Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

For $500 you'd want to be ale to demonstrate a significant improvement in power and/or response. Exactly what "significant" is is up to you to advertise and the consumer to decide if it's worth $500.

As he said himself, the benefit was less than that of a china manifold and he wont be providing that option to people.

Without a side by side comparison against a stock manifold, Stao will struggle to sell any.

"It performs nearly as well as a no name China manifold" isn't a satisfactory response to "what benefits can I expect above and beyond my current stock manifold?"

There is too much variation between "China' manifolds to be able to use "them" as a benchmark. Stock is the only acceptable benchmark.

Without a side by side comparison against a stock manifold, Stao will struggle to sell any.

"It performs nearly as well as a no name China manifold" isn't a satisfactory response to "what benefits can I expect above and beyond my current stock manifold?"

There is too much variation between "China' manifolds to be able to use "them" as a benchmark. Stock is the only acceptable benchmark.

Not too sure what you're trying to achieve? He did say he's not selling them because there were no substantial gains.

manifoldfront.JPG

manifoldrear.JPG

In car:

incar.JPG

Above is a China manifold, the one that I've had before Brae's manifold. and it actually worked exceptionally well and I've made 330rwkws of it based on a G3 on pump 98. This manifold is only $350 to get from China. It fits on stock position and bolt the turbocharger on factory position. This might be some thing I will be looking into in near future.

Well that level of gain Its not worth the $500, a cheap china manifold would've gained better result. I won't be providing that service.

Without a side by side comparison against a stock manifold, Stao will struggle to sell any.

"It performs nearly as well as a no name China manifold" isn't a satisfactory response to "what benefits can I expect above and beyond my current stock manifold?"

There is too much variation between "China' manifolds to be able to use "them" as a benchmark. Stock is the only acceptable benchmark.

If you open your eyes, you will see that his exact words were that a china manifold will produce a better result and that the $500 outlay is not worth the gains. Stao has clearly said he WILL NOT be selling those manifolds.

I suggest that you apologise to Stao, because you are clearly coming off rude and it is really uncalled for. Stao built that manifold for the benefit of the SAU community, and he himself admitted it cost too much for the benefit it gave.

Without a side by side comparison against a stock manifold, Stao will struggle to sell any.

"It performs nearly as well as a no name China manifold" isn't a satisfactory response to "what benefits can I expect above and beyond my current stock manifold?"

There is too much variation between "China' manifolds to be able to use "them" as a benchmark. Stock is the only acceptable benchmark.

Dude are you trying to be a deadset potato here?

If you open your eyes, you will see that his exact words were that a china manifold will produce a better result and that the $500 outlay is not worth the gains. Stao has clearly said he WILL NOT be selling those manifolds.

I suggest that you apologise to Stao, because you are clearly coming off rude and it is really uncalled for. Stao built that manifold for the benefit of the SAU community, and he himself admitted it cost too much for the benefit it gave.

Ok, I miss-understood.

I wasn't having a go at Stao, I'm a big fan of his work. I though he was saying it's not a worthy upgrade from a China manifold which I then assumed it was still on the cards for a stock upgrade.

There was a little bit lost in translation.

Dude are you trying to be a deadset potato here?

Settle on, it was a simple miss-understanding.

No need to start throwing insults.

Stao do you make or could recommend something for 4.2l diesel landcruiser?

I would use a ATR28G2 in a .86 rear housing.

and for the link earlier it appears to be the same manifold. Mine has been coated before I bought it, it was from a guy in Aus.

Ok, I miss-understood.

I wasn't having a go at Stao, I'm a big fan of his work. I though he was saying it's not a worthy upgrade from a China manifold which I then assumed it was still on the cards for a stock upgrade.

There was a little bit lost in translation.

Since its going to take another 4 hours to re-install the brae manifold. I might do further evaluation.

