Got bored today-2.9 Whipple inlet mod

9

97snakebite

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
1,776
Location
Sacramento
YuGneLrn2Day said:
I'd think you'll see some gains. Anytime you got more air coming threw is always a good thing, as long as you mods to support it. Which I see you do. Looking forward to see your gains :pop:
Click to expand...

woulnt the blower still be pulling the same amount of air?? whats the max CFM they can pull not push? subd
 
cozmo2806

cozmo2806

up in dat azz
Established Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Messages
1,335
Location
28115
That's a good question. I figured it can't hurt by helping it get the air easier. The cfm rating on the 2.9 is 1740 if that means anything.
 
Last edited:
RPM4DAZ

RPM4DAZ

Because stock sucks!!
Established Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
184
Location
So Cal
Great job by the way. You look like you have some experience in fabrication... As for the idea of "swinging the throttlebody out to clean up the angle of attack and try to help the short side radius. Well, I think you may run into more problems to engineer around than the increase may make. I do have a suggestion for the next one though. Install one or two turning vanes in you tunnel assembly. Even though the inlet is under vacuum rather than pressure, all the air wants to fall or collect at the outer wall. A smoke test in a lab would show this. By installing a couple of turning vanes, you increase the back wall area 2 or 3 times. This will help shift/spread volume more across the whole cross section and outlet port area. You could also increase the height of the tunnel at the small ( short side ) radius. Kind of like a trapezoid cross section. This would increase the area on the low speed ( short radius ) wall, along with a lower pressure area. Air flow follows into low pressure and around high pressure areas. I hope this makes sense. I sometimes have a hard time explaining what I want to get across. If you have access to a flow bench you should see a gain in CFM flow. It would actually work better as draw/vacuum was increased of course. Edit; Also, you could use some 100-120 grit sand paper across ( running vertically when installed in place ) before you install your back wall. The small light grooves helps to keep the boundary layer low/thin. That helps in increasing the actual or working cross sectional area. You do it on the roof and floor also, but I doubt it would help as much as the outer/high speed radius. Just make sure the air flow goes across the sanded grooves not along with them...
 
Last edited:
cozmo2806

cozmo2806

up in dat azz
Established Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Messages
1,335
Location
28115
RPM4DAZ said:
Great job by the way. You look like you have some experience in fabrication... As for the idea of "swinging the throttlebody out to clean up the angle of attack and try to help the short side radius. Well, I think you may run into more problems to engineer around than the increase may make. I do have a suggestion for the next one though. Install one or two turning vanes in you tunnel assembly. Even though the inlet is under vacuum rather than pressure, all the air wants to fall or collect at the outer wall. A smoke test in a lab would show this. By installing a couple of turning vanes, you increase the back wall area 2 or 3 times. This will help shift/spread volume more across the whole cross section and outlet port area. You could also increase the height of the tunnel at the small ( short side ) radius. Kind of like a trapezoid cross section. This would increase the area on the low speed ( short radius ) wall, along with a lower pressure area. Air flow follows into low pressure and around high pressure areas. I hope this makes sense. I sometimes have a hard time explaining what I want to get across. If you have access to a flow bench you should see a gain in CFM flow. It would actually work better as draw/vacuum was increased of course. Edit; Also, you could use some 100-120 grit sand paper across ( running vertically when installed in place ) before you install your back wall. The small light grooves helps to keep the boundary layer low/thin. That helps in increasing the actual or working cross sectional area. You do it on the roof and floor also, but I doubt it would help as much as the outer/high speed radius. Just make sure the air flow goes across the sanded grooves not along with them...
Click to expand...

Thanks for the input and reply. I have a pretty good idea I think I what you are saying. We use similar veins in radiator ductwork to even out the airflow. How long would you make them? Would you just put one in or multiple veins? I'm also curious to why you think it would create more issues with rotating the tb? Can you please elaborate. I like the way you think and appreciate the input!
 
