That is why things need to be applied to real world conditions. Most equations that are on paper use constants for variables (unless you are Porsche and can simulate EVERYTHING...Awesome) But when real world variables are introduced, things change.

 

Tim,

The GT3 WC plenum out flowed all of them, however flow by itself was not acceptable. Why would you want to bolt a GT3 plenum on stock 996tt heads? Air flow (of complete motor) plus fuel in the correct balance still still equals hp. Back to the plenums ......trouble is, when checking the same plenums for low pressure areas the GT3 WC was terrible compared to either of the 997 plenums tested. Yes there is more to it than flow, however flow is still important.

Our tests also included computer mock ups and calcs for a host of situations.

We have used all of the above and (along with testing another six available plenums) have designed and built a cf plenum using what we learned.

Flow testing by itself "useless" ...... yes. The above points you mentioned without flow tests/pton tests ..... equally useless. We have learned through past experiences that something is usually learned by examining different aspects of all variables along with what Porsche has produced so as to learn why they did what they did. When the question came up about flow I answered it. I was not about to go any further. I'm sorry you assumed there wasn't any more to it.

For your information, here is a glimpse at what some of the work we generated. There is much we cannot show at this time.







There are reasons for the oval shape of the two inlets, the widening/bulbing of the 90 degree turn prior to entering the runners, the tapering from the end of the 90 to the end of the webs (start of the drops) that extend to the almost port size short drops.

 

Betim,

Did you notice this in the area just prior to maximum developed torque.

 

Jags motor is using a 997TT intake plenum (a used one from a 997TT that we thought was bad but when we got a brand new one from Porsche it looked the same - cracks at the area where it is molded together) - it makes 1108hp/958tq @ 2.0/2.2 bar all wheel - i have 135 runs on the dyno and Jag has many street miles on it as well - what Don was talking about as far as a brace on top we made a bracket on each side and then used a small turn buckle to slightly tighten it after we installed it so it would not try to push apart - as far as the egr ports in the head go i did this - hand ream them to the size of a 0-2 bung bolt ( i actually used a drill and did it by hand ) - i then tapped it for 0-2 bung bolt - red locktite in and it looks factory - reprogram the the ECU - no light - if you have to have the air pump and piping you can still use the 0-2 bung size but make a fitting - hope this helps

 

Yes. I said bolt down to stock TT heads as that is what we are talking about. The regular joe bolting on a intake on his car in his driveway and picking up some ponys...

I must say that is impressive looking! Where are you going to mount the TB? How many TB are you using? I see you are using a cross over, that leads me to think that there is two TB's and the cross over is to balance the banks?

If your intake is reasonably priced I will surely buy one and try it! But by the looks of it (CAD drawings and model) it will most likely be in the XX,000.00 dollars with out the TB or the other fab needed for it to fit. Will it get passed the A/C and the oil filter? or do they move? Is there even one made this is the second time this CAD came out after I said that a flow bench means nothing?

Tim

 

Thats exactly what we did for the port, It worked perfectly.
Do you have an image of the buckle/strap you used installed?
I am thinking its almost like a torque strap correct?

 

Chad
Dude you always push the envelope and that intake looks awesome!
Robert

 

Tim,

Bolting to stock heads is akind to "hot rodding", it does take some adaption. I don't believe it will be a regular joe but a joe who is mechanically inclined and loves to tinker.

There are six 48 mm TB's mounted over a dual injector manifold. There is a crossover vent. Without going into a lot of detail the manifold is feed individually from each IC. The purpose of the cross over is to balance the banks.

We do not sell the intakes (we are not in that business), however we have paid for the development. I have given PD permission to copy and sell if they want. My guess is the costs probably will be more expensive than a normal intake but no where near what it costs to do the development.

The manifold has been designed to fit without modification around the AC and oil filter. We have designed it to be used with two servo motors, however someone with a little talent could make a single servo linkage.

Yes, there is one made at this time. There was actually three made and two were rejected. We will show pictures after the car is put out in public as our history has been one of being slow and we really don't want it out there ahead of us. This has happened to us many times.

 

I know you are going w/ individual TB, but I wonder if the Ford GT dual TB would work w/this manifold?

 

cjv,

I fully understand that..

Correct my if I am wrong, the manifold would need to be designed different if the TB was on the upstream side of the manifold.

Tim

 

Tim,

I'm wasn't the designer and honestly I am not sure. Not sure about the individual bank intakes. I am sure the shape of the beginning of the manifold would have to be different to match up with a TB.

 

Sorry, I am not familiar with the Ford GT dual manifold.

 

cjv,
Can you ask the designer for some input?

Tim

 

The designer is Neil Harvey from Performance Developments. I will tender your questions to him.

 

So it finally Said Good bye! I took the car out on Saturday as the Weather was perfect! and as soon as i laid into it it was at 1.8 then dropping like crazy, tried again 1.1 bar popped the lid and Yup 1/8" gaping crack. So it comes off tomorrow and I’m torn still! back to my 996 or try another 997, Let’s see what the survey says