http://dejontool.com/auto1.htm

Saw this...seems Dejon is making a 1G Sheet Metal intake...whats are your thoughts on this....

For $399

VS







For not too much more.....

Hmmmmm

I think it looks pretty good!

Yeah but most other Sheet metals are 600....I mean this product looks very nice...depending on how tight money is I might pick up one of these instead of my Magnus

If they offer a phenolic spacer, and nitrous bungs with plugs Im all over it.

All the brackets and vacuum nipples already tehre are really nice.

looks mean nothing. you all should know this. i want to see some damn #'s.

looks mean nothing. you all should know this. i want to see some damn #'s.

Click to expand...

Agreed, but I think as a unit it looks like avery nice sound product....I mean...I might get one let you guys know some dyno numbers if your interested

Chris

Looks like a pretty thin flange to me... I'll be saving for a Magnus, it's a proven design.

Magnus is a proven design, but now must ppl are going to BJ/Venom style...I dont think it will be long untill Magnus to changes the design. The main idea is all flow..and I mean if the Dejon Tool one can flow just as much and is just as good then why not? I mean it has a bracket and all the nippples already put on. Nevertheless, im going to call Dejon tomorrow and see what this produced on the flow bench and what gains if any are there?

I had good results with magnus, don't knock it if you haven't tried one. I have dyno charts to show the gains. They are in my galleryhere and also on Magnus' web-sitr under customer cars.

As for the manifold in question, welds don't look great and material seems real thin for such a high heat area. I saw this same manifold on e-bay and the pictures on there look horrible.

Just my opnion, would definatly use the forester for a little more $$.

Originally posted by Chrono
Magnus is a proven design, but now must ppl are going to BJ/Venom style...I dont think it will be long untill Magnus to changes the design. The main idea is all flow..and I mean if the Dejon Tool one can flow just as much and is just as good then why not?

Click to expand...

Flow distribution between cylinders. Marco didn't design his intake overnight.
What's important is what you want the car to do. If you like good response for the street don't go with a manifold that has a large plenum. It makes for crappy transient response. I've driven a car with a venom manifold (new style) and wasn't impressed for real street driving. Sure it pulled hard as all hell at high rpms at WOT, but it just wasn't as fun to drive on the street. The owner of that car has since gone back to a stock intake manifold and still pulls high 11s on pump gas.

doesn't the magnus have adjustable intake runners. which would allow you to tune where you want your powerband to be. so you could go more for street or more for strip? i don't know if this is true thought i read it somewhere.

The original magnus had silicone hose for runners and a seperate plenum and head flange.

Why they changed? Maybe 4 less couplers and 8 less clamps to wory about.

Now the FRH.... Me dig.... Big time...

The Dejon.... Needs to be made to look less home built.

There are places one can just buy 1g style intake flange that is alot thicker. As for the plenum... they did it the hard way... Get some ss square tubing and weld endcaps on it. If I welded it I'd smooth out and polish the welds such that it looks seamless.. I kinda get lost in my metal work... anyway that flange... Probably.......

Taboo speed shop

Another intake that is'nt well known Ross Machine.... A bit spendy but unkown,







Now if it had tapered runners i'd be more interested... As far as craftsmanship... Shwing....

Hold off on buying your manifolds for a little while fellas. I've spent the last 4 months designing my own design that I plan to go into production with this spring. I've been working on it w/ an Intake Design specialist from one of the "big three", whom I was lucky enough to meet and share some common intrests with. I will be starting a new thread on it here soon, but since you guys are discussing aftermarket manifolds I wanted to chime in.

All I can say right now is: Engineering software, CAD/CAM cababilities, family owned sheet metal fab. shop, TON's of research, and (when the winters over) TON's of testing. All combined with options and a price most closely compared to the lowest priced mani. on this page.

I'm serious as a heart attack about this whole thing. I want to make an impact on the DSM community and I know this is something I can do. My reason for posting this here is because I would like you guy's opinions and I dont want alot of attention on this yet. So what do you think?

Andy

Good idea, but I really like this dejon because of the brackets and everything is already there....

Also will you have a flow bench? What kinda flow/gain can we get from your manifold compared to say a magnus or a BJ?

Andy,

I wish you the best on your project! Do you know what your performance goals are yet? I am interested in the Magnus after reading Tevenor's review on his autocross car. Reason being, my car is a rally car, and I also plan on doing some autocross as well, so I'm not willing to give up low to mid range for a much stronger top end. Tevenors Magnus reviews were very positive for autocross applications...

Also, for all you drag guys, rmdsm.org is planning on putting together an intake manifold shootout on the dyno on Feb. 28th. These guys run big turbos with high boost levels, and I expect the test car will have a drag oriented setup. It looks like MANY manifolds are to be tested, so we will finally have some REAL numbers to go on instead of speculation.

