Bench Race this w/me ...

[TC]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

Since you are wanting better mpg and only 14 second timeslips, couldnt you just EFI the 350 and make your goal of better than 20 mpg? Seems like the turbos will well surpass your goal even on a mostly stock motor. A stock Iroc camaro would run in the 14's and get mid 20's on the freeway, right? Just askin'.

If that is the case why even use Turbos?? I thought you wanted something that would make 450-500hp and still get good gas mileage. Didn't realize you just wanted the turbo's for looks. ;)

[TC]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

I disagree, by a lot.

It's widely proven that many (most!) intakes that "flow more" will make their power only in certain powerbands. If what you say above was true, then there would be no science to intake design. "Flow More" - when discussed in magazine tech articles - refers total flow at a fixed restriction.

I've been working on an Engine Masters entrant and, the guys are spending HUNDREDSof manhours identifying the best intake for the event (coincidentally, it needs to make maximum power from 2500-6500rpm) - I can assure you, the "best intake" is not the one that "flows most" on a flowbench.

Long story short, he shouldn't go sticking a tall tunnel ram on the engine thinking it'll make good torque down low. Intakes are optimized for the application, NOT for "maximum flow"

First you should know what your talking about, because to call a RamJet Intake a high RPM intake is funny as hell. :D :D :D

Here this is the dyno graph for a RamJet 350. Hmmm. If the intake is matched to the rest of the engine(which I'm sure it is) then the intake would be an off idle to 5500 design, which basically fits what he wants. ;)



Either way it's going to work, the RamJet may give him a little more power, and when it comes to the ease of maintenance I'd go with the RamJet.

[dieselgeek]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

Since you are wanting better mpg and only 14 second timeslips, couldnt you just EFI the 350 and make your goal of better than 20 mpg? Seems like the turbos will well surpass your goal even on a mostly stock motor. A stock Iroc camaro would run in the 14's and get mid 20's on the freeway, right? Just askin'.

good point IMO. But the turbo / efi part would be a lot of fun for him to learn.

[cantvalve16]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

Since you are wanting better mpg and only 14 second timeslips, couldnt you just EFI the 350 and make your goal of better than 20 mpg? Seems like the turbos will well surpass your goal even on a mostly stock motor. A stock Iroc camaro would run in the 14's and get mid 20's on the freeway, right? Just askin'.

[A/Fuel]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

Ha, and I would say you are blessed with patience....and mine seems to come from the lack of it.

[dieselgeek]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

Just like how 2X4's on a Hogan sheet metal intake will out flow a performer?
Did you forget we are talking about a 307 here?

The good lord did not bless me with the same "make points in short sentences" skills as you Scott :D

[A/Fuel]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

Just like how 2X4's on a Hogan sheet metal intake will out flow a performer?
Did you forget we are talking about a 307 here?

[dieselgeek]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

If one intake flows more than another intake it will INCREASE POWER through out the WHOLE RPM RANGE. Get it, Good......

Meaning that the RamJet can give him more low end over the TPI because it flows better.

I disagree, by a lot.

It's widely proven that many (most!) intakes that "flow more" will make their power only in certain powerbands. If what you say above was true, then there would be no science to intake design. "Flow More" - when discussed in magazine tech articles - refers total flow at a fixed restriction.

I've been working on an Engine Masters entrant and, the guys are spending HUNDREDSof manhours identifying the best intake for the event (coincidentally, it needs to make maximum power from 2500-6500rpm) - I can assure you, the "best intake" is not the one that "flows most" on a flowbench.

Long story short, he shouldn't go sticking a tall tunnel ram on the engine thinking it'll make good torque down low. Intakes are optimized for the application, NOT for "maximum flow"

[TC]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

Everything you're talking about is in reference to peak power, it doesn't say anything about power under the curve. Bamfster is saying he wants an efficient street engine that will do OK at the track.

You're talking about optimizing power at a single RPM: great if it's for a magazine article. I don't think "flow characteristics of intake ports" is what matters - it's overall flow, and there's no question that 12-15psi of manifold pressure is going to make ANY port - TPI or Ram Jet- flow better.

I'm not saying you're wrong about the difference between TPI and RJ intakes: I'm saying that your point isn't relative to what Bamfster is looking for. He doesn't care about a peak number, he needs something with a broad powerband and at the low power he's requesting, a TPI would do just fine. So would a RamJet IMO. He's not going to care about the differences. My $.02

I'm not talking about Peak Power......

