Should I be doing more BMF intake testing?

[Shadow]

I'm definitely interested to see what you've come up with! I'm just looking at the BMFI from my perspective and goals of keep the cost down as much as possible and getting people 99% there as far as fitment with only very basic fab skills needed to finish the job if any. But this intake is meant to be modified and customized as need be for sure.

Keep in mind, this Doesn't change the Fact that you can continue to offer the VI version even "as is" while offering "More for More" ie. More Moola = More mods to Manifold

Someone who is willing to spend the extra $'s gets the angled longer runner version, maybe even pays to have the knock sensor mount, ect ect.

[OmniLuvr]

and that's why I chose the unwelded version, id like to make mine a little more "modular" so I can change lengths of runners, and have easier access to the turbo if needed. but I am glad to hear the manifold can be removed while the turbo and exhaust are still installed!

[acannell]

and that's why I chose the unwelded version, id like to make mine a little more "modular" so I can change lengths of runners, and have easier access to the turbo if needed. but I am glad to hear the manifold can be removed while the turbo and exhaust are still installed!

to be clear im not sure if it can on anything but a stock exhaust manifold and smaller turbo on a G body..other setups may be different..I dont think anyone has tried it besides me

[turismolover22]

Just by design the intake looks to be removeable without other things such as the exhaust manifold being removed. Since you can get at all 8 bolts through the top and not the bottom, it opens up the possibility of pulling it in-car. But I dont have one in front of me, so I couldn't say for certain

[4 l-bodies]

Just by design the intake looks to be removeable without other things such as the exhaust manifold being removed. Since you can get at all 8 bolts through the top and not the bottom, it opens up the possibility of pulling it in-car. But I dont have one in front of me, so I couldn't say for certain

Then the real trick will be changing out the intake/exhaust gasket after removing the intake without removing the exhaust manifold (lol). We need that guy to repop those copper 8V intake/exhaust gaskets. I knew I should have bought one!
Todd

[OmniLuvr]

Since you can get at all 8 bolts through the top and not the bottom

awesome!

Then the real trick will be changing out the intake/exhaust gasket after removing the intake without removing the exhaust manifold

crap...

[Dr. Johny Dodge]

still though , it should make removeing everything from the back of the head much easier while the motor is still in the car

...back to awesome

[acannell]

Then the real trick will be changing out the intake/exhaust gasket after removing the intake without removing the exhaust manifold (lol). We need that guy to repop those copper 8V intake/exhaust gaskets. I knew I should have bought one!
Todd

I've done it probably 5 times without changing my manifold gasket..there is very little damage done to it in the short term. I think it might start "bonding" to stuff only after alot of miles and heat? YMMV

BTW the procedure to get the BMFI on and off in-car is merely possible, its not fun or easy. You have to have a tiny ratcheting wrench, ball-end allen wrenches that are about 6" long and may need to be cut to length, etc..etc...once you have your little collection of special tools to do it I'd say you are good to go. You have to get to the bolts from both the top and bottom for various parts of loosening them. The swingvalve/top of turbo makes those 2 bolts very tricky, you need to really get a good angle in there with the ball allen wrench.

OTOH maybe someone will figure out a better combo of tools to do it.

And again, this all applies only to the 0.63" housing, stock exhaust manifold, G-body, etc...I have no idea if its possible on anything else.

[5DIGITS]

AFAIK moparzrule is the only person to have mounted a knock sensor with the BMFI, and he did the flange to flange welded on strip as you describe. I am not an advocate of this method because I would prefer things not be welded flange to flange for mechanical reasons, but I am being very conservative when it comes to that sort of thing, its probably okay mechanically. I am not sure about acoustically though, for the reasons you describe.

So, the solutions I am aware of for knock sensor mounting with the BMFI are:

1) moparzrule style with welded strip from #2 to #3 flange, drilled and tapped for sensor (requires welding and basic fab skills)

2) CNC machined knock sensor mount bolted to head ($$ to buy the mount from me, basic fab skills to modify your head to mount it, puts it a few mm from stock, very solid mounting)

3) Making #2 yourself. (basic fab skills, put it within mm of stock, very solid mounting)

4) Drilling and tapping the plenum for the knock sensor. (basic fab skills, puts it a few inches away from stock)

5) Grinding/filing a flat on #2 or #3 flange injector surface and drilling and tapping for knock sensor (basic fab skills. puts it ~1 inch from stock, very solid mounting, not centered audio-wise though)

6) ?

I am a fan of #2, #3, and possibly #5, all of which keep in the BMF spirit of easy, cheap, and extremely effective, since they avoid welding, require only basic fab skills, and provide a very solid mount very close to the stock position.

Nice clear drawing !
With so many ways to accomplish the task, there are things to keep in mind no matter which path is taken.

• Insure the injector bodies do not contact the intake at any locations to avoid injector noise transfer into the intake boss.
• If the billet stock is used, insure that total surface contact from the head to the knock boss is obtained - corroded heads may be a problem
• Do not allow the knock boss to contact the surrounding intake bosses to avoid resonant vibrations - consider reducing the width to insure clearances (see pic)

[black86glhs]

Will be interesting to see if bolting it there, will see injector noise, even with good clearance between it and the intake flanges. I see a lot of noise causing issues, but that is just shooting from the hip on my part.

[acannell]

Will be interesting to see if bolting it there, will see injector noise, even with good clearance between it and the intake flanges. I see a lot of noise causing issues, but that is just shooting from the hip on my part.

I would imagine there would be less coupling than stock, because at least the sound has to go to the head before it gets back to the sensor, while stock, the injectors and the sensor are literally in the same piece of metal. But who knows....

