Official Richard Holdener who wants to buy an intake manifold list

[PETERPOOP]

I think he said somewhere that this manifold will show gains after 2500rpms....

[blacksandiegovitz]

Originally Posted by PETERPOOP

I think he said somewhere that this manifold will show gains after 2500rpms....

I was very impressed with the dyno chart for the manifold . Looks pretty smooth at low rpms not a huge gain , but thats to be expected with a big smim , they're pretty much about top end power . On high rpms this thing looks killer, like 20+ hp and tq thats nice . I was pretty set on the blitz Sc kit , but the gains with the manifold are very close at a fraction of the cost, and the fact that you can run this manifold with a set of underdrive pulleys is even better , as you can't run smaller pulleys with the blitz supercharger . Im looking foward to the finished manifold, should be great.

[PETERPOOP]

underdrive pulley, intake manifold, then turbo. oh yes it will be nice

[richardholdener]

Not to sound like I'm trying to sell the intake, but I don't understand this line of reasoning. Check out the graphs supplied on the intake manifold post and you will see that this design offered gains at 2500 rpm, 3500 rpm, 4000-6000 rpm. Since it never made any less power than the stock manifold, I don't understand why someone wouldn't be interested in having these gains. If it is a money issue-I fully understand, but since gains came as low as 2500 rpm, that is pretty usable. Even the extra torque at 3500 rpm and 4000 rpm (6-8 lbs ft.) are usable in every day driving.

Originally Posted by WolfWings

Wish this was the mid-range manifold, I'd be all over it like white on rice. I've no complaints once the rev's get up, I just wish the little 1.5er had a smidge more grunt sooner in the RPM's. Enjoy the high-end zing though, you lot that're buying one. S'just not something I'd get any real use out of, or I'd be joining you all in a heartbeat!

[tk-421]

Originally Posted by richardholdener

Not to sound like I'm trying to sell the intake, but I don't understand this line of reasoning. Check out the graphs supplied on the intake manifold post and you will see that this design offered gains at 2500 rpm, 3500 rpm, 4000-6000 rpm. Since it never made any less power than the stock manifold, I don't understand why someone wouldn't be interested in having these gains. If it is a money issue-I fully understand, but since gains came as low as 2500 rpm, that is pretty usable. Even the extra torque at 3500 rpm and 4000 rpm (6-8 lbs ft.) are usable in every day driving.

I believe WolfWings was referring to the fact that the "midrange manifold" prototype showed higher low- and mid-range gains than the latest model. Judging from the above dyno graph, I'm thinking the gains at 2500RPM and 3500RPM should be barely noticeable under normal driving conditions, and that the really juicy stuff should kick in at 4K+ RPM, which is a territory that a lot of "point A to point B" folks don't usually tread under.

Again, I still consider this a worthwhile purchase, but I think more gains at the low- and mid-range would've been even better for people that spend most of their time in the street (i.e. between red lights, traffic, etc).

[cali yaris]

the really juicy stuff should kick in at 4K+ RPM, which is a territory that a lot of "point A to point B" folks don't usually tread under.

ah but they should -- the car is made for it!

[PETERPOOP]

heck yah. It's going to be great redlining this bad boy.

[TheRealEnth]

Yeah, what are these people talking about -laughs- this car is made for speed.... <3 But yeah this is a case of money. If i had 699 i would have been on the top of that list =(

[kou]

i am pretty sure that graph is a pretty stock yaris,so with other bolt-ons the power delivery will be different.and those jabs of tourqe at 2500,3500rpm. and yeah these little 4 bangers are made to rev.

[WolfWings]

Originally Posted by tk-421

I believe WolfWings was referring to the fact that the "midrange manifold" prototype showed higher low- and mid-range gains than the latest model. Judging from the above dyno graph, I'm thinking the gains at 2500RPM and 3500RPM should be barely noticeable under normal driving conditions, and that the really juicy stuff should kick in at 4K+ RPM, which is a territory that a lot of "point A to point B" folks don't usually tread under.

Bingo. My car's a DD that sees use at autocross, and my biggest wish is more grunt around the 2500-4000rpm range, since it's either stay in 2nd and go way up and down the RPM scale from 2000-redline as I go through the course, or bash my poor transmission to cinders slamming in and out of 1st gear ten or more times in a single 45-second run as I go in and out of corners. Even with my decent rev-matching, it's rough on the transmission.

Originally Posted by tk-421

Again, I still consider this a worthwhile purchase, but I think more gains at the low- and mid-range would've been even better for people that spend most of their time in the street (i.e. between red lights, traffic, etc).

Oh, I make no bones about complimenting this intake, it's wonderful looking for those that can hit open track day or for playing around on the highway where you can really unwind the decent legs on this motor. But for my particular performance-improvement goals (avoiding downshifting to 1st gear to deal with sub-25mph corners) it doesn't look like it would help that much compared to what I remember of the mid-range graph that had everything shoved about 500rpm to the left for HP, so torque was a notch higher down across the full low-range. Or was that some other dyno graph unrelated to any of these intakes?

