SDI Intake on ALH with Dyno Data

I wouldn't be much help with design, and I wouldn't have the first clue as to how to build one, but with good instructions and a parts list I would find a way.

I aim to do something similar to this with a comparison between the stock 1Z intake manifold and the PD130 Intake manifold. I want to see if you guys can come up with something usable we can put into the field.

Nick - can you start a new thread on this topic?

nicklockard said:

FUB,

I think if we put our heads together, we could get the cost of a DIY dyno down below $1000 for sure because of the open-source design, research, and development. Of course I'm conveniently ignoring the cost of welders, tools, etcetera. Alternatively, like you say, we could do an open-source 'butt dyno' method that would control for most variables, so long as everyone used the same brand of temperature/pressure sensor and Excel macros.

Edit: Oh, I'm not including cost of laptop, VCDS, or Excel license in my DIY dyno. Is there enough club interest to proceed?

Click to expand...

I'm all for open sourcing, but I don't think you can get the materials cost below a thousand dollars, not to mention any controls, sensors or data acquisition, or as you mention, fab equipment, laptop, VCDS, etc either.

I think you'll have to go used equipment for sure - Best bet might be an airboat prop/drive system, a variable speed two pulley system out of an old combine (similar to a snowmobile belt drive, but 200+HP capable at 1000 RPM's) - all this can go to the side of the car and be driven by the wheels which would make for a nice cross wind. It would be a challenge to turn it 90 degrees and have it go in front of the car.

Another idea is that old tractor PTO dyno's typically go pretty cheap (under 1k) at auction. Typically 200-300hp rated at 1540 RPM. Then you'd need a roller to drive on and some sort of gear reduction to spin it...

Lots more ideas, but have to go to work...

nicklockard said:

IMO, FUB's data is an excellent discussion start to a new experimental design:

Repeat this test in reverse run order with MAF based tunes. Record smoke opacity. Compare dynometer power and torque data against smoke opacity. Perhaps smoke opacity can be gauged with something like this tool http://www.machinebuilding.net/p/p4197.htm although it would be best to plot power/smoke opacity at each rpm point.

What this data tells me is that TdiClub has some excellent engineers and scientists, and we are in need of an open-source designed, home made DIY dynometer that users can build for the $550-$750 range from easily-sourced materials. Is there any club interest in starting a thread to gauge and collect user knowledge for such a project?

Click to expand...

Just thinking off the top of my head, not an engineer but a gearhead. Couldn't you just use an O2 sensor instead of an smoke opacity meter? If an intake produces a leaner mixture, you would need to fatten up the fuel mixture to where the previous intake O2 readings were. Then you would get comparable results on the dyno. Does this make sense or is it too simplistic?

I don't think slapping on a part without adjusting the tune/fuel would give accurate info.

Got Bearings? said:

Just thinking off the top of my head, not an engineer but a gearhead. Couldn't you just use an O2 sensor instead of an smoke opacity meter? If an intake produces a leaner mixture, you would need to fatten up the fuel mixture to where the previous intake O2 readings were. Then you would get comparable results on the dyno. Does this make sense or is it too simplistic?
I don't think slapping on a part without adjusting the tune/fuel would give accurate info.

Click to expand...

A wideband o2 sensor would also work fine in my opinion.

I don't believe that you should alter the tune at all to start out - if you change intake manifolds and more fuel is burnt because there is more air in the chamber, then it should make more power. If the MAF sees more airflow (and it's not saturated like most modified TDI's), then the ECU will add fuel as well which would add more power.

The whole point is to see what effect the intake manifold itself has in the system on it's own. Then with other modifications (tuning to an A/F ratio or smoke limit or seat of the pants or whatever) to optimize the overall system after we see what the intake itself should do.

Fix_Until_Broke said:

A wideband o2 sensor would also work fine in my opinion.

I don't believe that you should alter the tune at all to start out - if you change intake manifolds and more fuel is burnt because there is more air in the chamber, then it should make more power. If the MAF sees more airflow (and it's not saturated like most modified TDI's), then the ECU will add fuel as well which would add more power.

The whole point is to see what effect the intake manifold itself has in the system on it's own. Then with other modifications (tuning to an A/F ratio or smoke limit or seat of the pants or whatever) to optimize the overall system after we see what the intake itself should do.

Click to expand...

I understand what you're trying to accomplish but I don't think testing the intake with no other changes will give you meaningful data or be comparable.

For example, the tune is already optimized for the first intake (assumption) and will give a certain AFR. If a second intake is installed and the AFR changes, it's not a direct comparision. If you change the tune to achieve the same AFR, now you can compare results because you kept another variable constant. And you should go a step further and optimize the tune for the second intake. Now you can see the potential of both intakes.

As to the MAF adding fuel, all a tune/MAF does is add fuel based on how much air it sees. It does nothing if the air is being more efficiently downstream. A guy on another board tested 3 sets of headers for his V8. It was running 11's and it was dead on consistent. He tested 3 sets of headers - shorty, 4 into 1 and Tr-Y's and in each one, he had to play with the tune (+/- 5% fuel) to get the AFR where he wanted it and get a true direct comparision of each one.