RPM4DAZ

RPM4DAZ

Because stock sucks!!
Established Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
184
Location
So Cal
Yes, exactly as used in some radiator ducting. We have used the turning vanes in a small box style duct in front of racing cart radiators and actually dropped working temps to a more manageable temps... I have done the same in a pressurized area in front of radiators and had an engine oil cooler 90' to flow. The pressure and vane actually promoted flow to the cooler and dropping oil temps in a restricted area without placing it in front of the radiator... Cool stuff to play with, I love engineering solutions to certain problems. Now, I haven't worked on a Whipple unit yet. But, if I remember correctly the air inlet ducting runs over the cam cover and right next to the shock tower right? It even has a slight bend to it? If you were to swing the throttlebody out and away to help air flow through the supercharger adapter, you would have to add an additional bend or kink in the air inlet. Yes, I know it can be done. But, the air flow will become even more biased to one side before even entering the adapter after the throttlebody. I think ( my opinion ) that the great fab and engineering you did to the adapter would be wasted due to too much bias/therefore restriction to airflow before it. Kind of like a great set of heads on a 2bbl carbed V8... Where to place the vane/s...hmmm Obviously I do not have the part in front of me,but, I think I would start the leading edges around 1" - 1 1/2" after throttlebody blade for clearance and to reduce buffeting some. Knife edge the leading edge too. Then I would make them with a slightly decreasing radius towards the inside radius some. Not a lot though. The trailing edge will cause some buffeting once the air flows off the vane. It will help keep the air flowing in the general direction towards the decreasing radius. This will cause a lower pressure in the rear "tunnel" promoting flow at high velocities and promote flow to the inside radius side of the blower entrance too. Am I making any sense here? Another idea, would be to shape the trailing edge into a tight/long convex radius. It would allow a more gradual release of the air over the trailing edge as opposed the a straight perpendicular cut. Kind of like a fire cone in a header collector, just not to a point. Make sure to keep the edge of the trailing end crisp and clean. The air flow will separate from the vane better where any radius and the airflow wants to follow it. Kind of like pouring water out of large smooth rounded pitcher as opposed to say a sharp edged can or tin cup... Good luck to ya. I would sure like to see the next one!!! Another edit: I think I would use two vanes, maybe make the spacing progressively larger towards the inside. Easiest way would be to split the width of the floor into three even amounts. Decrease the outer width distance by about 10%-15% and increase the inner width the same amount. Unless you increase the height of the inside area to a trapezoid cross section. The shape will increase the areas for you.
 
Last edited:
cj428mach

cj428mach

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Messages
7,609
Location
Kansas
97snakebite said:
woulnt the blower still be pulling the same amount of air?? whats the max CFM they can pull not push? subd
Click to expand...

By that line of thinking there would be no reason to upgrade your air intake and filter combo. You can have restriction in front of the blower. I was looking through a magazine and they put a bigger TB on a stock 2013 GT500 and it picked up a lb of boost. I take it before the blower it was struggling to pull enough air in to compress it. By allowing it to suck in more air it was able to compress more and make more boost.

I know I was thinking about going with a JLT high boost intake on my car in hopes of gaining more power but when I saw the bottle neck the stock whipple intake has I figured there would be no point.
 