Using stock manifold, car made a one time maximum of 303rwkws with ATR43G3 none FNT turbo on pump 98. I will be install the same turbocharger back on and do one more run. Based on that I should be able to get the exact amount of gain if there is any.

Plus I've already got the result with the same turbocharger running the China manifold, so we can compare against all three.

Hey did you do anymore on the internally gated kando TD06? or did I just miss the discussion.

If it worked as well as internally gated garrets you would be onto a real winner.

I dont think he did an internal gate TD06, that would be interesting.

Into one of his RB specific housings, might sell well with the billet 20g wheel.

Stao you should set one up just to see. Im sure that you are capable of profiling the housing to suit, after all your FNT experience!

I think Trent had few internally gated runs and they were no good. Had a look at some of the internally gated SL2 and even T518z on NS and they are no where near what they are externally gated. They are not some thing made to internal gate.

besides all the Gx, SS1PU and SS2 units works well enough on ever manifold internally or externally gated, not much point re-engineer some thing's already been done.

But having said that I will drop the billet TD06 into .82 type B rear for curiosity sake when I have some spare time. Or let me now if any of yous would wish to trail.

Some updates for the externally gated series:

Great news as I've managed to find few suppliers whom can produce TD06, and T518Z housing and turbine wheel castings. We will have some of those housings brought in and finalize machinery work locally. I will also invest some time in making up CNC drawings for billet compressor wheels.

By the end of this month we should have billet version of both TD05H 18G and TD06SL2 20Gs in T518z (T28) housings, TD06 20 and 25G in both 8cm and 10cm in T3x turbine housings.

Price will stay competitive against Taiwanese producers, we will use our FNT turbine setups as well as custom wheel profiles archiving greater response with higher power level. All turbochargers will be made to order in strict time bases, great support and customer services as always, and we won't be blocking any one on ebay.

