Help about intake debate for us novices

[Bill Carroll]

Could someone who knows the history about the things that have/are being done to the intakes give the rest of us a brief, even generic outline about this intake debate, I am reading all that is being said here, but would like a little knowledge about what has evolved. It's a round pipe brazed to another round pipe. I'm sure it can be streatched and thinned a bit until it cracks. I'm sure many have tried a whole lot of different things and hours running thier flow benches, thats racing, I would just like a little history, I'm sure you'll leave the secrects out, that's not what I am asking for, just a general bit of insite and thoery. Thank you in advance.

[CitationFV21]

Bill,

I don't know what your level of experience is. If you are just starting out, here is what you have to know about a FV engine.

1. You need a well built bottom end (get you minds out of the gutter.....) something that will maintain oil pressure through a race,
2. You need a balanced carb, manifold, head combination. A killer carb will not work with a dud manifold etc. - work on the weakest part.
3. You need an oiling system (cooler, filter, and sump) to keep it all together.
4. A good ignition system with the right valve springs to allow it to rev and not break up.
5. Proper head cooling to make the engine live to make horsepower.

If you do all these things, but only have an average engine, you will have a great time and spend more time racing than worrying about your engine.

Most pro engine builders will build this for you and let you know what the weak points are. Through the years I have upgraded my heads, carb and manifold (probably due for another one now, but if I can do 1:00s at Lime Rock, how far can I be off...) and spread out the cost.

Depending on the track, new tires may make more of a difference than a great manifold. On the other hand, to win at nationals, besides beign a very good driver, you need everything else at the peak - tranny, chassis, tires, alignment, engine, brakes, aero. That is why a $6,000 car can win regionals, but you need a $12,000+ car to win Nationals. FV is so competitive that you can't compensate in one area for another.

Even at that still the cheapest way to go racing IMHO.

ChrisZ
Citation FV21

[FV80]

Bill,
What Chris said was absolutely true -- however, he did not answer your question.
About 45 years ago, FV was introduced to the SCCA. At that time, the rules were pretty much ... get a beetle motor, don't touch it, put it in your Vee and RACE! As time passed, people spent LOTS of time searching for things to make the car go faster - most of that effort was put into the engine. In those early days, all parts were required to be absolutely STOCK! No mods, no nothing... so everyone set about looking through junk yards, backyards, garages, etc for that 'primo' part that would make the engine faster. Best I recall, the early parts that were SO selected were the Cam gears. VW had a WIDE range of variance on the cams and finding a 'good' one became paramount to going fast. As time passed, SCCA finally decided to put a SPEC on the cam gear .. not to exceed. Then, they later allowed CUSTOM cams that matched that 'maxed out' profile. Specs were put on many of the internal engine components - in the interest of lower cost - so that any racer could LIGHTEN "his" part to match what the 'average best (lightest)' weight was without having to buy 25 parts to find 8 good light ones. While all this was going on, the builders and racers continued the search for the almighty HP - into heads, carbs, rods, lifters and ... you guessed it .. MANIFOLDS. Now we are up to around the mid 80's. There was a 'round' of carbs that seemed to 'get bigger' in places that were not allowed ... actually NO WHERE was it allowed, but it happened anyway. SCCA finally put SPECS on a LOT of the dimensions of the carb to stop the escalation (and erosion) of the internal aspects of the part. Now - some 10 or more years after that died down, we seem to have reached a point where SOME people read the rules and INSIST on ignoring the part that says 'if it's not ALLOWED, then you can't do it". And they look only to any SPECS that are specifically addressed. The FV manifold rules have (since the 70's) only said basically that the OD of the cross tube could not exceed .994 (that was intended to include the 'down' curved section to the manifold). Later, that rule was modified to make it easier for Tech to quickly measure manifolds in impound by specifying WHERE they would perform that measurement (in an easy to access area of the straight section). That was in no way intended to RELEASE the rest of the manifold from restriction. However,.... as the years passed, those sections of the manifold that are NOT in that specified area, seemed to GROW a bit. Now, in the last couple of years, those sections NOT specified have seemed to grow a LOT!!.. I mean a WHOLE LOT! (at considerable expense I might add).

