Saturn ION RedLine Forums banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Before anybody starts about the pro's and cons; I will run this manifold only with moderate boost pressure (so no extreme heat generation), but want to have the best possible flow for a good engine response at higher rpm's. (Ported head & cams in the pipeline)

I have opened up my manifold to port the Laminova slots, but when looking to the OEM Laminova Layout, the GM solution is rather strange: Not only is the slot-casting not uniform over the length, but also the in- & outlet slots are not in-line. I cannot find any reason for this non-allignment of the in- and outlet slots (or the air must have a very strange flow behavior inside the manifold), so this means that the compressed air has a long and a short cooling path to travel. Obviously not something Opcon had in mind when they designed the Laminova, as air will always favour the shortcut: http://www.opcon.se/www/files/laminova/pdf/core_general_info_intercooler.pdf
(Think of it like 2 uneven parallel resistors: Current will favour the less resistance, so with lots of current one will get hot and the other does not much. Take 2 of the same resistance and they will share the same load.)

Optimum slot porting seem to be around 17-18mm width. (More is said to hurt cooling capacity) However, with porting you should also look to the slot allignment: Port both sides evenly (or even the wrong side...) and you still end up with a long and a short cooling path. Port only the long path and you will even things out. Better! (And probably you can use an even wider slot without cooling losses.)

Just my thoughts. I will finish my manifold porting tonight and then have peace of mind that at least I have a somewhat more evenly distributed laminova cooling path...
:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
I don't know why GM wouldn't have the inlet/outlet matching. Doesn't make sense and certainly isn't ideal. The resistor example is a good one but this doesn't mean all the air goes through the shorter path, just more than what goes through the longer one.

The longer the air is in the core, the better the IC performance. This would mean that opening the slot at all would reduce IC efficiency. Obviously there has to be some opening or no air would flow but the ideal opening size is going to be dependent on the # of cores, length of them and amount of air you're flowing. Since the intake itself has less sq in area than the factory inlet slits now, any opening of the IC cores would hurt IC performance. If anything, you'd want to make the slits smaller for increased system performance but that would be difficult based on the casting.
 

·
Likes "Cheese" and "Head"
Joined
·
16,889 Posts
I dyno tested a ported IM from OTTP on my car last year.

The inlet and outlet ports were opened up to 17mm. The entire inside was smoothed and polished for better air flow.

Here are my dyno results. Same tune.

Blue Line = Stock
Green Line = Ported



At first glance you really have to question what was going on when GM molded that IM. But the dyno never lies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,132 Posts
I dyno tested a ported IM from OTTP on my car last year.

The inlet and outlet ports were opened up to 17mm. The entire inside was smoothed and polished for better air flow.

Here are my dyno results. Same tune.

Blue Line = Stock
Green Line = Ported



At first glance you really have to question what was going on when GM molded that IM. But the dyno never lies.
It looks like you lost power across the entire band, chief. >_>
 

·
Likes "Cheese" and "Head"
Joined
·
16,889 Posts
This would mean that opening the slot at all would reduce IC efficiency.
My IAT2 temps dropped 15-20 degrees over the stock IM. But I also went from a stock endplate with my stock IM to a ported IM with a dual pass endplate. So its hard to tell if the porting actually improved cooling.

If anything, you'd want to make the slits smaller for increased system performance but that would be difficult based on the casting.
Or just open up the inlet ports and leave the exit port alone.
 

·
Likes "Cheese" and "Head"
Joined
·
16,889 Posts
It looks like you lost power across the entire band, chief. >_>
Pretty much.

OTTP has seen hp gains with its ported IM on turbo'd cars and TVS cars of 10-15whp.

It breaks down to flow. The LSJ Stock IM is perfectly suited for the flow output of the M62.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
You don't want to open the inlet or the outlet ports. Nothing in the intake manifold is a restriction to airflow.

However, for the sake of discussion you would take the smallest orfice which is the immediate exit of the blower into the plenum and measure it. If the IC inlet has more surface area (it does) then the discussion can stop.

We know the longer the air is in the IC cores, the better the cooling and we know that the slits are larger stock then the opening to the plenum. No further testing needs to be done. Opening the ports on inlet or outlet will reduce system performance.

The Op who was claiming 27% increased airflow and increased boost doesn't understand what data to be testing for so they posted a loss and called it a gain (increased boost).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
As we run a fixed displacement pump, I don't think you will see any performance gain on the dyno from only a manifold porting. But it should be beneficial for high flow options like the TVS. (But not with a high heat load)

For cooling it is indeed important how long the air stays in the cores, so 1 long and 1 short path makes no sense at all to me. The minimum cooling eff. will be mostly determined by that shortest path, as it sees the most air. By lessening the resistance of the other, longer path, more of the air will flow in that direction and thus improving eff. of the short path. (less flow/airspeed => longer staytime on fins => better cooling.)

