Hey guys, I was curious is anyone in the area of central florida and willing to let develope a intake system on your car, I will give you the system at cost. I want to develope a intake system thats more affordable than the K&N Typhoon system. If anyone is interested please email me at energiedev@cfl.rr.com

you are going to develop this intake with who????

beers

I own a company called Energie Developments. If you are interested let me know. For the most part I can have basically everything ready for when you come down for the development. Basically, you just drop the car off for a total of about 3-4 hours and pick it up with the final product. Email me if you are interested.

wait,
you want me to drop of my car for 3 to 4 hours. you must be smoking crack.

do you have a web site. pic of product. rough sketch of the design.

intake change would take less than an hour. what are you going to do for the other 3?????

and anything out there you have desiged??? pics links ????

not to be skeptical, but i didnt just fall of the safety truck.

beers

Same Offer here...

I own Hyper Turbo Street Racer II Alpha.com and if you drop off your car for just 30 minutes, my company will install Twin Turbo's, and even detail your car free of charge.

My address...

187 Fohizzle Drive.
Compton, Ca. 90420... Just leave it by the curb with the key in the ignition. :D

Not to be a hater but there are already cone filter kits out there and the differences between them are so slight as to not be feelable. Anything new that is of the same design is just a copy. that being said I want someone to design an actual Helmholtz resonant tuned box similar in principle to the stock box but have room for a larger filter element as well as slightly larger intake tubes while retaining some sort of actuation for a second intake tube. (That was a hell of a run on sentence!) I would design it myself but I don't own an RX-8 yet. The stock intake tubes do not add up in area to the area of the maf or the throttlebody. By adding a cone system you are getting a benefit due to added air but you are losing tuning ability with the box and intake tubes. Someone please design both into a system!!! The larger the intake filter box (to a point), the greater the amplitude of the gain. You need to really have a good understanding of acoustics to comprehend this.

Fabbing up an adapter and fitting a generic cone filter to it is easy. What isn't easy is getting the location of the maf set properly in the tube. If you are off in the slightest it will read wrong. Ask Chuck at Rotary Extreme about this issue.

3-4 hours would go into developing a template and making a heatsheild. You could stay the entire time or not. If I knew you were fimilar with the rotaries and didnt have to worry about you blowing it up Id let you drive my t78 rx7.

i have driven a 78 rx7 and i did it 78. the t does that you put a turbo on it.

as to the 78 rx7 didnt have a turbo.

lots of tolls. how bout a photo of your 78.

you have little creditablilty with 4 posts and no rx8.

might take you seriously if you had any info for me.

beers

rotarygod --

I love your ideas on the intake. Helmholtz resonance tuning for the intake is a fascinating concept and I hate to see Mazda engineers' hard work destroyed by just putting in a big cone filter. I remember doing some basic study applications on this -- I think in my fluid dynamics classes back when I was an Aero. E. undergrad.

Can't you get a local Houston owner to donate a car for this? Seems like it could be a very viable product with distinct enginerring advantages over the current offerings. Maybe CZ would assist and market it for you?


Originally posted by rotarygod
Not to be a hater but there are already cone filter kits out there and the differences between them are so slight as to not be feelable. Anything new that is of the same design is just a copy. that being said I want someone to design an actual Helmholtz resonant tuned box similar in principle to the stock box but have room for a larger filter element as well as slightly larger intake tubes while retaining some sort of actuation for a second intake tube. (That was a hell of a run on sentence!) I would design it myself but I don't own an RX-8 yet. The stock intake tubes do not add up in area to the area of the maf or the throttlebody. By adding a cone system you are getting a benefit due to added air but you are losing tuning ability with the box and intake tubes. Someone please design both into a system!!! The larger the intake filter box (to a point), the greater the amplitude of the gain. You need to really have a good understanding of acoustics to comprehend this.

Fabbing up an adapter and fitting a generic cone filter to it is easy. What isn't easy is getting the location of the maf set properly in the tube. If you are off in the slightest it will read wrong. Ask Chuck at Rotary Extreme about this issue.

