OK who's making these?

[tim]

Originally Posted by Jakey

So I'm seeing two visual differences between your manifold and the Magnus:
-Cost
-Radius of the velocity stack

Am I correct?

You forgot the flange thickness, but pretty much nailed the rest.

[TheBlizzard]

Making a new manifold that is better than the rest is like trying to re-invent the wheel.

[95tsi]

Not to mention out of a small shop without tons of money for R & D. Looks good Nate. Let me know when you get the 2G version up and working.

[Jakey]

Originally Posted by 95tsi

Not to mention out of a small shop without tons of money for R & D.

So that justifies, at least from what I'm seeing visually here, the right to copy someone else's design?

[niterydr]

Originally Posted by Jakey

So that justifies, at least from what I'm seeing visually here, the right to copy someone else's design?

Hey, why R&D your own stuff when you can copy exsisting designs with less production costs? That is the name of the game unfortunally. The manifolds look interesting, good luck with future sales.

[Pushit2.0]

So its coated mild steel? Looks interesting, good luck.

~John

[BOVADDICT]

anyone reccomend getting one of these?

[Onefast99gsx]

I see 2 issues right off the bat with these manifold. The first is the flange thickness (which someone already mentioned). I think there would be too much stress on that thin of metal. My Magnus is at least 1/2" thick.

The second problem is the runners. A good design will have tapered runners and velocity stacks. Tapered runners will increase velocity due to the pumping action of the incoming air flow. When i used to port out 2 stroke engines, you always wanted to make sure the intake tranfer ports were larger at the base(crankcase) than at the window in the cylinder to avoid a reverse pumping action.

Here is a link for everyone to enjoy:

http://www.turbonation.com/intake.htm

While these ones on ebay may improve performance, they certainly could be improved.

[Halon]

I thought the tapered runners were to speed up the air along the walls. The air that's right against the walls gets slowed down due to it hitting the wall, but when the runners taper smaller, that increases the speed of the air, so that all the air molecules move at the same speed. That's what I heard, so it could very well be wrong.

Also, it looks to me that it does have velocity stacks. They aren't as rounded as Magnus's though.

[niterydr]

Originally Posted by Onefast99gsx

I see 2 issues right off the bat with these manifold. The first is the flange thickness (which someone already mentioned). I think there would be too much stress on that thin of metal. My Magnus is at least 1/2" thick.

The second problem is the runners. A good design will have tapered runners and velocity stacks. Tapered runners will increase velocity due to the pumping action of the incoming air flow. When i used to port out 2 stroke engines, you always wanted to make sure the intake tranfer ports were larger at the base(crankcase) than at the window in the cylinder to avoid a reverse pumping action.

Here is a link for everyone to enjoy:

http://www.turbonation.com/intake.htm

While these ones on ebay may improve performance, they certainly could be improved.

Velocity stacks aren't required in a FI application, its more benefictial in a NA environment.

[Jakey]

Decreasing the runner size as it gets closer to the intake ports will increase the velocity because of mass continuity. You have the same amount of air coming into the runner so when the cross-sectional area is decreased, velocity increases. The velocity of the air traveling through the runner can be looked at as a ) with the maximum air velocity at the center of the runner. The velocity at the very edge of the plenum is zero and increases in a ) shape towards the middle and then decreases again as you approach the opposite side of the runner.

[Jakey]

Originally Posted by niterydr

its more benefictial in a NA environment.

Explain please.

[tpunx99GSX]

Originally Posted by Jakey

Explain please.

Because he said so, bitch. LOL jk

[iceminion]

yeah, airflow in turbo cars is quite different, velocity stacks are for modded hondas.

personally, I would just go with a cyclone mani. On that note, I wonder if anyone has actual numbers on stock manifolds(ported/unported), cyclone manifolds(is it possible to "port"?), and sheet metal ones...personally I would send the $400 toward something else, like a bigger turbo, or better intercooler.

[Onefast99gsx]

Exactly what Jakey said.

Think of it this way too. Blow through a 2" diameter tube, then blow through a 1" diameter tube. Which one will yield you the most velocity? You should get this answer right....

[scheides]

So, anyone running one yet? Someone needs to go dyno their car, then go slap one of these on, then dyno it again. Let's see some numbers. 37whp was mentioned, but I want to see some real dyno graphs!

[Onefast99gsx]

And if it is 37whp, where is that 37 at??? bottem end, midrange or at the top? That's important too.

[npaulseth]

With the shorter runners, it should be a top end gain.

[Shane@DBPerformance]

Why would velocity stacks be more beneficial in an NA environment, besides the fact that NA guys are often trying to squeak out every last HP.

[Shane@DBPerformance]

Originally Posted by Onefast99gsx

The second problem is the runners. A good design will have tapered runners and velocity stacks. Tapered runners will increase velocity due to the pumping action of the incoming air flow.

In AMS's actual dyno testing they found more than a small amount of taper ended up hurting the power. They did use some taper though.