I would be down for a set of these. Will this also fit the 3.4 DOHC? I could use a set for that as well.

But for now only count me in for 1 set.

quote Originally posted by Jarhead 2m4: ...Will this also fit the 3.4 DOHC? I could use a set for that as well. But for now only count me in for 1 set.

Not sure what the intake looks like on one, but it can be done... If and when you decide to get them for the DOHC just PM me or chime in on the other thread and we'll figure it out.

------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

quote Originally posted by Raydar: You know I'm interested. Do you still need the middle intake for development? Very sorry. I got sidetracked and haven't shipped it yet.

I'm still interested. Please put me down for one.

Also... Your package is boxed and labeled and is in my truck. Will go to UPS today.
Finally getting caught up. (The hits just keep on comin'!) Sorry for the delay.

quote Originally posted by Raydar: ...Your package is boxed and labeled and is in my truck. Will go to UPS today...Sorry for the delay.

& no problemo

------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

Raydar, No problem, no hurry. Thanks

Tom

quote Originally posted by blakeinspace: Heya Raydar... don't you have the Truleo intake?

Yeah. And I love it!
But I've been thinking about going to a "way-too-damned-big" throttle body (following the "If more is enough, then too much is just right." school of thought) which would require a rework or (more likely) the purchase of another Trueleo. Then there is the cost of the TB. Last I heard, RSM was getting $300 and change, plus core charges. Either that or I'd have to adapt a 5.0 TB. Not my first choice.

So... I've been thinking about trying the dual TB setup instead. There are ten million Fiero throttle bodies out there, frequently just for the asking.
I also like that I'll be able to get to the fuel rail or change injectors easily.

Bottom line, it's just something new and different to play with.

[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 08-22-2007).]

Bump for interst (and to add to favorites). -Jason

quote Originally posted by Will: Ever think about square tubing? Originally posted by toddshotrods: Actually, I did. I made the decision for round tube trying to design a part that would appeal to and meet the needs of the general populace. I think I understand correctly that appearance, and user friendliness, is a bigger priority than those last few tenths of performance potential. Originally posted by Formula88: I'm not interested, but I was thinking one thing that might make it more tempting is if you didn't have to drill out the bolt holes on the middle intake. That keeps you from having to replace the middle intake should you ever decide to go back to original. Originally posted by toddshotrods: My original version was like that, but someone suggested the "drill-and-bolt-from-the-bottom" concept. When I considered it I found that this really took a lot of fabrication work out of making the intakes - which means they'll be cheaper. The savings in fabrication would easily pay for a spare middle intake. Originally posted by Coinage: What were you going to do for where the tube meets the lower part on the inside of the tube? Originally posted by toddshotrods: The intake ports on the plenum's base plate will be fully radiused. My understanding is that the biggest disturbance inside would be the air making an abrupt transition into the ports due to them having square leading edges. I decided early on to only offer the radiused port edges... Any well-versed types or experts on this issue, I am listening and open to suggestions that I can make, which will not increase the price of the product. The number one goal here was to offer a decent product for a reasonable price for people who purchased and drive budget sports cars...

I like the round tube, but let's go back to the square tube for a minute...


I'm not well-versed, but if the goal is simplicity and affordability, and the end user has to remove and machine the middle intake anyway because of the preferred mounting design: why not use thick-walled square tube with a simpler mounting flange, including the radius, machined into the flat bottom of the square tube? If there's concern for a smoother transition for improved airflow maybe the end user can match the inside of the runners on the middle intake to the (slightly oversized) ports on the tube (hey, if it's already off...).

Possible advantages are: less/easier machining, flat mating and mounting (or engraving ) surfaces, custom (i.e. bolt-on/interchangable) TB mounting plates (on either end), and easier customization/modification by the end user.

Just my $.02.

-fh

[This message has been edited by fierohobby (edited 08-22-2007).]

quote Originally posted by Raydar: ...Your package is boxed and labeled and is in my truck. Will go to UPS today...

A funny looking guy, in a funny looking brown outfit, driving a funny looking brown truck, left this great looking part!

------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

I've got one extra throttle body- the other is still on my car (needs to stay there so I can move it around), that can be used for R&D purposes. Only problem is I would need it back before installing the intakes Annyone else have an extra laying around?

[This message has been edited by topher_time (edited 08-23-2007).]

quote Originally posted by topher_time: ...Annyone else have an extra laying around?

Thanks, I think that's been covered; but I'll keep everyone posted.

------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

[This message has been edited by toddshotrods (edited 08-23-2007).]

quote Originally posted by toddshotrods: Thanks, I think that's been covered; but I'll keep everyne posted.

Ok, I haven't been on in a while, work, work, and more work is consuming my time.

