PRO-STREET INTAKE MANIFOLD TECH!

[@scottcolantuono9397]

Thank you Ben for sharing your knowledge and information always appreciated!

[@broke_dongle]

New Sub , this turned on my '66 Ford "Check Engine" light.

[@benalamedaracing2765]

Thanks for supporting my channel!

[@flappingflight8537]

Wauuuu this carburetor is bigger than Geo’s Metro engine and probably more expensive than whole Geo:) what is the point (if you are looking for power ), to use an carburetor ? According to the tick books , only avoiding the carburetor’s Venturi diffusers (when using fuel injection )give you up to +10% of power increase by minimizing the pumping losses. Also any unequal fuel distribution with multipoint fuel injection system drops by itself. The ability of maintaining the desired air/fuel ratio also is unmatched.The summary weight of the injection system probably will be half or less of the weight of this carburetor . The height of the engine will reduce and the center of gravity will be lowered.

[@benalamedaracing2765]

All your points are correct except in one major thing! Many FI proponents miss the ever important Joule-Thomson effect in the intake column charge temperature. Dry manifold compared to wet versions used by carb(s) has a distinct advantage in inlet charge temperatures and the hotter the manifold is the more prone and limited in ultimate high compression ratios or boosts is attainable. If you seen how a Weber carb intake works it is precise but crude compared to FI, nevertheless makes significant power and excellent fuel distribution. Now advance FI actually place the fuel injectors upstream on the intake trumpets to take advantage of the JT effect lowering charge temperatures big time! I have done an R&D for a 24 Hours of Daytona Mercedes team that also runs the 12 Hours of Sebring. I pointed at their location of their super expensive FI manifold and showed the advantage of using the JT effect and overnight after my explanations their manifold was deemed useless or close to it!

[@flappingflight8537]

@@benalamedaracing2765 Very strong argument but it has few drawbacks as well . 1. When fuel droplets evaporates in intake runners their volume increases 600-800 times ( depend of the type of fuel used ) , so in the cylinder, the available volume for filling with fresh air decrease which partially diminishes increased by the lower temperature charge density . 2.This way les fuel droplets reach the combustion chamber , so the internal combustion chamber cooling is less effective and much reacher mixture is needed in order to compensate this issue. If the mixture is too reach (to satisfy the internal combustion chamber cooling) can cause problems with spark plugs fouling, ignаbility , excessive carbon deposits buildup and slower flame front propagation , which isn’t good for the efficiency and the power output of the engine . 3.Engine throttle response isn’t so sharp as with mounted close to the intake valves fuel injectors. This is dew to the the longer travel path of fuel droplets and the big difference between their mass and the mass of the air. Air accelerates faster and fuel mixture become leaner for a moment after smashing the throttle . There are few different ways to solve the (dry intake cooling )problem with fuel injection systems. 1.Pure water or water/methanol injection . BMW even managed to collect the water condense from the exhaust system , so there isn’t even need of permanent refilling of the water reservoir. Pure water is preferable since is cheaper and do not change the air fuel ratio of the charge, so no adjusting of fuel maps needed . 2. Subaru just spraying water on the intercooler external surface . 3. Use of plastic intake manifolds . They are not only cheaper to produce and more easy and consistent to replicate exactly to desired shape and desired roughness on runners’ internal surface , but since the thermal conductivity of plastics is much weaker, they heat up less the intake air in comparison to the aluminum ones. 4. Some high RPM engines as on sport bikes use 2 injectors per intake runner. One close to intake valves and another even out of the trumpet . On low RPM only the closer injector is running on high RPM both injectors are used . This not only cool down the charge but supply droplets straight in combustion chamber for internal cooling , also at 13-14 K RPM the time for mixing air and fuel is short , so this is the main reason for putting fuel injectors away ( to give more time for air/ fuel mixing ). Also allows use of 2 smaller injectors , which are usually faster than one , which can cope with the desired fuel flow . Also this way the throttle response keeps sharp.Many of the new passenger cars use two injectors direct in cylinder and in the intake port but they started doing that mostly because intake valves carbon buildup problem on only direct ingested engines . 4. My invention for Propane-Butane ( BTW octane rating is 108-110 and it’s dirty cheap:) powered cars ( fuel systems generation up to 4, where the fuel is introduced in the engine by Venturi diffusers ( similar to carburetors but the fuel is already evaporated - this to generation 3 and sequentially fuel injected by fuel injectors but in gas phase for generation 4) is to evaporate the fuel in heat exchanger( AC internal core radiator) mounted after the air filter in the air filter box , so intake air stream is cooled down and respectively the charge is denser . Propane boils at -42degree Celsius at atmospheric pressure and can be used even as refrigerant. Mixing the air/ fuel mixture is much faster and the mix is much more consistent when the fuel is introduced in gas phase . The problem with occupying of too much volume in the cylinder (when the fuel is introduced in gas phase ) can be solved by injecting it in to the cylinder directly after closing the intake valves . Since the fuel is already in gas phase the time for mixing of the components is sufficient and is much feasible to be sufficient to much higher RPM than mixing air with liquid fuel droplets in any known conventional way . This will be the generation 7 gas phase injection system , suitable mainly for Propane- Butane and Methane. It solves also the problem with oil dilution on direct fuel injected engines. On the end , I want to take the opportunity to thank you for sharing your experience with the other motor heads . I know few things about the engines but almost every time I learn something new or you provoke me to look at the well known facts from different perspective . That’s way I’m among your subscribers.

