View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Ryan S Member
Joined: 03 Apr 2011 Posts: 36 Location: Snohomish WA
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:52 pm Post subject: Porting and Other Bolt Ons |
|
|
Hi everyone,
I'm running a 1991 L98 with a dbl roller timing chain, AIR Delete, Hooker shortys, MSD Streetfire Coil and a Dynomax catback system. I'm looking for a little more HP up top. Has anybody on here done, or have experience with Porting and siamesing the tubes/upper and lower intake, and can give me advice? Or upgrading to SLP runners? Also, can anybody give me input on running 1.6 ratio RR's are they worth it to upgrade?
All advice is greatly appreciated!
Thank You,
Ryan_S |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dewey316 The Lama
Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 7295 Location: Bringing the tech
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would look to go stealthram or something else like that, unless you can get a smoking deal on TPI parts (read: free), or just want to do it to try it out.
The issue with TPI's RPM limitions is only partly flow, the lenght of the runners is not good for performance above 4k revvs, its the nature of the long runner design.
1.6 RR's, I honestly wouldn't bother with them by themselves, I would rather spend the money to stab a cam in it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ryan S Member
Joined: 03 Apr 2011 Posts: 36 Location: Snohomish WA
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My biggest biggest problem is my car is a '90 and I still need to pass a few more emissions tests, and the HSR doesn't support EGR, a cam would be good, I'd really like to upgrade my block to a 4 bolt main one before I make my engine perform better at a different RPM |
|
Back to top |
|
|
QwkTrip 11sec Club
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's nothing wrong with 2 bolt main for the majority of people. Spend your money where it counts instead and help the engine breath. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
blue89 Member
Joined: 23 May 2006 Posts: 3482 Location: Bellingham/Eugene
1986 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
x2 on what dewey said.
I dont think there is any reason to go to a 4 bolt main unless you are spinning that thing rediculously fast or making stupid amounts of torque. Seems that the turbo small blocks on the turbo forums don't really care between 4 or 2 bolt unless your in the 800 hp range. Absolutely no facts backing this up, just the general opinion I've noticed. _________________ E30
86 RS - 7.4L V8 SOLD
89 RS - 3.25L V6 REMOVED
89 RS - 5.7L LT1 SOLD
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
aaron_sK Member
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 8834 Location: Back in beautiful Tacompton
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't need EGR to pass emissions in Washington state, they do not test for NOx on older cars.
TPI is stupid, throw that crap in the woods.
Can't bolt on a port job so the title of this topic makes no sense. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Alphius Peanut
Joined: 05 Sep 2006 Posts: 2429 Location: Grand Mound
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Agreed. No visual here in WA and no cares about the NOx, so you're good to go with a Stealth Ram. My Subaru handily passes WA emissions with no cats and no EGR.
Start worrying about a 4-bolt when you are making over 5-600RWHP.
TPI even with a port job and different plenum, runners, base etc still isn't too happy above 4k, like Dewey said it's runner length that is your big issue and there's no way to fix that aside from throwing on a different intake.
As the owner of an HSR on a mild 350, I will say that it will not give up a ton of low-end torque, but it will be plenty happy to flow as much air as you need even in excess of 6k RPM. It's a great budget intake that gives you more bang-for-the-buck than any other.
If you're interested, I can probably dig up and post my dyno graph and I'm sure someone else here with a graph for a TPI 350 could post one up as well. Aaron might still have his from the IROC. _________________ 84 Camaro Z28 - LS1/T56
85 Silverado - Low and Slow |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry guys. 4 bolt or allayed is needed at the 350 rwhp level. The problem is crank flex because the caps can't keep it in place. You wear the main bearings out in about 20k miles. Been there done that. And there is no reason to go 4 bolt unless you get a forged crank to go with. _________________ A redline a day keeps the carbon away! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aaron_sK Member
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 8834 Location: Back in beautiful Tacompton
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Alphius wrote: | like Dewey said it's runner length that is your big issue and there's no way to fix that aside from throwing on a different intake. |
Porting a TPI intake is like drinking out of a crazy straw and then saying "the drink doesn't get through it fast enough, I think I need a wider one." |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rjmcgee The Hammer
Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 2320
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
aaron_sK wrote: | Alphius wrote: | like Dewey said it's runner length that is your big issue and there's no way to fix that aside from throwing on a different intake. |
Porting a TPI intake is like drinking out of a crazy straw and then saying "the drink doesn't get through it fast enough, I think I need a wider one." |
A larger diameter straw would get you your favorite beverage faster. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ryan S Member
Joined: 03 Apr 2011 Posts: 36 Location: Snohomish WA
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hahaha alright, I guess I'll just save up and with the HSR.
