bellmouths

The 1UZFE EGR Delete Kit is available for sale here.

nathan

New Member
intake plenum

im gonna make a new intake plenum for my 1UZ, just to see if i have the skills, first of all, what size should the bellmouths be, should i just make it so it flows into the runners evenly, i am gonna use the stock lower runners (not that confident yet), also im thinking of just making it from mild steel, will this effect it at all, if i pull it off in stell, i will try alli then. this is only a cosmetic mod for now, but the last thing i want to do is loose power.

has anyone got pic of something they might have made that is similar.

and im just going to use a single TB, but a larger one than stock, any ideas here as well, just want some thing clean
 
I have been looking at doing that, figured that the stock runners are 38mm at the port, and start out at 41.5mm.
From my experience with individual intake tracts, the runners are right at the correct length, but could be opened up to maybe 50mm on the plenum side, tapering down, for the first three inches or so. I would get a spare lower manifold and find a good place to make a pair of cuts through the runners where a flange could be welded on, then your tapered, flared bellmouths could be attached to that. The flanges would also create a two angled planes for developing a plenum.
It would be more then cosmetic.
 
thanks for that, i understand most of it, i have a spare motor now, so i can use the lower manifold of that, could you maybe draw what you mean by a pair of cuts, i can get a pic of the top of the manifold if that will help, do you have any pics of something similar by chance.

im glad it will be more than cosmetic.
 
Be sure you angle (prefferably curvve) the section for the throttlebody around 33-40* off center. Be sure to give an inch or two of space after the last runner. (Most opposite of the throttlebody) Otherwise distrobution will be uneven.




Build a huge plenum. Best thing you can do. FI loves a huge common area.

AFA the runners, N/A has to have a balance between small diameter promoting high velocity charge speeds, and having large runners that can flow more with less effort. Go to big, or too small & power suffers. Same for head porting.
The runners also should be tuned to length. That way the sound pressure wave will bounce back through the intake & with the right timing(length), you can catch a returning sound pressure wave to shove air into the cylinder.


All of this is completely different when you're shoving air into the engine. The head & intake runners can be grossly enlarged (If you dont' mind loosing power out of boost). having the shortest runners possible also helps.







A lot of times, the easyest thing to do is saw the stock runners off & simply port them very large. Then build your own intake plenum.






1MZFEcuthalfIM2.jpg

Spend a couple of weeks griding & polishing, then spend a week with a tig welding the alu together & you wind up with something like...

cameng6e.jpg
\
 
say saw off the stock runners, because the intake on the 1UZ is 2 peices would the runners be the lower part


V8004.jpg

i dont understand about promoting high welocity and all that, i simply want something that will work N/A that wont loose power that will also in turn look good. i was thinking, a simple large TB and a bigger plenum would help, i was going to try make it so the air was pushed into the runners a little as well, just with the shape of the plenum, if i had some skills, i would draw what i am trying to explain on a CAD program.

i will try make something like the final product from steel before alu as well, ill get a pic when i do and see what you all think
 
In my experience, more lift and duration will help overcome smaller runner diameters in a FI setup. But I also agree that big runners still work well with FI. They don't seem to add as much as cams though.
 

Attachments

  • engine_out.jpg
    engine_out.jpg
    54.1 KB · Views: 33
Big runner&head VS small runner&head in a highly dummied down version & pretty short.

A 4 stroke engine has 4 strokes.
The charge stroke - the intake valves open & the mixture is sucked into the combustion chamber by the vacuum created from the piston moving down
The compression stroke - where the intake valves close & the piston moves up to compresses the mixture
The combustion stroke - spark plug fires, combustion the compressed mixture, which expands & pushes the piston down
the exhaust stroke - the exhaust valves open, the piston shoves what's left over of the combustion out of the combustion chamber.


That's how it works. What you get into with head & intake work is that this is a horrible way to tune an engine.



What needs to happen, is the different strokes need to be broken down.

3 intake phases
i1) The intake & exhaust valves overlap (both open at the same time) as the piston is still traveling upwards. -> The vacuum created from the exhaust leaving the combustion chamber sucks mixture into the chamber EVEN THO the piston is moving upwards.
i2) The "normal" suction phase -> This is what people are familar with. The downward motion of the piston creates a vacuum that suckes mixture into the combustion chamber.
What people don't realize is that the mixture being sucked into the cylinder doesn't immediately follow the piston. As RPM's climb, this becomes more & more pronounced - lowering effeciency greatly.
i3) After intake charging -> Most people assume when the piston reaches the bottom of the stroke & moves upwards (The compression stroke) that the intake stroke has stopped. THIS IS NOT TRUE! The intake valves are left open AFTER the piston is traveling upwards.
The mixture that lags behind the piston in the i2 phase has momentum behind it. Even tho the piston is traveling upwards, there is pleanty of room to pack in more mixture.

