Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just got my manifold the other day in the mail and thought id dummy it up on my setup tonight.

Yes it is one of those horrid stainless manifolds however the price i paid for it means i could break 4 of them and still be in the clear. Suprisingly it seems relatively well made and a mate whos a welder (does commercial stuff) says the welds are suprisingly good.

My one problem is where it mounts my turbo. I dont have my intake manifold with me and its in storage however im just wanting to see whether this is going to cause me a massive problem.

Im quite open to cutting a hole in the bonnet or spacing it down however was then worried about what could happen when it rained etc or the airflow of the gasses would be interrupted.

Can people post their setups and give me ideas on what i can do. Ive thought about cutting down where the turbo is mounted

Engine is rb30det (r32) with a .82 GT3540r. I have tried to fit it on my stock manfold and because of the wastegate this is the best option

post-21312-1170414414.jpg

post-21312-1170414561.jpg

Edited by SirRacer
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154595-top-mount-manifold/
Share on other sites

Engine is rb30det (r32) with a .82 GT3540r. I have tried to fit it on my stock manfold and because of the wastegate this is the best option

isnt the stock exh. manifold a very big power restrictor? i'm running 450hp+ RB25DET and i guess that this is limiting the power and also the turbo response...

.

I don't think that manifold/turbo combo would even come close to clearing the 32 bonnet on a 20 or 25, let alone a 30.

Even chopping a couple of inches out of the collector will be borderline for clearance (maybe a bulge in the bonnet would clear it though).

For a turbo of that size on a high engine i really think you need to consider low mount options like the hks cast manifolds to fit it in a 32.

when i brought the thing i knew it would be high but unless you really have an engine to mount it on you dont really have any ideas

im not bothering with the stock manifold as there is no where there where i can plumb in an external with descent flow and im not prepared to cut into the comp housing. a spacer pushed the turbo basically into the side of the strut tower

where are some links of the other ones?

i find the "xs-power" ebay ones to be very well positioned. im usind one. from sss-autochrome

this one here is stamped xspower yet they look the same. ss autochrome dont do the top mounted ones anymore

http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-Me-Motors/C.../p-34161484.htm

my brother is putting his gt35r onto his rb30 and i think this is a far better option (see pics)

the reason is that the thicker cast iron manifold will keep the heat in with less radiance, which promotes quicker spool as the energy is still very high inside the manifold

thin walled stainless steel radiate too much heat and in turn a bit of energy is lost. Also, the longer the runners the more distance there is for the exhaust gas to radiate heat along its length = more energy lost. The last thing you want is increased lag with a turbo this size combined with a relatively low rev limit of the 30.

the pics show the standard rb30 cast manifold which has been power ported and modified to accept an external gate. Keeps it a low mount and able to fit between the strut towers.

post-10672-1170463539.jpg

post-10672-1170463552.jpg

thats an rb30 manifold and the skyline ones are much different and there really isnt any possible area to tap into which will have even flow

can a few people post some pics of top mount setups to give me an idea on whether modifying this manifold will possibly work.

if you look at some of the pics the collectors finish and then there is the kind of spacer bit which mounts the turbo up higher. if i cut that off and remount the flange lower down i should be able to stop the turbo another 5cms so then it will only be 5cms above the rocker cover, will this work?

this is a pic of how it could sit if it was dropped a bit

post-21312-1170576681.jpg

Looks too high to me.

If you could rotate it I'd say it looks like it's on upside-down - but I understand that the RB30 head stud pattern

doesn't allow for that.

Do what you've done - put the turbo where you think it should be, figure out where the turbo flange

should be relative to the exhaust flange(s). Then find a manifold that makes that happen.

If it's a split-pulse manifold you're going to have a great deal of trouble cutting the flange off and re-welding

another one on (because of the split-pulse - they are almost impossible to weld from 'the other side').

Regards,

Saliya

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • This has clearly gone off on quite a tangent but the suggestion was "go standalone because you probably aren't going to stop at just exhaust + a mild tune and manual boost controller", not "buy a standalone purely for a boost controller". If the scope does in fact stop creeping at an EBC then sure, buy an EVC7 or Profec or whatever else people like to run and stop there. And I have yet to see any kind of aftermarket boost control that is more complicated than a PID controller with some accounting for edge cases. Control system theory is an incredibly vast field yet somehow we always end up back at some variant of a PID controller, maybe with some work done to linearize things. I have done quite a lot, but I don't care to indulge in those pissing matches, hence posting primary sources. I deal with people quite frequently that scream and shout about how their opinion matters more because they've shipped more x or y, it doesn't change the reality of the data they're trying to disagree with. Arguing that the source material is wrong is an entirely separate point and while my experience obviously doesn't matter here I've rarely seen factory service manuals be incorrect about something. It's not some random poorly documented internal software tool that is constantly being patched to barely work. It's also not that hard to just read the Japanese and double check translations either. Especially in automotive parts most of it is loanwords anyways.
    • If you are keeping the current calipers you need to keep the current disc as the spacing of the caliper determines the disc diameter. Have you trial fitted the GTS brakes fit on a GTSt hub or is this forward planning? There could be differences in caliper mount spacing, backing plate and even hub shape that could cause an issue.
    • Hi there I have a r33 gts with 4 stud small brakes, I'm going to convert to 5 stud but keep the small brakes, what size rotor would I need?
    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
×
×
  • Create New...