Pennock's Fiero Forum
  Technical Discussion & Questions
  High Flow OEM Style Intake (Page 4)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Email This Page to Someone! | Printable Version

This topic is 4 pages long:  1   2   3   4 
Previous Page | Next Page
next newest topic | next oldest topic
High Flow OEM Style Intake by HitesFiero
Started on: 09-14-2012 07:31 PM
Replies: 154 (9541 views)
Last post by: PatrickTRoof on 11-26-2014 12:36 AM
Patrick
Member
Posts: 30218
From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Registered: Apr 99


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 443
Rate this member

Report this Post01-25-2014 03:00 AM Click Here to See the Profile for PatrickClick Here to Email PatrickSend a Private Message to PatrickEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by ericjon262:

the primaries are going to favor the front bank to quite a strong degree, and the secondaries are going to favor the rear bank...


Okay, so let's say the carb is turned 90° (either way). Aren't the primaries and secondaries then simply going to "favor" the left (or right) ends of the two banks of cylinders instead?

I know what you're getting at, and I understand why you're saying it, but I wonder if a flow test would back up what you're suggesting.

If that carb is poorly positioned, then how about the TB on every 2.8? It would stand to reason with what you've stated that cylinders 5 & 6 get favored air flow, then 3 & 4... and then cylinders 1 & 2 get whatever little air flow remains way over on the passenger side of the intake manifold.
IP: Logged
ericjon262
Member
Posts: 2674
From: everywhere.
Registered: Jan 2010


Feedback score:    (10)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 63
Rate this member

Report this Post01-25-2014 05:11 PM Click Here to See the Profile for ericjon262Send a Private Message to ericjon262Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Patrick:

Okay, so let's say the carb is turned 90° (either way). Aren't the primaries and secondaries then simply going to "favor" the left (or right) ends of the two banks of cylinders instead?

I know what you're getting at, and I understand why you're saying it, but I wonder if a flow test would back up what you're suggesting.

If that carb is poorly positioned, then how about the TB on every 2.8? It would stand to reason with what you've stated that cylinders 5 & 6 get favored air flow, then 3 & 4... and then cylinders 1 & 2 get whatever little air flow remains way over on the passenger side of the intake manifold.


this is a actually true, and many obd2 cars have a table in the tune that allows you to scale the fuel for each individual cylinder unlike obd1. but on that note, a throttle body in a fuel injected car is only metering air, not air and fuel like a carb, so positioning is much more critical for a carb then for fuel injection.

honestly, as far as the carb setup in question is concerned, I think the whole setup is junk, I think it would be much better off using a high flow 2bbl, then a 4bbl, and if he's going to use a 4bbl, it should be a non-progressive linked mechanical secondary square bore carb.
IP: Logged
Patrick
Member
Posts: 30218
From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Registered: Apr 99


Feedback score: (1)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 443
Rate this member

Report this Post01-26-2014 12:35 AM Click Here to See the Profile for PatrickClick Here to Email PatrickSend a Private Message to PatrickEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by ericjon262:

honestly, as far as the carb setup in question is concerned, I think the whole setup is junk...


As much as you might be correct that this particular manifold/carb combination isn't ideal, I think you're perhaps being a little harsh on the fella who fabricated the manifold by referring to it as "junk".

I give trotterlg full credit for trying something different. I'd like to hear from him how well (or possibly not) the engine runs with this setup.

 
quote
Originally posted by trotterlg:





[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 01-26-2014).]