Eventually there comes the "fun part" --- actually figuring out the dimensions needed to make a dual plenum intake work well.

Two potentially useful threads that I believe haven't been mentioned yet on the present one are in the "Technical Discussion & Questions" section of PFF, the first from April 2007, and the second from March 2007:
1. "Plenum Size" accessible via https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/081750.html
2. "Plenum Volume" accessible via https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/081203.html

In turn, both of those threads reference an article at grapeaperacing.com titled "Induction Systems": http://www.grapeaperacing.c...inductionsystems.pdf

Pages 6 and 7 discuss the selection of intake runner dimensions (length, area, and taper).

Pages 8 and 9 discuss the selection of plenum size or volume, and apparently as it relates to DUAL PLENUM INTAKES in particular: "For 3 cylinders (6 cylinder engine with two plenums), each plenum needs to be about 65%-80% of the 3 cylinders it feeds."

Using 72.5% (just the midpoint of 65%-80%), and recognizing that the pushrod 3.4L is approximately 207 cubic inches, that translates into EACH plenum having a volume of (72.5% X 207 / 2 =) 75 cubic inches or (75/61c.i./L =) 1.2 liters. For a 2.8L, which is 173 cubic inches, that works out to 1 liter for each plenum, instead of 1.2 liters for each plenum with a 3.4L engine.

The last paragraph on page 8 of the last link also states, "To get a boost in the 2500-3500 rpm range, it [plenum volume] needs to be about 30% larger. With a 3.4L V6 engine, that equates to (75 c.i. X 1.3 =) 98 cubic inches or 1.2L X 1.3 =) 1.6 liters for each plenum's displacement. For a 2.8L V6, that works out to to 1.3 liters for each plenum, instead of 1.6 liters for each plenum with a 3.4L engine.

Basically, to help determine the dimensions needed for an effective dual plenum intake, it looks like this and the other formulas presented on pages 6 through 9 of the aforementioned "Induction Systems" article require one to choose some assumptions with which one is comfortable (e.g., the expected volumetric efficiency at some RPM level) and go from there. Ultimately, I imagine employing some reasonableness of judgment will be useful as well. For example, regardless of who authored the article, equations calling for dual plenums each the size of a straw (which thankfully didn't happen here) just wouldn't make sense.

In short, this project doesn't seem a simple one to me, but I think it will be an interesting one.

quote Originally posted by toddshotrods: A funny looking guy, in a funny looking brown outfit, driving a funny looking brown truck, left this great looking part!

Cool!

project34 - i'm hoping that was already factored into the design, since the first post on page 1 says parts are close to being put into production. If not, somebody wake me when they're ready .....

[This message has been edited by PaulJK (edited 08-24-2007).]

This is really annoying. The thread that this whole idea was born in was centered on making ONE-OF-A-KIND custom parts. When it became obvious that the prices of custom parts (even with me offering my services at hamburger-flipping labor) do not fit the budget of the average Fiero owner, I focused on parts that could be produced in limited quantities. This makes it possible for the price to be more inline with the average budget of the average Fiero owner. I will probably never recoup the labor I will have in getting any of these parts ready for limited production. I am willing to donate those development services to this community because I have always enjoyed being a member here, and wanted to give something back.

Now it seems as if some of you think I owe you something, and you're almost demanding that I do things how you want them done. NOT!!!

I NEVER CLAIMED TO BE MAKING A PART THAT CAME WITH ANY PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE!!!!

* I was asked to make a part that had already been done by other Fiero owners - who were more than satisfied with the results of their work.

* I was not asked if I could make a part that guaranteed any dyno-proven horsepower and torque increases. I would have said no.

* I am NOT going to make any performance guarantees.

* I am not going to put countless hours of development time into determining some ideal setup.

* If someone gives me such info that they want incorporated into the intake, and I think it will enhance the product, I will incorporate it into the design.

* The parts are being developed mostly on my "dime". If no one likes what I develop I am the only one who really loses.

* That's it. I am finished with this discussion.

For those of you who are satisfied with, and looking forward to, the intake plans as they are - I apologize for the inconvenience. I will be sending some of you PM's to discuss this privately. We're not far now from having CNC mills whittling and TIG welders sizzling, so please don't be dismayed or discouraged by this minor inconvenience. There are also some who have went above and beyond to help make this happen - I will remember that when the time comes.

As for this thread: I will continue to post progress here, and monitor this thread for interest, but I will now ignore demands and issues that are beyond the scope of the project. I usually do that from the beginning and never address it but, in this case, I felt it was more beneficial to deal with it. I am done dealing with it.

Again, my apologies to everyone who has to suffer in anyway because of this, but I see this whole thing starting to get off track and wanted to stop that now.