There are those of us who were naive enough to ASSUME that the specified limitation on the head intake port would keep 'excess' manifolds from producing measureable HP gains.... however, some recent dyno tests have indicated otherwise. THEREFORE, SCCA has asked the AD Hoc Committee to consider the issues and decide if rules changes are in order.

Why did they not ask the MEMBERSHIP, you might ask?? Because historical requests have resulted in approx THREE or maybe FOUR responses from the ... oh 200+ at least active VEE (or any other class) racers out there. Obviously NOT a good representation of the 'mass feeling's of the class - apathy abounds!). In the Ad Hoc Committee, SCCA recognizes that there are several of us who have extensive experience in the class, are dedicated to the survival of the class, and make every effort ( and we REALLY DO!) to look beyond any of our own personal interests and make recommendations to SCCA for the good of the class and its survival. In a case such as this - we have only our own GUESSES as to what the FV GROUP might like .. .so we urgently request that each and every one of you send your thoughts to us or the CRB or the F/SRC or whomever ... so we can get a good feel for what the class as a whole would LIKE to see happen.

Unfortunately, on forums, such as this one, a very few people actually PARTICIPATE in the online discussions.. That often SKEWS the perspective, because TWO or THREE people may be adamant and quite vocal in their thought direction, while others who oppose that view remain quiet because they'd rather not 'rock the boat'.

I can certainly see both sides of that ...however, we *REALLY* need to get a good idea of what is most desired by the MAJORITY of competitors. A situation like this one is GOING to hurt someone. If we don't tighten the rules, then bigger manifolds are inevitable (and SCCA seems to be reluctant to enforce the rules "as written") .... if we DO tighten up the rules, then SOME (how many?? who knows??) manifolds will, no doubt, "become" illegal by the strictest definition of the new rules.

So .. therein lies the quandry. Respectful responses are invited. Flaming is prohibited and I hope that a lot of you better understand now about the issues. Those that have only been racing for 10 years or less (NONE on the Committee are "that young"), are probably not aware even that there HAS BEEN an escalation of this issue until now.

Steve (outside of the Committee here - this is just my personal response to Bill's question).

[Bill Carroll]

Well here's my novice thoughts so far. I am brand new to FV and a novice to flow benches and dyno's so I really can't email the SCCA with my thoughts so I'll keep them on here for now, when I have a couple years experience and own a National car maybe I'll thnk differently.

The rules say NO, but since it's been done for years it's now OK to legislate to an acceptable limit of modification, hence 1.050, I see in the other thread that stock was 1.02x or there about in the bend and less .99x where it's straight (I guess). If I want to go fast I'll need a few weeks pay for the manifold and I'm sure everything it works with is even more.

Since "Stock" manifolds are abundant and cheap, especially out west, why not gather up several hundred, certify them as stock (this would take a good inspection and an $800 electronic wall thickness gauge) mark them in a way that can't be modified and sell them for say $100 each to everyone (Yes I know I just put four guys out of business, or we could make them the source?). Then we all have "Stock" virgin 1960's Wolfsbug manifolds as restrictor plates, and the part and rules are kept to the spirit of the sport.

[brian]

Nice plan Bill but the problem is that some manifolds will simply flow better than others. As Steve said, "back in the day" the fastest guys in the class were VW parts guys who could spend nights checking out all the stock parts. SCCA changed the rules to allow mods, up to a defined point, for those who didn't have that kind of access to large caches of parts.

While I try to not get too flamed up or discredit anyone, I'm very conservative with the rules and don't favor rewrites or clarifications since both often result in disagreements and unexpected consequences. SCCA didn't really initiate this rewrite but requested it in response to all the yelling and screaming at this year's runoffs. The rule was a bit sloppy but it wasn't a problem until a builder made some significant gains in his manifolds.

