Fiber Tuned Flow Bench Test Results
03-18-2010, 08:33 PM
#42
Manifold design is a whole different animal....port length, taper, and a host of other variables not related to flow come into play.
I was disappointed this intake design didn't get off the ground....would be nice to have a reasonably efficient shorter runner for these big inch engines that could stand to lose some torque with the trade off obviously an increase in power and the ability to carry power further out at higher RPM.
Right now its drop dime on the IR setups which require your first born or make due the best you can with a ported FAST. It does look the the new 102 has improved that situation some but a big engine is still going to nose over quickly with that long a runner design. I have some extra runners that Comp provided me for some testing (I had planned to modify and shorten them) but I don't think I will have time to do this test. Modifying eight runners (properly) would be a time consuming endeavor.
-Tony
Last edited by Tony Mamo @ AFR; 03-18-2010 at 08:42 PM.
03-19-2010, 08:42 PM
#43
TECH Addict
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Webb City, MO...out in the garage
Posts: 2,610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i know a 454 that could be a test mule 
A much more common situation in manifold testing more so than cylinder heads however (assuming your comparing similar sized runners and looking at the entire flow curve of both intake and exhaust on the same testing equipment).
Manifold design is a whole different animal....port length, taper, and a host of other variables not related to flow come into play.
I was disappointed this intake design didn't get off the ground....would be nice to have a reasonably efficient shorter runner for these big inch engines that could stand to lose some torque with the trade off obviously an increase in power and the ability to carry power further out at higher RPM.
Right now its drop dime on the IR setups which require your first born or make due the best you can with a ported FAST. It does look the the new 102 has improved that situation some but a big engine is still going to nose over quickly with that long a runner design. I have some extra runners that Comp provided me for some testing (I had planned to modify and shorten them) but I don't think I will have time to do this test. Modifying eight runners (properly) would be a time consuming endeavor.
-Tony
Manifold design is a whole different animal....port length, taper, and a host of other variables not related to flow come into play.
I was disappointed this intake design didn't get off the ground....would be nice to have a reasonably efficient shorter runner for these big inch engines that could stand to lose some torque with the trade off obviously an increase in power and the ability to carry power further out at higher RPM.
Right now its drop dime on the IR setups which require your first born or make due the best you can with a ported FAST. It does look the the new 102 has improved that situation some but a big engine is still going to nose over quickly with that long a runner design. I have some extra runners that Comp provided me for some testing (I had planned to modify and shorten them) but I don't think I will have time to do this test. Modifying eight runners (properly) would be a time consuming endeavor.
-Tony
03-22-2010, 02:32 PM
#44
A much more common situation in manifold testing more so than cylinder heads however (assuming your comparing similar sized runners and looking at the entire flow curve of both intake and exhaust on the same testing equipment).
Manifold design is a whole different animal....port length, taper, and a host of other variables not related to flow come into play.
I was disappointed this intake design didn't get off the ground....would be nice to have a reasonably efficient shorter runner for these big inch engines that could stand to lose some torque with the trade off obviously an increase in power and the ability to carry power further out at higher RPM.
Right now its drop dime on the IR setups which require your first born or make due the best you can with a ported FAST. It does look the the new 102 has improved that situation some but a big engine is still going to nose over quickly with that long a runner design. I have some extra runners that Comp provided me for some testing (I had planned to modify and shorten them) but I don't think I will have time to do this test. Modifying eight runners (properly) would be a time consuming endeavor.
-Tony
Manifold design is a whole different animal....port length, taper, and a host of other variables not related to flow come into play.
I was disappointed this intake design didn't get off the ground....would be nice to have a reasonably efficient shorter runner for these big inch engines that could stand to lose some torque with the trade off obviously an increase in power and the ability to carry power further out at higher RPM.
Right now its drop dime on the IR setups which require your first born or make due the best you can with a ported FAST. It does look the the new 102 has improved that situation some but a big engine is still going to nose over quickly with that long a runner design. I have some extra runners that Comp provided me for some testing (I had planned to modify and shorten them) but I don't think I will have time to do this test. Modifying eight runners (properly) would be a time consuming endeavor.
-Tony
How many times have you seen a a set of heads for sale and the first question asked is "What are the flow numbers?"
Never are hardly any of the other questions asked. The only 2 things most people know are port size and flow numbers. Sooo many other things can effect how much power is produced, these are just the 2 most easily "understood" I guess.
To be honest I have gotten to where I hate the word "flow" because it is so misused and and misunderstood.
03-22-2010, 10:54 PM
#45
Tony. You highlight some great points. I too am disappointed this intake didn't go far. I do appreciate the time and energy invested in the Fiber Tuned intake. They've demonstrated courage to go where few manufacturers have gone.
Cylinder head development is a complex formula. Intake manifolds can be even more complex and definitely requires far more expensive equipment than a flow bench. And then once a successful intake design is produced, it gets knocked off overseas for pennies on the dollar. Patents are worthless. I've seem a number of nice plans, but no follow through. One thing's for sure, a good intake will probably not fit the Gen 4 cars, but the Gen 5 Camaro does have a bit more room under the hood.
"If you build it they will come................"
Richard
Cylinder head development is a complex formula. Intake manifolds can be even more complex and definitely requires far more expensive equipment than a flow bench. And then once a successful intake design is produced, it gets knocked off overseas for pennies on the dollar. Patents are worthless. I've seem a number of nice plans, but no follow through. One thing's for sure, a good intake will probably not fit the Gen 4 cars, but the Gen 5 Camaro does have a bit more room under the hood.
"If you build it they will come................"
Richard
03-20-2012, 10:48 AM
#46
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hope Mills, NC
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tony. You highlight some great points. I too am disappointed this intake didn't go far. I do appreciate the time and energy invested in the Fiber Tuned intake. They've demonstrated courage to go where few manufacturers have gone.
Cylinder head development is a complex formula. Intake manifolds can be even more complex and definitely requires far more expensive equipment than a flow bench. And then once a successful intake design is produced, it gets knocked off overseas for pennies on the dollar. Patents are worthless. I've seem a number of nice plans, but no follow through. One thing's for sure, a good intake will probably not fit the Gen 4 cars, but the Gen 5 Camaro does have a bit more room under the hood.
"If you build it they will come................"
Richard
Cylinder head development is a complex formula. Intake manifolds can be even more complex and definitely requires far more expensive equipment than a flow bench. And then once a successful intake design is produced, it gets knocked off overseas for pennies on the dollar. Patents are worthless. I've seem a number of nice plans, but no follow through. One thing's for sure, a good intake will probably not fit the Gen 4 cars, but the Gen 5 Camaro does have a bit more room under the hood.
"If you build it they will come................"
Richard