IP: Logged
ericjon262
Member
Posts: 2674
From: everywhere.
Registered: Jan 2010


Feedback score:    (10)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 63
Rate this member

Report this Post01-26-2014 01:36 AM Click Here to See the Profile for ericjon262Send a Private Message to ericjon262Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I'm a pretty harsh person on a regular basis.
IP: Logged
Doober
Member
Posts: 445
From: Oro Valley, AZ/Swartz Creek, MI USA
Registered: Nov 2006


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post01-26-2014 11:56 PM Click Here to See the Profile for DooberSend a Private Message to DooberEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
However well (or not) it runs with a carb, it may have promise with a TBI unit. They flow plenty for a 2.8, and have plenty of injector options to feed it whatever you need.
IP: Logged
RobertGT
Member
Posts: 101
From: Denver, CO, USA
Registered: Dec 2013


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post01-27-2014 05:27 AM Click Here to See the Profile for RobertGTSend a Private Message to RobertGTEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
No it wouldn't have promise, it's a manifold designed on nothing more than convenience.

Besides, if it had potential for TBI, it'd have more with MPFI, even more with SFI, and even more with DI.
IP: Logged
ericjon262
Member
Posts: 2674
From: everywhere.
Registered: Jan 2010


Feedback score:    (10)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 63
Rate this member

Report this Post01-27-2014 06:56 PM Click Here to See the Profile for ericjon262Send a Private Message to ericjon262Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Doober:

However well (or not) it runs with a carb, it may have promise with a TBI unit. They flow plenty for a 2.8, and have plenty of injector options to feed it whatever you need.


WHY? for the same amount of work you could just do MPFI, and have a much more well engineered design.
IP: Logged
Doober
Member
Posts: 445
From: Oro Valley, AZ/Swartz Creek, MI USA
Registered: Nov 2006


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2014 01:29 AM Click Here to See the Profile for DooberSend a Private Message to DooberEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
BECAUSE! Besides, wet flow vs. dry flow wasn't the point of the post. It's the fact that it wouldn't have the fueling issues a carb would.
IP: Logged
ericjon262
Member
Posts: 2674
From: everywhere.
Registered: Jan 2010


Feedback score:    (10)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 63
Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2014 03:00 PM Click Here to See the Profile for ericjon262Send a Private Message to ericjon262Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Doober:

BECAUSE! Besides, wet flow vs. dry flow wasn't the point of the post. It's the fact that it wouldn't have the fueling issues a carb would.


how do you figure? fuel distribution(what this argument has been about) would be unchanged carb vs TBI. TBI would be just as much of a wiring and tuning hassle as MPFI, so there would be no reason at all to do that. doing this with TBI seems as backasswards as it gets.

IP: Logged
KurtAKX
Member
Posts: 4006
From: West Bloomfield, MI
Registered: Feb 2002


Feedback score:    (9)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 128
Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2014 03:34 PM Click Here to See the Profile for KurtAKXSend a Private Message to KurtAKXEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I've done a couple TBI swaps/builds. The problem is that when you have a high specific power output, you need big injectors.

Big enough injectors to make big horsepower at ~15psi are basically big on-off valves. They are extremely difficult to control at short enough pulsewidths to idle smoothly/consistently. Just try to get big injectors cycling reliably at pulsewidths under .9 ms.
This, by the way, is the real reason that OEM TBI injectors are barely large enough for the engines they're on.

The magic bullet solution to this is to fit a manifold-vacuum referenced fuel pressure regulator, so the injectors act small at idle and large at WOT.

By the time you go to the effort to plumb this hardware in, you could've already had a MPFI setup with less plumbing, less complication, better fuel distribution, better fuel atomization, less crazy acceleration enrichment requirements and more commonly-available and modern injector options.

[This message has been edited by KurtAKX (edited 01-28-2014).]

IP: Logged
Doober
Member
Posts: 445
From: Oro Valley, AZ/Swartz Creek, MI USA
Registered: Nov 2006


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2014 11:31 PM Click Here to See the Profile for DooberSend a Private Message to DooberEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by KurtAKX:Big enough injectors to make big horsepower at ~15psi are basically big on-off valves. They are extremely difficult to control at short enough pulsewidths to idle smoothly/consistently. Just try to get big injectors cycling reliably at pulsewidths under .9 ms.
This, by the way, is the real reason that OEM TBI injectors are barely large enough for the engines they're on.

