Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

Well testing is all done.

I think Jordan said he'd put the graphs together tomorrow but it was pretty interesting to say the least.

The most interesting part of the manifold that is staying on my car was that my track tune which dyno'd last october at 570whp/455wtq made 562whp/465wtq...but last time it was at like 37psi and this time was at like 32psi...5 psi less and close to the same power and more torque...

Once the tunes are tweaked I think this manifold should be worth some solid gains!

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

Damn you, more info! MAP long-runner?

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

Yes, I currently have the MAP long runner on there.

We tested 4 total...I will let Chris release some results tomorrow on the dyno graphs...but I guess if anyone has questions I will answer them. I don't think they have anything to hide.

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

In for long runner info.

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

Here is a little info....it's an overlay of boost logs from my car. One is from last October on the stock ported mani, one is from last night with the long runner. Both are my "track tune". The numbers should be pretty close as the baselines were spot on for my regular tune with the stock mani this week vs last october (within 1hp).

Numbers for stock ported were - 564whp/464wtq.
Numbers for long runner were - 562whp/465wtq.

So basically the same damn numbers at way way less boost...next step...bring the boost back up :)

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...BoostPlots.jpg

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

LOL

So how did the MAP long-runner compare vs. the FiD and MAP short-runner?

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

I could post boost plots of all of them if you want. I don't have all the dyno graphs yet though so it will be tough to say numbers wise.

The FID did provide the least amount of gain over any of the manifolds on the normal tune. But boost was a tad lower. still not near as low as the long runner though.

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

FWIW when we were tuning my car on the first pull made almost the exact same power as it did last summer, ~340whp, but at only 20psi vs the 28psi it ran last summer. When we turned the boost back up the car hit 400, but with more taper i.e. more to go.

High hopes for this retune are certainly worth having!

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

So basically exactly what I am seeing ;)

I might be trying your MBC/3 port setup to reduce wastegate duty cycle up top to see if we can get more outta it. I asked Shane what he thought was the best option, MBC, Forge wga (which i know he hates, but has a 25psi spring) or cranking down my blouch one more on the preload as it has lots of thread for preloading.

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

well here are general spool numbers. I don't have the numbers to go with each of these runs so its hard to say anything conclusively, but here are the rough spool numbers. (I kinda chose them at random from the groups of runs).

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...ostComparo.jpg

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

Any pics of this MAP prototype? When you refer to long-runner, that is Scheides' old one, right?

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

Correct.

No pics, I suppose I should've taken a few, but the prototype one might be a one off so I didn't want to take any pictures. I am sure Chris could get you a few pics though.

Those are .5 psi tick marks too on the graph, not 1psi...so you can see that both MAP longer runner type designs were quite a bit lower on spool up.

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

By lower are you referring to the initial boost spike? It appears that boost on both MAP long runner manifolds was lower throughout. Numbers coming soon!

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

These manifold comparisons are getting old. You tune for the setup, not for the part. You could have two identically built cars and the tunes between them will be anything but identical. It might be apples to apples, but comparing Red Delicious to Granny Smith is silly. One is good for eating, the other makes great deserts. It all comes down to the application and ingredients.

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

Yes the boost spike, which tends to carry power through the rpm range better. But overall boost was typically lower on the long runner designs on all the runs.

I could go for some apple pie, sounds yummy.

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

You're certainly entitled to your opinion (which I agree with to an extent, every car is different), but if you recall I was all but forced into this round of testing ;)

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

And imagine that, your product performed the best at your facility. Shocking. :)

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

If you want to get technical...the short runner that they don't make performed by far the best overall on the actual testing. Best spool/most power.

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

If that is the one listed as "MAP Short Runner" above, then it was also making the most boost.

Re: Dave's Evo X Build/The Life of Dave blog
 

Indeed, which is why this test can never be perfect no matter what you do.

You either change the tune to get the boost and everything as close as possible or you do what we did. I think both have advantages and both have shortcomings.

I don't think either is better than the other.

But the short runner is still running comparable boost to the baseline which is what matters.