This phase is extremely important for high power at high RPM's. The longer the intake valves are left open, the more mixture will pack into the cylinder. Idle quality is reduced if the intake valve is left open too long, and if left open much too long, obviously it will push the mixture right back past the intake valves into the head.






That's the intake stroke in a nutshell.

A large port can flow more that a small port can with less effort, but the mixture moves slowly.
Smaller porting will not flow as much as a large port without added effort, but the mixture will travel at a high rate of speed.

Large porting will give a good amount of flow during the i1 phase, a large amount during the i2 phase, and nothing during i3 as there isn't enough momentium to pack mixture into the cylinder.

Small porting will give less during the i1 phase, slightly less during the i2 phase, and exponentially better during the i3 phase when enouhg momentium is built up to increase the amount of charge packing 0 the affect also increases as RPM increases! (At high RPM's, it's not only just exponentially better, but the flow lead increases as rpms increase!)




On a stock, fairly low RPM engine, small ports will generally produce more power at low & medium RPM, while less during peak power.
Large ports will make less power at low rpm, about the same thing at mid rpm's and more at high rpms.


If you're running the engine at high RPM's, oversized (large) ports loose power to stock! Small ports not only make more power through the low-mid rpm ranges, but they wax the floor with them at high rpm.



















That's intake & head theory 332.(more advanced than basic engine 204 woot!) Here's how to apply it!

On a 4 valve head, it's good to enlarge the intake ports & runners to around 120-135% of the intake valve diameter.

If you're trying small ports, the intake ports & runners need to be filled back down to 85% of the intake valve diameter. Go any smaller, and you simply gain huge amounts of low end power, that severly chokes off as rpm climbs.


2 valve heads, you should enlarge to 130-135%, or fill down to 70%. (You can actually still get gains around 60%, but that's very drastic. It's only gonna help if you race north in every gear over say 6500rpm).
 
Now for an FI setup.
Most people doing FI are nto concerned about low end power. Sacrificing some low end for more power under boost is not a problem, or a secondary thought.
FI setup's love a huge common plenum to feed the chambers. Make the pleumn as large as possible! They also like short runners. The quicker things start get shoved into the chamber, the more get's shoved in - plain & simple.
If you make a new intake setup under boost, you want a huge plenum, with short runners / head ports that are LARGE in diameter.


Gotta be careful when doing cams. Most of the time stock cams work great because they have lots of low-midrange power. This facilitates getting the turbo spooled up & making power.

As a general blanket statement (I don't like making them but here goes). If you & your buddy have the exact same turbo, on the same engine (With the same power limitation), with nothing more than tuning difference.
The engine that produces more power earlier, can produce more power later by simply having a boost lead & increasing boost.
Sure, the other guy could make more possible horsepower at high rpm on XXX amount of boost, but it doesn't matter. You can make the same power by simply running more boost, while having a much stronger low & mid rpm range.



Mild cam upgrades do great.
With FI, normally a reground stock cam that are shimmed to greatly increase valve lift, and ground with less valve overlap & more intake duration will make a large increase in FI power, but retain a large amount of off boost & transitional performance.
 
Thanks for the explanation of intake phase. I have one question concerning the port sizing: with regards to % of the valve size, I'm assuming you mean both intake valves in a 4-valve head?

Any input on exhaust ports for naturally-aspirated applications? I know on turbo setups, everyone I've ever met pretty much has said not to lower the port floor.

Interestingly enough, I accidentally ported out my exhaust manifold to match the gasket before I knew better. The plan was to port the head the same. Luckily I learned better before I did. However, using the manifold I had no problems. Unfortunately I didn't have a direct before and after comparison, but looking back at it, it seems I accidentally did something of an "anti-reversion" modification similar to what Corky Bell talks about in "Maximum Boost." The fact that it worked as well as it did makes me beleive it might be a good idea to consider in the future, on other turbo applications.

With regards to cams, I only have experience with 4g63 turbo with cams. For one thing, the cams bring a much bigger % power increase on a small port head than the big port head. In other words, the cams seemed to help make up the difference of port sizing. Also, with the small ports, I felt I still had plenty of bottom end. These cams were fairly aggressive, as it seems to me that turbos like high lift and duration. I wasn't really concerned about losing bottom end (because before the cams, the engine really fell flat on it's face above 5500 rpm) but as I said, I felt I didn't lose much.