The magic bullet solution to this is to fit a manifold-vacuum referenced fuel pressure regulator, so the injectors act small at idle and large at WOT.


Precisely. I'm running 80# injectors between 18-23psi on a ~380hp 383.

TBI doesn't have fuel bowls and other carb-related problems. You mount a carb 90º to what it's supposed to be, and you have it acting like it's been laid on its side every time you accelerate. You run it the 'proper' direction you would on a regular longitudinal engine, and fueling isn't spread evenly between cylinders (front bank gets primaries, rear bank gets secondaries). With TBI it's just like a 2bbl carb, no primaries/secondaries, and it can meter fuel more precisely. Any time you change altitudes with a carb, you would always have to tune it to get it to run at its optimum. TBI, other EFI systems measure barometric pressure when you turn on the ignition... so they instantly know how much fuel to use.

I never said anything about running TBI in place of MPFI, it was SOLELY related to that sideways carb setup.

[This message has been edited by Doober (edited 01-28-2014).]

IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
ericjon262
Member
Posts: 2674
From: everywhere.
Registered: Jan 2010


Feedback score:    (10)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 63
Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2014 11:37 PM Click Here to See the Profile for ericjon262Send a Private Message to ericjon262Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Doober:


Precisely. I'm running 80# injectors between 18-23psi on a ~380hp 383.

TBI doesn't have fuel bowls and other carb-related problems. You mount a carb 90º to what it's supposed to be, and you have it acting like it's been laid on its side every time you accelerate. You run it the 'proper' direction you would on a regular longitudinal engine, and fueling isn't spread evenly between cylinders (front bank gets primaries, rear bank gets secondaries). With TBI it's just like a 2bbl carb, no primaries/secondaries, and it can meter fuel more precisely. Any time you change altitudes with a carb, you would always have to tune it to get it to run at its optimum. TBI, other EFI systems measure barometric pressure when you turn on the ignition... so they instantly know how much fuel to use.


depending on the height of the butterflies in relation to the entrance to the plenum, there very well could still be a fueling issue. the plate will push the majority of the mixture down the lower side of the plate, if there isn't a long enough space behind the plate, the mixture will bias towards that side. either way, this would be wildly impractical when you could just run MPFI like the engine was designed to do instead of all of the fab work to do TBI, it would be completely and utterly pointless.
IP: Logged
BrittB
Member
Posts: 453
From: Keizer, OR
Registered: Dec 2013


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2014 11:39 PM Click Here to See the Profile for BrittBSend a Private Message to BrittBEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
What about a two barrel carb mounted in the correct direction?
IP: Logged
RobertGT
Member
Posts: 101
From: Denver, CO, USA
Registered: Dec 2013


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2014 11:40 PM Click Here to See the Profile for RobertGTSend a Private Message to RobertGTEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
We're not arguing TBI vs carb, we're wondering why use TBI at all? It's outdated and quite inferior to SFI/MPFI despite needing the same amount of setup to get working. Do you have dyno sheets on your SBC?
IP: Logged
ericjon262
Member
Posts: 2674
From: everywhere.
Registered: Jan 2010


Feedback score:    (10)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 63
Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2014 11:43 PM Click Here to See the Profile for ericjon262Send a Private Message to ericjon262Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by RobertGT:

We're not arguing TBI vs carb, we're wondering why use TBI at all? It's outdated and quite inferior to SFI/MPFI despite needing the same amount of setup to get working. Do you have dyno sheets on your SBC?


I wasn't even arguing that TBI was outdated, I like TBI, I just think the premise of trying to use TBI on a manifold for MPFI, when the parts for MPFI are SOOO cheap and EASY to begin with, just doesn't make a lick of sense.
IP: Logged
ericjon262
Member
Posts: 2674
From: everywhere.
Registered: Jan 2010


Feedback score:    (10)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 63
Rate this member

Report this Post01-28-2014 11:46 PM Click Here to See the Profile for ericjon262Send a Private Message to ericjon262Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post

ericjon262

2674 posts
Member since Jan 2010
 
quote
Originally posted by BrittB:

What about a two barrel carb mounted in the correct direction?


