Ported IM?

[Zombo]

^Just curious: What aspect of the cam design would you suggest modifying? The engine has variable valve timing - not sure if this allows variable duration - probably not, and the Lift (15mm, as I recall) is, according to the Ford Engineer, extremely high, especially for a 4 valve engine.

Sponsored

 

[Mjc1241]

There is a separate intake thread and a member stated that a company by the name of Cortex may be coming out with an intake. The Cobra Jet does makes more power and is used on the 5.2 Illuminator Ford CPC motor which I think is the same engine that they run in the GT4 car. I think requires lowering the engine and removal of the strut tower brace to fit under the hood. It also requires a different throttle body as well.

 

[UAmach1]

There is a separate intake thread and a member stated that a company by the name of Cortex may be coming out with an intake. The Cobra Jet does makes more power and is used on the 5.2 Illuminator Ford CPC motor which I think is the same engine that they run in the GT4 car. I think requires lowering the engine and removal of the strut tower brace to fit under the hood. It also requires a different throttle body as well.

I'll see if I can find it but I saw a person mention in a thread, I think saying it was from a FP employee, that they did have to lower the engine to get the CJ to work with the GT350, but the gains were not worth it so they didn't use it. Same with the 92MM TB they supposedly shelved, the gains were not worth putting it into production.

 

[Hack]

^Just curious: What aspect of the cam design would you suggest modifying? If I'm not mistaken, the engine has variable valve timing - not sure if this allows variable duration, and the Lift (15mm, as I recall) is, according to the Ford Engineer, extremely high, especially for a 4 valve engine.

I have heard similar things and so duration was my initial thought. However, since Ford designed the engine to last - lift and ramps could probably also be messed with if we were willing to have longevity suffer somewhat. For me it would depend on the exact tradeoffs. Right now the engine idles perfectly and there is zero valve train maintenance required.

I am no expert, but I would assume additional intake/exhaust overlap would enable better breathing - at the expense of more HC emissions. Probably fuel economy and idle quality would also suffer.

 

[Mjc1241]

Info in this thread regarding the CJ and the Cortex. Info on gains for the CJ:
http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94796

Actually the gains under the curve we're not bad at all. The individual would have to determine if the ROI is worth it for the financial investment that it would require.

 

[Zombo]

I have heard similar things and so duration was my initial thought. However, since Ford designed the engine to last - lift and ramps could probably also be messed with if we were willing to have longevity suffer somewhat. For me it would depend on the exact tradeoffs. Right now the engine idles perfectly and there is zero valve train maintenance required.

I am no expert, but I would assume additional intake/exhaust overlap would enable better breathing - at the expense of more HC emissions. Probably fuel economy and idle quality would also suffer.

Overlap is handled by the Ti-VCT (Twin Independent Variable Camshaft Timing). Both the intake and exhaust cams are individually timing controlled, thus overlap can (and most likely is) being optimized, I would think.

 

[Hack]

Overlap is handled by the Ti-VCT (Twin Independent Variable Camshaft Timing). Both the intake and exhaust cams are individually timing controlled, thus overlap can (and most likely is) being optimized, I would think.

Overlap is optimized but within the emissions constraints. :cheers:

 

[UAmach1]

Overlap is optimized but within the emissions constraints. :cheers:

This.
The ZX2 used exhaust side VCT in place of an EGR for emissions, and once you tuned the cam on a dyno, took forever depending on how detailed you wanted to be, it breathed SO much better that you could even hear it sucking in more air under WOT. I know a lot of Focus SVT guys did the same for their intake VCT. It helped a lot in extending the powerband, and that was just with 1 cam using it. Personally, I spend the time to dial it in every 500RPM, since I had my own SCT software, some guys would do it every 1000RPM to save tuning/dyno time.

I haven't looked at the Mustangs VCT system It should be similar in function, just different in how it's utilized. I'd like to see if any shops have REALLY took to time to dig into it and see how they can use it. If I remember when the VCT system first came to the Mustangs most shops were just disabling it because they had no experience with it like the shops tuning the Zetec engines and found it just easier to lock the cams in place. I'm sure by now someone's spent time to see see how it can be used. I'd love to see their results.

 

[Zitrosounds]

Porting the OEM Coyote intakes(as well as the Boss and CJ intakes) is nothing new. While it doesn't yield huge gains there are some noticeable areas that can be improved upon especially around the injector ports where the two halves of the manifold are pressed together.


