| I can't keep up with the incompetence you keep spouting, so I'll just respond to the high points. “Notice how Alan's story never included the phrase ‘I really feel the responsiveness on 2.5" breather Z's is very lacking’
No one has ever complained about that, ever. Find me one SINGLE post of a breather Z that has this complaint.” You keep pursuing this notion that in order for a modification to be legitimate, there has to be a complaint first. And not only does there have to be a complaint, but it has to be documented in a TT.net post. That rationale is absurd. I searched TT.net, and you’re right, there are no complaints about responsiveness on a full-breather car. But I took it one step further – There were no complaints about responsiveness before the introduction of: 3” expansion downpipes
2.5” super-split downpipes
60 mm throttle bodies
Ash 2.5” intercooler piping
2.5” intercoolers
MSP exhaust manifolds
Haltech/E85 tuning By your rationale, all of the above are unnecessary because the complaint didn’t come first. This rigid formula where there has to be a complaint, then the complaint justifies a “problem,” and only then can you start working on a “solution,” is delusional.
“The piping may very well be shorter, but that doesn't mean it is going to deliver a tangible difference in driving.”
You are correct. At this point it is speculation to assume it will deliver a tangible difference in driving. But it is also speculation to assume it won’t. It is common knowledge that intercooler piping should be short, straight, and direct. Advocating that the stock piping layout is better is the much harder position to sustain because of all the extra bends and length. 
“This is a vanity project pure and simple.” I’m sure that would be convenient for you. “Why not just own it? ‘I like FMIC's always liked them, think they make the car look cool, but I wanted to do them right and not put ebay chinese crap on the car, and the TDM kit requires too many sacrifices for my liking, so I went with this.’” The same could be said for your position: “I have always disliked FMICs on a Z32. I think they make the car look stupid, and I’ll justify my position any way necessary, including mocking and personal attacks.”
“I could respect that. I do respect that. But this masquerade, sorry, calling BS. Makes ZERO sense in any measure for a street car. Try to imagine that teams of japanese engineers actually hashed out this and hundreds of other core design questions and are at least as smart as anyone here...and had testing facilities, testing instruments, testing team, and a budget to pay for it all...oh and they got PAID just to do this. Wow what morons, some guy from Jersey figured out that the opposite design choice was a better way, in his spare time!”
Did the teams of Japanese engineers also design the suspension, brakes, fuel system, exhaust, interior, seats, wheels, aero, PCV, HICAS, and turbos? Because we have no problem modifying those areas of the car. Or is the intercooler layout the only area that is incorruptible? The masquerade is yours. You don’t like FMIC setups out of some misplaced notion of loyalty to Nissan, and you’ll fabricate criticism to justify that position.
“Alan, it's a nice project, it honestly is...you appear to be doing a good, proper job like most TTnetters would, but you are simply throwing money away if this is for performance purposes. Intake piping length is so far down the ‘problem list’ you might as well be polishing the inside of the entire exhaust piping tract or purchasing a $10K titanium catback exhaust handcrafted by Jesus and Gandhi for all the good it will do you.”
This is just hot air and I refuse to respond to it. “apparently not ‘outside the box’ enough.... to solve what problem I am still yet to learn. ‘more airflow’ ‘shorter intake piping’ two solutions to non-existent problems.” You still keep avoiding the actual issue. Alan’s setup (similar to the TDM setup) makes the intake/intercooler piping shorter, straighter, and more direct. If you would at least concede, “Yes, there is a potential performance gain to bigger intercoolers, and making the intercooler piping shorter, straighter, and more direct” I think we could at least take your position seriously. “Alan is acting like he is doing something for performance purposes when in reality he is doing it for fashion purposes. Then he impugns anyone who challenges the claim by saying they are ‘afraid’ and are narrow minded...All said and done he will likely be north of $2000 to basically relocate SMIC's in front of his radiator, and he won't be able to tell a damn bit of difference in the way the car drives had he just gone with those lame SMICs in their lame factory locations. It doesn't even matter if the car overheats or not, it is a colossal waste of time for any purpose other than fashion....aka ‘being unique’...which, like most things in 2016, mean the opposite of what they claim to be.”
Oh the irony. Alan’s intercooler setup and layout is based on sound principles of turbo systems and physics.
Straight from Corky Bell’s Maximum Boost ([ http://www.volkspage.net/technik/04/maximum_boost.pdf ]):
(Intercooler) Frontal Area: In many respects, frontal area reflects the amount of ambient air that goes through the core to cool the intake charge. The greater the mass of ambient air that can get through the core, the greater the cooling capability. p. 56
(For reference, Alan’s setup has 166 square inches of frontal area and 747 cubed inches of volume, Z1’s has 160 square inches of frontal area and 720 cubed inches of volume.) Bends and Section Changes (of the intercooler piping): Any bend in a tube…must be viewed as a potential flow loss or source of increased drag. It would be reasonable to estimate that every time the airflow must turn 90 degrees, a loss of 1% of the flow will occur. Three 30 degree bends will add up to a 90. p. 62 (Compressor Inlet) Large diameter, low flow-loss inlets to the compressor are vital. p. 36 Larger air filters are necessary for performance and to help keep thermal loads in check. p. 195 And a summary of why the larger the diameter, the shorter the intake and the fewer the turns, the better the intake design. [ http://stratifiedauto.com/blog/a-technical-discussion-of-intakes-and-turbocharging/ ] Alan’s setup accomplishes these goals. If you cannot address these design principles, and keep reverting back to petty argument, then you are the one hamstrung by the superficial.
|
00:28:20 04/21/16