I think it would work better than whats on there now, but like I said, I think the design is horrible, I see uneven distribution and poor fuel suspension problems all over the place with that design.

------------------
1st class A**hole.

we're in desperate need of a little more religion to nurse your god-like point of view...

http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/119122.html

IP: Logged
dematrix86gt
Member
Posts: 490
From: havana arkansas
Registered: Jul 2013


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2014 03:02 AM Click Here to See the Profile for dematrix86gtClick Here to Email dematrix86gtSend a Private Message to dematrix86gtEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
The Q Jet design intake would be prone to puddling in the bottom of the intake, Ever seen a Manifold explosion on a LS corvette? Youtube it, its not pretty. The plenum design is worlds better because the air fuel mixture isnt mixed in the plenum persay but in the lower runners just above the valves. Tin Boxes or sheetmetal intakes or as we call them "explosion chambers" offer no better benifit. Of course your going to be shoving alot more fuel and air to the motor and get that Loud Q Jet Secondaries sound but to the point your not burning all the fuel in the cylinder and pumping it out the exaust. (glowing Cat syndrome) washing the rings down and losing compression is another result. Not Bashing your design, just raced for a many of years and seen Thousands of new homemade designs come to the dragstrip with explosive results.
IP: Logged
KurtAKX
Member
Posts: 4006
From: West Bloomfield, MI
Registered: Feb 2002


Feedback score:    (9)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 128
Rate this member

Report this Post01-29-2014 08:15 AM Click Here to See the Profile for KurtAKXSend a Private Message to KurtAKXEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by dematrix86gt:

The Q Jet design intake would be prone to puddling in the bottom of the intake, Ever seen a Manifold explosion on a LS corvette? Youtube it, its not pretty. The plenum design is worlds better because the air fuel mixture isnt mixed in the plenum persay but in the lower runners just above the valves. Tin Boxes or sheetmetal intakes or as we call them "explosion chambers" offer no better benifit. Of course your going to be shoving alot more fuel and air to the motor and get that Loud Q Jet Secondaries sound but to the point your not burning all the fuel in the cylinder and pumping it out the exaust. (glowing Cat syndrome) washing the rings down and losing compression is another result. Not Bashing your design, just raced for a many of years and seen Thousands of new homemade designs come to the dragstrip with explosive results.


Fuel puddling doesn't cause a manifold to explode. In fact, when you have that much fuel and you're that far from stoich, the flame speed is slowed. Those manifold explosions on youtube are Nitrous Oxide related. In a sheetmetal box intake on an engine with a qjet and no nitrous or other oxidizer, you won't have that problem.

IP: Logged
Doober
Member
Posts: 445
From: Oro Valley, AZ/Swartz Creek, MI USA
Registered: Nov 2006


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post01-31-2014 12:19 AM Click Here to See the Profile for DooberSend a Private Message to DooberEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Jeez-Louise... I was only mentioning TBI because there was a carburetor on a manifold that would be better suited for TBI since the engine isn't longitudinal.

I didn't say TBI was better or worse.

I never even brought up port injection or how it relates to TBI, or the manifold it was on.

Would I run a carb (or TBI) on a manifold that was designed around port injection? No, I never said that, someone else got that idea somehow.

Hopefully this clears up whatever confusion there was when I originally brought it up... ridiculousness this has become
IP: Logged
ericjon262
Member
Posts: 2674
From: everywhere.
Registered: Jan 2010


Feedback score:    (10)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 63
Rate this member

Report this Post01-31-2014 11:11 PM Click Here to See the Profile for ericjon262Send a Private Message to ericjon262Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Doober:

Jeez-Louise... I was only mentioning TBI because there was a carburetor on a manifold that would be better suited for TBI since the engine isn't longitudinal.

I didn't say TBI was better or worse.

I never even brought up port injection or how it relates to TBI, or the manifold it was on.