[@benalamedaracing2765]

@@flappingflight8537, thank you and appreciate your opinions and well taken. Like in anything fuel(s) included there is always a compromise and it all depends on the goal at hand. This said, I will be posting the next few days my experience in straight gasoline vs. E85. On gasoline and boosted via a supercharger, 3 small block Fords I had running on street driven vehicles ran in the 9.90 sec. 1/4 mile. They broke after experiencing detonation and 2 out of 3 broke big time splitting the blocks right in the middle! Horsepower at the back wheel came up at 576hp to be exact on one and the other 560! Now the post I will show with E85 another engine from my shop made 638hp/ 632ft.lbs of torque. Bigger numbers while boosting 2-3# less! This at the same time about 600rpms lower than the other 3. All because of E85 which was had a more stable, cooler and faster burning than higher octane gasoline. I have always suggested higher output engines preferably run on this fuel instead of the others even highly oxygenated gasolines...

[@JG-kv4oi]

One for the algorithm 👍

[@benalamedaracing2765]

I have to learn more of this internet tech stuff! lol

[@JG-kv4oi]

@@benalamedaracing2765 Yes and I can't fathom why you don't have more subs. I really should give you a call as my Windsor build is coming together but there's still a few critical details.

[@perryford1014]

Very Informative Ben 👍 Thank you

[@bulldogbradford8081]

Great video!!!!!!

[@arthurking6549]

Great content- maybe expand on the Ford camshaft lobe centerline differences due to the velocity spreads of the runner length/ volume.

[@benalamedaracing2765]

I would look into doing a segment about it and thanks for the suggestions! In fact we have run different ratios on the corners (higher) to compensate for the long runners. Doing this on the camshaft might be expensive so rocker ratios on the ends will definitely help. Thanks for the suggestions.

[@arthurking6549]

@@benalamedaracing2765 I usually fill the end runner roofs when the volume is excessive- subject to angular approach.

[@benalamedaracing2765]

Art, it is very possible to play around with cam specs and it will take tedious run and re run to see differences if there are. There is a major cam manufacturer here in the USA and I was contracted to make several grinds for them and they will make it and if successful? They said they will post it on their catalog under special grind section basically Ford HO and strokers. It might happen after all these covid stuff is over and we will sit down and do some testing. The manager is the main tech man and he has been real busy with all these Outlaw racing on Tv.

