equal lenght manifold and turbo.
06-14-2005, 02:34 PM
#21
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 279
I'm going to bust a nut with all this talk of turbo...
06-14-2005, 09:38 PM
#23
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 329
Originally Posted by turbo2liter
my manifold is not an equal length unit. Tubular is better than log regardless of the length of the runners because it directs the flow. Log manifolds have insane turbulence inside of them, think about it. Equal length is a step up from tubular, obviously.
I’ve gone back and cut and paste the topic of this post equal lenght manifold and turbo. Yes the post clearly states that I’m talking about tubular equal length manifold and how they are NOT needed with a sub 10 PSI, Camry cam engine. 
Now that you admit to running a flow modified LOG manifold.
vs an equal length tube manifold, I would suspect you really don't have any knowledge or experience with the conversion from log to equal length tube manifolds. Do we have a problem on what the word equal means?
Originally Posted by turbo2liter
NVS_TC - Where are you now? You stated that there are no gains to be had by adding a tubular to a stago 0 kit because oldman said so. You said I'm arguing but I'm agreeing with him. Why don't you come in here and debate with me. I never agreed with him, I said tubular is ALWAYS better than a log style,
Originally Posted by Oldman
What’s the big deal about an equal length manifold? This is a turbo setup you will NEVER have negative reverberation wave port scavenging like in a tuned length header. The only benefits are:
If this was a large cam or VTEC engine with near 300 degrees of exhaust while on the big lobe then yes an equal length manifold will give you some better flow isolation till the collector. This is a stock Camry cam read that as maybe a 220 degree cam.
If this was a 600 WHP engine, then yes the more isolated and channeled the flow before the turbo the better. As we are talking nearly 4 times the HP as the stock engine was meant to flow.
If we are talking bling.. yep equal length tube of snakes looks real good.
Now if we are talking street cars with pump gas and 10 PSI of boost. Um you ain’t going to see much I know I know the equal length “look” like the flow so well and channel the flow to the collector so well. But we are really dealing with a pressure pulse wave in a semi-enclosed container so really 90 degree bends etc don’t mean much. You really need to be looking at a much bigger cam profile and a much higher RPM range to start seeing BIG payback for a equal length well channeled manifold.
I would rather have a cast iron one that I know won’t bust, is quiet, and has some channeling of flow, but logs are OK and I’ll bet you will be HARD pressed to find anywhere in this wonderful world of the internet of a dyno run: log vs smooth flow equal length tube manifold yield much gains on a Camry type cam sub 10 PSI setup.
Now racing, big boost, big cam, big RPM, big turbo… I ain’t got a clue.
If this was a large cam or VTEC engine with near 300 degrees of exhaust while on the big lobe then yes an equal length manifold will give you some better flow isolation till the collector. This is a stock Camry cam read that as maybe a 220 degree cam.
If this was a 600 WHP engine, then yes the more isolated and channeled the flow before the turbo the better. As we are talking nearly 4 times the HP as the stock engine was meant to flow.
If we are talking bling.. yep equal length tube of snakes looks real good.
Now if we are talking street cars with pump gas and 10 PSI of boost. Um you ain’t going to see much I know I know the equal length “look” like the flow so well and channel the flow to the collector so well. But we are really dealing with a pressure pulse wave in a semi-enclosed container so really 90 degree bends etc don’t mean much. You really need to be looking at a much bigger cam profile and a much higher RPM range to start seeing BIG payback for a equal length well channeled manifold.
I would rather have a cast iron one that I know won’t bust, is quiet, and has some channeling of flow, but logs are OK and I’ll bet you will be HARD pressed to find anywhere in this wonderful world of the internet of a dyno run: log vs smooth flow equal length tube manifold yield much gains on a Camry type cam sub 10 PSI setup.
Now racing, big boost, big cam, big RPM, big turbo… I ain’t got a clue.
Originally Posted by turbo2liter
regardless of what performance you can get out of a log. I said for 6-8psi, log is probably fine (what oldman said), then oldman decided to turn south and go into Honda kits and a/c and this other junk to avoid the topic at hand.