Would I run a carb (or TBI) on a manifold that was designed around port injection? No, I never said that, someone else got that idea somehow.

Hopefully this clears up whatever confusion there was when I originally brought it up... ridiculousness this has become



how is that design better suited to TBI? the LIM was designed clean sheet for MPFI...

------------------
1st class A**hole.

we're in desperate need of a little more religion to nurse your god-like point of view...

http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/119122.html

IP: Logged
Doober
Member
Posts: 445
From: Oro Valley, AZ/Swartz Creek, MI USA
Registered: Nov 2006


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post02-02-2014 10:04 PM Click Here to See the Profile for DooberSend a Private Message to DooberEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Again you missed the point.

I NEVER SAID THE INTAKE ITSELF WAS GOOD TO USE WITH TBI. I SAID THE TBI WOULD BE BETTER TO USE WITH THE INTAKE THAN THE CARBURETOR.

Are you seriously trying to troll here or something? I don't know how else I can say it.
IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
ericjon262
Member
Posts: 2674
From: everywhere.
Registered: Jan 2010


Feedback score:    (10)
Leave feedback





Total ratings: 63
Rate this member

Report this Post02-16-2014 08:58 PM Click Here to See the Profile for ericjon262Send a Private Message to ericjon262Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by Doober:

Again you missed the point.

I NEVER SAID THE INTAKE ITSELF WAS GOOD TO USE WITH TBI. I SAID THE TBI WOULD BE BETTER TO USE WITH THE INTAKE THAN THE CARBURETOR.

Are you seriously trying to troll here or something? I don't know how else I can say it.


once again, I'll ask how? how would tbi magically be better then a carb here, they both suck outright for this manifold design. both carb and tbi are wet flow systems, either way, you have a wet flow fuel system on a dry flow manifold. it's a bad idea no matter what way you cut it, tbi doesn't magically change the fact that the fuel has to stay in suspension throughout the runners.

------------------
1st class A**hole.

we're in desperate need of a little more religion to nurse your god-like point of view...

http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/119122.html

IP: Logged
Doober
Member
Posts: 445
From: Oro Valley, AZ/Swartz Creek, MI USA
Registered: Nov 2006


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post02-18-2014 12:32 AM Click Here to See the Profile for DooberSend a Private Message to DooberEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
It would be better because it's not feeding one half of the engine with the primaries and the other half with the secondaries... TBI doesn't care if it's mounted 90º to the direction the car travels, like a carb would.

I don't care how good it is or isn't for this intake, simply that TBI would be better off than a carb. Don't even let the thought of port injection enter your head.

Will a carb react differently being mounted the wrong way on and engine? Will an engine like one bank getting more of the primaries while the other bank gets the secondaries? TBI won't have to worry about any of that... again, don't even consider the original design of the intake runners.

That said, a 2bbl. carb would be more than adequate for the little 2.8, and no worries of primaries/secondaries like with a 4bbl. A 350ci engine at 6000rpm doesn't need more than 600-650cfm for the street. Are you spinning this little v6 to 10k?

Hopefully this clears the air a LITTLE more... and hopfully the OP comes back with new pictures and results of the new intake.
IP: Logged
Knight
Member
Posts: 364
From: Tampa, FL
Registered: Apr 2006


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post02-19-2014 07:31 PM Click Here to See the Profile for KnightSend a Private Message to KnightEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Seem to have gotten off topic. Thought the discussion was to improve airflow without loosing stock look. OP solution was to design a new intake with a style and look at least close to the factory intake.
Card vs MPI should be a new thread.

[This message has been edited by Knight (edited 02-19-2014).]

IP: Logged
Doober
Member
Posts: 445
From: Oro Valley, AZ/Swartz Creek, MI USA
Registered: Nov 2006


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post02-20-2014 12:36 AM Click Here to See the Profile for DooberSend a Private Message to DooberEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I didn't think it would go far off as it has, I didn't realize there was so much confusion in the posts I've made.

