Low End vs High End torque

[Knuto]

Thank you

Why don't road cars use this system?

Do they use variable valve timing systems instead of this?, could both systems be used together?

I can't think of any car using continously variable length intake, but a lot of them use a two step manifold:
Variable length intake manifold - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
4.6 Intake Manifolds

A 2-stage manifold can also be combined with a resonator
AutoZine Technical School - Engine

I'm not exactly sure why the continous system isn't used on road cars. Telescopic runners may be difficult to make economic when they are curved? Straight runners would maybe to long?
I don't know. Maybe the 2-stage is sufficient.

Exhaust tuning also gives more power. People have tried making variable length exhaust, but the high temperature and length makes it very hard to make a telescope mechanism. Either it leaks or it seizes.... IIRC

my 2 cents

[roosterjuicer]

Why not just have both high and low end torque?

im pretty happy having monster torque both at low RPM's and at high RPM's-small block FTW

[ruim20]

Again, thanks Knuto, i learned something very interesting today

I guess space may be the main problem in using these systems.

[Knuto]

Again, thanks Knuto, i learned something very interesting today

I guess space may be the main problem in using these systems.

Anytime.

I just remembered Jediali made one Very nice design:
V10 idea: - Ultimatecarpage.com forums

[Kozy]

Why not just have both high and low end torque?

im pretty happy having monster torque both at low RPM's and at high RPM's-small block FTW

It's not that simple. The engine is only optimised for one speed, the rest of the range is a comprimise.

[mister_playboy]

It's not that simple. The engine is only optimised for one speed, the rest of the range is a comprimise.

VTEC and all the other similar technologies have made the compromises a whole lot smaller than they used to be.

[Kozy]

True but VTEC still only optimises two engine speeds rather than one. It does do this very well though, although the system is quite old now, I still think it ranks as one of, if not the best.

[jcp123]

Holy moly, just realised how OLD a thread this is! 2004?! Whatever possessed you to ressurect such an old post dude?

Eh. No big deal.


For me it's pretty much preference. For racing you generallty want it higher up, for street driving it behooves you to have it lower down in the rev range.

[Rasmus]

Almost a month since it was posted, but thanks for the links, Knuto.

A common mod on the 3V Ford modular engine is getting CMCV (Charge Motion Control Valve) delete plates. C&L is also coming out with a new intake manifold: COMING THIS FALL!! 2005+ C&L 3-VALVE MUSTANG INTAKE MANIFOLD It's an interesting read.

[ThisBlood147]

Almost a month since it was posted, but thanks for the links, Knuto.

A common mod on the 3V Ford modular engine is getting CMCV (Charge Motion Control Valve) delete plates. C&L is also coming out with a new intake manifold: COMING THIS FALL!! 2005+ C&L 3-VALVE MUSTANG INTAKE MANIFOLD It's an interesting read.

Eyeballing a future pony modification, eh?

[Rasmus]

How'd you know? That's uncanny!

But I'm probably just going to stick with a 2nd hand set of delete plates. The C&L manifold is going to be $750, and for an NA engine its main purpose is getting rid of the charge motion valves.

Apart from that, yes, I am trawling mustang sites, forums and ebay. Still trying to keep it as stock looking as possible though. Go before show.

[Juggs]

low end torque plus high end torque??

compound boost baby! twin screw supercharger plus twin turbos!

Compound Boost 2003 Mustang Cobra Twin-Turbo - Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords Magazine