Last edited:
cozmo2806

cozmo2806

up in dat azz
Established Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Messages
1,335
Location
28115
RPM4DAZ said:
Yes, exactly as used in some radiator ducting. We have used the turning vanes in a small box style duct in front of racing cart radiators and actually dropped working temps to a more manageable temps... I have done the same in a pressurized area in front of radiators and had an engine oil cooler 90' to flow. The pressure and vane actually promoted flow to the cooler and dropping oil temps in a restricted area without placing it in front of the radiator... Cool stuff to play with, I love engineering solutions to certain problems. Now, I haven't worked on a Whipple unit yet. But, if I remember correctly the air inlet ducting runs over the cam cover and right next to the shock tower right? It even has a slight bend to it? If you were to swing the throttlebody out and away to help air flow through the supercharger adapter, you would have to add an additional bend or kink in the air inlet. Yes, I know it can be done. But, the air flow will become even more biased to one side before even entering the adapter after the throttlebody. I think ( my opinion ) that the great fab and engineering you did to the adapter would be wasted due to too much bias/therefore restriction to airflow before it. Kind of like a great set of heads on a 2bbl carbed V8... Where to place the vane/s...hmmm Obviously I do not have the part in front of me,but, I think I would start the leading edges around 1" - 1 1/2" after throttlebody blade for clearance and to reduce buffeting some. Knife edge the leading edge too. Then I would make them with a slightly decreasing radius towards the inside radius some. Not a lot though. The trailing edge will cause some buffeting once the air flows off the vane. It will help keep the air flowing in the general direction towards the decreasing radius. This will cause a lower pressure in the rear "tunnel" promoting flow at high velocities and promote flow to the inside radius side of the blower entrance too. Am I making any sense here? Another idea, would be to shape the trailing edge into a tight/long convex radius. It would allow a more gradual release of the air over the trailing edge as opposed the a straight perpendicular cut. Kind of like a fire cone in a header collector, just not to a point. Make sure to keep the edge of the trailing end crisp and clean. The air flow will separate from the vane better where any radius and the airflow wants to follow it. Kind of like pouring water out of large smooth rounded pitcher as opposed to say a sharp edged can or tin cup... Good luck to ya. I would sure like to see the next one!!! Another edit: I think I would use two vanes, maybe make the spacing progressively larger towards the inside. Easiest way would be to split the width of the floor into three even amounts. Decrease the outer width distance by about 10%-15% and increase the inner width the same amount. Unless you increase the height of the inside area to a trapezoid cross section. The shape will increase the areas for you.
Click to expand...

Ok, Ive got a pretty good idea of what you are trying to explain I beleive. I can picture in my mind the decreasing radius to help on the short side. Will this directly help the air try and shoot straight into the blower? Thats kinda what I am picturing. I understand the sharp edge vs. round edge in airflow. I will try and fabricate 2 vanes to go in there like you recommend. I will get some pics up as soon as I mock them up. I wont be able to work on this til at least Sunday.
On this particular inlet, we are limited by the shock tower like you said. But on the next one, my personal car, I have all kinds of room to play with. This combo is stuffed in a 65 Mustang with the shock towers removed.:banana:
 
cozmo2806

cozmo2806

up in dat azz
Established Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Messages
1,335
Location
28115
cj428mach said:
By that line of thinking there would be no reason to upgrade your air intake and filter combo. You can have restriction in front of the blower. I was looking through a magazine and they put a bigger TB on a stock 2013 GT500 and it picked up a lb of boost. I take it before the blower it was struggling to pull enough air in to compress it. By allowing it to suck in more air it was able to compress more and make more boost.

I know I was thinking about going with a JLT high boost intake on my car in hopes of gaining more power but when I saw the bottle next the stock whipple intake has I figured there would be no point.
Click to expand...

Exactly my thinking.
 
9

97snakebite

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
1,776
Location
Sacramento
cj428mach said:
By that line of thinking there would be no reason to upgrade your air intake and filter combo. You can have restriction in front of the blower. I was looking through a magazine and they put a bigger TB on a stock 2013 GT500 and it picked up a lb of boost. I take it before the blower it was struggling to pull enough air in to compress it. By allowing it to suck in more air it was able to compress more and make more boost.

I know I was thinking about going with a JLT high boost intake on my car in hopes of gaining more power but when I saw the bottle next the stock whipple intake has I figured there would be no point.
Click to expand...

good post :beer:
 
cozmo2806

cozmo2806

up in dat azz
Established Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Messages
1,335
Location
28115
Yes I saw that thread awhile back. It definately didn't do anything for the 2.3 Whipple. I am hoping with the 2.9 and higher boost will show better results than what that behemoth did for the 2.3. I guess there are no guarantees! We are shooting for around thanksgiving time for the results. Kurgan will be doing the tuning.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 9 (members: 0, guests: 9)


Top