Off course the effect will not be major, but I like to think this into the extremes:
Imagine one very long and one very very short path around our laminova core. Obviously in the extreme case the core will have almost zero efficiency as the air just flows at one side of the core. An optimum is found in the middle and moving to a very short path at the other side gives again zero cooling efficiency.

I will try to port my manifold for the optimum middle flowpath... :)
 

·
Likes "Cheese" and "Head"
Joined
·
16,889 Posts
I will try to port my manifold for the optimum middle flowpath... :)
I think GM has already done that.

I wouldn't touch the ports unless you plan on upgrading your power adder. Maybe polish the casting to make it smoother but that is it.

Have you dyno'd your car for a baseline?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,894 Posts
yea, when I ported my manifold, it was more of a polish, I barely took anthing out, just like when I ported the outlet of my blower, it was mainly a polish as well.

Now the intlet of my blower is fucking hogged out to match my ported ls4 throttle body. and my head is definitely ported. LOL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
606 Posts
Sorry to bring this back from the dead but what is the Ls4 throttle body off of and where can you get one? Do you have to switch anything over.

Also, What are the pro's and con's of porting the IM and Blower. Is it really worth doing?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
Sorry to bring this back from the dead but what is the Ls4 throttle body off of and where can you get one? Do you have to switch anything over.

Also, What are the pro's and con's of porting the IM and Blower. Is it really worth doing?
Uhhhhh are you serious? :rofl::rofl::rofl: :bangin: Sorry if that sounds bad but man, I would bet the LS4 comes of an LS4 motor. Just like the LS2 throttle body is off of....... the LS2


:zlurking::flamed::flamed::twak:
 

·
Likes "Cheese" and "Head"
Joined
·
16,889 Posts
Uhhhhh are you serious? :rofl::rofl::rofl: :bangin: Sorry if that sounds bad but man, I would bet the LS4 comes of an LS4 motor. Just like the LS2 throttle body is off of....... the LS2


:zlurking::flamed::flamed::twak:
Don't take this personally but I have not flamed anyone in a long time so you will feel my wrath...



Your attempt at flaming someone has failed. Please try harder next time!

*************************************************

The LS4 TB is from the GM 4.2L engine found in the Trailblazer, Envoy and many other GM vehicles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
606 Posts
Don't take this personally but I have not flamed anyone in a long time so you will feel my wrath...



Your attempt at flaming someone has failed. Please try harder next time!

*************************************************

The LS4 TB is from the GM 4.2L engine found in the Trailblazer, Envoy and many other GM vehicles.
Thank you. I wasn't sure what it came off of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,813 Posts
but his question was nt what motor it comes off of but what car it comes off of... so your flame still failed


<-----please refer to avitar for statement
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
Im a Chevy guy so that question was funny to me, as that motor is quite popular, and in quite a few cars.

* 2006-2009 Chevrolet Impala SS
* 2006-2007 Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS
* 2005-2008 Pontiac Grand Prix GXP
* 2008 Buick LaCrosse Super

Here is a link for you. That motor is in quite a few vehicles, it should be easy to find a TB from a junkyard even. LKQ probably can get you one.

GM LS engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

:flame::flamed:
The Throttlebody might be the same for the 4.2 but it is NOT an LS4 motor...

"Vortec 4200, or Atlas LL8, is a 4.2 L straight-6 in the GM Atlas engine family. It has four valves per cylinder and is a double-overhead cam (DOHC) design. Introduced in 2002 for the Chevrolet TrailBlazer, GMC Envoy, and Oldsmobile Bravada, the engine is also in use in the Buick Rainier, Saab 9-7, and the Isuzu Ascender."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
606 Posts
Im a Chevy guy so that question was funny to me, as that motor is quite popular, and in quite a few cars.

* 2006-2009 Chevrolet Impala SS
* 2006-2007 Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS
* 2005-2008 Pontiac Grand Prix GXP
* 2008 Buick LaCrosse Super

Here is a link for you. That motor is in quite a few vehicles, it should be easy to find a TB from a junkyard even. LKQ probably can get you one.

GM LS engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

:flame::flamed:
The Throttlebody might be the same for the 4.2 but it is NOT an LS4 motor...

"Vortec 4200, or Atlas LL8, is a 4.2 L straight-6 in the GM Atlas engine family. It has four valves per cylinder and is a double-overhead cam (DOHC) design. Introduced in 2002 for the Chevrolet TrailBlazer, GMC Envoy, and Oldsmobile Bravada, the engine is also in use in the Buick Rainier, Saab 9-7, and the Isuzu Ascender."

Why didn't you just say that instead of being a smartass.

I've googled it and had no luck so I tried here. And People wonder why other redline owners stay away from the site.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top