[black86glhs]

Asa....I agree that the stock one is not in the best location either. Very likely I am wrong, just throwing it out there in case someone wants to give it more thought. I have always wondered if the front side of the head was a better place. That probably would have required reworking the head for a good place to put it. They weren't going to put in the $$$$ for that, IMO.

[acannell]

Asa....I agree that the stock one is not in the best location either. Very likely I am wrong, just throwing it out there in case someone wants to give it more thought. I have always wondered if the front side of the head was a better place. That probably would have required reworking the head for a good place to put it. They weren't going to put in the $$$$ for that, IMO.

just an update, I have actually machined a prototype of this

it could be installed on the front of the head I think, or anywhere you could drill and tap the holes for it

http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/sh...SM-development!

[knownenemy]

How about you find a flowbench place, flow a 2 piece stocker, flow your BMF, then sell lots of them based on the big numbers.

I don't think you'd even have to waste time or money flowing the 2pc.
Just have the BMF flowed, and note the results.

I think the numbers would be so great that testing a 2pc. would be an obvious waste of time for BMF owners.

If you were considering it for folks who MAY buy a BMF, then you'd probably have to flow many different setups;
Stock 2pc, stock 1pc, ported 2pc, ported 1pc, and surely many more.
There's just too many different setups to try and "compare" to the BMF's flow numbers.

But having BMF flow results available would be great for folks to have their previous intake done,
and then compare to the flow #s of the BMF.

- As for the KSM idea; I think it's a fantastic one.
But on that same note, I'd like to get input on what people think of mounting it directly to the head,
in the same position your KSM mounts.
Sorry to hijack the thread, but I'd like to hear what others think about
drilling and tapping the KS threads directly into the head between #2 & #3 cyls.

Or in a bit more complicated way,
TIG an aluminum boss with the KS threads directly to the head,
and mount the KS in it.

[Reaper1]

Just as a note the Masi 16V engines have the knock sensor mounted on the front of the block where the one engine mount boss is that normally isn't used on the FWD blocks (it's only drilled and tapped in Dakota blocks and the Masi AFAIK). I am pretty sure it was determined that the knock code for the Masi and the 8V engines are the same.

[acannell]

I don't think you'd even have to waste time or money flowing the 2pc.
Just have the BMF flowed, and note the results.

I think the numbers would be so great that testing a 2pc. would be an obvious waste of time for BMF owners.

If you were considering it for folks who MAY buy a BMF, then you'd probably have to flow many different setups;
Stock 2pc, stock 1pc, ported 2pc, ported 1pc, and surely many more.
There's just too many different setups to try and "compare" to the BMF's flow numbers.

But having BMF flow results available would be great for folks to have their previous intake done,
and then compare to the flow #s of the BMF.

- As for the KSM idea; I think it's a fantastic one.
But on that same note, I'd like to get input on what people think of mounting it directly to the head,
in the same position your KSM mounts.
Sorry to hijack the thread, but I'd like to hear what others think about
drilling and tapping the KS threads directly into the head between #2 & #3 cyls.

Or in a bit more complicated way,
TIG an aluminum boss with the KS threads directly to the head,
and mount the KS in it.

Just to be clear, I'm all for whatever testing anyone thinks of as far as evaluating components.

However I am a little doubtful as to how well an intake manifold can be flow tested, since plenum volume plays such a big role (in theory) and that will not be reflected in a static flow test. In the same way that runner length causing pressure waves to help flow would not be detected in a static test.

So while I think a flow test can tell you something, its going to be missing some important information in that regard.

And in order for the test to be used for relative comparison I would say test the BMF versus whatever else on the same flow bench, otherwise things start getting apples to oranges with different flow benches dont they?

[Shadow]

Just as a note the Masi 16V engines have the knock sensor mounted on the front of the block where the one engine mount boss is that normally isn't used on the FWD blocks (it's only drilled and tapped in Dakota blocks and the Masi AFAIK). I am pretty sure it was determined that the knock code for the Masi and the 8V engines are the same.

Can you absolutely verify that the knock code is the same? This would be a nice simple solution for sure.

[1984rampage]

Just as a note the Masi 16V engines have the knock sensor mounted on the front of the block where the one engine mount boss is that normally isn't used on the FWD blocks (it's only drilled and tapped in Dakota blocks and the Masi AFAIK). I am pretty sure it was determined that the knock code for the Masi and the 8V engines are the same.

Pics of the engine mount boss / knock sensor mounting on the Masi motor ?

[iTurbo]

Attachment 52697

Picture of the Masi 16v knock sensor mounted in the block. You can see the (broken) knock sensor mounted just right of the oil filter location.

[5DIGITS]

Just to be clear, I'm all for whatever testing anyone thinks of as far as evaluating components.
However I am a little doubtful as to how well an intake manifold can be flow tested, since plenum volume plays such a big role (in theory) and that will not be reflected in a static flow test. In the same way that runner length causing pressure waves to help flow would not be detected in a static test.
So while I think a flow test can tell you something, its going to be missing some important information in that regard.
And in order for the test to be used for relative comparison I would say test the BMF versus whatever else on the same flow bench, otherwise things start getting apples to oranges with different flow benches dont they?

What's missed on the flow bench is the large consideration of intake tuning pulses.
Although, flow benches are a calibrated devices with most deviation being realized from how the operator mounts the unit and incorporates air horns, at entrance points.

I agree..
I'd suggest that any 'A' 'B' comparisons between various components (stock vs BMF vs XXX, etc..) be made on the same bench.
This will establish a baseline to which others can compare to, especially in the case of comparing your results of a stock/ported two-piece vs others.
Additionally, consider testing that utilizes push and pull measurements (vacuum vs pressure), if the bench supports it.