Cossie M.I.S inlet manifold
15-03-2007, 01:22 PM
#41
Dave,
Just for the criminally stupid
, the point I was trying to make is that the MIS moves the power curve like BD10s do. It is that efficient that it makes 40bhp, but at the expense of a similar loss in torque down the bottom end.
The idea with the individual throttle bodies is to replace some of this lost response, which is exactly what fitting these do
. The MIS was designed for rally-cross where top end power was more important than mid-range response.
Hope this adequately clarifies this time.
Just for the criminally stupid
, the point I was trying to make is that the MIS moves the power curve like BD10s do. It is that efficient that it makes 40bhp, but at the expense of a similar loss in torque down the bottom end.The idea with the individual throttle bodies is to replace some of this lost response, which is exactly what fitting these do
. The MIS was designed for rally-cross where top end power was more important than mid-range response.Hope this adequately clarifies this time
.
15-03-2007, 01:32 PM
#43
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Doug Stirling
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Hope this adequately clarifies this time .
.
Mike, sorry about the blonde joke, innappropiate (spl) use stereo-typing on this occasionn 
ok...so the std cam behaves better than a BD10 but they are the same
can u see the problem dave ?
15-03-2007, 01:35 PM
#44
Originally Posted by EsCosRacer
Originally Posted by Doug Stirling
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Hope this adequately clarifies this time .
. Mike, sorry about the blonde joke, innappropiate (spl) use stereo-typing on this occasionn ok...so the std cam behaves better than a BD10 but they are the same
can u see the problem dave ?
.
15-03-2007, 02:41 PM
#45
Professional Waffler
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Dave,
Just for the criminally stupid, the point I was trying to make is that the MIS moves the power curve like BD10s do. It is that efficient that it makes 40bhp, but at the expense of a similar loss in torque down the bottom end.
The idea with the individual throttle bodies is to replace some of this lost response, which is exactly what fitting these do. The MIS was designed for rally-cross where top end power was more important than mid-range response.
Hope this adequately clarifies this time.
Just for the criminally stupid
, the point I was trying to make is that the MIS moves the power curve like BD10s do. It is that efficient that it makes 40bhp, but at the expense of a similar loss in torque down the bottom end.The idea with the individual throttle bodies is to replace some of this lost response, which is exactly what fitting these do
. The MIS was designed for rally-cross where top end power was more important than mid-range response.Hope this adequately clarifies this time
.
15-03-2007, 02:54 PM
#46
It looses bottom end torque NOT response. The ITBs improves the RESPONSE down the bottom end, which makes it FEEL like you have some of the torque back .
The MIS is like when you put a big valve head on a N/A car, outright power is improved, but at a loss of torque.
I haven't got any CFM figures for the MIS, but am reporting on a back to back rally-cross engine that Harvey did for a customer in one of the Scandanavian countries where he originally built it on an RS500 manifold and then when it came in for a rebuild (to identical spec), but the customer had an MIS manifold to go on, the power climbed HUGELY, but the torque that he had before was shifted up the power curve, so he lost a chunk down the bottom.
.The MIS is like when you put a big valve head on a N/A car, outright power is improved, but at a loss of torque
.I haven't got any CFM figures for the MIS, but am reporting on a back to back rally-cross engine that Harvey did for a customer in one of the Scandanavian countries where he originally built it on an RS500 manifold and then when it came in for a rebuild (to identical spec), but the customer had an MIS manifold to go on, the power climbed HUGELY, but the torque that he had before was shifted up the power curve, so he lost a chunk down the bottom.
15-03-2007, 02:58 PM
#47
Professional Waffler
The idea with the individual throttle bodies is to replace some of this lost response, which is exactly what fitting these do . The MIS was designed for rally-cross where top end power was more important than mid-range response.
It looses bottom end torque NOT response
ummmm
15-03-2007, 03:34 PM
#52
Professional Waffler
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
I meant mid-range torque - I now feel as bad as Dave .
Just like Dave, I knew what I meant, even if no-one else did .
Anyway, I "think" I have suitably clarified.
.Just like Dave, I knew what I meant, even if no-one else did
.Anyway, I "think" I have suitably clarified
.
The idea with the individual throttle bodies is to replace some of this lost torque, which is exactly what fitting these do .
15-03-2007, 03:44 PM
#54
No, you changed the wrong thing .
ITBs help give better repsonse. They don't give any extra torque.
With a normal single body you have the delay that is caused by the TB being a million miles away from the inlet valves, so on a Cossie it has a long torturous route to get to the engine when you open the throttle. The ITBs mean that the route is about 1" and directly into the engine, so response is INSTANT.
It should take away some of the delay and "feel" better / sharper, despite offering very little power improvement.
This is the theory - Martin "says" it works on his car and I will tell you exactly back to back on how it feels on mine in April.
.ITBs help give better repsonse. They don't give any extra torque.
With a normal single body you have the delay that is caused by the TB being a million miles away from the inlet valves, so on a Cossie it has a long torturous route to get to the engine when you open the throttle. The ITBs mean that the route is about 1" and directly into the engine, so response is INSTANT.