I would also say that flow bench testing intake manifolds is of limited value. There are other factors that I believe make much more difference in the real world performance of an intake manifold. I say this because air does not flow at a steady state through the manifold, rather it enters the combustion chambers in "pulses" when the intake valve opens. The result is sort of like a resonant frequency that forms in the intake runners almost like a musical instrument. This is why some manufacturers have intakes that change the intake path relative to manifold pressure and RPMs so the intake manifold can be optimized for different engine RPMs and throttle openings. Another important factor in manifold design is achieving equal flow to each cylinder. The velocity of the air entering the intake port is another key factor. I am not an engineer who has done labratory grade research on this subject, so I can't explain it as accuratly as a professional, and thus any theories I have on how important or effective these factors are would be uneducated speculation, so I won't go there. It is only my opinion that a flow bench test will not acurately determine the real world performance of an intake manifold.

I may be missing something, but it appears to me that dejon intake is STEEL. the thing would weigh a ####ing TON.

It says it only weighs 9lbs. I also would like to see how it flows before I would put any money into it.

Chrono- Brackets are definately do-able. I had originally only planned on the doing only the throttle cable bracket but for a street setup but it would be nice to mount the coilpack in a "stock-like" location. Good call.

I am building my own flow bench this spring (which obviously will be calibrated). At the least, it will verify the equal airflows of the individual runners. But I plan to get really crazy sometime soon with my personal head work and I will need it for that as well. RallyGSX said it very nicely though, flow testing is of limited value. While it is very valuable to assure equal flow, flow rates are not neccesarily the ticket to performance. To think this would be "old-school" .

Concerning HP gains, I will never speculate that, ever. I would never make any statement until after a dyno comparison was made in a controlled climate. But in mine and the person whose helping w/ the calc.'s opinion, we believe every manifold out there has some form of a design flaw. The degrees of severity obviously vary. The biggest problem is no options. It's pretty much full race or nothing . This manifold would put down entirely different hp#'s just by changing the combo. We are trying to design something that doesn't incorporate the problems we've seen. But then of course mitsu. had to put that stupid firewall there!

As for my performace goals. I am fully setup for drag on my silver car and this season I plan to put down 500+whp on a 50trim, (I know, I know). I also have FWD 14b street car w/ minimal cost mods which I really want to shoot for some 1320 benchmarks w/ this year. Lastly, I have another 1G GSX which when finished, (hopefully this fall but probly next fall) will be my daily/autocross car. Having all of this variety in my own driveway has led me to believe that a manifold that the buyer can pick their own runner lengths and plenum sizes would be a very welcome product. Especially considering the fact that it seems everyone has their own ideas of what's the perfect size. Thanks to my engineer buddy I can calculate the optimal runner size and length given the displacement, IAT's, etc.

I'm anxious to see what becomes of that dyno shootout and I only wish I could have one of mine ready by then to throw into the mix. As of right now I'm designing / building the perfect manifold for my car with production in mind at all times. My final decision on if I sell these will be 100% influenced by everyone's response to the thread I will start in late winter - early spring. I dont want to start any thing untill I have one done to show pics. of though. Any other thoughts or suggestions are duly noted. Thanks

Andy

My response to your long PM was too long so I sent it email...

I agree that you are on to something with the modular design.

I sent you some extra goodies along those lines as well as some new things to consider.

Flowbenching is necessary... Still the best test is running the design on a car strapped to a dyno and comparing them to other runs with other manifolds or variations of yours.

Thank you, and I think your right, flow benching is neccessary but dyno # are the main thing. I didn't mean to imply that I would ever release a design that wasn't fully tested and proven. I just don't think one could calculate a % HP increase per CFM or anything That's just not the key to big HP anymore.

Andy

One thing to think about in regards to plenum size.

I don't think size is critical on a forced induction engine.

I think flow distribution which is why the almost IC endtank inspired magnus plenum works so well. Also more plenum = more space to fill with compressed air = more lag... Like IC pipe length... It's opposite a NA motor when it comes to plenum size.

Runner length and intake pulse still comes into play.

The size of the plenum does have an effect on drivability. Transient boost is what is hurt or helped based on the design of the plenum. From what I have seen (I have the Magnus unit) the intake manifold with the large plenums have more problems going from negative to positive pressure. I have never driven a FHR equpied car to really compare however I do know that my car felt exactly the same with the Magnus unit as before, except that power after 5500 did not seem hampered anymore.

The old magnus units had the variable runner length however I think the "perfect" length was discovered and they were pretty well all run at that length for a while so they ended up making them with the lenght that you see now because it worked out the best.

I would be interested to see how that Dejon intake manifold worked out. I'm surprised to see how many intake manifolds we have available to us now really...

I have an idea for an intake although it would be complicated to build and I dont know if it would work. It would be similar to a cyclone intake in that it would have two different length runners, but instead of having the butterfly valves in the runners they would be in a small plenum inside of a larger plenum( the small plenum would be a tube coming in from the throttle body inside a larger box plenum) The butterflys would be located on the round small plenum as would the long runners which would run through the bottom of the large plenum in meet up with the short runners from the big plenum right at the flange(just like a cyclone). Now how it would work, at low rpm's the butterfly's would be closed only letting air go through the long runners and only stay in the small plenum giving you great low end, but as the rpm's raise the butterflys are controlled by some sort of rpm controlled motor and open letting the air into the large plenum and go through the short runners giving you good top end power. Now I know this thing would be really heavy and hard to fabricate, but it would be nice.

Drew

that would be exactly like a taurus sho. it works well on a sho don't know how it would do with us.