Originally posted by swoope
i have driven a 78 rx7 and i did it 78. the t does that you put a turbo on it.

as to the 78 rx7 didnt have a turbo.

lots of tolls. how bout a photo of your 78.

you have little creditablilty with 4 posts and no rx8.

might take you seriously if you had any info for me.

beers

Um...A T-78 IS a turbo. He put a T-78 turbo on an RX-7. He has a very high horsepower RX-7 is what he is trying to say. Then again so do I and so do a couple of my friends so they aren't all that uncommon. I just don't have a T-78.

Originally posted by rotarygod
Um...A T-78 IS a turbo. He put a T-78 turbo on an RX-7. He has a very high horsepower RX-7 is what he is trying to say. Then again so do I and so do a couple of my friends so they aren't all that uncommon. I just don't have a T-78.

thanks,

didnt think he was old enough to have driven a 78.

while you are at it could you explain. the fd i see all the time.

beers

If you haven't gotten anybody by the 17th of Feb, I'll do it when I get back to the US!

im not trying to be an ass, it is just what i do best. i just have noticed that in the car forums you get lots of people with nothing to do.

in motercycle forums i use it is not that way. this is the second person i have interacted with that claims to be in fla. that has the same # of posts everytime they post.

i did find some pics of his or her car. the girl on the hood is hot. not photos of an engine. lots of stereo mods, gauges. no engine.

beers

Originally posted by RXhusker
rotarygod --

I love your ideas on the intake. Helmholtz resonance tuning for the intake is a fascinating concept and I hate to see Mazda engineers' hard work destroyed by just putting in a big cone filter. I remember doing some basic study applications on this -- I think in my fluid dynamics classes back when I was an Aero. E. undergrad.

Can't you get a local Houston owner to donate a car for this? Seems like it could be a very viable product with distinct enginerring advantages over the current offerings. Maybe CZ would assist and market it for you?

Thanks. The way I would design the box is to first and foremost relocate the battery to the trunk somewhere. There are alot of people who don't want to do this. I would on my own car but then again I am also pretty crazy at trying things. I would make a similar shaped box as the stock air box but mine would go all the way across the engine bay and also take up the space that the battery was in. This would give me the area that I wanted as well as allowing some serious air filter(s) to be installed. I would do 2 seperate intake tubes rather than one with a branch like the stock one does. The added area of the 2nd tube when open automatically tunes to a higher point. I would keep both tubes immediately next to each other so air flow comes from the same relative spot in the box. I don't want any added turbulence from different entrances. The 2nd tube would have a butterfly valve on it that is electrically actuated with an rpm trigger (window switch) for tunability. Simple but effective. The factory valve opens by vacuum and this is slower than an electric system. This method would make the transition much smoother. To get really crazy design a constantly variable length intake tube that constantly adjusts with rpm. Lots of cool things to try.

The RX-8 guys I have met in Houston are nice people but really aren't into doing alot of experimentation with their vehicles. I'll probably have to wait until I get one to try it. I can't verify that it will or will not work but the principle is sound and I'll never know unless I try. I am also much more comfortable experimenting on my own property. If anyone is willing never the less I will give it a shot. The good thing is that there would be nothing permanent done to the vehicle so the only potential loss is time.

Originally posted by rotarygod
I'll probably have to wait until I get one to try it.

Well, what are you waiting for ;)

Can't wait to see what you come up with -- I guess I'll have to be patient -- not my strong suit.

Originally posted by rotarygod
Thanks. The way I would design the box is to first and foremost relocate the battery to the trunk somewhere. There are alot of people who don't want to do this. I would on my own car but then again I am also pretty crazy at trying things. I would make a similar shaped box as the stock air box but mine would go all the way across the engine bay and also take up the space that the battery was in. This would give me the area that I wanted as well as allowing some serious air filter(s) to be installed. I would do 2 seperate intake tubes rather than one with a branch like the stock one does. The added area of the 2nd tube when open automatically tunes to a higher point. I would keep both tubes immediately next to each other so air flow comes from the same relative spot in the box. I don't want any added turbulence from different entrances. The 2nd tube would have a butterfly valve on it that is electrically actuated with an rpm trigger (window switch) for tunability. Simple but effective. The factory valve opens by vacuum and this is slower than an electric system. This method would make the transition much smoother. To get really crazy design a constantly variable length intake tube that constantly adjusts with rpm. Lots of cool things to try.

