Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

It needs to, otherwise there is zero point in making the manifold split pulse.

I was going the single gate route but got talked out of it.... No regrets!

 

  • Like 1
1 hour ago, GTSBoy said:

It needs to, otherwise there is zero point in making the manifold split pulse.

Won't quote names but I've seen a few from big brands appear to be split until both pulses are just going into 1x big 50 mm hole to the gate.

Best I've seen from one brand was an open scroll manifold with a divided T3 flange welded on top lol

  • Haha 1

yeah 6 boost did the spilt for the gate. 

I did all the fab work, trust me you dont want anymore pipe work under there. In saying that my gate is plumbed back in which makes it a bit harder. Screamer pipes are easier to route. 

But at the end of the day, what for - why make it harder and most $$$ for the same result. 

Edited by Deano 1
  • Like 2
1 minute ago, Deano 1 said:

yeah 6 boost did the spilt for the gate. 

I did all the fab work, trust me you dont want anymore pipe work under there. In saying that my gate is plumbed back in which makes it a bit harder. Screamer pipes are easier to route. 

But at the end of the day, what for - why make it harder and most $$$ for the same result. 

Also the plate thats welded up the inside of the pipe from the mani to gate flange - Hangs out past the end of the pipe, once you weld the V band onto the end of the pipe - you than shape the "spilt plate" to suit the back of the waste gate, so its sealed up. 

  • Like 1

This would be practically no different to the IWG housings, and i'd be pretty confident that it would be as good as twin gates.

What stumps me is when people do have a split pulse manifold and the single gate isn't divided..

  • Like 1

Given r32-25t has posted a dyno of his -5's with vcam on the same dyno presumably as this i thought i'd put them together for interests stake. 

Of course if ramp rate was different etc might cause comparison issues but i figure this is better than most considering its same dyno and a short period of time apart.

Book3.thumb.png.3a762751f695fa78934f0e0cff471c1f.png

  • Like 4

For what its worth, going on boost curves etc, i'd expect my 2.8/9.5:1 8374 to be to the left of the -5 curve. But its hard to say if street feel would line up on a dyno etc. 

 

But yes if i had another spare 5000 i'd get vcam.

Your car would belt the 5s just like every other back to back 5s vs 8374.

Plus a run in tune would be low on timing I'd like to think which should fatten up the middle a bit more. 

V cam on your car would probably just induce surge. With the hi comp and .92 it wouldn't need any help getting it spooling! 

Piggies car would start surging on the dyno as low as 2800rpm. 

So even if it had v cam on it, you couldn’t move the intake cam anyways. 

Edited by Mick_o

New EFR crew member checking in....

Manifold will be a 6boost w/ twin gates.

Wastegates will be tial mv-s.

Exhaust will be plumbed back via 3.5" downpipe

The EFR will be used on a SR20DET with a fully ported NAPREC head, big valve chamber with deleted squish pads.

ETA for completion is probably 6 months away.

Having been in a 2.8L EFR machine, the thing is completely mental and beats stock response with quadruple the power.  THEY ARE MAGIC fellas.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
21 minutes ago, sneakey pete said:

might plot that tomorrow arvo if i get a chance.

Note the one i already plotted was -5's with vcam.

 

As the pig said thats also the same v cam and rolling road not hub dyno like the -5 result. So theres a possibility that its a "higher reading" vs the rollers. 

1 hour ago, BakemonoRicer said:

New EFR crew member checking in....

Manifold will be a 6boost w/ twin gates.

Wastegates will be tial mv-s.

Exhaust will be plumbed back via 3.5" downpipe

The EFR will be used on a SR20DET with a fully ported NAPREC head, big valve chamber with deleted squish pads.

ETA for completion is probably 6 months away.

Having been in a 2.8L EFR machine, the thing is completely mental and beats stock response with quadruple the power.  THEY ARE MAGIC fellas.

 

 

 

Tell em the turbo son! 

1 hour ago, Mick_o said:

As the pig said thats also the same v cam and rolling road not hub dyno like the -5 result. So theres a possibility that its a "higher reading" vs the rollers. 

Because I was worried about the exact same thing I spoke to Jez about that and his dynos are within 3% of each other 

Sweet thanks for clearing that up ?

So lets call it "on par" you're at about 160kw at 4000.. The 8374 is at about 240kw at 4000??

80kw through the middle with 60kw up top. 

Thats quite alot more power EVERYWHERE! 

Plus all those nice things EFR delivers that the dynosheet doesn't show... 

 

Edited by Mick_o

I'm happy with mine also but coming from Tomei ARMS that wouldn't be a glowing endorsement :P

did take it for a bit of a moutain squirt last week and its great, no 'to large to be fun' issues... and (once i get e85/boost) will have a shitload of power for whenever else i want it

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, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...