[eTiMaGo]

Well, if I may share my 2 cents, I've had a lot of time to think about this conundrum...

As much as we want, we cannot expect any sensible improvement of low to mid-range torque with just bolt-on NA mods. You must realize that a 1.5L engine can only do so much. Sure, you could get higher compression pistons, a stroker kit and maybe some new cams, but AFAIK those also really come into their own at high RPMs.

The reason is, sadly, there is no replacement for displacement. You cannot expect the torque of a bigger engine, it's just not gonna happen. You won't see Pee-Wee Herman bench pressing 300lb, you won't see a 1NZ with V8 torque...

So, one must realize this intake manifold is not some magical end-all solution to more power. If the best results are a pretty sizeable increase of torque from 2500RPM onward, then I think it is correct for the manufacturer to maximize on this.

This means that yes, on the street, if you drive in a calm and "normal" manner, you'd never really see an advantage. This intake manifold will really come into its own where it is designed to, at high RPMs, so it will be of most use to those who really race their cars, be it on a track or autocross.
It was said in a previous post, or one that was lost with the hack, but this manifold could be compared to a "bolt-on VTEC", as it gives the engine the ability to keep revving far better than stock. And, as with VTEC, the love-hate relationship is that you have to keep the engine at high RPMs to get good power output from it.

If you really want more low-end torque, the most effective solution is more displacement. This is where forced induction comes in, as it can be considered "virtual displacement" (think about this... normal atmospheric pressure is what, 14psi? a turbo running at 7psi is thus forcing in 50% more of atmospheric pressure, thus giving your engine characteristics of one that is 50% larger, or 2.2L. Of course, this is a very rough generalization, kinda like giving steroids to Pee-Wee!). This is why superchargers excel in this area, they start shoving in more air as soon as the engine is moving, same thing with small, responsive turbos that may not create massive boost, but can start to supply it quite early.

There you have it... If you seriously want more low end torque, go for a small turbo or supercharger. Of course, it's $3000 vs $700, I think that's also an important reason why many are wishing for a "low RPM" version of the intake.

I'm in no way an engine expert, so feel free to pick apart what I've just written

[at3GG]

No thanks, I'll take your word for it

[PETERPOOP]

Well I'll start by saying, You just compared our engines to Pee Wee Herman!!! ahaha

[Yoda]

you were right on it man. couldnt have said it better

[cleong]

I have to say that the pinnacle of NA engineering was when Honda put out their B16 series with 100bhp/litre (Toyota did the same with their 20V 4A-GE). Since then, emissions legislation has conspired to neuter that down to between 100hp to 120hp for the 1600cc class.

Even then, these engines lived for the high RPM, you wouldn't see great torque numbers out of the 4A-GE or the B16; they had to have their tits revved right off to get the horsepower numbers, along with valve timing trickery.

With our 1NZ engines, they're fundamentally economy-biased engines, and its a hard ask to make them put out torque and horsepower numbers like the 20V 4A-GEs, or the B16 lumps. I'd be glad to get 135hp out of my 1NZ. It'd leave my car feeling like it was an ideal balance between its suspension and brake capabilities, and the power that it puts out. Until then I would still be tempted by whatever that comes along that promises a horsepower hike.

I'm still interested in this intake manifold; and now that there is more than 10 people who have declared that they are willing to lay down the $700, I'm waiting to see it come to fruition, and hoping that Richard will continue to manufacture these manifolds if they're all that they are cracked up to be.

[richardholdener]

If we got enough owners to step up to the mid-range version (I will post power grpahs tonight), the I could do a production run of those as well and you guys could choose. This could only be realistic if we got another list filled for those wanting mid-range version. Let me know what you guys think.

Originally Posted by WolfWings

Bingo. My car's a DD that sees use at autocross, and my biggest wish is more grunt around the 2500-4000rpm range, since it's either stay in 2nd and go way up and down the RPM scale from 2000-redline as I go through the course, or bash my poor transmission to cinders slamming in and out of 1st gear ten or more times in a single 45-second run as I go in and out of corners. Even with my decent rev-matching, it's rough on the transmission.



Oh, I make no bones about complimenting this intake, it's wonderful looking for those that can hit open track day or for playing around on the highway where you can really unwind the decent legs on this motor. But for my particular performance-improvement goals (avoiding downshifting to 1st gear to deal with sub-25mph corners) it doesn't look like it would help that much compared to what I remember of the mid-range graph that had everything shoved about 500rpm to the left for HP, so torque was a notch higher down across the full low-range. Or was that some other dyno graph unrelated to any of these intakes?

[PETERPOOP]

Here's your guys chance. He called the bluff. Put yourselves on that list.

[tk-421]

Originally Posted by richardholdener

If we got enough owners to step up to the mid-range version (I will post power grpahs tonight), the I could do a production run of those as well and you guys could choose. This could only be realistic if we got another list filled for those wanting mid-range version. Let me know what you guys think.

That would be great!