, and for you, I have included the full cut and paste above, was the usefulness of an equal length manifold on a stock cam, sub 10 PSI engine. It is your bud that found a dyno run “proving” that this was not so, a dyno run that is flawed for so so many reason from an engine that I’ve already listed on the original post as one that COULD benefit from an equal length manifold. So yes please stick to the topic and that is once again the benefits of an equal length manifold on a stock Camry cam, 10 PSI engine for say $1000 vs just upgrading to a stage 1 ZPI package that has been dyno tested at +100 WHP. 
06-15-2005, 12:15 AM
#24
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 219
I guess we had a good discussion then 
Also, you never replied to my PM, oldman.
Also, you never replied to my PM, oldman.
06-15-2005, 01:33 AM
#25
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 329
Originally Posted by seen4ever
1. the first post made by Full-Race wasn't performed by a vendor in the first place. Evans Tuning in PA performed all the tests independently. Sure the vendor put the post up, but hell it showed that they had made a manifold which outperformed a log style manifold by 68whp. I think any vendor would do this.
When I get that SIMPLE answer then we can continue on.
06-15-2005, 01:53 AM
#26
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 164
Originally Posted by oldman
There is no need to “debate” as I can cut right to the chase: Do you believe that the base line 250 BASIC engine HP SAE corrected is what can be expected from a log manifold GS-R turbo kit + ancillaries at 10 PSI yes or no?
When I get that SIMPLE answer then we can continue on.
When I get that SIMPLE answer then we can continue on.
http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=959616
Here is one person i've tuned. he put down 238whp @ 9psi on the drag3 manifold. So i would say it would be more of a log manifold than the revhard kit. To me the revhard is almost a cast 4-1 manifold, where the drag is a log. All 4 ports go into the log which goes into turbo.
Next he went to a equal length setup:
http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1211059
I couldn't find his latest dynos, but I know he made 241whp@ 8psi on the same turbo with the new manifold, downpipe.
his old setup 11.9, new setup 11.7. Old 1/8th mile 7.85, new best was 7.41.
So from seeing his car, sure it picked up power.
I'm sure you don't agree with the original post of log vs tubular, but i think it goes for what you were asking. Yes this doesn't have much to do with scions, but the theory is still there. Not to mention the b16 has much milder cams than the GSR every has.
06-15-2005, 02:23 AM
#27
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 329
Originally Posted by seen4ever
I think 250 may be possible pushing it to the max. From my personal experience tuning car, I've seen this.
http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=959616
http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=959616
The link you have is for a B16 with a FMU, a KNOW pitiful combination at 9 PSI with log at 240 wheel HP or about 270 engine HP. IMO if this was a B18c it would have done an easy 260 wheel HP or close to 300 engine HP. The baseline dyno you have posted before shows ENGINE HP for the baseline log manifold at 250 engine HP
I will now ask you again. Do you think 250 ENGINE HP or 215 WHP is what can be expected from a B18c turbo, log manifold, chip tune, ancillaries at 10 PSI? Yes or No?
06-15-2005, 02:28 AM
#28
Senior Member
Scion Society
SL Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sanger, CA
Posts: 1,253
Kick em in the Nards!....
Wolf man don't have nards!............
Wolf man has NARDS!
Wolf man don't have nards!............
Wolf man has NARDS!
06-15-2005, 02:58 AM
#29
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 329
I will assume your answer to the question post is um no, that somewhere between 280 to 300 engine HP should be expected for the log manifold 10 PSI chip tuned B18c and thus the 250 HP figure was obviously a sand bag figure and thus no meaningful amount of “gain” can be construed from the 308 engine equal lenth tube header HP figure as I’ve show you TWO vendors with log manifolds that make about the same amount of HP. 
I have owned and run both the drag setup and the Revhard, which I was one of the first to own, and was the guru on the Honda board when the rev manifold was being designed.
Plus Raymond? Forget now came down with his young bride to see my car and his manifold run way back in 1996 ish. So yes I am quite familiar with the setups in question.