It should take away some of the delay and "feel" better / sharper, despite offering very little power improvement.
This is the theory - Martin "says" it works on his car and I will tell you exactly back to back on how it feels on mine in April
.
15-03-2007, 03:51 PM
#55
Professional Waffler
do YOU really think its going to make a difference?
ive drivent a few cossies in different stages of tune, and none have lacked throttle responce (how fast the reaction between engine speed/torque changes due to a change in throttle angle)
would you agree?
you would be better off spending more time mapping the TFC than waxing 2k on a throttle body conversion
ive drivent a few cossies in different stages of tune, and none have lacked throttle responce (how fast the reaction between engine speed/torque changes due to a change in throttle angle)
would you agree?
you would be better off spending more time mapping the TFC than waxing 2k on a throttle body conversion
15-03-2007, 04:06 PM
#59
Originally Posted by GARETH T
but they speced the manifold around the whole engine,, and didnt just try and gain throttle resonce from the manifold
agree?
agree?
. Only time will tell . The theory is there - I'll tell you how it works in practice .Obviously the roller barrel design means that there is also no restrictions in the air flow either
.
15-03-2007, 04:17 PM
#60
Professional Waffler
im sure your new engine is going to be great as i know you dont do things by halfs 
2K to gain maybe about 10 milisecond better responce,,, you gotta be crazy 
ive seen many tests,,, and the throttle plate is invisable at WOT 
keep trying to justify something your bought with your eyes and not your education
2K to gain maybe about 10 milisecond better responce,,,
you gotta be crazy
Obviously the roller barrel design means that there is also no restrictions in the air flow either
keep trying to justify something your bought with your eyes and not your education
15-03-2007, 04:42 PM
#62
20K+ Super Poster.
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 23,377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GARETH T
2K to gain maybe about 10 milisecond better responce,,, you gotta be crazy
you gotta be crazy How many times can one person be overtaken on circuit, before they give up with "400bhp, but it's responsive! " ?
15-03-2007, 06:09 PM
#63
15K+ Super Poster!!
Gareth - i disagree!
it's irrelevant of turbo. Infact, with a bigger exhaust size, u gain response. You have atmosphereic pressure much nearer to the valve than with a single throttle body - the air rushes in much quicker, hence the response increase. The plenum volume helps with this to, a larger volume acting like a tank of unrestivtive air if you like.
On Karls own engine, he said how lazy the GT40 felt with the sweedish style manifold - changing to ITB's improved things greatly.
The only reason that the manifold will push the curve up will be the runner length - are they sunstantially shorter than std? The peak power is fixed by the runner diameter - it's the only thing that can effect it.
it's irrelevant of turbo. Infact, with a bigger exhaust size, u gain response. You have atmosphereic pressure much nearer to the valve than with a single throttle body - the air rushes in much quicker, hence the response increase. The plenum volume helps with this to, a larger volume acting like a tank of unrestivtive air if you like.
On Karls own engine, he said how lazy the GT40 felt with the sweedish style manifold - changing to ITB's improved things greatly.
The only reason that the manifold will push the curve up will be the runner length - are they sunstantially shorter than std? The peak power is fixed by the runner diameter - it's the only thing that can effect it.
15-03-2007, 07:53 PM
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Gareth,
I'll tell you how better it is when I have tried it. Mountune developed the intake system to do a particular job, so I hope it does what they say, or I will be well pissed .
I'll tell you how better it is when I have tried it
. Mountune developed the intake system to do a particular job, so I hope it does what they say, or I will be well pissed . Since your engine, correct me if im wrong, is brand new and its intake will never be changed we dont know the figures with anything other than the mountune item.
butterflies only give small amounts of resistance to the airflow, what makes them inferior to roller barrels are the turbulences that are created by them.
honestly, but im not a pro, i thought that had a much bigger effect on NA engines than on turboed ones where the gain by using rollerbarrels was only marginal.
i would be highly interested to know what it makes on a swedish intake compared to the mountune one
we better hope ur rods are coming in too late so that u got my engine in ur car and we can eperiment with urs on harveys dyno 
15-03-2007, 08:06 PM
#65
Professional Waffler
Originally Posted by Rick
Gareth - i disagree!
it's irrelevant of turbo. Infact, with a bigger exhaust size, u gain response. You have atmosphereic pressure much nearer to the valve than with a single throttle body - the air rushes in much quicker, hence the response increase. The plenum volume helps with this to, a larger volume acting like a tank of unrestivtive air if you like.
On Karls own engine, he said how lazy the GT40 felt with the sweedish style manifold - changing to ITB's improved things greatly.
The only reason that the manifold will push the curve up will be the runner length - are they sunstantially shorter than std? The peak power is fixed by the runner diameter - it's the only thing that can effect it.
it's irrelevant of turbo. Infact, with a bigger exhaust size, u gain response. You have atmosphereic pressure much nearer to the valve than with a single throttle body - the air rushes in much quicker, hence the response increase. The plenum volume helps with this to, a larger volume acting like a tank of unrestivtive air if you like.
On Karls own engine, he said how lazy the GT40 felt with the sweedish style manifold - changing to ITB's improved things greatly.