I have had the same manifolds for many years and have enjoyed some success in both national and regional racing. The first prepped manifold I bought in the late 70's cost $125. After the rules changed in 1997, I paid $600 for one that took advantage of the rewrite. Like many things in racing, this is more an issue of perception than anything else.

Welcome to the class and good luck, you'll find us more than just rule weanies, but a great group of guys who have spent most of their adult lives in the class.

[jaymzz]

I also was reading the other thread and got lost, so thanks for the novice explanation.

[Bill Carroll]

Thanks Brian, I know that there would be exceptions, such that 10 manifolds would have 10 different flow numbers. Flow each as part of the inspection, and sell the lower third to VIntage guys for $100, middle of the pack to regional guys for $125 and the best to the national guys for $150. Keep a quantity available and no-one will be selling a top manifold for $1000 on eBay. This Levels the playing field, controls costs and keeps the parts and rules in the spirit of the sport.
... and what is the real difference between an average to a good stock manifiold 1/50 of a HP?? Just a thought. I'm sorry for going from asking for help to injecting my thoughts here, but It seems that the rules are following the problem not fixing it. It is the same in most other racing I have been around, I just thought I'd put in my two cents. Thanks to everyone who is helping us new guys learn.

[Matt King]

Unfortunately the biggest problem with the idea is that nobody want to go backwards in performance terms. The class has already evolved too far for that. What I think could work is to open up the rules in such a way that aftermarket manifolds flowing equal or better than the current top custom manifolds could be manufactured relatively easily and inexpensively. Take the labor out the equation and it's really a pretty simple and cheap part that could be made readily available to anyone who wants one for a fraction of the current cost, which comes from the time and labor required to comply with, or more accurately "stretch" the rules. I suppose this is similar to a control manifold solution, which I'm sure has its own set of problems.

[nick_fv71]

This may be a dumb question and slightly off topic--I'm assuming there's a point to where the carb becomes the restricting factor instead of the manifold in the equation. Have we gotten there, are we close, or anywhere in the ballpark? I am pretty much clueless about the carb; if there's a problem, about all I know how to do is take the top off and make sure there's gas in the bowl , so apologies again for the naivity, just trying to understand

[brian]

The entire induction system is a constraint and it's hard to say which is the main item. Some consider the manifold the culprit, some the carb. Thruth is that all three components need to matched and opitmized. I've never been convinced that a restrictor plate is an answer either. Matching is more important than big flow numbers. I've sen flow bench queens turn up as turds on the dyno.

[hardingfv32-1]

The majority of the Vee engine specs are an effort to make it possible to equalize the performance (set the upper limit) of stock parts. This removes the need to comb through piles of used parts...which are not readily available anymore. Some parts, like heads and intake manifolds, are hard to control when it comes to max performance because they are complex systems, not simple parts.

Now a perception issue: Just because a Vee looks less than high tech and the engine is low tech, this is not the case for the cars at the front of the fields. Effort and money will always make your car faster. For the competitors at the front of the grid, the commitment is almost without boundaries. This commitment generally doesn't last forever. That is why you see some ebb and follow among the front runners. There is no quick or cheap way to the front of the FV grid.

I've scoured the US and Canada and there are no quantities of manifolds available. After all these years off engine, half of those manifolds found are rusted out. The old business model was to make a bunch off manifolds as simple and cheaply as possible. A lot of performance/flow variability. With this technique the average manifolds go to the average guy for a reasonable price, ...but... the great manifolds go the front runner for say $1000. We are talking about a range of 2-3 HP.

EVERY costumer I come in contact with wants the best or nothing at all. If they can't afford it, they wait until they can. I use a business model the includes 3 times the manufacturing effort to remove the variability. I produce only the highest flowing manifolds by design. The average manifold is probably made in 6-8 hrs, while I need 22-26 hrs. I added a couple of extra hours for possible new restrictions.