Thanks a lot for the input everyone it's really nice to know what mods are cost effective before I just go out and waste money on stupid TPI ones. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Even if you got the ACCEL base, AS&M runners and ported the plenum to match, the TPI still has a TUNED issue which is what dewey was talking about. It's TUNED by runner length and positioning that causes a clash above peak torque. The Larger setup moves that number up to about 5200rpm, but if you've got good heads and cam, you'll need closer to 6000rpm.
You absolutely cannot beat the low rpm TPI torque though. The HSR will suck you in your seat slowely as it builds more power, TPI pins you to the seat instantly. _________________ A redline a day keeps the carbon away! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DBL_TKE Member
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 1505 Location: Aloha, OR
1991 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Whatever happened to making the best use of what you got? I was hoping for some good insight with this thread because I can't stray away from the stock TPI setup but instead got a bunch of same old responses saying not to bother with it. _________________ Richmond 3.73 posi| 36/24 sway bars | SLP LM2 | Koni's | Ground Control 800/200 | Y2K wheels | Dyno Don headers & Y-pipe | airfoil | BBK underdrive pulleys | Raised strut mounts | Extended ball joints | LCARB'S
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Quasi-Traction "I have petals"
Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Posts: 3873 Location: stumptown
1986 Chevrolet Camaro Berlinetta
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
HSR or Stealth ram, some kind of stand alone tuning system you can tweak with values on (Holley Commander, megasquirt, etc..) are a good investment. you'll be a couple thousand into it, but the tune-ablilty will make it seem worth while.
Then you can think about internal engine mods, (cam, rocker arms, 4 bolt block, etc.) because you'll have a platform that can be edited for mods.
<--humble .02 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Twilightoptics Hardcore (12sec Club)
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 9191 Location: Auburn , WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Stealthram with AFPR for about $600.
What's the cost of a $400 Base and $2-300 runners?
End of story.
TPI is excellent in stock form, or built for towing.
Not for performance or power. Period. Sorry guys, it's just the way it is. It's not what it was built or designed for. We all wonder why it wasn't implemented into trucks but the TBI was.... because TBI has more power potential than TPI. _________________ A redline a day keeps the carbon away! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
QwkTrip 11sec Club
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 Posts: 3942 Location: Peoria, IL
1989 Pontiac Firebird
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DBL_TKE wrote: | Whatever happened to making the best use of what you got? I was hoping for some good insight with this thread because I can't stray away from the stock TPI setup but instead got a bunch of same old responses saying not to bother with it. |
Stop whining and show us how it's done, champ. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Leejo2005 Member
Joined: 12 Jul 2009 Posts: 466 Location: Kennewick
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Alphius Peanut
Joined: 05 Sep 2006 Posts: 2429 Location: Grand Mound
1984 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe one day I'll get a truck and stick a TPI on it for pulling torque. That sounds like a great idea, actually. _________________ 84 Camaro Z28 - LS1/T56
85 Silverado - Low and Slow |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dewey316 The Lama
Joined: 08 Jan 2004 Posts: 7295 Location: Bringing the tech
1990 Chevrolet Camaro RS
|
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DBL_TKE wrote: | Whatever happened to making the best use of what you got? |
There is something to be said if it is cost effective, I said, if he got stuff free, or was just going to port it himself over the winter, sure go for it. But if you are going to spend the money on a base/runner combo for TPI, spend the money on something else and get more bang for the buck.
Now, if you really want to keep TPI. The trick is knowing the RPM range you want power in, and trying to adjust the reflection length for the harmonics based on that. The TPI setup has the runners the lenght they are to get the 3rd wave harmonic from the intake valve closed to reflect back at about 4200 RPM. The width of the runner will NOT change this. It masks some of the effects if you get runners larger than needed, but it is still there. The only way to really use the TPI style intake above that range is to get true siamessed runners, and actually shorten the distance between the reflection point at the mouth of the plenum to the intake port (This is not easy, since the outside wall will be longer than the inside wall, it won't reflect the same way as stock). THEN, you have to get a cam that matches with a torque peak at the same RPM as the runner's harmonic length. (the other hitch here, is you can hit a 2nd wave harmonic at higher RPM, so if you were to add a bell extention onto the TPI intake, you might be able to get the right lenght for a 2nd wave in the right RPM range, but with the added lenght would need some pretty good flow to make it work at the higher RPM)
--John |
|
Back to top |
|
|
IROCDave Member
Joined: 16 Jan 2010 Posts: 957 Location: Snohomish WA
1987 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z
|
Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Save your cash, buy a decent sent of after market heads, cam and intake.
If you were able to open up the intake, the stock cam would be the next obstacle. The next obstacle would be the heads.
If your after performance, all three need to be changed. Intake, cam, and heads. The exhaust also needs to attention. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|