What I'm getting at is just changing a part and nothing else is not a true comparision. Everything on an engine (tune included) works together as a package. If you change something, you need to tune for it so it's a package again.

So do we have dyno numbers for SDI vs PD130/150 intakes and then custom plenum versions with different length runners?
What is actually best??
Has anyone fitted an SDI intake and got powergains? At the start of this thread it appears to show losses?

Any one use thise snaill sdi intake ?,
im building a dual chamber intake with the large sdi snaill as base with a, tapper tube on it with a 20mm entrance to the sdi intake over the full lenght of the intake side.

Tested the scrol sdi intake it flows,realy bad not yet made to dual chamber. But it smokes more then my orther sdi intake. Now building anthore one based on the mk4 sdi. All metal and with dual chamber intake and long runners.

mk1-83 said:

Tested the scrol sdi intake it flows,realy bad not yet made to dual chamber. But it smokes more then my orther sdi intake. Now building anthore one based on the mk4 sdi. All metal and with dual chamber intake and long runners.

Click to expand...

Any ideas on why it flows so badly?
My intuition's on the "step over" in the runners before they hit the ports in the head, I know my pyro runs pretty darn hot on my previous ALH manifold because it's in the exhaust stream of #4, and that one obviously is getting less air than #2&3. On the scroll type manifold it looks as though #4 and to a lesser extent #2 have a significant step-over.

Well anyways, got one coming in the mail to be cut apart and welded into something a little more oddball, I'll post some pics of the sections of it when it's cut apart.

i think , when you look inside the manifold the scroll is open no guide to the ports.
the plastic 2 piece mk4 sdi have nice runners to the ports and a nice smooth 90* bend to the head. also it have a bit of plenum.

I like the 1Ynstyle and d24 the most. Both have decent plenum and good entry angle at the port. 1Y has although little room abovd exh manifold, so egr port has to be shaved.

Rub im use a 1y runners on mine dual chamber intake works and fits fine.
https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/108917392344342499586/albums/6100827470787026065

yeah I also used it with single bigger plenum and shorter runners, but on alh/afn mani it doesnt fit without shaving EGR port..

I run a snail on my race car and we make good power

I still can run the EGR port ETS with the snail I just grind ed the EGR port boss and used a button alen and cut the intake where it hit a bit.

CNGVW said:

I run a snail on my race car and we make good power

Click to expand...

you can make 'good power' despite a lot of things working against it

I just wanted to know why it was a slouch in testing, and I guess I got my answer in that the runners' inlets aren't radiused very much, "no velocity stack" to them causing all kinds of unhappiness at the beginning of the runners. I'll try and remedy that on the one I butcher.

Yeah, it's interesting to me that the sdi scroll type manifold doesn't really flow that well. I had always assumed from its external appearance that it would. I may have to make a winter project of hacking up my d24.

172 Hp is not much and is easy to make even with that bad flow intake.
Things get more precies when running 280-300 hp on tdi like mine

just for info, dynoed the 50/71 2260 hybrid yesterday, made 275 hp at 4k2 and over 250hp from 3000 till 5200. pd150 intake and stock engine. grey haze. 2.4 bar with 3 bar emp at 5k rpm

mine old tune with gtb2260vk hflox.275 made 277hp and from 3000-5500 250+ hp

mine vklr hybrid do 2.5 bar at 5000 and 2.8 emp

yeah this one has stock turbine..

Mine hybrid have 46mm turbine and 49/62 ett-65mm 6/6 compressorwheel
Rub whats youre opion about emp with hybrid turbo ? Mine sits 0.4-0.5 above boost

At 270 hp 2260 turbine seems to have no problem supplying required shaft power.. I think with good engine that flows things might look different with this hybrid. Yours def seems a better combo.

So what design intake do you guy feel is best.
We are stepping up to a 2260 turbo for next year. and keeping the 17/22 for some other engine.

A pd 130 intake ore the mk4 sdi 2 piece intake ore a custom dual chamber.

CNGVW said:

So what design intake do you guy feel is best.
We are stepping up to a 2260 turbo for next year. and keeping the 17/22 for some other engine.

Click to expand...

the 1x/1y intakes are pretty well regarded (as well as a good base for a dual chamber intake), as is the PD150/130

I have PD130 intake but want a better flowing. I have bought a flowed head with biggest valves in stock seating. What intake do I take best?

For high power I recommend a modified D24 intake. It give you a higher flow and the big plenum is good for distribution to all 4 runners.
For ultra performance I suggest to polish the inside of the intake.

At the moment I have one D24 intake in the house.

intaketommy said:

For high power I recommend a modified D24 intake. It give you a higher flow and the big plenum is good for distribution to all 4 runners.
For ultra performance I suggest to polish the inside of the intake.

At the moment I have one D24 intake in the house.

Click to expand...

Do you have any data to support this?

Fix_Until_Broke said:

Do you have any data to support this?

Click to expand...

Rub87 wrote here some data from d24 intake