MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

At Modern Automotive Performance we pride ourselves on the quality of our work and the performance of our products. With that said it is easy to see why we would find comments in reference to our products like the ones below very troubling.

Obviously some dyno testing was in order ;) Luckily, I was able to track down a local Evo owner and long time Buschur Racing customer that was running one of their manifolds and willing to be a guinea pig for this testing. Please see below for just a few of the variables that we kept constant throughout this testing in order to provide an accurate and truthful comparison:

1) Testing was performed on a Dynojet dynamometer with SAE correction and a smoothing value of 5.
2) Testing was performed in one dyno session over a matter of just a few hours yielding consistent intake air temperatures and negating any environmental factors. The car remained strapped to they dyno while the manifolds were swapped.
3) No changes to the tune were made during testing yielding consistent boost, timing, and AFR's.
4) Standard Buschur and MAP exhaust manifolds were used for this testing, no changes were made and no additional work was performed.

It is also important to note that two unbiased parties (customers of both MAP and Buschur) witnessed this entire test and will confirm that every precaution was taken to ensure that these results were not skewed in any way. Now on to the results, please click the graph for a larger view.


In conclusion, it is evident that the additional time and effort we put into our Rev2 ported exhaust manifold yields a substantial increase in performance over the Buschur racing manifold. While I have the utmost respect for David Buschur and what he has done for this community, it is clear that even with 20+ years of experience he is not infallible.

Disclaimer: If you intend to reply to this thread please do so appropriately and with civility. I understand that this is a passionate subject and there will be arguments posed from both parties. However, I DO NOT want this thread closed based on inappropriate or off topic comments.

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

The car used in the test was mine.

A few years ago I picked up a buschur ported exhaust manifold and SS o2 housing based on some advertised gains and since then I have been extremely happy. Credit NEEDS to be given that this is a good basic port job and the silver ceramic coating that comes on it is IMHO the most durable I've seen thus far. Seriously, thank you David for an awesome product. I've had it for TWO YEARS and its proven itself over and over, performing very consistently. I have a ton of other Buschur parts, so if someone wants to call me a MAP fanboi or nutswinger, they better call me a Buschur fanboi and/or nutswinger too ;)


Still, I have seen Bob@MAP's port work have had him do several parts on my car since; when I got my BBK he ported the turbine housing and compressor cover beautifully, and then when my head was off earlier this summer he gave it their stage3 treatment. I've seen his manifold portwork first hand and I've seen the various discussions regarding the different theories of porting various parts of the inlet and outlet tract and what makes more power, better spool-up, etc etc. Needless to say I was still curious.

When the opportunity arose to do a scientific comparison between the two, I was game and volunteered immediately. I wanted to be as thorough as possible and get as much data as we could, as I knew this was heading into passionate waters. I have a degree in Physics and spent a TON of time in scientific laboratories compiling data, plotting charts, and making conclusions based on the data. This is how I wanted to do this test, and that's what we did. I run mrfred's boost corrected, ecu-controlled boost control with the GM BCS and tuning was originally done by shane @ DB Performance. I turned down the timing across the board so as to let the car be in a very safe state, not right at the edge of the limits timing-wise (12 days ago this car put down 480whp on this dyno at full timing, under similar weather conditions). I think the graphs below show that we did our very best to keep things as consistent as possible from run-to-run.

All runs were performed with aquamist hfs-1 on, running a 50/50 mixture of VP M1 methanol and distilled water.

Actual data from actual comparo runs presented above:
http://imgur.com/mWIep.jpg

http://imgur.com/FQ3iF.jpg

Note that my boost numbers are slightly higher than MAP's, since we used different map sensors, and mine was not zero'd out before the test.
http://imgur.com/VLqvB.jpg

http://imgur.com/BLqzH.jpg

http://imgur.com/8y8fJ.jpg

http://imgur.com/zpajf.jpg

So there you have it. Depending on the run, you'll see that the buschur port job nearly equal but slightly out-done by the more extreme MAP port job, but is consistently bested by the MAP manifold above 7000rpm. On average, gains in the midrange were around 4-5whp and up top they were on average 8whp.

Full mod list:
Buschur Racing 3" TBE w/ bullet testpipe
Buschur Racing Intake w/Perrin filter
BR Race FMIC
Custom LICP
BR Upper IC Pipe
OEM IX BOV
AMS/TMS L19 headstuds
MAP Stage 3 Ported Head
Kelford 272 cams
GSC beehive valve springs
BR Ported/Coated Exhaust Mani
CBRD BBK turbo
MAP ported/coated turbine housing
BR SS O2 Housing
BR Ported Intake Manifold w/ EGR delete
BR 65MM TB
Walbro 255HP fuel pump
4x Kracka Vent setup w/ ebay catch-can
Buschur dipstick retention spring
Aquamist HFS-1 Alky Injection Kit (1.0 + .9mm jets)
FIC 1050cc injectors
GM BCS
Evo X MAP sensor
Innovative LC-1
GM IAT
Tephra v7t6 ROM w/EGT Elim, Direct boost mods

In the end, I left the MAP manifold on my car. Being an impartial (but loyal) average car guy, I want the part on my car that makes the most power. IMHO, the MAP manifold consistently makes more power. I saw it with my own eyes, felt it on my own car. The buschur unit has served me well and I would recommend it to anyone if the MAP manifold was out of stock.

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

What Forum were the original comments made on? I am curious to see what others around the country had to say before and after.

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

EvoM

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

thanks, I'll have to check it out.

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

It's a CF, as usual :)

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

cf?

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

I would assume cluster fuck? Since it involves EvoM.

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

Yes, that.

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

http://forums.evolutionm.net/evo-dyn...s-try-2-a.html

Wow, what drama over there, its as bad as MNSC for christ sake. I did however enjoy this comment:

I would say that pretty much sums up what kind of a business man David Buschur is.

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

It would have been nice to see the comparison to a stock manifold also. I am not in the market to purchase on of these but I like to get an idea whether some of these mods are worth the money. I like to look at is as a $/hp deal. Maybe there was a comparison Buschur to stock??? No time to research.

Good job.

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

I posted this on evoM and it turned it a decent discussion for a while, then went to crap, then eventually (apparently) got deleted. I never noticed, bitched, and re-posted it. I'm still happy with this manifold, Bob@MAP does top-notch port work.

http://forums.evolutionm.net/evo-dyn...ml#post7779409

Re: MAP vs Buschur: Ported Exhaust Manifold Dyno Results
 

Damn, I hate reading DynoJet Graphs compared to DD Graphs.