 
     |
| Returning Fiero Owner - Let's Talk 2.8 Breathing (Page 2/14) |
|
La fiera
|
MAR 30, 01:48 PM
|
|
When I started the quest on making the iron head breath, my first test was installing a dual 48mm TPI TB
on a box welded to the top of the upper plenum which gave more volume to the intake system
Those were the ONLY changes and the numbers increased +5WHP & +5WTQ.
That result was everything I needed to know to start working on a top end system to uncap
the power capabilities of these iron heads marvels.
Welcome back to the forum and we are here to help!
Rei
|
|
|
|
SpaceLion
|
MAR 30, 02:31 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by La fiera:
When I started the quest on making the iron head breath, my first test was installing a dual 48mm TPI TB
on a box welded to the top of the upper plenum which gave more volume to the intake system
Those were the ONLY changes and the numbers increased +5WHP & +5WTQ.
That result was everything I needed to know to start working on a top end system to uncap
the power capabilities of these iron heads marvels.
Welcome back to the forum and we are here to help!
Rei |
|
Wow, sounds good! You wouldn't happen to have a picture of that setup would you? And where did you get the TB? I know you said that it gave you +5 HP/TQ but I would be curious how it effected the entire power band, particularly the top, since my goal is to keep the power from falling off as long as I can and as much as I can to be able to hold gear longer in some situations. And for what I consider to be a more fun engine dynamic.
|
|
|
|
La fiera
|
MAR 30, 02:51 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by SpaceLion:
Wow, sounds good! You wouldn't happen to have a picture of that setup would you? And where did you get the TB? I know you said that it gave you +5 HP/TQ but I would be curious how it effected the entire power band, particularly the top, since my goal is to keep the power from falling off as long as I can and as much as I can to be able to hold gear longer in some situations. And for what I consider to be a more fun engine dynamic. |
|
I'll see if I can find pictures of it, I believe I still have the Dyno sheet somewhere.
|
|
|
|
La fiera
|
MAR 30, 03:20 PM
|
|
Here you go! It looked like E.T. !![This message has been edited by La fiera (edited 03-30-2020).]
|
|
|
|
La fiera
|
MAR 30, 09:38 PM
|
|
This is my 2.8 with the top end I developed. Heads, cam and intake.
The aftermarket parts you can buy from Comp Cams, Truelo and other vendors will never get you near this results, they are generic parts.
This 2.8 had more power than any 3.4 except mine. That's why I always stress the entire package gets the results you are looking for, the right parts.
Miss match parts make it worse.
Look at the dyno sheet below for example, If you follow the HP line of the stock 2.8 WHP on this dyno sheet it'll be at 94WHP@6000.
At that same rpm the Supernatural 2.8 (I call my parts "Supernatural" by the way) made 166WHP (The most WHP it made was 173WHP).
That is 72WHP@6000RPM gain, all naturally aspirated, not turbo or supercharged.
And that was with email chip tuning. If I had back then the means to tune it like I do now I can guarantee you
I could've made 200+WHP with this 2.8.
|
|
|
|
SpaceLion
|
MAR 30, 11:40 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by La fiera:
This is my 2.8 with the top end I developed. Heads, cam and intake.
The aftermarket parts you can buy from Comp Cams, Truelo and other vendors will never get you near this results, they are generic parts.
This 2.8 had more power than any 3.4 except mine. That's why I always stress the entire package gets the results you are looking for, the right parts.
Miss match parts make it worse.
Look at the dyno sheet below for example, If you follow the HP line of the stock 2.8 WHP on this dyno sheet it'll be at 94WHP@6000.
At that same rpm the Supernatural 2.8 (I call my parts "Supernatural" by the way) made 166WHP (The most WHP it made was 173WHP).
That is 72WHP@6000RPM gain, all naturally aspirated, not turbo or supercharged.
And that was with email chip tuning. If I had back then the means to tune it like I do now I can guarantee you
I could've made 200+WHP with this 2.8.
|
|
Man! That is just awesome! Look at that new torque and HP curve!! That's exactly what I'm talking about. That's why I started this thread. You've show real evidence that the 2.8 is capable of not only breathing up to 6K but make usable power too! I mean look at those new curves, that is impressive. So obviously you fabricated that yourself. Did you have to modify the hood to get it to close properly? And I might have missed it, but what dual intake did you use on your custom plenum? Man, again, very impressed. That's exactly what I'm shooting for. Couldn't agree more about the correct combination of synergistic parts. I think with what the previous owner did, I'm off to a good start of supporting parts. That's why I'm really concentrating on the airflow. It seems to be the only thing the setup is really missing to get the best out of it.
|
|
|
|
sourmash
|
MAR 31, 08:26 AM
|
|
I've got the intake manifold available (if someone is interested) off of this setup found in the junkyard. Just the intake. I took details shots of the TB used but the price was too high on that.
 
|
|
|
|
RayOtton
|
MAR 31, 10:03 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by pmbrunelle:
You asked a question (question mark at the end of your sentence), so I shared my point of view...
|
|
Obvious to most members, my question was rhetorical.
| quote | Originally posted by pmbrunelle:
There's no need to talk about peoples' occupations... arguments should stand based on their own merit, not because of a person's credentials.
|
|
WUT? This is a non-sequitur if ever there was one. No one's talking about what people do for a living, I simply stated that I'm not an engineer so I can't speak about technical issues. If I had questioned YOUR credentials then you might have a point, otherwise, it seems you are looking for an argument that will add nothing to the discussion.
| quote | Originally posted by pmbrunelle:
If data doesn't agree with theory, then either the data is wrong, the theory is wrong, or both are wrong. If there is an inconsistency, that means we have some learning to do.
All propositions shall not be accepted at face value (including my own; nobody's word should be taken as-is). Everything should be scrutinized and picked apart... what remains after the collective debate is hopefully the truth.
By this method of collective verification and scrutiny, we can create a repository of quality information in the PFF archives.
|
|
Already in the PFF repository.
http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/139779.html
|
|
|
|
La fiera
|
MAR 31, 10:56 AM
|
|
The newer version (TR2)was installed and dynoed. This one has wider runners (used Camaro mid runners) and added plenty of volume.
It picked up 13whp at peak and kept that gain to 6000rpm. The torque band stretched 2000rpm and picked up about 12WTQ@6000rpm.
Look at the dyno sheet of the TR1 vsTR2 intakes so you can see the improvement!
This is how it looked on the car. Unfortunately you can't have an intake that supplies the airflow the engine
needs to breath and keep it under the hood. That's why the factory upper plenum is so restrictive, packaging.
Then I made another version (TR3) and applied my findings to the intake on the right. It's basically the same concept
but with a bit of physics applied. It has much more shorter runners to improve top end power and decreasing radius plenum open runners.
This newer intake gave me an extra 7WHP from 6000 to 6500rpm and without affecting the power and torque curve in the mid-range.
TR2 vs TR3
So, based on my research, the lesson learned was that the more plenum the intakes got the more power output.
I also learned that I could place power anywhere by using different runner lengths and shapes.
|
|
|
|
cvxjet
|
MAR 31, 06:25 PM
|
|
|
|
|