[@claytonstoolbox]

Hi Ben, I would love a tunnel ram for a (408/351W 9.5 deck) engine. But no one seems to make one. Do you a suggestion where I could get one?

[@benalamedaracing2765]

I had them custom made and there are none I am aware that is produced.

[@donaldgalaz4513]

Small block Chevy Weiand blower is what I'd like to learn about... I want to put one here to use....

[@ts302]

Thank you Ben! Looking at the shape of the single carb top (8:31), would a more rounded shape toward the front/end intakes flow better when compared to the straight/angular shape? Also which is better, the carb spacer or a spacer between the manifold/top?

[@benalamedaracing2765]

If we would have curve that plate it would make it worse due to the fact the air will not be able to adhere to the wall shape and create more turbulence because it pulls away too drastic! It is a bad situation all in all and a spacer will give it some elbow room to somehow bend towards the end and these is all we can do besides boring the 4 hole spacer pointed front and back. It would work but the carb/TB cfm would be a lot less than advertised.

[@vrm86gt]

thanks Ben!

[@paulmbylbie6065]

Keep em coming ben my pop who's Own's & operates his own auto machine shop likes yr yideos

[@brandonfairbanks5764]

Great video Ben. Keep up the good work sir. Is there any performance advantage to porting the intake spacer to taper towards a ported intake manifold? Say the entry point at the upper plenum to the bottom of a HVH 2" spacer.

[@benalamedaracing2765]

That was what i was trying to explain but without a sample in hand it is rather difficult. You and I on the same mindset and the only drawback would be the Cfm of the carb or throttle body will definitely take a nosedive.

[@benalamedaracing2765]

I replied to somebody here with the same comment of, running a spacer but boring out the 4 holes angled towards the front and the back. It would definitely help but the total airflow would be a lot less from the carb or throttle body.

[@wayneireland4802]

Thanks for sharing your experience.on other side coin could you put more duration on back cylinder by playing around with different camshaft profiles as in dual pattern cams your could you go further and have different ring gaps to try equal difference in cylinder pressure?.peace

[@benalamedaracing2765]

I feel running a slightly longer ratio on the four corner cylinders would be beneficial or just grind it into the cam lobes on those corners and it should pay dividends. Working on these with a major cam manufacturer soon as this covid thing is dying out so the opportunity to do R&D with them should be possible.ASAP.

[@fortyshooter1]

When will someone design a good 2x4 intake for the 400+ size Windsor 9.5 deck for street/strip using Holley carbs? The Holley Hi Ram runners are too short.

[@benalamedaracing2765]

It is best to have a sheetmetal intake done to your specs! I have run the 2828 for a dominator carbs and I have a two piece intake here and it is very expensive to buy and to machine.

[@818bulldog4]

Nice video!!!!!

[@efernandez8499]

How to compensate for the flow of the back cylinders in a single throttle body plenum type like the LSX intake?

[@benalamedaracing2765]

Efernandez, it should not be too serious as far as A/F ratios as long as you have FI injectors at each individual port runners. The concern was the heavy fuel molecules which could not really take the drastic turns towards the end cylinders. Flowing "air only" would be good and the only exception is those carb looking throttle bodies with the injectors in the throttle plates! They would have the same issues as the carbs. Note, I would still extend the throttle plate high on the manifold like shown on the last plenum with the spacer. This should be workable and if you have individual fuel control on all cylinders then you can fine tune the corners making it safer for your engine and wallet!

[@benalamedaracing2765]

E, I have to see a by using CFD's and do flow analyzing in order to get an idea. It will be hard with all the cylinder to cylinder sequence and flow robbing all over the place. It would have been easy if all the intake valves opened at the same time! But that would be impossible. lol The closest any intake will flow equally is during peak torque numbers wherein everybody is getting their fare share of the air inside the plenum.