The fact that the original intake manifold does not have clearance issues like one would run into when swapping to a CJ intake is the reason for the OP mentioning clearance issues.

Ok, So i get the clearance issue hence porting the OEM piece. But what I meant by how to port was answered by Zombo,

1) hundreds of hours of CFD analysis on this manifold
2) flow bench testing
3) engine and electronics to do dyno testing
4) flow bench or Dynamometer

Porting without proper analysis and testing is a waste of time.

 

[UAmach1]

Ok, So i get the clearance issue hence porting the OEM piece. But what I meant by how to port was answered by Zombo,

1) hundreds of hours of CFD analysis on this manifold
2) flow bench testing
3) engine and electronics to do dyno testing
4) flow bench or Dynamometer

Porting without proper analysis and testing is a waste of time.

None of that stopped the 4.6 4v guys. Nearly all their testing was dynos and the strip. Much cheaper IM to mess up on though.

 

[Hack]

Ok, So i get the clearance issue hence porting the OEM piece. But what I meant by how to port was answered by Zombo,

1) hundreds of hours of CFD analysis on this manifold
2) flow bench testing
3) engine and electronics to do dyno testing
4) flow bench or Dynamometer

Porting without proper analysis and testing is a waste of time.

I agree with you and Zombo on that. The only thing I would expect could be done by a backyard guy is cleaning up casting flash or the equivalent (assuming there is any). I'm sure any improvement would be minuscule. And I expect the intake, heads and exhaust are all matched so all would have to be changed.

 

[Grimace427]

This.
The ZX2 used exhaust side VCT in place of an EGR for emissions,...

All modern variable cam timing cars use that for EGR nowadays.

Ok, So i get the clearance issue hence porting the OEM piece. But what I meant by how to port was answered by Zombo,

1) hundreds of hours of CFD analysis on this manifold
2) flow bench testing
3) engine and electronics to do dyno testing
4) flow bench or Dynamometer

Porting without proper analysis and testing is a waste of time.

I don't understand this mentality that because the OEM spent all this R&D on a product that it must be perfect. If that were the case there wouldn't be an aftermarket. People have been finding all kinds of ways to improve the factory stuff especially since the OEM didn't design these components purely for maximum performance. They had so many other considerations that those R&D dollars and hours were spent on.

None of that stopped the 4.6 4v guys. Nearly all their testing was dynos and the strip. Much cheaper IM to mess up on though.

Not just them, the Coyote was a big hit for minor porting mods even though the results were relatively minor. The factory plastic intakes are super easy to remove and do some minor port matching.

 

[UAmach1]

All modern variable cam timing cars use that for EGR nowadays.

Really? That kind of surprises me as I remember hearing the SVT Focus kept the EGR and moved to Intake VCT because the ZX2 was having an issue with modern emissions. Maybe that was just limited to how that specific version of the system was designed.

 

[Grimace427]

Really? That kind of surprises me as I remember hearing the SVT Focus kept the EGR and moved to Intake VCT because the ZX2 was having an issue with modern emissions. Maybe that was just limited to how that specific version of the system was designed.

It's the variable cam timing in general and not a single cam in particular. Under low-load conditions the factory tune can hold both valves open for extra overlap and dilute the intake air/fuel charge to reduce combustion chamber temps, thus reducing NOx emissions(which is the purpose of EGR). NOx is produced by specific combustion chamber temps(2,500F IIRC?, somewhere very high) and by reintroducing exhaust gasses into the chamber which cannot be burned again the resulting overall chamber temp is reduced. Under full load obviously this does not occur.



Also given the recent developments meant to increase fuel efficiency where the engine is run ultra-lean(Mazda Sky-Active for example) the manufacturers are fighting a major battle in reducing NOx emissions. Direct Injection is the major thing helping in this case since you can run ultra-lean but still control chamber temps to a reasonable degree. Exactly how they are accomplishing this I'm sure is trade secret or not fully known to me. Mercedes had some neat stuff alternating between homogeneous fuel injection with stratified injection methods(multiple fuel bursts per compression stroke) to sort of achieve the best of power, efficiency, and emissions.

 

[shelbyman]

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Was trying to follow this thread along till I got here and just had to totally agree... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Sponsored