If one intake flows more than another intake it will INCREASE POWER through out the WHOLE RPM RANGE. Get it, Good......

Meaning that the RamJet can give him more low end over the TPI because it flows better.

[dieselgeek]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

don't forget: converter, trans and gears are probably bigger factors of your fuel economy than the engine. Turbo cam will save you fuel at cruise RPM/loads however.

700R4 w/ stock converter, 3.73 gears. The cam I have is an Edelbrock performer ....

I'm thinking that can in a 307 will be outta steam by 5K anyway

You can say goodbye to the stock converter, well that is unless you want major turbo lag.

Think 2500 stall minimum.......

Since he hasn't picked a turbo, I don't see how you can warn him about "turbo lag" - also, I wouldn't pick a 2500rpm stall for his application either. Unless he decided on an 88mm turbo he's spending $2000 on...

I say, TPI, tight converter, single HX35 turbo, ebay intercooler. Locking converter for the highway. You'll surprise plenty of people at the track, and you'll get the economy you're seeking.

[TC]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

don't forget: converter, trans and gears are probably bigger factors of your fuel economy than the engine. Turbo cam will save you fuel at cruise RPM/loads however.

700R4 w/ stock converter, 3.73 gears. The cam I have is an Edelbrock performer ....

I'm thinking that can in a 307 will be outta steam by 5K anyway

You can say goodbye to the stock converter, well that is unless you want major turbo lag.

Think 2500 stall minimum.......

[dieselgeek]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

If he is going to run that motor above 5000rpm, which most likely he will, he will benefit from the RamJet manifold more than he will with the TPI setup.

Remember the air flow characteristics of the intake ports are the same weather Boosted or Naturally Aspirated. It's all about flow and a TPI manifold isn't the best flowing manifold around. Plus you have to take the whole god damn thing apart to get to the regulator and injectors. Basically just a pain in the ass. And if they are so great, why isn't GM still using them??

Again this gets into optimizing the parts of the motor to work with each other.

Everything you're talking about is in reference to peak power, it doesn't say anything about power under the curve. Bamfster is saying he wants an efficient street engine that will do OK at the track.

You're talking about optimizing power at a single RPM: great if it's for a magazine article. I don't think "flow characteristics of intake ports" is what matters - it's overall flow, and there's no question that 12-15psi of manifold pressure is going to make ANY port - TPI or Ram Jet- flow better.

I'm not saying you're wrong about the difference between TPI and RJ intakes: I'm saying that your point isn't relative to what Bamfster is looking for. He doesn't care about a peak number, he needs something with a broad powerband and at the low power he's requesting, a TPI would do just fine. So would a RamJet IMO. He's not going to care about the differences. My $.02

[TC]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

Dan read this article if you serious about the TPI, it has some good info.

http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/148_0207_tuned_port_injection_small_block_v8/index.html

[Bamfster]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

don't forget: converter, trans and gears are probably bigger factors of your fuel economy than the engine. Turbo cam will save you fuel at cruise RPM/loads however.

700R4 w/ stock converter, 3.73 gears. The cam I have is an Edelbrock performer ....

I'm thinking that can in a 307 will be outta steam by 5K anyway

[TC]

Re: Bench Race this w/me ...

The RamJet setup will be better than the TPI setup..........

why?

Stock TPI setups are know to be garbage, why do you thing AZ Speed and Marine and others made bigger runners for them. They are a low end/midrange manifold. Really not that good above 5000 rpm.

so, you describe an almost perfect street combo that can make a ton of torque. What would a turbo add to that? tons more torque - while maintaining low RPM / load efficiency. I don't see a reason to care what RPM he's making the power in this case. Turbocharging is only going to broaden/increase the powerband that's there. In other words, I don't think the difference between them is important based on his request.

If he is going to run that motor above 5000rpm, which most likely he will, he will benefit from the RamJet manifold more than he will with the TPI setup.

Remember the air flow characteristics of the intake ports are the same weather Boosted or Naturally Aspirated. It's all about flow and a TPI manifold isn't the best flowing manifold around. Plus you have to take the whole god damn thing apart to get to the regulator and injectors. Basically just a pain in the ass. And if they are so great, why isn't GM still using them??

Again this gets into optimizing the parts of the motor to work with each other.