View Poll Results: Would You Buy One?!
Voters: 110. You may not vote on this poll
A Pled To Any and All Vendors...
05-06-2008, 12:02 AM
#52
New Member
Join Date: 10-14-07
Location: VA
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes, the m62 was poorly designed, we can all agree on that. but what i keep saying is that, you get more out the m62 if you have the supporting mods. there is nothing wrong with using the m62 to its fullest potential. nothing wrong with that at all.
05-06-2008, 12:03 AM
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-17-06
Location: Rochester Hills, MI
Posts: 3,795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-06-2008, 12:03 AM
#54
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 09-05-07
Location: Sasebo Japan
Posts: 10,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-06-2008, 01:14 AM
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Maidstone, SK
Posts: 5,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Awwww ****.... I leave to a few hours and this place goes to hell again... 
First;
I haven't posted up any flow numbers for a reason.... this place is full of retarded dip *****.
Until I find a reason to post them, they stay on my hard drive.
Next.... after cutting an OEM manifold open, I can guarantee you that it IS the biggest restriction. The allow 75% of the flow of what the laminovas can handle.
The cores ARE NOT the problem... it's the ports.
How do I know this?
A) flow calculations
B) Opcon's recommendations
C) flow testing
But... In the end, if someone doesn't want to believe that the IM is restictive... that's fine.
In the end they'll be the one bitching about heat and low numbers.
But, he said that the Laminovas were restrictive, you are talking about a car that already had them removed (Paul's), and was running a FMIC.
So, overspinning the blower, creating more BOOST, not RPMS, doesn't aggrevate the heat issue? Wouldn't cams on a worked head, yeilding about 15 psi on a 2.7, also REDUCE the heatsoak?
I'm still waiting on CFM numbers from the Omega manifold work, out of curiousity
So, overspinning the blower, creating more BOOST, not RPMS, doesn't aggrevate the heat issue? Wouldn't cams on a worked head, yeilding about 15 psi on a 2.7, also REDUCE the heatsoak?
I'm still waiting on CFM numbers from the Omega manifold work, out of curiousity
I haven't posted up any flow numbers for a reason.... this place is full of retarded dip *****.
Until I find a reason to post them, they stay on my hard drive.
Next.... after cutting an OEM manifold open, I can guarantee you that it IS the biggest restriction. The allow 75% of the flow of what the laminovas can handle.
The cores ARE NOT the problem... it's the ports.
How do I know this?
A) flow calculations
B) Opcon's recommendations
C) flow testing
But... In the end, if someone doesn't want to believe that the IM is restictive... that's fine.
In the end they'll be the one bitching about heat and low numbers.
05-06-2008, 01:20 AM
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-19-05
Location: Horseheads, NY
Posts: 3,018
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Awwww ****.... I leave to a few hours and this place goes to hell again...
First;
I haven't posted up any flow numbers for a reason.... this place is full of retarded dip *****.
Until I find a reason to post them, they stay on my hard drive.
Next.... after cutting an OEM manifold open, I can guarantee you that it IS the biggest restriction. The allow 75% of the flow of what the laminovas can handle.
The cores ARE NOT the problem... it's the ports.
How do I know this?
A) flow calculations
B) Opcon's recommendations
C) flow testing
But... In the end, if someone doesn't want to believe that the IM is restictive... that's fine.
In the end they'll be the one bitching about heat and low numbers.
First;
I haven't posted up any flow numbers for a reason.... this place is full of retarded dip *****.
Until I find a reason to post them, they stay on my hard drive.
Next.... after cutting an OEM manifold open, I can guarantee you that it IS the biggest restriction. The allow 75% of the flow of what the laminovas can handle.
The cores ARE NOT the problem... it's the ports.
How do I know this?
A) flow calculations
B) Opcon's recommendations
C) flow testing
But... In the end, if someone doesn't want to believe that the IM is restictive... that's fine.
In the end they'll be the one bitching about heat and low numbers.
Us non-retards are curious
edit: I just read thread...lots of fail in here already
05-06-2008, 01:49 AM
#58
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Maidstone, SK
Posts: 5,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By increasing the port flow, you can then use the laminovas to their full capacity.
As far as the cooling ports being larger, it wouldn't really make a difference. As long as we stop choking the engine like it is now.
WRT flow numbers; I'm waiting until I can compare it to my new sheet metal manifold.
I refuse to post up numbers at this point in time.... and no, I won't PM them either.
Oh yeah....
Last edited by Omega_5; 05-06-2008 at 01:49 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
05-06-2008, 01:55 AM
#59
I mean, the laminovas have the ability to flow 25% more than the ports allow them to flow.
By increasing the port flow, you can then use the laminovas to their full capacity.
As far as the cooling ports being larger, it wouldn't really make a difference. As long as we stop choking the engine like it is now.
