How much hp is a slightly ported 1pc intake good for

[wheming]

My Spirit always kept the stock 1 piece intake. The motor is still pretty stock.
Old school, 2.5 TI, stock crank, cast pistons, stock cam, MP 287 head (+1mm valves but no real port work), stock 46mm TB. Super 60. 25psi boost dyno'd 268hp/372lb-ft at the wheels.
Those were ok numbers 16 years ago...

No one is going to argue the 1 piece is optimum. But you can still make respectable hp with it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

[mopar-tech]

That would be the first time i've heard that, for sure. Where were you measuring boost?

Stock location if I recall, I was using the same hose as the factory gauge.

[mopar-tech]

I remember telling Pat and saying, I think Gary’s trying to pull a fast on me dude, there’s no way that the engine in that Daytona is basically stock.

CSX has gone 12.8 at 107 mph on a very conservative 21-22 psi and it doesn't even have a ported exhaust manifold.

52 mm TB, underdrive pulley, no cat and a high flow exhaust and a 5th injector. Its all in getting the most out of the package.

Daytona motor is still setting there, I invite anyone who is curious to crack it open, just bring some spare gaskets.

[Dr. Johny Dodge]

Daytona motor is still setting there, I invite anyone who is curious to crack it open, just bring some spare gaskets.

note to staff

we need an "I respect the hell out of this comment" button for posts like this one !!

[Gaboon]

CSX has gone 12.8 at 107 mph on a very conservative 21-22 psi and it doesn't even have a ported exhaust manifold.

52 mm TB, underdrive pulley, no cat and a high flow exhaust and a 5th injector. Its all in getting the most out of the package.

Daytona motor is still setting there, I invite anyone who is curious to crack it open, just bring some spare gaskets.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not questioning the fact that there really isn't much done to those engines to achieve those results. I was only amazed considering how much I and others had thrown at these engines only to obtain similar or even lesser results.
I agree, it's all in how you get the most out of a package.

[GLHS60]

looks familiar , i mis messing with this stuff !

We miss you too!!

How have you been doing??

Thanks
Randy

[glhs875]

I find this really hard to believe.

A stock T2 turbo is only rated to around 250 HP. Gary laid down just a touch over that on the dyno but with HP and torque fallen after 5250 RPM pretty sharply! I feel hitting the correct shift points is a must to accomplish this feat!

[OmniLuvr]

It should make more than that. I just ran my caravan with a stock 2.5 (except cam timing) to a calculated 220-230hp at 20psi

that's calculated hp and a 2.5, t2 is usually referring to a 2.2l, you were probably making a crap load of tq at really low rpm with a mitsu

A good running T2 setup @ 20 psi should be making 240+hp.

so basically 18hp away from maxing out a garret t2 turbo at 20psi??? doesn't really add up?

The Daytona on the rollers with 52 mm TB, underdrive pulley, backcut valves, 3" exhaust, ported exhaust manifold and all of it boost setting.

Everything else bone stock.

254 hp, 321 ft/lbs

and this is with all of it boost

ive ran my car multiple times on the dyno, engine was tired, stock EVERYTHING, and prob not a great tune, but I got 201 hp at 18 psi and 215 at 20 psi, ON THE DYNO

[Reaper1]

Keep in mind that Gary did a LOT of things to that Daytona to lighten it as well. I don't think his performance with that car is a good "measuring stick" since it was more extreme than most people would go. Now, he did it in a way that the functionality of the car was kept and it was still VERY much a street car (hell, he daily drove it for a long time IIRC).

I would use his build as an extreme case of what *can* be done, but those results are not typical...even for other experienced people. I remember watching videos of that car on the dyno with the upper I/C tube looking like a party balloon being blown up! LOL The *only* reason I can see that the boost would hold 30 psi is the fact that he was running enough that other components were FORCING the boost to artificially stay up. Remember he was seeing a 5psi drop across the I/C alone! That is restriction, which is read in car as "boost".

The stock TII Garrett turbo can support ~280chp run all the way out. Depending on the rest of the combo it might make slightly more or less, but for the most part...that's ALL that turbo has in stock form.