I'm definitely waiting on new info on this intake...
IP: Logged
Knight
Member
Posts: 364
From: Tampa, FL
Registered: Apr 2006


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post02-20-2014 09:20 PM Click Here to See the Profile for KnightSend a Private Message to KnightEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Me too Doober. I. Really want to keep a factory look and have a really good intake.
IP: Logged
hiwil88formula
Member
Posts: 617
From: San Antonio, Texas
Registered: Oct 2001


Feedback score:    (12)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post08-05-2014 05:06 PM Click Here to See the Profile for hiwil88formulaClick Here to Email hiwil88formulaSend a Private Message to hiwil88formulaEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
any updates?
IP: Logged
HitesFiero
Member
Posts: 401
From: St. Charles, MO, USA
Registered: Sep 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post10-27-2014 11:58 AM Click Here to See the Profile for HitesFieroClick Here to Email HitesFieroSend a Private Message to HitesFieroEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Sorry for the lack updates, I've been chipping away at this as time permits.

Current progress thus far;







IP: Logged
lateFormula
Member
Posts: 992
From: Detroit Rock City
Registered: Jul 2002


Feedback score: (2)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post10-27-2014 03:39 PM Click Here to See the Profile for lateFormulaSend a Private Message to lateFormulaEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
That thing looks huge! Does the decklid close over that?
IP: Logged
HitesFiero
Member
Posts: 401
From: St. Charles, MO, USA
Registered: Sep 2003


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post10-28-2014 12:34 AM Click Here to See the Profile for HitesFieroClick Here to Email HitesFieroSend a Private Message to HitesFieroEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
 
quote
Originally posted by lateFormula:

That thing looks huge! Does the decklid close over that?


Yes, but only by about 7mm. I measured it with a blob of play dough . 😁
IP: Logged
masospaghetti
Member
Posts: 2477
From: Charlotte, NC USA
Registered: Dec 2009


Feedback score:    (10)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post10-29-2014 08:21 AM Click Here to See the Profile for masospaghettiClick Here to Email masospaghettiSend a Private Message to masospaghettiEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
That looks awesome, eager to see how it performs.
IP: Logged
PFF
System Bot
zkhennings
Member
Posts: 1491
From: Massachusetts, USA
Registered: Oct 2010


Feedback score: (3)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post10-30-2014 08:17 AM Click Here to See the Profile for zkhenningsSend a Private Message to zkhenningsEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
I am very impressed by how your home castings have come out!
IP: Logged
AL87
Member
Posts: 2578
From: Bradenton, Florida, United States
Registered: Mar 2010


Feedback score: (5)
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post10-31-2014 10:26 AM Click Here to See the Profile for AL87Click Here to Email AL87Send a Private Message to AL87Edit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
finally the testing of the first prototype will soon begin!

I'm so exited for the results!
IP: Logged
Bebbitt
Member
Posts: 25
From: Mt Pleasant, NC, US
Registered: Aug 2014


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-12-2014 08:43 PM Click Here to See the Profile for BebbittClick Here to Email BebbittSend a Private Message to BebbittEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
This still in the works ?
I would be very interested as well.
IP: Logged
PatrickTRoof
Member
Posts: 547
From: Baltimore, MD, USA
Registered: May 2013


Feedback score: N/A
Leave feedback

Rate this member

Report this Post11-26-2014 12:36 AM Click Here to See the Profile for PatrickTRoofClick Here to Email PatrickTRoofSend a Private Message to PatrickTRoofEdit/Delete MessageReply w/QuoteDirect Link to This Post
Bump for updates!
IP: Logged
Previous Page | Next Page

This topic is 4 pages long:  1   2   3   4 
next newest topic | next oldest topic

All times are ET (US)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Back To Main Page

Advertizing on PFF | Fiero Parts Vendors
PFF Merchandise | Fiero Gallery | Ogre's Cave
Real-Time Chat | Fiero Related Auctions on eBay



Copyright (c) 1999, C. Pennock