View Full Version : Installing ITB's on the 2.8/12V is gonna be a fretfully spendy and complicated process...


VAP
08-19-2008, 10:38 AM
involving building a 3-piece cylinder head mounting plate(basically a very short intake manifold), an intermediate set of mandrel-bent equal-length runners welded to the base plate that gets bolted to the cylinder head with matching intake runner ports and a ITB mounting plate welded atop those runners that the ITB's will bolt to. The reason this "has" to be a full-blown 3-piece mounting base is that we have 2 intake runners in each head that are only 50mm apart center bore-to-center bore and even a pair of 40mm ITB's will require at least 80mm center-to-center spacing. So, even if 40mm ITBs were used and jammed together "bore-to-bore" they would be 30mm wider than the 2 cylinder head intake runner inlets they cover. Only way around that is to build offset runners that allow the ITB's to be mounted further apart and have only the IM runners converge at the cylinder head runner inlets. And for me 40mm ITB's cannot/will not make enough horsepower or flow enough CFM "per-cylinder" to achieve my design goal of closer to 55HP per-cylinder meaning I'll have to opt for a minimum 45mm bore ITB's which necessarily means I'll have to opt for "at least" 90mm spacing, and probaly closer to 110mm spacing on 2 of the ITBs with the 2 closely-spaced cylinder head intake ports. And of curse if I want to make equal HP/TQ in all 6 cylinders that also dictates I have to use an identically configured offset mandel-bend in the 3rd remaining cylinder head runner inlet that is spaced further apart. This in turn creates an inteference issue with the spark plug nearest the closely-spaced runner's end-most spark plug which is on the right rear and left front spark plug port (as viewed from the drivers' seat). Totally doable but "may" require a complete removal of both ITB intake manifolds any time the right rear or left front spark plugs need to be removed for ANY r4eason.

Another issue I see is trying to form the mandrel-bent runners into the shape of the runners that are in the head. Those runners are tall/narrow rather than perfectly round. A work-around for that "may" be to CNC the cylinder head runner inlets into a gradual concentric (round) taper at their inlet. The "unknown" factor in this approach is not knowing how deep one can go with that taper before running into a water or oil gally inside the head at any of the intake ports and only way to know for sure is to mount a "sacrificial head" in the mill and go for it even 1/8" to 1/4" deeper than the ITB setup will require as only going to a depth that meets the "needed" depth cannot reveal if there's adequate aluminum thickness and that you're not a "paper-thin" thickness away from a watery/oily grave.

Another concern for me and everyone who has to pass a visual as well as tailpipe emissions test is the crankcase recovery issue. Sure I can run individual "sock-type" foam oil filters but that aint gonna fly the visual portion of my e-test. And the only way around that means I must devise a plenum of some sort... just like the black plastic one our cars came with or the recovery sleeve many of us use to reintroduce blowby gases back into the combustion process. That literally dictates a single or dual plenum that is a sealed system between the ITB upper velocity stack inlets and the clean air intake. If individual foam "sock" filters are used within the plenum there won't be any additional filtration required. But that means all those blowby gases will now collect in the ITB sock filters insuring they get very dirty, very quickly. External filtration as we have now will allow only ITB inlets to get dirty while filter remains clean and dry but that in and of itself makes for a convoluted intake air path much like we have now where intake air has to follow a longer path with multiple bends to find its way into the ITB velocity stacks. And to further complicate things the latter method is the ONLY way to use ITB's with a stock OEM MAF system whereas the more efficient MAP system used with stand-alone would necessarily perform much more efficiently and make more power.

Bottom line is even if today we had someone making a manifold that would work for us as well as a clean air filtration intake system and planned on retaining stock engine electronics I don't believe this could be done using "new" products for less than $5k-$6k minimum. A stand-alone system would allow for perhaps a $500-$1,000 cheaper installation until you add back the $2k+ required to purchase a quality stand-alone plus installation if someone else installs it for you. Hell, I'll be at over $4,200+ international shipping "just" for the 6 ITB's, linkages, cable pulleys etc I want to use for this project if I can make it work. And I would still need to make the 3-piece intake manifold, dual fuel rails and adapt a TPS system to communicate throttle position sensing.

I'm going to proceed with this least for now for my own use and proceed VERY slowly. I'll first CNC a single cylinder head mounting plate. Next I'll pay someone to make me the required mandrel-bent runners for that plate that I can then CNC the throttle body mounting plate that will be affixed to the opposite end of the runners. I'll machine a sacrificial head before doing ANYTHING to determine if there's sufficient "meat" to hold back water/oil once cylinder heads are machined properly and known to work as-planned. Last thing I will do is buy ITBs as there's about a gazillion things that have to come together and be in place and working before I lay out almost $700 per ITB for the Jenvey ITB's I want to do this project with.

Jretal
08-19-2008, 11:26 AM
sounds like a boat load of work... better you than me kind sir! Glad to see you pecking away at that motor again, though!

The Devil
08-19-2008, 09:46 PM
<center><img src="http://www.twminduction.com/ThrottleBody/ThrottleBody.imgs/8valve_vs_crossflow.jpg"></center><p>

VAP
08-19-2008, 10:04 PM
and my design includes using a left &amp; right bank "dual-chambered" fuel rails that consists of a vac accumulator chamber with a separate sealed fuel chamber running thru the center of it. Does double-duty as a pre-injector fuel cooler and works much the same same way high-efficiency dual pane glass windows with a vacuum between 2 or more layers of glass works. Vacuum is an incredibly good insulator! Far more efficient than just a dead-air space of equal depth/width.