WRT flow numbers; I'm waiting until I can compare it to my new sheet metal manifold.
I refuse to post up numbers at this point in time.... and no, I won't PM them either.
Oh yeah....
By increasing the port flow, you can then use the laminovas to their full capacity.
As far as the cooling ports being larger, it wouldn't really make a difference. As long as we stop choking the engine like it is now.
WRT flow numbers; I'm waiting until I can compare it to my new sheet metal manifold.
I refuse to post up numbers at this point in time.... and no, I won't PM them either.
Oh yeah....
05-06-2008, 02:03 AM
#60
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-25-07
Location: Kissimmee, Fl
Posts: 6,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But a Turbo set-up at 21 pounds makes 401 WHP.....All that is due to just the intake manifold? Surly some of the power loss we see is due to the blower needing power to make power....
05-06-2008, 02:13 AM
#62
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Maidstone, SK
Posts: 5,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the case of the LSJ, the IM is a fair size smaller than the head. Port matching in this case would be beneficial.
On other cars I've done this too, I've found a different gain other than power.... fuel economy. When pulling vacuum, the engine seems to like the constant area from the plenum to the head.
I'm not sure if it would be the case with these cars.... but it's worth a try.
And it is my understanding that that is the reason why a blower boosting upwards of 20 pounds are not seeing the results to the ground. Twinscrew for exaple.
But a Turbo set-up at 21 pounds makes 401 WHP.....All that is due to just the intake manifold? Surly some of the power loss we see is due to the blower needing power to make power....
But a Turbo set-up at 21 pounds makes 401 WHP.....All that is due to just the intake manifold? Surly some of the power loss we see is due to the blower needing power to make power....
In the case you listed, it's not 100% about the IM or any of that, but the turbo has the potential to flow a higher rate, with less 'boost'.
Last edited by Omega_5; 05-06-2008 at 02:14 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
05-06-2008, 02:22 AM
#63
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boost is a function of engine air ingestion capacity.
Edit: wow Dan's right, this thread is on cruise control to downietown.
05-06-2008, 02:33 AM
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-25-07
Location: Kissimmee, Fl
Posts: 6,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It confuses me on why the Turbo will make more power than a SC....I'm not a power guru and don't care to have a 500hp fwd car that still does 13's in a 1/4 mile. I would just like to understand why that is.
05-06-2008, 02:46 AM
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Maidstone, SK
Posts: 5,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-06-2008, 02:49 AM
#68
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-06-2008, 02:56 AM
#70
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you think an engine reacts in any way different to airflow because of the compressor providing it, you are dead wrong.
Pressure is nothing more than a reaction to airflow. 20psi boost from a blower is the same amount of airflow as 20psi from a turbo.
05-06-2008, 02:58 AM
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Maidstone, SK
Posts: 5,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is pretty elementary physics.
If you think an engine reacts in any way different to airflow because of the compressor providing it, you are dead wrong.
Pressure is nothing more than a reaction to airflow. 20psi boost from a blower is the same amount of airflow as 20psi from a turbo.
If you think an engine reacts in any way different to airflow because of the compressor providing it, you are dead wrong.
Pressure is nothing more than a reaction to airflow. 20psi boost from a blower is the same amount of airflow as 20psi from a turbo.
You got the flow, you got the volume, and you got the pressure.... what part are you missing?
Certain compressors do certain things better....
What is it?.... huh?
Please... think before posting....
05-06-2008, 03:37 AM
#72
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You: Mass flow rate
I found our problem.
05-06-2008, 09:39 AM
#73
Member
Join Date: 02-18-08
Location: Cleveland OH
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ummm this thread is totally lost. I mean are you pissed that our cars won't perform up to a turbo balt or you just can't make your any faster. Yeah an intake would be nice but there's only so much you can do to the car and me spending 1000-2000 or wwhatever for an intake for my lil 4banger cobalt isn't worth 20-30 horse. Yeah I got some mods on my balt but I would rather put my money in my camaro....more potential...and thats just my opinion so I'm not knocking people for wanting an intake....its just not worth it to me
05-06-2008, 09:51 AM
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-29-07
Location: "Central", PA
Posts: 3,811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Pled to Any and All Vendors...
What the hell is a "pled"?
It was either supposed to be:
I plead to any and all vendors....
or
A plee to any and all vendors....
What the hell is a "pled"?
It was either supposed to be:
I plead to any and all vendors....
or
A plee to any and all vendors....
05-06-2008, 09:58 AM
#75
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Maidstone, SK
Posts: 5,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ummm this thread is totally lost. I mean are you pissed that our cars won't perform up to a turbo balt or you just can't make your any faster. Yeah an intake would be nice but there's only so much you can do to the car and me spending 1000-2000 or wwhatever for an intake for my lil 4banger cobalt isn't worth 20-30 horse.