would like some coments on using a rew upper and lower ( w/ 1" adaptor plate) on a 6-port n/a.

seem's like it would be good for torque.

not sure if i will go large SP, or go half bridge(sec only)

thought's, coments?

 

I put a 6-port intake on a TII block for better low end/midrange torque.

The part that kinda shocked me was that top end power increased, too.

The TII block may be a special case. The intake ports are a right angle like the older engines, and there is a big pinch in theintake manifold right before the flange. Reminded me of a 12A manifold's primary ports, but on all four runners. Mazda stopped doing that for the later engines, and rightly so.

 

The 1" spacer help with the flow and the mounting

should i go with a 1.5" spacer instead? for better flow? or am i just going to far w/runner length's?

 

What I am getting at, is the N/A intake manifold is already a rather nice piece. It has a nice bend into the engine block, whereas the turbo manifolds are pinched in order to clear the turbocharger(s). Mazda moved the ports up to an angle with the twin turbo engines, which I suspect was simply to make the intake manifold situation better.

I'd need to see an FD or -RE intake in one hand and a 6-port engine in the other, but I suspect that a spacer would have to be a bit more than an inch to fix things.

On the OTHER hand, I've made decent power before with a GSL-SE intake manifold, severe port mismatch on all four runners, on a TII block... not earth shattering but it's amazing what can be done despite horrible things

 

Instead of starting a new thread I resurrected this one as I was about to post pretty much the same question.. What is the current thought on using the FD UIM with a TII lower on a 6-port( port matched per Aaron Cake's write-up). Only reason I considered it was I read the FD one used the reversion pulses like when the VDI is open on the S5. Seems it would have fewer bends than the complete S5 intake. Not sure on what the runner length would end up vs. the S5 n/a. Would any potential gains from the FD upper be killed by the sharp bend of the TII lower( to clear a turbo) as it enters the ports?

As to why I would bother I still fancy going turbo one day. This setup would allow it when the time comes and I was hoping it might net some power gain in the mean time while still n/a.

 

There will not be a power gain. The TII lower is junk compared to the N/A, even before you get into the problems associated with having a huge change in area in a bend once you opened up the short side to match a 6 port engine. Putting it on a 6 port engine is a Bad Idea unless you need to clear a turbo. (You would be better off buying TII end housings to match the manifold, which are still available for fairly cheap as engine parts go)

Look at it this way - the Turbo II needed 7 pounds of boost to make 25% more power than the N/A. Does that sound like the engine breathes better?

 

Oh well I guess if I won't pick up any turbo intake manifolds until I have a turbo to go with them.

 

How about running the REW upper on the stock 6 port lower?

 

would be like a 4 to 6 inch adapter.. and that maybe work well..

 

So lets say one could fabricate a means to attach the REW upper to the 6 port lower. Maybe a tubular setup of some kind which also maybe you could place your secondary injectors in. Could that potentially solve the ills/restriction of the S5 upper while retaining the benefit of the reversion pulses from when the opposite rotor closes the intake port?

 

yes, and you should make them collapsible as well... or telescoping.

 

A la 787b? Might need some sort of motors.