Resolved 2G JMF intake manifold

[DSM_GSX01]

Ok i want to make 400-500hp maybe more if i can. I want to upgrade my manifold to JMF but dont know what to go with. The Drag or Street or Race Version. I was going to just use my stock manifold but i will be loosing power.

Also i am doing a fuse box relocation and i know i can delete some sensors so what ones can i with the JMF and using dsmlink?

 

[motomattx]

Its absolutely true in every way. The drivability goes down, the engine doesnt respond the way that it should. If this wasnt true then why isnt the stock manifold designed with a huge plenum? or how about why do the manufacturers of aftermarket manifolds offer three different types of manifolds? do your research.

 

[RvlutionMtrsprt]

You obviously don't know much about 2.3 setups. If you had any first hand experience with them, both with stock intake manifold and aftermarket, you would not be spreading misinformation like you are now. Go build yourself a stroker and test it with a bunch of different parts combinations as I have then come back and post how you were wrong and a smim is worth every penny on a stroker.

 

[motomattx]

I hate to make you look any more stupid, its like shooting fish in a barrel. Oh, well:

from "how to tune and modify engine management systems," by jeff hartman:

Quote:
plenum volume

"the purpose of a plenum is to permit charge gases to slow down and gain density, and to help isolate the resonant pulses of the individual runners from a desirable overall smooth flow of air through the throttle. ... the tradeoffs involve supplying sufficient plenum volume to deliver plenty of airflow versus keeping the volume low enough to keep throttle response from becoming sluggish." (p.120)

To reiterate here my point is to use an appropriate manifold for your cars planned use, I never said dont use a smim on your car, only "use the right one" street car=street manifold drag car=drag manifold, for the same reason that you wouldnt pair up a GT4205 for in town driving.

 

[RvlutionMtrsprt]

Thanks for proving my point: you have ZERO real world experience. Keep on reading books and regurgitating useless bs while the rest of us build cars.

 

[motomattx]

Just concede already and admit that you are wrong, why is that so hard for people?

 

[lasthope05]

Just concede already and admit that you are wrong, why is that so hard for people?

I don't think you understand the function of an intake manifold does not rely on only plenum size for emphasizing power production in a specific location. Entry angles, runner length, runner diameter, plenum size and shape all play a huge part together with valve harmonics.

With a bigger displacement motor you will not notice much if any loss in low end as it is already offset. With stokers bigger is better. 280 cams on a stoker motors act like 272s because of how much more airflow it has.

 

[motomattx]

I don't think you understand the function of an intake manifold does not rely on only plenum size for emphasizing power production in a specific location. Entry angles, runner length, runner diameter, plenum size and shape all play a huge part together with valve harmonics.

With a bigger displacement motor you will not notice much if any loss in low end as it is already offset. With stokers bigger is better. 280 cams on a stoker motors act like 272s because of how much more airflow it has.

Tell me your trolling and that you dont actually believe this.

 

[lasthope05]

Tell me your trolling and that you dont actually believe this.

No. I think you are trolling.

You really believe a stroked motor does not consume more airflow thus requiring more cam duration and lift to acquire it? Just like your argument of intake manifolds are designed for a 2.0l motor the cams are also designed for the same. Take a look at FP/Comp's standard cams and stroker cams and compare the two. The stroker cam will always have more lift and duration to help fill the cylinders.

 

[motomattx]

No. I think you are trolling.

You really believe a stroked motor does not consume more airflow thus requiring more cam duration and lift to acquire it? Just like your argument of intake manifolds are designed for a 2.0l motor the cams are also designed for the same. Take a look at FP/Comp's standard cams and stroker cams and compare the two. The stroker cam will always have more lift and duration to help fill the cylinders.

No, they wont always have more of both of those at all, you really need to go back and get a grasp on the fundamentals of 4 cycle engine operation before trying to engage an auto engineer on how an engine operates there buddy. By your theory, the stock 2.4 liter 4g64 has more lift and more duration than the 2.0 liter 4g63 then right? . The 2.3 stroker is only 300cc larger than the 2.0 engine for that matter, do you have any idea how small 300cc is? your push mower is bigger in displacement than 300cc, not that it has anything to do with all of this but it hardly requires larger cams to operate due to the 300cc increase in displacement. The stroker setup gets its additional fill due to increased velocity in the intake system which is one of the reasons that the stroker has better bottom end response and once again a large "drag" plenum will diminish this advantage on the highway with sluggish throttle response due to lowering the intake velocities to less than optimum.

 

[Seamus]

Tell me your trolling and that you dont actually believe this.