The RX-8 guys I have met in Houston are nice people but really aren't into doing alot of experimentation with their vehicles. I'll probably have to wait until I get one to try it. I can't verify that it will or will not work but the principle is sound and I'll never know unless I try. I am also much more comfortable experimenting on my own property. If anyone is willing never the less I will give it a shot. The good thing is that there would be nothing permanent done to the vehicle so the only potential loss is time.

Dude... we are having simliar thoughts. With all the commentary about RE's intake, K&N and Racing Beat's comments... I was thinking that there must still be some more horsepower in there still. People just aren't thinking of how to get at it... meaning they are are just thinking SRI or CAI... but what about a variable length intake (like you mentioned). What about changes to the upper intake manifold? It's not a simple piece of equipment, but... taking the Ford 302 as an example... various companies... SVT, Ford Motorsport, Holley, etc. all came up with different upper and lower intakes for that engine. How much power and in what range it hit varied... by the design... intake runner length being one variable. So why isn't anyone thinking/digging more deeply into the Renesis engine??? Mazda engineers are limited... each person only works on a very small part of the car and that's it. They are hampered by too many useless meetings, and many other in efficiencies... so no they can't have gotten all that there is or even nearly so. We just need to change how we are looking at the problem... and Rotarygod is making the first steps in the right direction! let's see some more of this and we'll get N/A 300hp yet!

Originally posted by rotarygod
I'll probably have to wait until I get one to try it. I can't verify that it will or will not work but the principle is sound and I'll never know unless I try. I am also much more comfortable experimenting on my own property. If anyone is willing never the less I will give it a shot. The good thing is that there would be nothing permanent done to the vehicle so the only potential loss is time. Cool stuff, RG.

Sounds like we need to take up a collection here to buy you and RX-8! :D (I'll donate a dollar...)

So what do you think of this idea?

Use a moveable intake runner that spans the width of the engine bay. This would allow more flexibility over intake tuning. Then place a Carbon Dynamic Airbox (http://www.bmcairfilters.com/infoCDA.asp) in between the intake runner and a short pipe that holds the MAF sensor.

I'm not familiar with the Carbon Dynamic part, but the variable runner is a GOLDEN idea!

The problem would be the high speed of the actuator needed, to wing that thing in and out (trombone style) as fast as the revs could change.

I would buy one, just to hear the 'song' that thing would play when revving!

I also agree that the most gain is available by FIRST getting the various air box intake tubes to equal the MAF area, or better.

S

Originally posted by StealthTL
I'm not familiar with the Carbon Dynamic part, but the variable runner is a GOLDEN idea!

S

it sure is Ray, it sure is... marvel at a Le Mans winnging engine that's over a decade old:

Hmm... checked out that Carbon Dynamic Airbox. Too bad the manufacturer didn't put any kind of testing data up on the site. However it does make me think of something I read on a bike forum about porting an engine... that it's not all about pure volume, but the speed at which the combustion chamber can be filled. Thinking about this... I am taking this to mean the efficiency at which the vacuum can draw in fresh air. So if you port it too large you lose efficiency so it may be able to freely draw in air, but the intake is now so large it is unable to effectively use it all... so air speed drops and the combustion chamber doesn't fill with as much fresh air as possible. The CDA filter seems like it is trying to provide a more free flowing system while keeping efficiency (thus keeping up the speed of fresh air being drawn in).

Some testing of this air box in combination with a variable intake runner could prove to have interesting results...

The carbon dynamic airbox is really just a low pressure loss air filter. By using it instead of an intake "box" we are losing alot of the benefit of tuning. The intake tubes themselves are tuning the box itself much like a speaker box. We are trying to get the intake box to resonate at a certain frequency. This resonance is helping to draw in air into the engine by raising the pressure inside the box. This sounds a little strange but this high pressure is translated into high pressure through the entire intake manifold/port system. What is boost? Higher pressure! The larger this box and the larger the intake tubes (to a reasonable point) the "louder" this resonance and therefore benefit should become.

The term louder doesn't neccesarily mean that the intake will be louder in amplitude from outside the car as with the aftermarket intake growls. The whole principle is to use acoustics to help out powerband since acoustic waves are pressure waves. At the same time the box is "harmonizing" with the engine to produce gains it is also hurting in other areas. However this is true with any other system out there including the stock one. This is the basis for a variable trumpet which retunes the box itself to match the engine over a broader range. If you could do 2 sliding trumpets with the second one still possessing a butterfly valve, you would have an extremely wide range of tuning ability.