Myself and others seem to agree that the "ideal" rough guess for lobe seperation is 110 degrees. That is where I would start off when tweaking the cams. I learned the hard way that turbos do not like a lot of overlap (the cams were not ground to center correctly). Interestingly enough, rotary guys increase the overlap of their engines when they do porting, and they seem to like to do this with big turbos. Rotary engines are somewhat of a different beast, but it intrigued me to see these people saying that overlap was a good thing (in a turbo setup).

Anyway, as my focus on the 1UZ is natural aspiration, I'd like to know a bit more about porting the exhaust. I assume that a small port might also be desirable due to the fact that velocity is a concern, but at the same time, the heat of the exhaust should mean that the volume of gas would be greater, and thus maybe we need a bit more port area? I'm not sure.
 
Exactly right on the size.
If you're doing the runners on a multi valve head, (or a combined port in a head) you use all the valve sizes. Once you get down to a single feed for a single valve (Where the ports split down to feed the single valves), you just use the valve size it's feeding.
The same thing works on the exhaust port. It's harder to do, because with the intake side, you can use a few different methods to fill a port if you choose to go smaller. (Welding, certain bonding agents. JB Weld is the most popular b/c if applied correctly, it grabs to an aluminum head & expands & contracts at the same rough temperatures.) On the exhaust side, it's weld material in it, or forget it. Big difference in a 300-500*F head/intake port temperature with maybe 100-250*F temperature mixture & a 400-600*F port wall temp & 1200-2500*F gas temp!

I knew lots of overlap is bad on a turbo (exhaust pressure is 30-50% higher than charge pressure, As soon as the pressure coming out of the cylinder is lower than the exhaust flow, it'll backflow like a sewer during the overlap! Unfortunately, I had ported my engine out with small ports & retarded my exhaust cams very agrgessively.
It was rather hilarious because I didn't realize how huge a change it would make. As soon as the turbo was spooled up, power would rise under boost, then fall like a brick as the exhaust reversed back into the cylinder!!!
I'm not sure what a good general duration is as I've never checked the duration on my cams. Turbo's live just fine with less overlap than stock. They don't need the cross flow through the cylinder as much when under boost.

You can do a lot of things porting people tell you not to do. Many "rules" just don't apply in some cases.
You can lower the port floor of it, but in turn you have to modify the short side radius to reflect that. It would help if you did it at least a little, but don't go overboard unless you can weld material back in if it screws up (or you have a spare set).
In general, our low angle Toyota FE heads don't like flat floors on either intake, or exhaust side. They want a little hump just before to push & accelerate the flow into, or out of the chamber. I'd advise to measure the combined port diameter with the combined valve diameter. The general rule is right, it is very easy to take too much out & lower the velocity drastically.

I don't know about 1uz heads, but our v6 FE heads love it when you knock the guide bosses down on the exhaust side & unshround the valves. The engine has multiple orgasms.

N/A VS Turbo is fairly well opposites if you want the maximum potential.
N/A you want the intake side to flow the maximum possible @ the maximum velocity possible. If possible, anything that will slow a reversion should be done.
FI you want the intake to flow AMAP regardless of anything. Exhaust needs to move AMAP, while having a high velocity. Limiting reversion on the exhaust side can have a huge affect.
 
Toysrme said:
In general, our low angle Toyota FE heads don't like flat floors on either intake, or exhaust side. They want a little hump just before to push & accelerate the flow into, or out of the chamber. I'd advise to measure the combined port diameter with the combined valve diameter. The general rule is right, it is very easy to take too much out & lower the velocity drastically.
By hump, you mean the port should converge a little bit towards the end to increase velocity? Kind of like a venturi?

I also agree that taking less material out is better than too much. I've seen some quite amazing gains on certain engines with just porting casting imperfections and working the bowl area a little (no other porting on the ports, kept the same size as stock).

Toysrme said:
I don't know about 1uz heads, but our v6 FE heads love it when you knock the guide bosses down on the exhaust side & unshround the valves. The engine has multiple orgasms.
LOL! What do you mean exactly by "knock the guide bosses down?" I'm assuming you're talking about doing something to the part of the guides that intrude into the intake port. I have seen this done before but frankly I've never done it myself for fear that I would screw the guides up.
 
Your'e correct, the guide bosses are the large areas of casting that "guide" the valve stem down into the intake path. You can take a lot of material out in these. Intake side as well as exhaust.
Take the ridges out right behind the valve seats while your at it.
 
I usually shape the guides to provide a fairing for the valve guide, this reduces the area that will oppose the airflow, reducing turbulence.
Or just take away the guide right down to the port floor on a dohc engine.
 


Back
Top