Hmm, does high school in the mid 90's count? I could definitely look into it though.Just curious, do you use CAD software?
Not a bad idea.Also, If you were to develop a tune for them to go with, and your product would be more competitive at even at a slightly higher price range. Just a thought
So with the cross section area of the intake runners being the same, a longer runner will favor the low end and a shorter runner the top end. But unless you intend to literally copy the other guys product exactly, some thorough R&D is definitely in order.I think one of the hardest things would be is to decide on the actual optimum width of the spacers themselves. You could go with the 'what the other guy did' philosophy but there's no guarantee what they did was actually the best option.
Another interesting idea.If one is offered for the MY18+, an additional feature of a small intake for valve cleaning (ie some place to spray valve cleaner) since they are DI. There's alot of angst out there about carbon build up on the valves...
:thumb_smileyvault-cTrying to increase the horsepower on a naturally aspirated engine by putting performance mods on it is like trying to look more muscular by drawing abs on your gut. Don't waste any of your money on such nonsense.
lol, exactly!!It’s almost as pointless as replying to a thread you have no intent contributing to.
Well if you want to make more power, you need to burn more fuel. The only exception being higher octane gas, where you can run more total timing for the same AFR or a leaner AFR for the same timing. Not sure if that makes any sense?In degrees of efficiency, for my purposes at cruise (1.5k to 2.5k rpms) if their figures are correct, would only give me 2 to 4 hp for the manifold blocks and that would be at a loss of mpg's because of f/a ratios and timing at those rpm's (if I have my facts straight). So without a tune, you will lose mpg's (my goal)?