------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

[This message has been edited by toddshotrods (edited 08-24-2007).]

quote Originally posted by toddshotrods: ...I am trying to make sure that the people who have expressed interest understand what I am promising to deliver. If it's not what you want I understand.

I understand completely.
Bring it on!

i for one commend you on this. there are many people that have dreams of parts that the have limited means to make. they way i look at it you are makeing my design of part to my specs if there is a problem in performance its on my end not yours. You are helping all of us take what would stay in our heads or drawn out on paper and make it a real. Paul why are you so hard on him? I see in no way has he steped on your toes or made any claims of somthing he has not made an attempt to do. even the 3d rendering has to have taken time that he has not once asked for a dime. he has stated he would only take money when he had parts to sell. Todd never laid clame to any gains and has asked for input as he has designed. with the part we are working on i will take his design over to the fiero comuinty there we will collectivle make a jugement of what the demintions need to be after that. what i expect from todd is a well made part that we bolth aggre on nothing more. I wish there was a way to give people more than one +. I know why people are weary when it comes to startups you see page after page of people getting ripping off. I for one had to fight for months to get my money back. I have only been on fiero.nl for a short time but some of the people i have run into on this board i would not want to sit down and have a beer with.


WE ALL NEED TO SIT BACK AND GIVE HIM A FARE CHANCE THATS ALL HE IS ASKING FOR.

quote Originally posted by project34: Eventually there comes the "fun part" --- actually figuring out the dimensions needed to make a dual plenum intake work well.

I don't want to put words in Todd's mouth, but I'm assuming that if you do the math yourself and present that data to Todd, he can probably build it. But it'll be up to you to get the math right.

Thanks guys I appreciate the support and open communication. We can move on from that whole issue because as far as I am concerned it's a done deal. I think it'll be easy to determine who my clients and customers are from here on out and keep my attention on you. I don't want to waste bandwidth and time discussing irrelevant facts when we can spend the time figuring out how I can best serve you.

quote Originally posted by Blacktree: I don't want to put words in Todd's mouth, but I'm assuming that if you do the math yourself and present that data to Todd, he can probably build it. But it'll be up to you to get the math right.

Exactly. I enjoy the challenge of building parts to suit the specific needs of the buyer. If we can come to terms on a deal I'll build it.

------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

Blacktree, yours is an intriguing idea that I hadn't even thought of at all earlier:

quote Originally posted by Blacktree: I don't want to put words in Todd's mouth, but I'm assuming that if you do the math yourself and present that data to Todd, he can probably build it. But it'll be up to you to get the math right.

Todd, your response in regard to considering such "one-off" creations also is intriguing:

quote Originally posted by toddshotrods: Exactly. I enjoy the challenge of building parts to suit the specific needs of the buyer. If we can come to terms on a deal I'll build it.

Issues of one-off, extra-cost, custom projects aside, my intent in creating my first post to this thread merely was to share some information I found that seemed like it might be helpful to this project. However, I'll be sure to keep the comments I've quoted above in mind. Thanks.

"And now, back to our regularly scheduled program..."

------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

a while ago somebody posted a link for a site that sells parts to make your own intakes
anyone got it ? (sorry to poach the thread)

------------------



87 Fiero GT 5sp with Vortec L35 4300 Turbocharged V6
Bully Stage 2 clutch
Syclone intake manifold and engine management with Moates adapter and chip burner
Air/water intercooler and Devil's Own progressive water/alky injection
50lb injectors, 3 bar map sensor, Walboro fuel pump and Jabasco Intercooler pump
LM1 wideband on custom manifolds and 3" stainless exhaust system
T31/T04B S4 turbo with a Super T61 in the box
S10 caliper conversion.
Murphy's Constant Matter will be damaged in direct proportion to its value
Murphy's Law of Thermodynamics Things get worse under pressure.
Arthur C. Clarke "Any significantly advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"

I like the idea of Dual Plenum intakes. It would make the car look more exotic. Probably a performance benefit too.
Most exotic's (Audi R8, Lamborghini Gallardo, Lamborghini Murcielago, Ferrari's, Jaguar XJ220, Buggatti Veyron's, etc.) have dual plenum intakes. I think it would look awesome in a transverse setup.

Didn't someone fabricate something similar before? I thought I saw pictures somewhere..

-M

There are a couple floating around, but they are one-offs. Toddshotrods wants to make something that is available to more people.

I had thought about this too a while back but didnt have the resources (welding equip and such) i wanted to replace the middle intake too though with rectangular tubing for more of a straight shot down into the head.

Todd seems like a bright guy. he is in the right direction. Although he has many projects going on at once! There are a few of them i am watching excited to see his progress on... Just wondering which is gonna get more attention. lol.