Brian

[Bill Carroll]

This Novice thread is getting more like the real discussion in Tech Tips, Rules and Safety, sorry I may have started that with my two cents. I really would like to know one thing:

1. If we did flow and or dyno 100 stock manifolds how much of a difference would there acutally be?

Does it affect everyone or just National engines (If I race regioanlly and don't worry about 2 national drivers that show up, and if I place third, I win? Right? Heck If I pass one of the national drivers I'm probably going to get a seat with the new US F1 team, unless my intake is 1.051!

I hope that a good solution comes of all this, and next year we can argue if light beer weighs less than regular!

Again Thanks for eveyones comments, any more info is welcome, I'll see you at the track! Truck just pulled in with my engine, I'll go out and measure the intake!

[Bill_Bonow]

If we did flow and or dyno 100 stock manifolds how much of a difference would there acutally be?

Bill,

You would be hard pressed to find 100 stock manifolds. Brian Harding has been on a manifold shopping spree.

Part of the issue is that previously one was looking for the -021D manifold that only came on the '65 type 1 (semi-rare)

[ external image ]

Unfortunatly after 45 years of rules, FV manifolds don't look or dimention much like the one in the photo

Non-novice joke:
I'd bet Mike Beaumia doesn't have 50 stock manifolds.

[hardingfv32-1]

Bill

I say this with a BIG smile......... because I do not do half baked testing. What is to be learned from a bad test?

I have about 20 good cores (suffix D) with mild internal rust and a few dents:

1) Should I remove the dents? If I do there is a good chance that the ball I send through will true or slightly enlarge the bends. The dents should come out to help with the rust removal (remove the high spots).

2) How good a job do I do removing the rust? What finish surface/grit do you want? I might not be able to see all the rust areas to verify that in fact they are clean and smooth. Maybe you should give/allow me an amount of weight to remove from the interior to make sure all the rust is removed.

Really no reason to proceed without some good RULES to follow. You can ask the Vee Rule Committee for advice.

Brian Harding
Monster Manies

[Dave]

Bill are you asking if he has 50 lying on the shelf or on engines?

Dave

[Bill Carroll]

My comment is purly hypothetical. If we had 100, and flowed and or dyno'd them, heck even ones with small dents and rust, and they were stock, what would the true spread be? For this thread a guess from those who have flowed and dyno'd these is as good of an answer as we can hope for. I am sure that no one is about to spend the time or money to flow even 10. My thinking is that if the stock manifolds made in Germany in the 60's were made on the same equipment and from the same size stock they will yield close results, limiting the "Unfair Advantage" to much, much, much less than 2HP, I've been wrong before.

[Bill_Bonow]

Bill,

If your thought process were true (German quality control), this would never have been an issue.

Because VW was building so many type 1cars in the early to mid 60's (about 1 million per year), they had sub-contracted mutiple vendors for just about every part on the car. The intake manifolds were no different. VW had multiple suppliers building approx. 25,000 manifolds per week. If we were talking about BMW or Mercedez, then quality may have been a factor. However, these were type 1 VW's and as long as the air fuel mixture made it from the carb to the heads, VW was happy.

That is why/how this got started. The guys who worked at VWoA parts distribution in Deerfield, IL would ship out hundreds of intake manifolds to local VW dealers who would flow them, pick the best one and return the rest.

Unfortunatly, the flow delta (good to bad) on stock manifolds is too large.


Dave,

I'd bet he has 20 in a box or on a shelf, but I don't think he's got 50.

[hardingfv32-1]

Bill

I guess the point I was trying to make was that these parts don't arrive coated with Cosmoline, they are junk.

I will flow ten of the best cores and provide an estimate of the relationship between good and bad. I have a very powerful homemade flow bench that is not calibrated, but I do know how the results play out on my dyno. Give me a couple of hours.