I have stated and it has already been reposted that I prefer a flow styled log such as the alpawerks manifold. Clearly this thread is in opposition against equal length tube turbo headers. To even think the cast revhard manifold is anywhere close to design, flow, or pulsation balancing of a merged tube equal length header is fanciful leap at best. These cast manifolds are flow styled logs period.
http://www.alphawerks.com/alpha_frameset_turbo.htm
Great and he made 3 WHP going from a pitiful drag log manifold to a equal length setup at 1 less PSI, let’s give him 12WHP for the PSI loss OK? He now has 15 WHP from a VTEC engine going from a pitiful log to a equal length 4 to 1 header, are we clear here? I think so.
If you refer to my initial post (where I cut and pasted on the post above) I clearly said a large cam VTEC engine WILL benefit from a equal length tube manifold. Above I think we can agree that 15 WHP at 10 PSI is reasonable to expect for such a large cam engine. The question is how much would a 10 PSI Camry cam engine gain? ½ that? Less then ½ that? How about my 6.5 PSI Camry cam engine? ¼ that? Less then ¼ that? Not even measurable? How do you even know the gains were made from the “style” of the manifold, maybe they all came from an external wastegate install or change of location?
Once again my intial musing would seem right on the money and all these convoluted post merely have to stretch the parameters to show gain. I’m sure they will, but as it stands a Camry cam, sub 10 PSI setup will not show much gains going from log to equal length tube turbo header. Which is EXACALLY VERBATUM what I said in my initial post.
So for $1000 bucks you can get an equal length turbo header that may give 3 WHP to 15 WHP, purely speculative BTW.
Or a upgrade to a stage 1 kit good for 100 WHP
For $300 bucks you can get a external wastegate that ZPI says is good for 10 WHP.
I think I know where I’d spend the extra $1000.00
your answer to the question post is um no, that somewhere between 280 to 300 engine HP should be expected for the log manifold 10 PSI chip tuned B18c and thus the 250 HP figure was obviously a sand bag figure and thus no meaningful amount of “gain” can be construed from the 308 engine equal lenth tube header HP figure as I’ve show you TWO vendors with log manifolds that make about the same amount of HP. I have owned and run both the drag setup and the Revhard, which I was one of the first to own, and was the guru on the Honda board when the rev manifold was being designed.
Plus Raymond? Forget now came down with his young bride to see my car and his manifold run way back in 1996 ish. So yes I am quite familiar with the setups in question.I have stated and it has already been reposted that I prefer a flow styled log such as the alpawerks manifold. Clearly this thread is in opposition against equal length tube turbo headers. To even think the cast revhard manifold is anywhere close to design, flow, or pulsation balancing of a merged tube equal length header is fanciful leap at best. These cast manifolds are flow styled logs period.
http://www.alphawerks.com/alpha_frameset_turbo.htm
Originally Posted by seen4ever
Here is one person i've tuned. he put down 238whp @ 9psi on the drag3 manifold. So i would say it would be more of a log manifold than the revhard kit. To me the revhard is almost a cast 4-1 manifold, where the drag is a log. All 4 ports go into the log which goes into turbo.
Next he went to a equal length setup:
http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1211059
I couldn't find his latest dynos, but I know he made 241whp@ 8psi on the same turbo with the new manifold, downpipe.
Next he went to a equal length setup:
http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1211059
I couldn't find his latest dynos, but I know he made 241whp@ 8psi on the same turbo with the new manifold, downpipe.
If you refer to my initial post (where I cut and pasted on the post above) I clearly said a large cam VTEC engine WILL benefit from a equal length tube manifold. Above I think we can agree that 15 WHP at 10 PSI is reasonable to expect for such a large cam engine. The question is how much would a 10 PSI Camry cam engine gain? ½ that? Less then ½ that? How about my 6.5 PSI Camry cam engine? ¼ that? Less then ¼ that? Not even measurable? How do you even know the gains were made from the “style” of the manifold, maybe they all came from an external wastegate install or change of location?
Once again my intial musing would seem right on the money and all these convoluted post merely have to stretch the parameters to show gain. I’m sure they will, but as it stands a Camry cam, sub 10 PSI setup will not show much gains going from log to equal length tube turbo header. Which is EXACALLY VERBATUM what I said in my initial post.
