sheet metal intake

billfisher

Active Member
Jul 17, 2005
1,296
4
38
huntsville, AL
let me say first that i am sick of trying to use parts that will never work.

so i quit trying and have purchased a brake and sheet metal, tubing to do the job.

the tubing is 1" x 2.5" x .064 aluminum tubes. the sheets of aluminum are .085 thick.



here are the basic parts. they are not welded so their shape is off a little. they are also just mocked up for this picture. the runners are 11" and 14". it will create two distinct torque peaks. one at ~3900 the other at 4700. one thing that shows up in the modulars is a torque loss at 2900-3600 with bigger than stock cams and 11" or shorter runners. i left the cmc plates in the lowers. if i change the pcm to an 05+ pickup truck part, the VCT and cmc will come in handy. they are wired open for now.


IMG_3839.JPG





IMG_3840.JPG


so there is the secret thingy.

also the runners are parallel and vertical so they can be cut and shortened or lengthened based on dyno results. the plenum will be exactly as tall as the 4.6 part or 8" tall before adding provisions for a TB on top. i can put the TB opening anywhere i want it. i will probably weld a square bore holley flange to the top. this is a wet manifold, so carbs can be used with an 8 psi fuel pressure regulator and 6an return line. or it can be used for fuel injection. i have 8 injector bungs ready to weld on. carburetor will require a TPS to be fitted to use my current PCM. otherwise an MSD unit will work.

i am going to fuel inject if first. -b

the lowers are from a 4.6 3v cmc plate set. it gives me something to weld to in the start, and saves money trying to get cnc deletes.
 
well do it.

get some used f-150 PI aluminum lowers and cut the runners off. get mandrel bent tubes, purchase plenum and trumpets. weld it to a usable tubing length and wellah.

oh and do a few years of trial and error research at the track and dyno. it isn't rocket science, but it isn't real cheap either.

i have cut and pieced 3 expensive manifolds to get to here. i know exactly what it wants now. but it is really hard to figure out. especially after trying something and it falls on it's face. you have to do one change at a time and dyno or track run it. i have run as bad as 10.88 at 66 mph trying the wrong things.


but what the hell else do i have to do? nothing.


if you try it, it is important to make it modular in the sense that runner length changes need to be easy, and get the plenum volume right the first time.

over kill on the throttle body is easier than redoing the plenum because it cost you all your torque. long runners that taper or at least work in a usable rpm are mandatory.

a heliarc rig is also required.
 
well i have to be honest. two sets of runners at different lengths will force me to have two tunes. one for long and one for short. or i will have to compensate with two fuel rail systems and different injectors/pressures.


i will try 23lb(EV-6) for the longs and 24lb(EV-1) for the shorts at first. that's why a carb would make it easier in some ways.
 
Subscribing - I really envy you Bill...I love to work with metal and craft my own stuff...I too have often thought about making an intake. My hat's off to ya - I can't wait to see and hear how it turns out - Best of Luck!
 
I just realized that Mr. Fisher is probably also known as Assassinator. I think I sent the same person the same PM's. :)

What are you end goals with developing this intake? Are you planning on selling the specs, or CAD'ing it and producing your own to sell, or is this simply a one-off project?

I can understand your enthusiasm for developing a car-friendly n/a intake, but would not a custom adapter-like lower intake that would fit a popular displacement blower such as the M112 Eaton ('03-'04 Cobras) be easier to get results from? Pos. displ. blowers seem from my experience, limited as it is, to be less sensitive to runner length. With many people ditching their Eatons, I could see an industry spring up for F-series pickups with the 5.4 that sold custom intakes + Eatons + neccessary tune + fuel components, serp. belt, etc., all for probably less than 4,000$ and definitely less than even the comparatively mediocre (my opinion) Roushcharger kits that go for 5,000-6,000$.

-Austin "Tire"
 
i would not waste my time and money on blowers of any kind.


if i went forced induction turbo is the only way i would consider. why throw away 60hp to get to 380rwhp? or make 425rwhp at 12psi for a 4.6 2v and throw away 80hp? why not keep the power and be easier on the motor with say 6-8 psi ?


it would require a custom custom manifold to keep power. oh i made some adapters for 4.63v to 5.4 3v, but i dismmissed the idea. small plenum volume and runners that are better suited to a 4.6 3v, not to mention adding 2" to the runners and ending up where i started. also a ~30 degree bend in the airstream just entering the ports.


it's no better than using RR adapters on a 5.4 2v using a 4.6 2v manifold. wasted effort.


so this manifold will allow for expansion as it were. big power turboed. but still excellent power N/A.


if you cannot purchase an MMR sheet part then by all means roush is the route my friends go. 425rwhp is typical for 8psi with supporting mods.
 
here are the new adapters. ther cmc's are ported to fit. the runners are 1.5" long and ~30 degreees cut.

IMG_3932a.JPG


i realize building the clean sheet is going to take longer so i am making these for now. all i have left to do is cut the plates for mounting to the plastic, weld them, and bolt them up.
 
Because blowers rob horsepower from the motor to function. You take 60 hp from the motor to get 385 hp. If you didn't have to rob the 60 hp, you'd really have 445 hp. Thus the reason a lot of people prefer turbos. I'll stick with my P1SC and the 60 hp loss at this point.
 
Because blowers rob horsepower from the motor to function. You take 60 hp from the motor to get 385 hp. If you didn't have to rob the 60 hp, you'd really have 445 hp. Thus the reason a lot of people prefer turbos. I'll stick with my P1SC and the 60 hp loss at this point.

yea but wouldn't you make up for the hp loss in torque and no turbo lag???