If we were to use the carbon dynamic airbox, I would put it either inside or after the main airbox to maintain the tuning benefit but also keep the minimal pressure drop. The whole point of tuning with this method is to get as close to if not actually see positive pressure (boost) at certain spots in the power band at the engine ports. On a naturally aspirated engine this is possible but it is much easier to do with port overlap which the Renesis does not have. The realism is that while positive manifold may not actually be possible with this method, we could at least see a minimal vacuum at spots in the powerband.

To do an experimental trumpet system, I would just replace the long intake tube on the stock box and add the trumpet as shown in the above diagram. It's cool that was posted because it was the first place that I envisioned it.

Thanks to Professor RotaryGod.. I learn something new about my car everyday... this is more entertaining than reading it in a book.

Thanks to Professor RotaryGod.. I learn something new about my car everyday... this is more entertaining than reading it in a book.

I have to agree... we certainly benefit a lot from having him around on this forum...

:( You guys have brought a tear to my eye!!! lol

I have given this a little more thought. As with an exhaust system there is more than one way to tune. I have been focusing on Helmholtz tuning but the above diagram by Speed Racer does have potential as well. That tuning method is based on organ pipe resonance principles. Here's how it works:

If we look at an organ pipe, each pipe is tuned to a certain frquency based on its length and opening size. In our case the opening is the end. By adjusting the length we are adjusting the frequency to which it resonates. Changing the length changes the frequency. Even noticed how a trombone works? The above picture would be best described as a trombone intake rather than an adjustable trumpet.

I may have mentioned it above in this thread or maybe it was another but this is how I broadened the torque of my little Honda Civic. If I reposted this again from above I apologize. Just skip this paragraph then to the next one. That car needs tons of help. I had just installed a cold air intake tube similar to the ones the ricers use and noticed the car seemed down on power. This was verified by lower average gas mileage. Even though there was more flow power was off. Tuning must have been affected. I then made several different lengths based off of some 3" aluminum tubing I had lying around. I finally got the length way long to the point that the filter is in the passenger side front of the car down low. This audibly tuned the intake to a lower point and for obvious reasons but more importantly the car felt stronger on the low end. This once again was verifyed by better gas mileage. In fact I get better gas mileage than what the car was rated at from the factory. Top end power didn't seem any better but power was improved over the entire average powerband. This is where it counts.

What made me mention this again is a site posted in a different thread about a new Greddy intake. The web based translation devices suck so it would be very helpful if someone fluent in Japanese could translate it to verify what I think they are saying. Here's the web link from the other thread. Click on the link that says: "January 7 GRACER air INKUSU set MZ-M011B SE3P"

http://ocn.amikai.com/amiweb/browser.jsp?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.trust-power.com%2F06new%2Findex.html&langpair=2%2C1&c_id=ocn&lang=JA&toolbar=yes&display=2

Hope that works.

If you look at their system, it is very long which would tune very low based on organ pipe resonance. From what I can make out from the very broken English in the translation is that Greddy found that just by removing the stock airbox and replacing it with just a filter, that power went down in some spots. However that by using a really long system, they not only gained a little average power down low but also gained all the way up to around 7000 rpm or so. Just by looking at their system I would guess that there is no top end gain to be had but then again average power is what makes you faster. Can someone go read the Japanese version and verify this? If this is true then it is the same thing that happened to me on my little Civic.

By designing a system that does this in conjuncion with a sliding trombone stlye pipe, the top end could also get a gain. The Helmholtz box would still be a good idea though. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. It would be nice to see development of each system and the comparisons between them.

Rotarygod... ask and ye shall receive. I was only going to post a summary, but... it turned into a line by line translation. Merry Christmas.


The Sequential Dynamic Air Intake System (S-DAIS), which uses the engine intake pulses, has been introduced in the 13B-MSP. Simply removing the stock air cleaner box and only installing a open air cleaner has the opposite effect, a drop in power. Mid-range rpm power loss occurs.

The results of considering pipe diameter and length and repeatedly testing is a layout where the Air Inksu main body is put in the passenger side inner fender.