So for $1000 bucks you can get an equal length turbo header that may give 3 WHP to 15 WHP, purely speculative BTW.
Or a upgrade to a stage 1 kit good for 100 WHP
For $300 bucks you can get a external wastegate that ZPI says is good for 10 WHP.
I think I know where I’d spend the extra $1000.00
06-15-2005, 03:42 AM
#30
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 164
actually i think just about any honda engine with 10psi behind it shoudl be at 215whp, this includes D-series with vtec. fact of the matter is, its easy to do so if you have an engine that breaths good.
You keep talking about a revhard manifold, i think, well i'm too lazy to go back and copy & paste, but i've said repeatedly. The rev-hard isn't really a 'log' manifold. it has 4-1 designed chamber. Its just like the inlinepro manifold.
I think i've also said, that for the scion guys, its just not going to matter, as really you have next to zero choices right now. I mean you buy ZPI kit, you buy the better alpha kit or wait for the tubular scionspeed kit. Regardless you choices are extremely limited.
While the dyno of the white hatch didn't increase that much, he went from running 31 degrees of timing to 18 degrees of timing as well. As he went to a form of engien management. being able to control the engine took down some power, but regardless, he's running two tenths faster now, than he did before.
I don't understand at all how moving from an internal gate to an external will give you more hp. I always thought gates released excess exhaust gas, so if both cars are running the same turbos, same boost, and the internal gate has teh divide housing, then it wasn't increasing the backpressure.
Not to mention, the cost of the Neukins manifold on the white hatch was 500 bucks. While you wouldn't want it, as its not cheap. He was planning for a future build, where a drag3 ____box manifold wouldn't allow him to go.
You keep talking about a revhard manifold, i think, well i'm too lazy to go back and copy & paste, but i've said repeatedly. The rev-hard isn't really a 'log' manifold. it has 4-1 designed chamber. Its just like the inlinepro manifold.
I think i've also said, that for the scion guys, its just not going to matter, as really you have next to zero choices right now. I mean you buy ZPI kit, you buy the better alpha kit or wait for the tubular scionspeed kit. Regardless you choices are extremely limited.
While the dyno of the white hatch didn't increase that much, he went from running 31 degrees of timing to 18 degrees of timing as well. As he went to a form of engien management. being able to control the engine took down some power, but regardless, he's running two tenths faster now, than he did before.
I don't understand at all how moving from an internal gate to an external will give you more hp. I always thought gates released excess exhaust gas, so if both cars are running the same turbos, same boost, and the internal gate has teh divide housing, then it wasn't increasing the backpressure.
Not to mention, the cost of the Neukins manifold on the white hatch was 500 bucks. While you wouldn't want it, as its not cheap. He was planning for a future build, where a drag3 ____box manifold wouldn't allow him to go.
06-15-2005, 03:48 AM
#31
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 219
The internal gate on the Scion was being routed back into the stock exhaust, while the external gate was being vented.
I'd guess this is good for more than 10whp, considering there are no internally gated dyno's produced by ZPI (there basic stage 0 package).
I'd guess this is good for more than 10whp, considering there are no internally gated dyno's produced by ZPI (there basic stage 0 package).
06-15-2005, 03:50 AM
#32
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 164
i thought they had divorced housings on the turbos, so regardless they were being rerouted...
06-15-2005, 03:56 AM
#33
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 219
I don't believe ZPI has done any testing on their internal gates. The dyno's they had were the stage 0 and stage 1, but with an external and fmic IIRC.
06-15-2005, 03:59 AM
#34
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 329
Originally Posted by seen4ever
You keep talking about a revhard manifold, i think, well i'm too lazy to go back and copy & paste, but i've said repeatedly. The rev-hard isn't really a 'log' manifold. it has 4-1 designed chamber. Its just like the inlinepro manifold
Let say for "grins" this styled log manifold make 1/2 the HP gain from pure log to equal length turbo header or 7.5 WHP on the Honda. How much is this going to be on a tC? Say 1/2 that or 3 WHP... just not enough to worry about.