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

    • Yeah everyone always seems to refer to them as S13 wheels however they came on R32 Skyline, A31 Cefiro, C33 Laurel etc., and also came polished diamond cut or painted depending on the model. Congrats on your GTS purchase! I'd personally leave it NA.
    • In this thing about this 100% renewal energy stuff I hear no one really talking about anything other than power and fuel really Power and fuel, whilst being a huge part of how we use the billion year old Dinosaur juices, are only 2, of the probably thousands of things that we need to use it for in the chemicals industries for making nearly everything we use nowadays I'm all for a clean planet, but if we want to continue to have all the day to day appliances and stuff that we rely on everyday we will still need fossil fuels Whilst I do love science, and how it can bring innovation, there's really a limit to how far it can go in relation to "going green" As for EV's, unless your charging of your own solar panels, it isn't helping the environment when you consider the the batteries, the mining processes required,  the manufacturing process required, and how long a batteries (read: the vehicle) lasts long term If I was supreme dictator of the world, I would ban the use of sugar for fizzy drinks and food additives and use that for ethanol manufacturing, petrol engines would be happier, and people would be alot healthier  Disclaimer: Whiskey manufacturing would still be required, so says the supreme dictator of the world Same same for all the vegetable oils that get pumped into all our food, use that for bio diesel Disclaimer: the supreme dictator would still require olive oil to dip his bread in This would take some of heat off the use of the use of fossil fuels which are required for everything we use, unless you want to go back to pre 1800 for heat and power, or the early 1900's for plastics and every thing else that has come from cracking ethylene  Would I be a fair and just dictator, nope, and I would probably be assassinated within my first few months, but would my cunning plan work, maybe, for a while, maybe not Meh, in the end in an over opinionated mildly educated arsehole typing out my vomit on my mobile phone, which wouldn't be possible without fossil fuels And if your into conspiracies, we only need the fossil fuels to last until a meteor hits, or thermonuclear annihilation, that would definitely fix our need for fossil fuels for manufacturing and power issues for quite some time  Meh, time for this boomer to cook his lunch on his electric stove and then maybe go for a drive in my petrol car, for fun    
    • It really helps that light duty vehicles have absolutely appalling average efficiency due to poor average load. Like 25% average brake thermal efficiency when peak is somewhere around 38% these days. So even a 60% BTE stationary natural gas plant + transmission and charging losses still doing much better with an EV than conventional ICE. And that's before we get into renewables or "low carbon nonrenewable" nuclear which makes it a no-brainer, basically. In commercial aircraft or heavy duty diesel pulling some ridiculous amount of weight across a continent the numbers are much more difficult to make work. I honestly think in 5-10 years we will still be seeing something like the Achates opposed piston diesels in most semi trucks running on a blend of renewable/biodiesel. Applications where the energy density of diesel is just too critical to compromise. CARB is running trials of those engines right now to evaluate in real world drayage ops, probably because they're noticing that the numbers just don't work for electrification unless our plan is to make glorified electric trains with high voltage wires running along every major highway and only a token amount of battery to make it 30 miles or something like that after detaching. Transport emissions is not insignificant especially in the US, but yes there's a lot of industrial processes that also need to be decarbonized. I agree the scale of the problem is pretty insane but EDF managed to generate ~360 TWh from their nuclear reactors last year and this is with decades of underinvestment after the initial big push in the 70s and 80s. I don't think the frame of reference should be solar-limited. France is not exactly a big country either. Maybe it doesn't work everywhere, but it doesn't have to either. We just can't live off of fracking forever and expect things to be ok.
    • Yeah, all the crude is used for fuels and petrochem feedstocks (pesticides, many other chemicals, etc etc). But increasingly over the last few decades, much of the petrochem synthessis has started with methane because NG has been cheaper than oil, cleaner and easier and more consistent to work with, etc etc etc. So it's really had to say what the fraction either way is. Suffice to say - the direct fuels fraction is not insigificant. Heavy transport uses excruciatingly large amounts. Diesel is wasted in jet heaters in North American garages and workshops, thrown down drill holes in quarries, pissed all over the wall to provide electricity to certain outback communities, etc etc. Obviously road transport, and our pet project, recreational consumption camouflaged as road transport, is a smaller fraction of the total liquid HC consumption again. If you're talking aboust Aussie cars' contribution to the absolute total CO2 production of the country, then of course our share of the cubic mile of coal that is used for power generation, metallurgy, etc adds up to a big chunk. Then there is the consumption of timber. Did you know that the production of silicon metal, for example, is done in Australia by using hardwood? And f**king lots and lots and lots of hardwood at that. Until recently, it was f**king jarrah! There are many such sneaky contributors to CO2 production in industry and farming. NG is used in massive quantities in Australia, for power gen, for running huge water pumps (like, 1-2MW sized caterpillar V16 engines running flat out pumping water) for places like mine sites and minerals/metals refineries. And there are just a huge number of those sort of things going on quietly in the background. So NG use is a big fraction of total CO2 production here. I mean, shit, I personally design burners that are used in furnaces here in Oz that use multiple MW of gas all day every day. The largest such that I've done (not here in Oz) was rated to 150MW. One. Single. Gas burner. In a cement clinker kiln. There are thousands of such things out there in the world. There are double digits of them just here in Oz. (OK< just barely double digits now that a lot of them have shut - and they are all <100MW). But it's all the same to me. People in the car world (like this forum's users) would like to think that you only have to create an industrial capability to replace the fuel that they will be using in 10 years time, and imagine that everyone else will be driving EVs. And while the latter part of that is largely true, the liquid HC fuel industry as a whole is so much more massive than the bit used for cars, that there will be no commercial pressure to produce "renewable" "synthetic" fuels just for cars, when 100x that much would still be being burnt straight from the well. You have to replace it all, or you're not doing what is required. And then you get back to my massive numbers. People don't handle massive numbers at all well. Once you get past about 7 or 8 zeros, it becomes meaningless for most people.
×
×
  • Create New...