He's right to some extent. A lot more so than your Internet jockey tactics or quoting info you read all day. The thing with running these bigger cams on the bigger displacements is educated tweaking of cam timing. Installing the off the shelf cams straight up is even less optimal on a motor with larger displacement. just because you went up in displacement doesn't mean you want more overlap on your application. Cams are pretty complex and I in no position to give lectures on setting up a veal train but at least I've played with the shit we're talking about instead of reposting info I read on a forum.

No, they wont always have more of both of those at all, you really need to go back and get a grasp on the fundamentals of 4 cycle engine operation before trying to engage an auto engineer on how an engine operates pal.

Cool story. When do you graduate? How's the dorm food.

 

[boost97gst]

Damn, how can a SMIM really have hardly any effect down low(negatively) on a 2.3L? It goes against the grain strongly. I just dont think many people will agree that a SMIM on any built 2.3 is a bad idea for street use. Shit, i dont think you would find many that would say its a bad idea for a 2.0L.

Personally i want to keep my 2g IM and see how far i can go. They are proven well into the 600whp range. I believe somewhere around 650whp stock 2g IM(same goes for 1g IM)

OP: If you have the money go for a SMIM but you can still get a whole hell of a lot out of a stock unit. It wont be a "dog" on the streets with any SMIM you get.

 

[motomattx]

He's right to some extent. A lot more so than your Internet jockey tactics or quoting info you read all day. The thing with running these bigger cams on the bigger displacements is educated tweaking of cam timing. Installing the off the shelf cams straight up is even less optimal on a motor with larger displacement. just because you went up in displacement doesn't mean you want more overlap on your application. Cams are pretty complex and I in no position to give lectures on setting up a veal train but at least I've played with the shit we're talking about instead of reposting info I read on a forum.



Cool story. When do you graduate? How's the dorm food.

It is a cool story, and I've likely been building engines for people since you were still sh1ting green.

Seeing as I have been participating in the Dsmshootout since oh the 6th or 7th annual one, I happen to know my way around the 4g series. How many 4g engines have you put into the single digits? none.

 

[lasthope05]

No, they wont always have more of both of those at all, you really need to go back and get a grasp on the fundamentals of 4 cycle engine operation before trying to engage an auto engineer on how an engine operates there buddy. By your theory, the stock 2.4 liter 4g64 has more lift and more duration than the 2.0 liter 4g63 then right? . The 2.3 stroker is only 300cc larger than the 2.0 engine for that matter, do you have any idea how small 300cc is? your push mower is bigger in displacement than 300cc, not that it has anything to do with all of this but it hardly requires larger cams to operate due to the 300cc increase in displacement. The stroker setup gets its additional fill due to increased velocity in the intake system which is one of the reasons that the stroker has better bottom end response and once again a large "drag" plenum will diminish this advantage on the highway with sluggish throttle response due to lowering the intake velocities to less than optimum.

Im sorry. I forgot everybody on the internet is a engineer.

So are we talking about a stock 2.4l with sohc vs a 2.3l dohc motor build for performance? Best comparison ever!

 

[motomattx]

Im sorry. I forgot everybody on the internet is a engineer.

So are we talking about a stock 2.4l with sohc vs a 2.3l dohc motor build for performance? Best comparison ever!

It doesnt matter in this case since the blanket statement that a stroker engine will always have more lift and duration in its cams than a stock 2.0 does because of the "additional air"

Here is a link to a post that was made in the past, Jim the owner of Jmfab himself talked a customer out of running the race version in favor of the street version as it served his street purposes better!

http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/bolt-tech/277606-jm-fab-street-vs-race-street-numbers.html

 

[synthetek]

Here is a link to a post that was made in the past, Jim the owner of Jmfab himself talked a customer out of running the race version in favor of the street version as it served his street purposes better!

http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/bolt-tech/277606-jm-fab-street-vs-race-street-numbers.html

Because they were running small turbos. The turbo is going to make a big difference in deciding what manifold to run.

 

[donniekak]

I'm just going to leave this here.
Intake Runner and Peak Torque Calculator

 

[motomattx]

^^^Nice Donniekak, I was looking for that myself.

 

[FirstCarIsA GSX]

No, they wont always have more of both of those at all, you really need to go back and get a grasp on the fundamentals of 4 cycle engine operation before trying to engage an auto engineer on how an engine operates there buddy. By your theory, the stock 2.4 liter 4g64 has more lift and more duration than the 2.0 liter 4g63 then right? . The 2.3 stroker is only 300cc larger than the 2.0 engine for that matter, do you have any idea how small 300cc is? your push mower is bigger in displacement than 300cc, not that it has anything to do with all of this but it hardly requires larger cams to operate due to the 300cc increase in displacement. The stroker setup gets its additional fill due to increased velocity in the intake system which is one of the reasons that the stroker has better bottom end response and once again a large "drag" plenum will diminish this advantage on the highway with sluggish throttle response due to lowering the intake velocities to less than optimum.

