viperormiata
I'm just upset the developer of the product didn't perform the testing.
this implies that the product was actually developed.

vs you know.....chopping off a honda flange, welding on a miata flange, making mold, and casting.

Originally Posted by Lokiel
Maybe they did!
I bet. And when it didn't perform, they left out the data .


But despite all this, It's still a cool new product, esp for the money.
Which shows just how low our IM standards are
Old Dec 17, 2017 | 11:44 PM
  #294  
AlwaysBroken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 817
Total Cats: 20
From: TAMPA, FL
Default

Taken alone, this seems like a pretty cool alternative to hunting down a flattop... but you have to also buy the skunk throttle as well. So it's really more like an 800 dollar flattop than a direct alternative. *googles current price of flattop manifold* Oh well nevermind, this actually appears to be a great deal.

I'm still kinda of amazed at how no one has come up with a manifold that makes better power than a mazda factory manifold. Did the old mazda engineers really have better tools for modeling intake manifolds than we have today? Or does the miata's head just suck so bad that it's impossible to fix by improving the intake?
Old Dec 18, 2017 | 12:05 AM
  #295  
18psi's Avatar
VladiTuned
iTrader: (76)
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 35,821
Total Cats: 3,482
Default

the latter
Old Dec 18, 2017 | 08:35 AM
  #296  
swimming108's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 638
Total Cats: 11
From: Seven Valleys, PA
Default

Originally Posted by AlwaysBroken
Taken alone, this seems like a pretty cool alternative to hunting down a flattop... but you have to also buy the skunk throttle as well. So it's really more like an 800 dollar flattop than a direct alternative. *googles current price of flattop manifold* Oh well nevermind, this actually appears to be a great deal.

I'm still kinda of amazed at how no one has come up with a manifold that makes better power than a mazda factory manifold. Did the old mazda engineers really have better tools for modeling intake manifolds than we have today? Or does the miata's head just suck so bad that it's impossible to fix by improving the intake?
Kinda makes you wish that someone would develop an aftermarket head for the BP block, doesn't it... That will never happen though. Even the CNC machined heads that 949 offered were too expensive for majority of the cheapskate miata owners.

I may not get rid of my VICS manifold, since my primary use of the car is autox, but i am glad that S2 decided to expand our options with this manifold. They didn't have to release this manifold for us and it probably isn't even that profitable of a market expansion for them. A big "Thank you" to 949 and FM for giving us some legitimate data to understand how it will perform on our motors.
Old Dec 18, 2017 | 12:14 PM
  #297  
Mazdaspeeder's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 916
Total Cats: 70
From: Philadelphia
Default

I'm glad well get to see S2 vs SQ numbers on the same dyno. I was amazed at just how much less power the FM car made overall compared to what I do here at sea level. That car had a 3071 (or 76) with 27psi and made WITH the S2 manifold what i make on 20psi out of a 6258 here.

I guess its safe to say there will be more gains to be had at sea level?
Old Dec 18, 2017 | 12:37 PM
  #298  
The Driver's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 250
Total Cats: -64
From: Lakewood (Green Mountain) CO.
Default

^ In Colorado (and parts of New Mexico) power wise, is like loosing a cylinder ot two. Is the price we pay to live in this wonderful place.
Old Dec 18, 2017 | 01:26 PM
  #299  
04orangecrush's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 74
Total Cats: 4
From: Albuquerque, NM
Default

^^^ It’s awesome. I lost 95hp in my cobra moving to New Mexico from Florida(500hp vs 405 hp) It’s terrible, my car felt soooo slow. I at least upgraded the blower now. 20lb pulley only makes about 15lb up here. Car feels 10000x faster on 17lb pulley at sea level than it does on the 20lb pulley where I live. Anyways, back to topic at hand.
Old Dec 18, 2017 | 02:13 PM
  #300  
hornetball's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 6,301
Total Cats: 697
From: Granbury, TX
Default

An F/A-18 at 50,000' is an absolute dog!

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:09 PM.