ALFAGTV6.COM

Yeah and now all you rich countries are going to fork out to save our a$$es so I can get that 3rd Recaro interior I found for 1000Euros!
Jim K.

haha, as if...

This will be the very definition of "cutting loose".

I've just picked up on this thread...funny, as today my mechanic and i were talking about how restrictive the standard plenum chamber is. He said the ports were very small and are restricting more HP. I like the 164 plenum idea..there would be plenty to choose from i suppose..does anyone know the size of the ports in the 164 chamber..? Would they be roughly around 45mm by any chance..? This will be my next modification to the engine.


Would 1 either side be better than just one..?

its more like 40mm... the 24v GTA has 45mm.

Tonight I'll measure it to be sure.

One chamber would be good enough and would cause less of a headache to build.

Here is one i build. Uses the bend from a 2.0 TS inletmanifold ( butterfly from the throttle is the same size).


edit:

the pipes from an 164 are about 37mm inside diameter and the alu pipes on the chamber are 39mm inside diameter.

Any opinions for this design? My plan is to move TB to first cyl and to build longer pipes which would connect to AR 164 intake runners (want a bit more torque in lower range)...


[Sorry for copyrights, but it was excellent angle for psd conversion]

Looks nice, experience from my own simulations say that the volume in the mouth areas around runner 1 and 6 are too low though. So balance will be off.

Yeah, I saw that you gained better results with walls moved further (10mm) - will do that too. Which material you've chosen for build and what thickness?

On the last picture it looks like the runners are unequal length? that is not so good i guess...

Thanks Evo..i forgot to ask is the throttle body from the 164 plenum 80mm also..?

Hey Garth, did you fit ported heads to your engine? I thought I read that you didn't bother with them in your build up thread.

Giuliettaevo2 They will be the same lenght, I'm not so good with photoshop...

GarthW: TB's on AR164 are 70mm too

Hey Duk! No i never had them ported, rebuild cost enough as i had new everything replaced. For whoever rebuilt the engine years ago in the first place, they did a really bad job, and cost me more in the end to have a full complete rebuild done But damn you know
i never gave it a thought..suppose it wouldnt have hurt!!! Arrrgh...oh well.

Thanks Killaz-damn only 70mm...

Was just looking at youtube, and i love the look and size of this 24v plenum on a gtv6 having a dyno run-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bn6ec3YOlA

Look good or what...? Oooh yeah, hmmm...

killaz wrote:Yeah, I saw that you gained better results with walls moved further (10mm) - will do that too. Which material you've chosen for build and what thickness?

10mm on my plenum, and I would have moved them another 10 if I had the room. From the pics it looks like my initial plenum design had more room around the last runners then your so I guess you need to move the walls quite a bit.
I used weldable (duh) aluminium 3 or 4mm thick, not sure right now actually but I'll check and get back to you. You might want to match the thickness of the material in your part though.

Hey Garth, anybody who says you need a bigger TB than 70mm is telling 'porky pies'
If people can get 350+RWKW from a 2JZGTE's standard 65mm TB, then a 70mm is just fine.

Damn thats big HP for a 65mm TB!! I just thought bigger the TB the better, but sweet, 70mm should be just fine then!! I'm only after around 250HP, hopefully i'll get that at the wheels, but i very much doubt it..

But yes the runners and plenum are a huge power robber with my car at the moment..in around 6 months i'm changing all the runners and plenum chamber.

With forced induction the standard set up is just simply not big enough to allow all that extra air in..