The only reason that the manifold will push the curve up will be the runner length - are they sunstantially shorter than std? The peak power is fixed by the runner diameter - it's the only thing that can effect it.
16-03-2007, 09:17 AM
#66
Originally Posted by GARETH T
Originally Posted by Rick
Gareth - i disagree!
it's irrelevant of turbo. Infact, with a bigger exhaust size, u gain response. You have atmosphereic pressure much nearer to the valve than with a single throttle body - the air rushes in much quicker, hence the response increase. The plenum volume helps with this to, a larger volume acting like a tank of unrestivtive air if you like.
On Karls own engine, he said how lazy the GT40 felt with the sweedish style manifold - changing to ITB's improved things greatly.
The only reason that the manifold will push the curve up will be the runner length - are they sunstantially shorter than std? The peak power is fixed by the runner diameter - it's the only thing that can effect it.
it's irrelevant of turbo. Infact, with a bigger exhaust size, u gain response. You have atmosphereic pressure much nearer to the valve than with a single throttle body - the air rushes in much quicker, hence the response increase. The plenum volume helps with this to, a larger volume acting like a tank of unrestivtive air if you like.
On Karls own engine, he said how lazy the GT40 felt with the sweedish style manifold - changing to ITB's improved things greatly.
The only reason that the manifold will push the curve up will be the runner length - are they sunstantially shorter than std? The peak power is fixed by the runner diameter - it's the only thing that can effect it.
. I hope their right, or I've just wasted a fair chunk of money .Mike,
My engine is still similar enough for me to feel any increase or decrease in response
.
16-03-2007, 10:22 AM
#67
Advanced PassionFord User
I think what Gareth is getting at is, when will this immense response time come into play....it won't....yes i'd agree that in a rallycross car running +500hp, coming out of a slowish corner on a mixed surface, response time may be that important as to warrant a 5K inlet system, but come on, even a track car where a quick driver would carry enough speed through most corners, the cash not be better spent elsewhere.
All the cars you talk about are built to prove engineering capability and excellence, not actual driver/car performance....if that were the case they would be being raced competively.....as you say Mike mountune built that inlet for a purpose, as did Jenspeed, they arn't really being used for the purpose for which they were designed, they are completely overkill IMO...
Ian
All the cars you talk about are built to prove engineering capability and excellence, not actual driver/car performance....if that were the case they would be being raced competively.....as you say Mike mountune built that inlet for a purpose, as did Jenspeed, they arn't really being used for the purpose for which they were designed, they are completely overkill IMO...
Ian
16-03-2007, 10:29 AM
#68
Ian,
As you can see from what people say about them who have had them fitted, the difference is quoted as being night and day. As I am not chasing power figures, I decided to spend my money instead on optimising what I had.
However, I will report totally objectively on my findings and I REALLY hope it will show some improvement. There is no way I would have bought the item brand new though, as I agree, even Ł5k is too much for the total cost
. Thanks to you, you know I got a billy bargain .
As you can see from what people say about them who have had them fitted, the difference is quoted as being night and day. As I am not chasing power figures, I decided to spend my money instead on optimising what I had.
However, I will report totally objectively on my findings and I REALLY hope it will show some improvement. There is no way I would have bought the item brand new though, as I agree, even Ł5k is too much for the total cost
. Thanks to you, you know I got a billy bargain .
16-03-2007, 10:35 AM
#69
Originally Posted by RichardPON
Originally Posted by GARETH T
2K to gain maybe about 10 milisecond better responce,,, you gotta be crazy
you gotta be crazy How many times can one person be overtaken on circuit, before they give up with "400bhp, but it's responsive! " ?
16-03-2007, 10:41 AM
#71
Originally Posted by Doug Stirling
Mike, at Silverstone when Steve Scott was lapping 10 - 12 faster than you, which plenium/throtle type was he using? b
.HOWEVER, check out this month's PF and look what manifold is on his NEW engine
.You can apologise now or later if you want
.
16-03-2007, 10:46 AM
#72
15K+ Super Poster!!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 18,589
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i saw his manifold yesterday and can confirm that he is uses the mountune inlet, but it looks pony in comparision to some of the of the other bits he has there.
And i can back with a huge box full
and that wasnt including my diff
And i can back with a huge box full
and that wasnt including my diff
16-03-2007, 10:47 AM
#73
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 7,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
He was using a normal one, but with 200kg less weight and 150bhp more power .
HOWEVER, check out this month's PF and look what manifold is on his NEW engine.
You can apologise now or later if you want .
.HOWEVER, check out this month's PF and look what manifold is on his NEW engine
.You can apologise now or later if you want
. So prey tell - what mainfold/plenium is he using now?
16-03-2007, 10:57 AM
#76
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 7,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Same one as me .
. So hopefully your lap times will be a fair bit closer to his this season.........I can put the egg timer away and use a stopwatch from now on
16-03-2007, 12:10 PM
#80
Originally Posted by Doug Stirling
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Same one as me .
. So hopefully your lap times will be a fair bit closer to his this season.........I can put the egg timer away and use a stopwatch from now on