Jump to content
popeye

Taurus EcoBoost manifold

Recommended Posts

That manifold did well in the upper rpms, very well but the loss of tq down low kept it from being viable. It ran flawlessly for two years through

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

I'm assuming you were talking about the SHO manifold working great for 2 years.... did the f150 manifold ever come to bear fruit? I was curious if the larger plenum volume of the f150 manifold helped out like predicted assuming you completed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm assuming you were talking about the SHO manifold working great for 2 years.... did the f150 manifold ever come to bear fruit? I was curious if the larger plenum volume of the f150 manifold helped out like predicted assuming you completed it.

I did run that manifold for a while but chased a tune on that manifold that wound up being a bad TB the whole time. Out of frustration I swapped to a ported stocker and left it alone. Never went back.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to very much be the case with manifold swapping.  You always end up going to stock or similar.  Coyote guys are kinda spoiled for options as there's an offering for just about any application, stocker, Boss 302, CJ, GT350 intakes...  You should see how ridiculous the LS engines get with intake manifolds.  Dyno queen clowns will gladly give up well over 75 - 100lb ft down low just so they can run monster cams up top to 7000 - 7500 RPM.  And then put it on a trailer and never see it again until the next dyno shootout.   :mad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well with the Cyclone engine you are severely handicapped by the height of the engine along with the very narrow valley. Injector layout and what not. So any NA manifold has to be far shorter than optimal or a severely laid over design like stock. Any engineered solutionwas wildly expensive.. Had the engine been a DI like the 3.5 I would have been running a roots blower the second month I owned the car. Having the injectors down in the block gives you a lot of liberties in design. But at the end of the day, the coyote is such a sexy platform, I was designing options that would appeal to such a small percentage of owners. I always built something for myself and then looked towards a marketable piece. The returns were always miniscule. More than likely it would never have made dime #1. Now a roots setup on that motor would have been eye opening. Too many tall hurdles,, literally.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well with the Cyclone engine you are severely handicapped by the height of the engine along with the very narrow valley. Injector layout and what not. So any NA manifold has to be far shorter than optimal or a severely laid over design like stock. Any engineered solutionwas wildly expensive.. Had the engine been a DI like the 3.5 I would have been running a roots blower the second month I owned the car. Having the injectors down in the block gives you a lot of liberties in design. But at the end of the day, the coyote is such a sexy platform, I was designing options that would appeal to such a small percentage of owners. I always built something for myself and then looked towards a marketable piece. The returns were always miniscule. More than likely it would never have made dime #1. Now a roots setup on that motor would have been eye opening. Too many tall hurdles,, literally.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Something like this would look ridiculous sticking out of the hood but in the back of a ford GT height doesn't matter. This is a picture of a twin throttle body setup on the ecoboost engine by Roush, even if we had the height available it would still need a second throttle body mirroring setup. (Below)

 

https://ozmoengineering.com/product/standalone-dbw-2tb-controller/

 

https://www.z1motorsports.com/electronics/selin-design/new-2nd-generation-selin-dual-maf-translator-p-3986.html3ed13665e99c755fbc191dfcee7b5bcf.jpg

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only the Voodoo had twin throttle bodies......

It looks like they used 2 OEM 2.0L throttle bodies on this engine (from reading the articles on the Roush Yates engines). I kind of want to know if the valve covers and dry sump oil system will work on our 3.7's too... these look like bad ass little engines making 600hp in the prototype GT on the first gen ecoboost 3.5. It had to run 2 high pressure fuel pumps just to fuel it.

 

I think the closest you can get right now to twin voodoo throttle bodies is by swapping to the cobra jet manifold and twin blade single throttle but as I understand it the stock voodoo gt350 manifold is top dog for power and torque so several coyote mustangs are swapping to them but I have no idea how they are controlling the variable part of it.

 

It's my opinion that our side slung manifolds are the N/A power limit and the only way to get long enough runners and have enough plenum volume for our 3.7 engines are to use the Jenevy crossing runners (adding injector bungs) into 2 separate plenums and twin 2.0 throttle bodies. Of course we might need to build the engine for 8000rpm if that's where it makes power which would probably mean stiffer valve springs and such.

c67da449cc24ec56b672a4f3bf47a83c.jpgefde4cf1546b334566e981f3f8c4aabe.jpg

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't be much different than it is now, other than the headache of trying to fit two intake tubes.

 

It would have altered their thinking on the entire top end too.  Oh if only's...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone distract them while I just roll those engines away............

My girlfriends best friends husband,,, builds thess 3.5 engines for Roush in SC. When she went down there this summer I gave her a list of questions to ask him. It was quite comical her interpretation of some of his answers but smuggling North a rotating assembly was a definite NO.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.