Turbo Manifolds 2008
12-09-2007, 03:07 AM
#1
1.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 247
Turbo Manifolds 2008
what is the general rule of thumb with regards to turbo manifolds?
because i had a Ram horn custom built and now my car is slower....
boosting with the Log the power was raw and viscious.now with the tubular i have lag and the boost response is weak. i have derived my own theory.
Smaller cc's need LOG!
because i had a Ram horn custom built and now my car is slower....
boosting with the Log the power was raw and viscious.now with the tubular i have lag and the boost response is weak. i have derived my own theory.
Smaller cc's need LOG!
12-09-2007, 03:18 AM
#3
1.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 247
Re: Turbo Manifolds 2008
Originally Posted by ososlohatch
SPLOG FTW !!!
i can understand the design but the reality when boosting a log compare to a tubula, LOGr is far more intense/Vicious
12-09-2007, 05:27 AM
#5
1.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 247
Re: Turbo Manifolds 2008
can you not have the best of both worlds with a custom manifold? if you can this is the manifold i seek!!!!!!
Anyway as i said before the Fastest Honda im my state runs a Log and he is a gewd 1-2 seconds faster than anyone else!!!
My new concern is, Log Generates more thermal efficency/heat. and your intake temp is directly related to how much you can boost on a given fuel. so is this one of the reason why tubular is said to be more superior? because you would beable to booost more?
do you need "TOP END POWER/HIGH HP" to run gewd 400m times?
Anyway as i said before the Fastest Honda im my state runs a Log and he is a gewd 1-2 seconds faster than anyone else!!!
My new concern is, Log Generates more thermal efficency/heat. and your intake temp is directly related to how much you can boost on a given fuel. so is this one of the reason why tubular is said to be more superior? because you would beable to booost more?
Originally Posted by one2many
logs make shity top end power
logs suck for high hp
wtf more do you want ?
logs suck for high hp
wtf more do you want ?
12-09-2007, 05:48 AM
#6
1.5 BAR
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 676
Re: Turbo Manifolds 2008
There is way too much to type on this subject. Most is theory. End result is we know a few things.
1) Solid merge collectors help a ton. A lack of a decent/good collector really ***** up air flow and drops efficiency
2) Reversion is the enemy of any engine, especially turbocharged engines. Minimize reversion on a turbo engine and maybe even have some scavenging, you are doing the right thing.
3) There will always be a compromise between low end, midrange, and top end power. Having all three is basically impossible. Pick one to focus on based on your needs or live with the fact you can have mediocrity over all three.
4) There is theory that says you can run a small volume exhaust manifold and use large wastegate(s) to minimize reversion. This has never been tested/proven to my knowledge.
5) The sooner you can pressurize the manifold, the faster your turbo will spool.
Why do ram horn manifolds typically make more power/psi than logs? Ramhorns have a larger volume and the merge collector allows air to flow more efficiently resulting in less reversion. Why do log manifolds spool faster? The volume is smaller so less air is needed to pressurize the system, thus the system pressurizes earlier.
My thoughts have always been to either run short/equal volume/length larger diameter tubing/pipe with a nice merge collector and wastegate priority or longer equal length/volume smaller diameter tubing/pipe with a nice merge collector and wastegate priority. Which one is priority #1? I'd say the collector as it's the most easily conceivable and achievable. As for the other points, ---- if I know. Buy a welder and some material and get to work.
PS: Whatever you choose, your cams, wastegate, and turbo have to work with it. Downpipe always is bigger is better.
1) Solid merge collectors help a ton. A lack of a decent/good collector really ***** up air flow and drops efficiency
2) Reversion is the enemy of any engine, especially turbocharged engines. Minimize reversion on a turbo engine and maybe even have some scavenging, you are doing the right thing.
3) There will always be a compromise between low end, midrange, and top end power. Having all three is basically impossible. Pick one to focus on based on your needs or live with the fact you can have mediocrity over all three.
4) There is theory that says you can run a small volume exhaust manifold and use large wastegate(s) to minimize reversion. This has never been tested/proven to my knowledge.
5) The sooner you can pressurize the manifold, the faster your turbo will spool.
Why do ram horn manifolds typically make more power/psi than logs? Ramhorns have a larger volume and the merge collector allows air to flow more efficiently resulting in less reversion. Why do log manifolds spool faster? The volume is smaller so less air is needed to pressurize the system, thus the system pressurizes earlier.
My thoughts have always been to either run short/equal volume/length larger diameter tubing/pipe with a nice merge collector and wastegate priority or longer equal length/volume smaller diameter tubing/pipe with a nice merge collector and wastegate priority. Which one is priority #1? I'd say the collector as it's the most easily conceivable and achievable. As for the other points, ---- if I know. Buy a welder and some material and get to work.