------------------
"Raced That, Wrecked Better" ~In Memory Of Jesse Cesek~ 1980-2000
US Armored Cavalry - Fox 2/81 - Death By 120 - 1 Shot 1 Kill

3800 SuperCharged Series II Swap, Rare BTTK Intercooler, Thrasher MPS, Fastback Swap

quote Originally posted by Austrian Import: I like the idea of Dual Plenum intakes. It would make the car look more exotic. Probably a performance benefit too. Most exotic's (Audi R8, Lamborghini Gallardo, Lamborghini Murcielago, Ferrari's, Jaguar XJ220, Buggatti Veyron's, etc.) have dual plenum intakes. I think it would look awesome in a transverse setup. Didn't someone fabricate something similar before? I thought I saw pictures somewhere.. -M

I agree on all counts. Just check out the two "one-offs" pictured about two-thirds of the way down on the previous page of this thread.

The primary intent here is to make a dual plenum intake available to more than just one lucky person.

Thanks guys, and I pray that this thread can keep this focus. The last posts are dead on about the "whats, whys, and whos", of this project. Nuf said.

quote Originally posted by The Fieromaster: ...i wanted to replace the middle intake too though with rectangular tubing for more of a straight shot down into the head...

I would love to do that but it would take it out of reach (financially) of the average owner...

quote Originally posted by The Fieromaster: ...Todd seems like a bright guy...

quote Originally posted by The Fieromaster: ...Although he has many projects going on at once! There are a few of them i am watching excited to see his progress on... Just wondering which is gonna get more attention. lol.

Interestingly, the projects all feed each other. I strategically select them. The best analogy I can give is of a chef timing each course of the meal so that it all comes together at the right time to be served. The beauty of my setup is that after I get a product over the initial hump it's on auto-pilot. I am even in the process of designing safeguards into my systems, to be sure that the limited production products I produce continue, almost uninterrupted, if something happens to me. I need a protoge for the one-offs and projects that haven't made it over the hump though.

------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

Didn't intend to be mean .... I've just seen people in the past generate a lot of discussion about something new and cool, get everybody's hopes up, then let everybody down. I really hope this dual manifold product turns out, believe me. I think more people have 2.8 engines in fieros than anything, so the market is a BIG one.

Sorry for distracting the discussion ... i'll just shut up now and keep an eye on things for a while

[This message has been edited by PaulJK (edited 08-26-2007).]

Honestly, my main goal for this dual intake is not necessarly for the preformance gain, although it is a consideration, it's just not the main goal. I drive my Fiero because it is unique, I can go a month or two without seeing another one and I like that. The dual intake has piqued my interest because it is unique, and it sets mine apart from the others. I applaud you for the work you are putting into this endeavor and for the other ideas your are persuing for us. Thanks -Jason

quote Originally posted by PaulJK: ...Sorry for distracting the discussion...

No hard feelings, I am not the type to hold a grudge. I'm just trying to keep the focus centered on meeting the needs of the target market for this product.


------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

[This message has been edited by toddshotrods (edited 08-26-2007).]

I personally prefer the square tubes. They'll probably be easier to fabricate, since the base plate will be attached to a flat surface. Plus, you could cut grooves in the top to mimic the tops of the valve covers.

Just a thought.

Just a progress report. I am waiting on some parts to build a full-scale mock-up.

------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

quote Originally posted by toddshotrods: Just a progress report. I am waiting on some parts to build a full-scale mock-up.

Just an occasional update to let you guys know I am still working on this, and moving forward as fast as I can. I am hoping to do some hiring later this year, or early next year, which will allow me to crank out a LOT more good stuff.

------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

More pieces of the puzzle arrived today! Thanks ceverhart Now, I can start doing the ACTUAL develoment work. Fortunately, I am finding that my design, and expectations, line up almost perfectly with the real parts Next step is to do a full scale model to make sure everything is in order, and show you guys what it will look like in real life.


Can anyone tell me what these ports are for?


------------------
toddshotrods.com - wanna ride?
crazy projects, features, articles, art & more

[This message has been edited by toddshotrods (edited 09-07-2007).]

A and D are the inlet and outlet for the throttle body coolant lines, engine coolant that circulates around the TB to prevent icing. B and C are vacuum ports.

A and D are for hot water lines to prevent freeze up in cold weather, B and C are vacume ports for the maze of vacume lines under the intake. I will try and get the actual functions of B and C ports later today. I do not plan on hooking the water lines back up on mine, but left those in place in case needed on your end.
fastback 86 you type faster than me lol

[This message has been edited by ceverhart (edited 09-07-2007).]