So 15% more displacement alone is irrelevant when picking cams or an intake manifold? Please explain your theory to me on this topic because it just sounds like trolling to me.

 

[Black95TSIawd]

I think you guys are thinking dyno graphs and motomattx is thinking in 3d real world. Yes, a SMIM will show great topend gains and minimal losses etc etc. However, driving the thing around will SUCK. I leave SMIM to race cars and will stick with an evo 3 IM in my street car.

 

[motomattx]

I think you guys are thinking dyno graphs and motomattx is thinking in 3d real world. Yes, a SMIM will show great topend gains and minimal losses etc etc. However, driving the thing around will SUCK. I leave SMIM to race cars and will stick with an evo 3 IM in my street car.

I would say that you and I have been around long enough to know how things work in the real world, (check the join dates on some of these kids). Guys like David from Buschur Racing, Marco from Magnus Racing, Jim from JMfab, etc are in our company and each one of them would echo what you and I know and are trying to get out there to make this a teachable moment to the newbies, some people are just too dumb to be smart though!

So 15% more displacement alone is irrelevant when picking cams or an intake manifold? Please explain your theory to me on this topic because it just sounds like trolling to me.

I dont have to explain a theory, I have a flowbench. Better yet why dont you explain YOUR theory as to why a 2.3 WOULD have to have bigger cams or intake manifold? Again, the factory 2.4 does not have more aggressive cams or intake manifold from the factory, and Mitsubishi engineers are NOT stupid, again I'm suggesting the PROPER intake for the intended use of the car, see I've been around long enough to realize that ricers like to throw the biggest "drag" intake on their car and the biggest "lopey" cams in their car and side exit exhausts, vented bov's, open dumps etc etc and justify it (so as not to look like a ricer) by pretending that they NEED it for: (insert random reasoning here), its been going on for years in every import scene that there is, and when the car drives like garbage due to all of the mismatched parts on it and they dont hit their 600 hp goal with bolt ons then the car is deemed "unreliable junk" and the kiddies go back to their Honda's and Caviliers with wings and broken primered body kits. As far as this guy (the o/p) is concerned he doesnt have to have any aftermarket intake at all, the stock 4g63 intake has made over 600hp before and his goal is less than that, so stock he should stay. Lets see if he does though.

 

[TalonSpeed]

Instead of going back and forth like little girls fighting over finger nail polish, just ask somebody that has a 2.3 and switched from a stock manifold to a JMF manifold.

I switched from a stock manifold\TB to a JMF street manifold\1g TB on a E16g turbo. The stock setup was more torquey, 264 cams had decent mid range too, but the top end fell off bad!! After switching manifolds and TB I noticed a very slight delay in spool, mid range even better, and a top end that still falls off after 6k but not nearly as bad.

Switched to speed density and and new turbo intake (ram air) setup and now the instant spool is back, mid range ever better, and a top end the stays flat (not peaky like a honda, still on 264 cams).

 

[Black95TSIawd]

Most people on here live their lives a "thread page at a time" so it is a difficult to get proper discussions going.

There is a fine line between a car that see's street duties and one concentrated on just racing. I for one would never run a SMIM on a car that is road worthy. I did in the past and it was a mistake. Sure the power after 6.5krpm felt nice however it was a complete dog on the bottom end. Spool was only a few hundred RPM's later but it took so much more throttle response to get there and the torque shifted so far right that I felt like I really had to get on it to get the car going.

Drag racing is cool, but too many people base their builds on it. I've realized over the years that quick response and broad power is so much more fun to drive.

To the OP:

Your decision on what manifold to run should be based around your build. Stroker or 2.0? Bolt on turbo or t3? What cams?

My vote is for the JMF Street 2nd and Evo 3 1st.

 

[lasthope05]

I would say that you and I have been around long enough to know how things work in the real world, (check the join dates on some of these kids). Guys like David from Buschur Racing, Marco from Magnus Racing, Jim from JMfab, etc are in our company and each one of them would echo what you and I know and are trying to get out there to make this a teachable moment to the newbies, some people are just too dumb to be smart though!



I dont have to explain a theory, I have a flowbench. Better yet why dont you explain YOUR theory as to why a 2.3 WOULD have to have bigger cams or intake manifold? Again, the factory 2.4 does not have more aggressive cams or intake manifold from the factory, and Mitsubishi engineers are NOT stupid, again I'm suggesting the PROPER intake for the intended use of the car, see I've been around long enough to realize that ricers like to throw the biggest "drag" intake on their car and the biggest "lopey" cams in their car and side exit exhausts, vented bov's, open dumps etc etc and justify it (so as not to look like a ricer) by pretending that they NEED it for: (insert random reasoning here), its been going on for years in every import scene that there is, and when the car drives like garbage due to all of the mismatched parts on it and they dont hit their 600 hp goal with bolt ons then the car is deemed "unreliable junk" and the kiddies go back to their Honda's and Caviliers with wings and broken primered body kits. As far as this guy (the o/p) is concerned he doesnt have to have any aftermarket intake at all, the stock 4g63 intake has made over 600hp before and his goal is less than that, so stock he should stay. Lets see if he does though.