Brian

[hardingfv32-1]

Bill

Tested 10 untouched manifolds with a range of readings of 13 CFM. There was a 6 CFM difference between the best stock manifold and a fully prepped unit.

So that is a 13 CFM range for the stock manifold range, best to worst. I would say this is too great, but......
6 CFM difference between the best stock manifold and a fully prepped unit is too small. 6 CFM is the usual difference between a Regional grade manifold and a top of the line National manifold.

My linear relationship between flow and HP could be lost with such a large range of flow, but you could estimate 2 CFM per HP.

Brian

[problemchild]

Bill,
In terms of understanding this controversy, this big row is not about new technology or new parts availability. This is about people making new aggressive interpretatations of existing rules and disregarding the accepted protocol. Dan Grace's explanation in the other thread (page 2) could not have explained the situation better. There are some that have decided that because a measurement procedure is undefined, that bends are free. Others, as I understand it, a large majority, have manifiolds built to the " unless specifically authorized .... there are no exceptions. IF IN DOUBT, DON’T" interpretation.
Any significant difference in performance between different sources, is because the manifolds have been prepped to different rules. Once everyone starts playing fair and to the same rules, the status quo will return and there will be good, better, and great manifolds from different sources. The question is : How many tens of thousands of $$$ will be spent by the FV community to return to the status quo?
It has been my experience that most FV racers are more interested in having their current competitive parts remain competitive, than spend money and more money in pursuit of the holy grail of manifolds. Most would sell their soul for a couple of hp if it was exclusive. If everybody does it, why bother?
Cheers!

[Bill Carroll]

Brian, your commitment to helping us by flowing those manifleds just shows me that we do have a great group here, like after watching a race last year, seeing one driver making a mistake and running another off course, then helping that driver fix his car so he would be out in the next session.

The spread or delta of your flow test follows what others have said here about the Greman QC with subcontactors, etc. and the guys back in the day flowing a crate full of manifolds and picking out the best few, from what I gather here there was an actual HP advantae with a certain few virgin manifolds.

So now we have the 1.050 proposal and the go-nogo gauge and other suggestions. I still don't feel that most of us, especially novices really can say much, but this thread has helped us learn.

I welcone more comments and insite if any of you who are reading this have some.

To all of you who have submitted information for the rest of us, I thank you,

Bill Carroll

P.S. I got my engine yesterday and the first thing I looked at was the manifold, it has been "Improved", so I guess that puts me in with the rest who want a rule to help stop the escalation and cost, to help make it fair. I'll have to dig out my calipers and see what it measures.

[brp]

Bill and Dave,

Bill is the closest. I think I have between 5 and 10 40hp manifolds that are not FV manifolds. Years ago, I decided that I would'nt build manifolds after removing the 'heat riser' tube on a few and trying to figure out how to ball size them and all that stuff. Besides Mike Kochanski had started building them. Carbs on the other hand.....

Mike

[Matt King]

It has been my experience that most FV racers are more interested in having their current competitive parts remain competitive, than spend money and more money in pursuit of the holy grail of manifolds.

This is why I'm in support of the recent revision and the proposal for more restrictions. I may be a FV rookie, but I have been there and done that in other classes, and it's a waste of money and effort I would rather put towards other uses.

[dd46637]

Maybe this is sidestepping the thread a bit but what is a decent core manifold worth?

[hardingfv32-1]

Bill
Just as I offer a performance guaranty, I can guaranty that new rules will NEVER reduce the cost of manifolds in any way. They are a complex system the make absolute control impossible with rules.
Reducing the availability of top of the line manifolds will only insure that the those with connections and money have the best.

Matt
Most Vee racers might think their manifolds are competitive, but the FACT is they are down 2-3 HP from the front runners. This is what I have observerd form the majority of my customers. New rules will just insure that you will never get to a level playing field.

dd46637
Lately the cores are costing me about $25 plus $5 shipping. 50% of those will not be usable. So a good core would be $50.

Brian