Welcome to the SR20 Community Forum - The Dash.
Register
SR20 forum logo

Thread: Thermo Block spacer questions

+ Reply To Thread
Posts: 1-10 of 15
2008-10-09 20:37:09
#1
Thermo Block spacer questions
hi

someone dynoed theese little pieces with a sr20de?

my concern is that

a) the runner length is changed to longer (effect on top mid low end?)
b) the injectors are moved away from their optimal(?) place more far away from the intake valves. so i wonder if the homogeneous mixture of fuel and air is effected in a negative way.


greetings ronny
2008-10-09 22:16:58
#2
Check this out: http://www.sr20-forum.com/showthread.php?t=9874

A.)


B.) Answer to this one can be found here, but I included the quotes

Won't moving the fuel injectors 1/4" mess up the "aim" of the fuel stream and cause driveability and mileage problems? Doesn't the injector have to hit the back of the intake valve perfectly to work properly?

This was an initial concern of Outlaw Engineering also. After investigation, testing, and real world experience, it would seem that injector pulse placement is not as critical as some may feel. For example, most modern 4 valve/cylinder engines have two intake valves and only one injector per cylinder. If you take a look at some of these injectors, many have a "splitter" that breaks the fuel shot into two streams to shoot it in the general direction of the intake valves. Hardly a precision aimed component. There have been racing organizations that successfully move the injectors several inches from the stock position without negative effects. With literally thousands of ThermoBlok spacers in the field, this has never posed a problem.


Won't the additional length/volume added to the intake manifold mess up the power curve (or VRIS valve resonance points)?

The 1/4" (6.35 mm) addition to the runner length will indeed shift the torque curve to the left slightly, about 50 RPM. This has actually been proven to be a benefit as it helps to restore some of the torque lost due to the addition of larger intakes and exhausts. Take a look at the dyno plot on our TECH page (or on your specific vehicle application page) and you will see that although the torque curve is shifted, power is up across the entire power band.




How they work
2008-10-09 22:45:05
#3
BTW injectors are only placed so close to the head for emissions reasons.

Placing them further away makes the mixture more uniform. Have you ever seen stand off injector setups?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsKNbsDqEPs

F1 one does (or did) run setups like these.
2008-10-09 23:46:22
#4
so it would help in emissions??^^
2008-10-10 05:14:54
#5
Originally Posted by jen36
so it would help in emissions??^^


Yep that was the whole reason behind low ports. Low ports have the injectors closer to the cylinders then high ports.

Not 100% why it helps the emissions, but it seems like low ports have more torque, but HP wise and head flow they are lacking.
2008-10-10 14:26:37
#6
Originally Posted by Vadim
Yep that was the whole reason behind low ports. Low ports have the injectors closer to the cylinders then high ports.

Not 100% why it helps the emissions, but it seems like low ports have more torque, but HP wise and head flow they are lacking.


Ok Im a bit baffled with what your saying here?

I think your getting High and low ports mixed up here?

RR motors - ie Lowports make more HP from stock and with light mods than Highports dont they?

The head spacers wouldnt make a major significance on runner length, maybe lowering peak torque by 200 rpm max.
2008-10-10 15:22:59
#7
Originally Posted by Autech
Ok Im a bit baffled with what your saying here?

I think your getting High and low ports mixed up here?

RR motors - ie Lowports make more HP from stock and with light mods than Highports dont they?

The head spacers wouldnt make a major significance on runner length, maybe lowering peak torque by 200 rpm max.


No sir, haha I know what I said.

RR motors make 145 HP because they have roller rockers (less friction) and a lighter crank.

Low ports do not have more power. In fact they have ~8WHP less power due to cam sizes. If you put the high port cam into the lowport, you should have as much HP, but the head flow will still be worse at higher RPM's.

There was an article on [url]www.sportcompactcarweb.com[/url] by Mike Kojima, but I can't seem to locate it.
2008-10-10 15:39:50
#8
Originally Posted by Vadim
No sir, haha I know what I said.

RR motors make 145 HP because they have roller rockers (less friction) and a lighter crank.

Low ports do not have more power. In fact they have ~8WHP less power due to cam sizes. If you put the high port cam into the lowport, you should have as much HP, but the head flow will still be worse at higher RPM's.

There was an article on [url]www.sportcompactcarweb.com[/url] by Mike Kojima, but I can't seem to locate it.


Wow!! welll there you go!!! We learn something new everyday.

All this time over here everone has been chasing RR style lowport motors haha!! We always thought the lowport motors had better ports as well
2008-10-10 15:42:17
#9
Originally Posted by mafoose
BTW injectors are only placed so close to the head for emissions reasons.

Placing them further away makes the mixture more uniform. Have you ever seen stand off injector setups?


F1 one does (or did) run setups like these.


hehe - who needs sequential pulse firing.

Bucket + hose over the TB's might be just as effective
2008-10-10 16:25:37
#10
Originally Posted by Autech
Wow!! welll there you go!!! We learn something new everyday.

All this time over here everone has been chasing RR style lowport motors haha!! We always thought the lowport motors had better ports as well


The only engine that has better flow then high ports is the VE. So I would go with the VE head/manifold if possible
+ Reply To Thread
  • [Type to search users.]
  • Quick Reply
    Thread Information
    There are currently ? users browsing this thread. (? members & ? guests)
    StubUserName

    Back to top