Using Air Inksu and a 80ö diameter pipe, intake resistance is reduced, and due to the long intake pipe length a dynamic turbocharging effect is created. Mid to high rpm intake air volume has been increased. When compared to stock, the largest output change is at close to 7,000 rpm where power increases more than 7.4kw (10ps/8hp).

Efficiently inhaling fresh air and bringing out the engine's maximum performance, it appeals with a sense of the existence of the powerful rotary engine's unique intake sound.

Also, for protection against water when driving in rainy conditions, an aluminum shroud is attached.

So I was basically correct! Woohoo!!! I knew that the stock box did something useful and there is the proof. Less midrange power without the box. Proper tuning wins again!

I still feel that a better designed Helmholtz system has more inherent potential but a fixed pipe is easier to construct. Thanks Japan8!

No problem at all... glad to be of service. Besides... more "good" info that is out there only benefits the whole community.

It does indeed seem that you have the right idea... resonance tuning of the intake is important with the Renesis engine. I hope that we can see some more products appear on the market that take this info account, and maybe even work a variable tuned system as you've suggested.

Interesting thread. We're looking into designing a variable intake manifold for racing only (5500 - 9000 rpm) essentially for cost reduction and simplification of engine management (we are going to build a seconf sport proto).

Continuously variable is not an option, but we'd look into something with vacuum actuated VDI and APV.

and so it starts again awsome. i read this a while ago and i am happy to see it returning. help us rasputin (rasputin? as in.... hahaha)

RG's idea on the intake is very interesting...

If I had the money... (gimme 2-3 months) I might be down with the idea...

But the whole process seems like a lot of work....

Relocation of the battery??? Simply that itself would cost some 200....

Well... actually... This whole idea seems a little over my head....

Holy thread back from the dead! I need to go back and read what I wrote again to see if I still agree with myself! ;)

^^ From what I read, it made sense. But then, I haven't much experience in Wankel intake manifold design.

I'd like to get rid of the VDI which adds a lot of complexity. Wonder how much power would be lost, and if it can be recovered by other improvements to the intake manifold.

What I'd really like to do, is to get a desktop design to go to the dyno with, and be able to test it different tubes lengths to see what works and what doesn't.

Fabrice

The Renesis intake manifold is a work of art when it comes to design. If you want to improve it, take it off and smooth out the rough castings inside a bit but leave everything working. It isa fantastic system that would be very hard to improve anywhere without really hurting power in other areas.

Well I went back and re-read what I posted a couple of years ago an while I still think the idea has merit, I'm not so sure that the amount of potential gain that it would give would be worth all the effort. It might make a few more horsepower if implemented properly but that's not much power to put so much effort into. Every little bit does help though. There are many other things to do to the car before getting to that.

The Renesis intake manifold is a work of art when it comes to design. If you want to improve it, take it off and smooth out the rough castings inside a bit but leave everything working. It isa fantastic system that would be very hard to improve anywhere without really hurting power in other areas.I agree. My technical requirements are very specific and are different from what one would want for a road car. I probably should give it its own thread somewhere.

To summarise, we don't want to pay 2500 Eur for the alloy manifold + 600 Eur for the plastic one if we could design something (much) cheaper and simpler giving similar perf between 5500 and 9000 RPM. I'm also seriously considering moving from 6 to 4 bigger injectors with specific (return) fuel rails.

Fabrice

If you are just looking for a race engine manifold then you could definitely do something much simpler at the expense of low end power.

If you are just looking for a race engine manifold then you could definitely do something much simpler at the expense of low end power.Ok, great. I'll continue this discussion in the racing section.

Cheers,

Fabrice

hmm dont know where i should put this now. but i said id put it here so here it is.

when Fred (RG) and i were discussing rx-8 intake design a few years ago at 7stock we talked about lengthing the primary. I think this would help in your situation. by removing most of thje S-DAIS functions you will lose some low end grunt. but you could make up some of that grunt with a longer primary. im not sure how much longer. it may have been discussed in this thread already somewhere i havent looked. i think the cross connect at 7250 should stay though for NA. that shortening of the intake path is what allows it to flow correctly for power above that rpm.

i had some star mazda tuning info around somewhere but it might be what Team sent you before.

I found this in one of the SAE papers on the Renesis.

http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/3010/sdaisdw6.jpg
________
buy condo Pattaya (http://pattayaluxurycondos.com)

I have that paper. It's not very detailled on the S-DAIS.

F