PS: Whatever you choose, your cams, wastegate, and turbo have to work with it. Downpipe always is bigger is better.
12-09-2007, 07:48 AM
#8
1.5 BAR
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 752
Re: Turbo Manifolds 2008
dude, finish your spaghetti
i'm not one for flaming, but you are being irritating. multiple threads of it.
seriously.
if you keep it up i'll put on the hmt cap for a few minutes and flame you till i feel better.
i've just been shafted pretty bad (someone sold my skyline for 1200nz when i had 4k of suspension and sounds, 2k of labour, 3 - 5k of car, and countless hours/dollars making it mechanically mint. i dont need you asking dumb questions. i might flip out. 9 - 15knz lost. so gutted. and nothing i can do. stupid nz laws, never let a woman run your country.
i'm not one for flaming, but you are being irritating. multiple threads of it.
seriously.
if you keep it up i'll put on the hmt cap for a few minutes and flame you till i feel better.
i've just been shafted pretty bad (someone sold my skyline for 1200nz when i had 4k of suspension and sounds, 2k of labour, 3 - 5k of car, and countless hours/dollars making it mechanically mint. i dont need you asking dumb questions. i might flip out. 9 - 15knz lost. so gutted. and nothing i can do. stupid nz laws, never let a woman run your country.
12-09-2007, 07:59 AM
#9
1.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 247
Re: Turbo Manifolds 2008
hey dude i get what you are saying!
and im gonna agree with you. this Turbo manifold debate started when i was pushing 150bhp, so i thought if the car got more power the lag will dissapear, now the car is pushing 100bhp MORE and i still got the same problem.
I was told that the benifits of the tubular manifold's FLOW will make itself very clear and i will grow to love the tubular manifold. but that hasn't happend so basically ive got one Tuner's Opion vs Another's so what do i have to do.
i have to find out for my self. So now im looking for a Design that is gonna give me the balance of both manifold design's.
I know i was on your case about methonal injection(PS: im not asking any more Q's on water/meth), i understand that the car will boost more, even if i make 100bhp more im sure im still gonna have the weak boost response. thats why i was asking about ADVANCEING timing. the car isnt as competitive as it should be for the power it is making..
3) There will always be a compromise between low end, midrange, and top end power. Having all three is basically impossible. Pick one to focus on based on your needs or live with the fact you can have mediocrity over all three.
I know all 3 is impossible, thats why im looking at a hybrid turbo manifold any suggestion?
all i wanna do is get over the quatermile line FASTER......
and im gonna agree with you. this Turbo manifold debate started when i was pushing 150bhp, so i thought if the car got more power the lag will dissapear, now the car is pushing 100bhp MORE and i still got the same problem.
I was told that the benifits of the tubular manifold's FLOW will make itself very clear and i will grow to love the tubular manifold. but that hasn't happend so basically ive got one Tuner's Opion vs Another's so what do i have to do.
i have to find out for my self. So now im looking for a Design that is gonna give me the balance of both manifold design's.
I know i was on your case about methonal injection(PS: im not asking any more Q's on water/meth), i understand that the car will boost more, even if i make 100bhp more im sure im still gonna have the weak boost response. thats why i was asking about ADVANCEING timing. the car isnt as competitive as it should be for the power it is making..
Originally Posted by Inquisition
3) There will always be a compromise between low end, midrange, and top end power. Having all three is basically impossible. Pick one to focus on based on your needs or live with the fact you can have mediocrity over all three.
all i wanna do is get over the quatermile line FASTER......
12-09-2007, 09:45 AM
#10
1.5 BAR
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 752
Re: Turbo Manifolds 2008
1/4 mile = top end
check out the oem manifold on the bpt and f2t, its a basic good design for good spool and good flow.
for spool minimise volume
for flow maximise smoothness
i'd never use a log mani, but its tricky to make a good flowing manifold very compact. doable though.
i'd go for top end anyday. if you have spool issues, perhaps your turbo is oversized for your application.
like the other guy said you can only have one of the three things happening well. the other two will be less than perfect.
check out the oem manifold on the bpt and f2t, its a basic good design for good spool and good flow.
for spool minimise volume
for flow maximise smoothness
i'd never use a log mani, but its tricky to make a good flowing manifold very compact. doable though.
i'd go for top end anyday. if you have spool issues, perhaps your turbo is oversized for your application.
like the other guy said you can only have one of the three things happening well. the other two will be less than perfect.