You say check the join dates as if that determines your knowledge of dsm is greater vs somebody who joined just yesterday. If my eyes are correct you only just joined in 2010.

As for discussion about 2.3/2.4l motors and bigger cams. Where does anybody say strokers have to run larger cams? Again, you need to stop constantly trying to compare a stock motor build by the manufacturer for fuel economy to a personal build performance motor as Mitsu engineers could care less what kind of output a sohc 2.4l would put out in a galant/spyder gs..etc.

Yes, it is true that stroker motors get their increased torque from increasing intake velocity, however, by increasing intake velocity you are in a sense overrunning the stock intake manifold and cams. Its as you say, the Mitsu engineers arent stupid right?(they designed a 2.0 motor with a specific runner length and plenum size for the 2.0 and not a 2.3/2.4)

In any case, in a performance standpoint, as a 500hp engine is far from factory. With the stroker motors you are able to offset intake plenum sizing due to the fact that you are changing the base airflow/cfm/velocity of the engine allowing you to go bigger without as much loss seen with a 2.0 motor and larger plenum. It is because of the increase of intake velocity the side effects of larger cams and their overlap are not as extreme as would be on a 2.0. That is why they can go bigger.

And you comments on Buscher and Marco... All I have to say to you is read this thread.

Magnus V5 vs AMS F1 Intake - Page 4 - evolutionm.net

There is no perfect intake for a 2.0, 2.1, 2.3 and 2.4. Each seems to require a little something different. These huge plenums are best suited for 2.3/2.4's though and SUCK on a 2 liter.

So if the smaller plenum is better for smaller displacement engines, is it safe to say that a the displacement increases so should the plenum?

My personal belief is, it's safe to say everyone has made a plenum that is too big for a 2 liter and more optimal for 2.3's and such.

 

[TurboDSM90]

Threads like these make me not even want to post.

But speaking from real world experience on a build a local and I just put together, write this down. 2.3L, Early Evo intake manifold, Curt Brown 2G head, FP 3065, E85, and it SCREAMS torque and HP. If I were to build a street car, I would build it exactly like this. Oh, and it has a full 3 inch exhaust...

There are many details left out in the above comparisons and dick measuring contests as far as 1G vs 2G intake and head designs. Flow benches leave out a key performer, and thats velocity. Something the 2G head has over the 1G head. lets not forget most 2.4L engines came with single cam heads. So stock for stock...ya, thats an ignorant statement.

BTW, this build I am talking about is an automatic. So some torque is sacrificed due to the nature of the beast. On a 5 speed, this thing would be overly peppy and have excellent power. It still makes power up to 8200ish.

What this setup can benefit from to increase the HP output? A slightly bigger cam setup OR intake manifold. Other than that, its damn near perfect in my opinion.

 

[Seamus]

I would say that you and I have been around long enough to know how things work in the real world, (check the join dates on some of these kids). Guys like David from Buschur Racing, Marco from Magnus Racing, Jim from JMfab, etc are in our company and each one of them would echo what you and I know and are trying to get out there to make this a teachable moment to the newbies, some people r yet why dont you explain YOUR theory as to why a 2.3 WOULD have to have bigger cams or intake manifold? Again, the factory 2.4 does not have more aggressive cams or intake manifold from the factory, and Mitsubishi engineers are NOT stupid, again I'm suggesting the PROPER intake for the intended use of the car, see I've been around long enough to realize that ricers like to throw the biggest "drag" intake on their car and the biggest "lopey" cams in their car and side exit exhausts, vented bov's, open dumps etc etc and justify it (so as not to look like a ricer) by pretending that they NEED it for: (insert random reasoning here), its been going on for years in every import scene that there is, and when the car drives like garbage due to all of the mismatched parts on it and they dont hit their 600 hp goal with bolt ons then the car is deemed "unreliable junk" and the kiddies go back to their Honda's and Caviliers with wings and broken primered body kits. As far as this guy (the o/p) is concerned he doesnt have to have any aftermarket intake at all, the stock 4g63 intake has made over 600hp before and his goal is less than that, so stock he should stay. Lets see if he does though.

My god. No one is talking about throwing a giant intake on a car because its shiny. You are a clown. We are talking about matching an intake to the cams, motor, turbo. At least some of us are. Just because you oversee the door cards at the Lear plant doesn't mean jack.