Altogether common setup in GT2/GT3 SCCA Pro Cars.

EDIGREG
08-19-2008, 10:14 PM
So will you convert to MAP? Why haven't you done that already since you have stand-alone?

Another potential problem I can think of is the angle at which the IM bolts enter the head...I'm sure you can CNC a "wedge" on the mouting plate to give the bolt a flat tightening surface, but hopefully that doesn't get in the way of the runner...

VAP
08-19-2008, 10:23 PM
That I mentioned here mid last month (see link below).

Mounting holes are easy they just run at a 45 degree angle to the heads and base plate will have those holes in place with a "seat" below the surface on recessed shoulders to allow the allen cap heads when torqued to not protrude above the base-plate runner surface.<ul><li><a href="http://forums.audiworld.com/12v/msgs/70756.phtml">MAF/MAP Link</a></li></ul>

The Devil
08-19-2008, 10:36 PM
<center><img src="http://i15.ebayimg.com/04/i/001/06/35/400b_1.JPG"></center><p>
Back in the day when I was considering turboing the 12v I snagged a cross flow intake manifold from the junkyard. I was thinking of using them as a start to a twin intake manifold design. Have u ever seen a lower crossflow intake manifold? One could build a plenum and have velocity stacks on one of them pretty easily? No? To mount it to the 12v engine all one would have to do is weld the mounting holes close and redrill it to the right angle. Audi seemed to like the idea, and lamborghini too?

Wouldn't a setup like so be more daily driver friendly?

Twin vr6 throttle bodies with an intake manifold like the r8? Now that would be very nice?<ul><li><a href="http://www.bufkinengineering.com/audir8_intake.jpg">http://www.bufkinengineering.com/audir8_intake.jpg</a</li></ul>

EDIGREG
08-19-2008, 10:39 PM
but what porpose does the MAF serve in relation to the knock sensors? Piezoelectric knock sensors function on their own, correct?

VAP
08-19-2008, 10:42 PM

EDIGREG
08-19-2008, 10:43 PM
the "adaptive knock control device" that our current knock sensors are not/cannot do?

VAP
08-19-2008, 10:45 PM
so I only have to make it "once" and it doesnt cost any more than some scrap aluminum plate and tubing. Once I have the intake manifolds made the ITBs are plug-n-play. And these will in fact be an identical pair of dual "cross-flow" IMs. Many don't realize we have the same head on both banks as that relates to AAH or AFC heads. That there's only 1 part number for AAH heads and 1 part number for AFC heads and that part number can be installed and works on left and/or right cylinder banks. Given that the 2 IM's I build will be identical to each other and swappable between heads. So I dont have to make 2 different IMs but rather only 1 IM twice.

But the "real" answer is; I'm intrigued/fascinated by it and LOVE the challenge, ie; It's what I want and WITH ram air! Tho given the above info I'm struggling harder with finding a reason to NOT make this than a reason TO make it!

And I ran dual 52MM DCOE Weber dual side draft carbs with 4 venturis back in the early 70's in my SCCA Datsun 510 B-Sedan which is almost identical to ITBs and never had any issues keeping them sync'd or any other issues associated with 4 individual venturris on 4 cylinders. And they've had 38 years to improve linkages and cable pulleys since then, not to mention fuel injectors are a TON more stable/bullet-proof than carbs. And the sound alone is like no other normally aspirated induction system on earth! Done right it's the single highest HP/TQ induction system for a normally aspirated engine in the world!

VAP
08-19-2008, 10:48 PM

EDIGREG
08-19-2008, 10:48 PM
Although I should have expected an edit since you usually find a way to read my mind and edit the post accordingly ;]

VAP
08-19-2008, 10:50 PM

EDIGREG
08-19-2008, 11:02 PM

VAP
08-19-2008, 11:06 PM

The Devil
08-19-2008, 11:16 PM
I'm uneasily satisfied these days and if I see a better way to do it I just go a head with it. I partly blame u, and places like mcmaster. however it's a good thing and i'm enjoying my time in the garage very much these day. More than I ever did with the 20vt setup I did along time ago. I'm having fun with it. Even my sound system now is modular with metripack connectors, braided lines, heat shrink, and all these weird things (well only where it's visible in the trunk). But I can remove my amp now in like less than a minute.

you remind me of this quote:

We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.

Lately, this quote fits me too with my v8 swap. To learn about JIC/an fittings, PTFE, cunifer, heat shrink, high temp heat sleeving. I never imagined I'd learn all this stuff, but it's keeping me occupied.

U choose to struggle so to speak, and me maybe a few years ago I wouldn't of understood it. Now these days I get it more and can relate to it. I don't care anymore about the big smile, and I'm not in a rush to get to it. I enjoy all the little smiles as I go with it. This being said it gets mighty expensive. Luckly I can justify it as "educational".

Part of the problem is my background isn't cars, isn't engineering, isn't even remotely related, but i've got a fun imagination and a never ending desire to suck up information.

independent77
08-21-2008, 06:37 AM
but then again, it is a rare gizmo.<ul><li><a href="http://sdsefi.com/specific.html">http://sdsefi.com/specific.html</a</li></ul>

VAP
08-21-2008, 07:32 AM