My set-up was far from optimized, but totally stock 180,000+ miles '88 TII, basic bolt-on mods and a calibration made 225whp/291wtq...that's bumping the 250chp range running 22psi. Car ran 14.0@100mph (~3100# wet curb weight at that time)

[mopar-tech]

Keep in mind that Gary did a LOT of things to that Daytona to lighten it as well.

Looking over my notes the Daytona was still rather porky- 3000lbs with driver. Base turbo Daytona's, Shadows or l-bodies are all lighter. I removed the drivers power seat bottom, pulled the driving lights, a horn, a pair of speakers and ultimately bolted on a set of Bogarts out back.

Svelte it wasn't, but did get into the 12's which was the goal.

I don't think his performance with that car is a good "measuring stick" since it was more extreme than most people would go.

I know guys who went way farther than I did- Light seats, no HVAC, fuel cell, bumpers cut to ribbons, hole sawed brackets.

Hell I was still running air conditioning and the drivers power enthusiast seat and electric windows and locks!

Now, he did it in a way that the functionality of the car was kept and it was still VERY much a street car (hell, he daily drove it for a long time IIRC).

Yes I drove the car for years and years till it rotted away, year round.

I would use his build as an extreme case of what *can* be done, but those results are not typical...

Cecil County, 11-14-16 CSX runs 12.80 at 107 mph.

I don't think it is so extreme, I didn't even push the car that hard.

Been sorely tempted to drop in something more stout in the CSX along with an automatic and a huge Bosch pump in the tank but all this fooling about just would delay when the Reliant returns to the track and I must restrain myself. 'gotta keep eyes on the ball and not get distracted.

Gary

[boost geek]

I

We miss you too!!

How have you been doing??
I'm doing all right, but my days of tinkering are over I don't wanna put a plate on my car till it gets a new timing belt/ well beyond my current skills
Thanks
Randy

thanks for asking Randy!

[Vigo]

that's calculated hp and a 2.5, t2 is usually referring to a 2.2l, you were probably making a crap load of tq at really low rpm with a mitsu



so basically 18hp away from maxing out a garret t2 turbo at 20psi??? doesn't really add up?



and this is with all of it boost

ive ran my car multiple times on the dyno, engine was tired, stock EVERYTHING, and prob not a great tune, but I got 201 hp at 18 psi and 215 at 20 psi, ON THE DYNO

All hp is calculated. A 2.5 doesn't have any peak horsepower advantage over a 2.2 with the same top end parts. The fact that i made basically the same power as you AT 3700 RPM (i.e. something is wrong with the setup) at 16 psi ON THE DYNO as you say, just goes to show that ~210whp isn't scratching the surface of a maxed out stock garrett. People have dyno'd 260 whp with a stock garrett. Gary did 254 before widebands and 3-bar cals were even a thing.

As for "18hp away from maxing out a garret t2 turbo at 20psi??? doesn't really add up?" you're comparing CHP to WHP and forgetting about the drastic diminishing returns of getting WAY outside the happy range of the combo. Just because something is running 30 psi doesn't mean it's making 33% more power than the same setup at 20psi (which isnt even proper math but not the point). I would not be surprised if you took a '30psi' TII dyno and only dropped 10 peak hp running it at 22. Gary basically already proved that with his daytona vs csx runs. Likewise, i bet i only gained 10-15hp running my mitsu turbo from 16-20psi when if you assumed that all boost was the same it should add closer to 30hp. The combination of rising pumping losses on the exhaust stroke per psi and the loss of charge density on the intake side conspire to make the turbo very inefficient as you raise boost into the 'twice as much as originally intended' range.

[83scamp]

Original poster asked about the limitations of a 1 piece intake manifold for his build. MANY people have contributed their ideas or experience or in Gary's case he has posted times slips and hard dyno numbers. Tracey you have done none of that here and it's not the first thread you've poisoned so please take your inflamitory pointless banter to another thread.

I agree 100%.