I think we all agree a styled cast log is hard to beat, I said that first off, I said that in a ZPI post, I say it again. Don't know why guys are not going with the alphawerks setup. If I had time that would be the way I'd go!
06-15-2005, 04:02 AM
#35
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 219
Mod cheap, mod twice. How many of you will stay happy with 300whp ;)
06-15-2005, 04:33 AM
#36
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 329
300 WHP, LSD, tires, clutch, suspension. I'm good
I've been on the need for unlimit HP, the truth be know 90% of the turbo kit buyers will be happy at 300 WHP. If I wanted to go crazy, I would have go the RSX-S K20 and slapped it into a Honda Civic. If I wanted real power I would get a LS1 Camaro and shove in a LS2 and 150 HP of N20 and a 12 bolt...
I've been on the need for unlimit HP, the truth be know 90% of the turbo kit buyers will be happy at 300 WHP. If I wanted to go crazy, I would have go the RSX-S K20 and slapped it into a Honda Civic. If I wanted real power I would get a LS1 Camaro and shove in a LS2 and 150 HP of N20 and a 12 bolt...
06-15-2005, 04:42 AM
#37
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rolla, MO
Posts: 606
First i dont have a good idea of what all this is and what a log is either if someone can post a pic of each that would be helpful, but i do know what an turbo exhuast manifold is, so are these the different types or designs or something?
But i would like the comparison of honda engines to the tc engine to cease cause they are not alike since they have vtec and we dont, so i am confused on why so many comparing is taking place, and we wont know unless someone like zpi states something after some testing right?
But from what i gather, for about what ever gains there are from a tubular one, i dont think i would spend 1 g for it unless i had the money or i done everything to my tc and was bored.
but thanks for all the info and if someone can clear up some misunderstaning stuff i am having, i would greatly appreciate it.
thanks for your time guys
But i would like the comparison of honda engines to the tc engine to cease cause they are not alike since they have vtec and we dont, so i am confused on why so many comparing is taking place, and we wont know unless someone like zpi states something after some testing right?
But from what i gather, for about what ever gains there are from a tubular one, i dont think i would spend 1 g for it unless i had the money or i done everything to my tc and was bored.
but thanks for all the info and if someone can clear up some misunderstaning stuff i am having, i would greatly appreciate it.
thanks for your time guys
06-15-2005, 05:21 AM
#38
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,726
A log manifold generally is basically a hollow metal log that connects all the exhaust gases to the turbo. The turbulence is inside and is much like a stock exhaust header in that all the gases get shot together on a whirlwind adventure to the turbo. Tubular manifolds send exhaust gases from each cylinder on a very fast, very directed journey into the turbo.
The gains are almost comparable to the gains of the OEM header and an after market header: pretty little. On a turbo, since the length of the manifold is short already, the gains can only be seen at the limit of power and are rarely realized on a street with a lot of normal cars and normal people driving along in their normal lives.
They can be easily realized on a track with plenty of lbs of air.
And the comparison between Honda engines and Toyota engines? It's a 2.0 iV-Tech to a 2.4 vvt-i. Almost same technology and therefore, comparable.
The gains are almost comparable to the gains of the OEM header and an after market header: pretty little. On a turbo, since the length of the manifold is short already, the gains can only be seen at the limit of power and are rarely realized on a street with a lot of normal cars and normal people driving along in their normal lives.
They can be easily realized on a track with plenty of lbs of air.
And the comparison between Honda engines and Toyota engines? It's a 2.0 iV-Tech to a 2.4 vvt-i. Almost same technology and therefore, comparable.
06-15-2005, 12:31 PM
#40
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 164
Originally Posted by oldman
If I wanted to go crazy, I would have go the RSX-S K20 and slapped it into a Honda Civic. If I wanted real power I would get a LS1 Camaro and shove in a LS2 and 150 HP of N20 and a 12 bolt...
I will agree that for the vast majority of individuals in the scion community, 220whp would be more than enough. I know that alot of them are under the age of 21 and in reality, I'd prefer for them to have less hp, than more