Very good and knowledgeable folks leave forums all the time because somebody just can't leave well enough alone. They have to argue, and poke at documented information. Just because that person can't do what the guy with years of experience can, doesn't mean it's BS. Gary & his experience are a true treasure trove of information to all of us TM guys. I certainly hope he sticks around for a long time. I may have some questions for him myself, as I delve into my lastest motor project.

The old saying still stands: If you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all...

[Reaper1]

Looking over my notes the Daytona was still rather porky- 3000lbs with driver. Base turbo Daytona's, Shadows or l-bodies are all lighter. I removed the drivers power seat bottom, pulled the driving lights, a horn, a pair of speakers and ultimately bolted on a set of Bogarts out back.

Svelte it wasn't, but did get into the 12's which was the goal.




I know guys who went way farther than I did- Light seats, no HVAC, fuel cell, bumpers cut to ribbons, hole sawed brackets.

Hell I was still running air conditioning and the drivers power enthusiast seat and electric windows and locks!



Yes I drove the car for years and years till it rotted away, year round.



Cecil County, 11-14-16 CSX runs 12.80 at 107 mph.

I don't think it is so extreme, I didn't even push the car that hard.

Been sorely tempted to drop in something more stout in the CSX along with an automatic and a huge Bosch pump in the tank but all this fooling about just would delay when the Reliant returns to the track and I must restrain myself. 'gotta keep eyes on the ball and not get distracted.

Gary

Well...I want to stay on topic, so...LOL

I do realize others have gone much farther in removing stuff fromt heir cars to go faster in comparison to what you did. I always liked the fact you kept the A/C etc. I did think you had gotten the car to be a bit lighter, but that was with driver. Was that before or after your diet? I remember you lost quite a bit of weight yourself at one point. Either way, a 3000lb (wet) '89 Daytona Shelby is nothing to sneeze at, especially in full road trim!

I suppose I should have described what I meant by "extreme"...I meant with the cutting extra length off of bolts and some of that stuff.

BTW, I will attest to this car's performance. I never saw it in person, but I do remember following the threads about it WAY back in the day and watching the videos. I thought there were a few other "old timers" that were around to see it in person, too that are still active.

All this talk is making me want to stuff this TII engine I have in something and go racing! LOL

[Pat]

Race weight of 2490, bone stock 2.2 with one piece, no porting, ancient FM E1 turbo (think it's just a t360 trim compressor wheel, all else stock, .48 exhaust), two stock IC's y piped together, 3 bar cal, 5 speed. 11.75@116 at 23 psi.

One piece could be better, but it's not that bad.

[mopar-tech]

Was that before or after your diet? I remember you lost quite a bit of weight yourself at one point.

Nope, it was before I started putting on the pounds.

I'd guesstimate I was around 210 lbs in 1999 so the Daytona was roughly 2800 lbs without driver.

I suppose I should have described what I meant by "extreme"...I meant with the cutting extra length off of bolts and some of that stuff.

The sawing off of muffler clamp ends saved me what about a pound? Would have been better served pulling the back seat.. I know I was trying to keep the car "as driven" but some stuff was silly and I was trying everything.

Here is a link to the car making a pass, I'll load more later.



Speaking of one piece intakes- Jon Genesky's CSX-T was running 11's with a Super 60 turbo, NPR intercooler and a 3-bar RP calibration. We flogged the thing for 2 dozen passes at Cecil with a best of 11.85. It was still running the one piece intake, we didn't even bother installing the charge air sensor in the intake, just screwed it in the intercooler plumbing so we didn't have to crack the motor.

Gary

[glhs875]

I would like to see some dyno pulls on a bone stock engine but with a turbo capable of supporting at least 500 to 600 HP! Cam timing and intercooler changes allowed!

[mopar-tech]

I would like to see some dyno pulls on a bone stock engine but with a turbo capable of supporting at least 500 to 600 HP! Cam timing and intercooler changes allowed!

Here is a dyno sheet from Jon's car.

Little more tweaking it would have hit 300 hp at the wheels.

[glhs875]

Here is a dyno sheet from Jon's car.

Little more tweaking it would have hit 300 hp at the wheels.

What Turbo?

[mopar-tech]

What Turbo?

Super 60 turbo, NPR intercooler and a 3-bar RP calibration