Don't post this thread to pieces please, just letting folks know that in my secret spare time I have begun modifying the 2nd prototype with serious porting of the runners at the lower flange end. Rough calculations put the cross-sectional improvements over 25% vs the low-rpm-torque designed runner ports of the prototype that was *dyno'd* recently. Next time it gets dyno'd I will double-check all the vac lines so that I don't have another leak and actually get a useable dyno readout.

And for fncks sake don't tell my mrs!!

Happy Valentines day EZ, everyone here loves you

Welcome back EZBoy we will keep this :silenced: form the missus

glad to have you back

Don't post this thread to pieces please, just letting folks know that in my secret spare time I have begun modifying the 2nd prototype with serious porting of the runners at the lower flange end. Rough calculations put the cross-sectional improvements over 25% vs the low-rpm-torque designed runner ports of the prototype that was *dyno'd* recently. Next time it gets dyno'd I will double-check all the vac lines so that I don't have another leak and actually get a useable dyno readout.

And for fncks sake don't tell my mrs!!

Sounds gd mate...

But how would we well your missus???
Maybe give Today tonight a call..
Nah jks

Good to see you post Ian :)

out of curiousity how does the new cross-sectional area of the ports compare to the OEM manifold lower ports?

thats one ballsy mother****er i have to say...all this after i go after an rpw plenum :doh: glad to hear this may come to fruition afer all.

YAY I am so happy, glad i didnt go buy another plenum from somewhere else, except now im spending the money on cams, but dont you worry ill save up and get the money again. Dont worry we will keep it our little secret.

Mike

I hope this doesn't land you in hot water mate.

Great to hear that this is now a skunk works project.

I'm sure that there will be a queue of willing testers when you can get these changes incorporated.


I hope that there are 2 dyno volunteers.

First to pick up the difference on a lightly modified car. Maybe exhaust manifold and flowed throttle body and CAI only.

Second on someone who has had head work, higher compression ratio and different cams.

Gerry

Hell yes!
Welcome back. :D

Hopefully by the time this baby is ready to ship I'll actually be able to afford it.
In the meantime however, a PM will be en-route shortly to arrange for a flowed TB.

Good to see you post Ian :)

out of curiousity how does the new cross-sectional area of the ports compare to the OEM manifold lower ports?

Big increase. Gain in the order of 30% cross section. The idea behind the smaller ports was to enhance low and mid rpm but from my experience with the big bore welded proto, any gains just aren't there with dozey cams like ours and the stroke:bore. So mid and top end it is. That, I can do!

Porting finished. Will be on car later this week :dancin: Let smoke some rubber!!!

nice. Good to see you back mate!! :D

You're game trying that with the missus, you should have seen the trouble I had when I bought the blower! :shock:

I'll have to get in contact with you to organise a highflow TB as well, just so you can look legit :)

So I can chuck my mood stabilizing medications (lithium, anticonvulsants, valproic acid, carbamazepine, valium, lamotrigine etc) to bin and be hopeful again?

My dog was getting reeeally sick of me sookying more than him. :shock:

Good to hear EzBoy! Reckon get one ready for me before my hol trip in 2 weeks....? Oupss, didn't mean to place any pressure there. :cool:

Looks like I'll hook up some dyno time with a Ralliart in the near future. Finished milling the ports last night. Has opened the runners up very substantially.

Honestly I can produce a manifold for anyone right now, depends if people want dyno results. The problem with the dyno is that is doesn't show: Fuel economy, throttle response, engine smoothness, driveability, etc. The sort of stuff that makes or breaks a daily driver.

Will keep folks updated on the dyno run, may even snap and do it locally.

I would be interested in Dyno results, more so for the power curve, rather than the peak output.

You see, I have two options, do some head, cam work, than add your manifold and get a retune, or, hunt round for a second hand Sprintex unit.

Both have positives, both also have negatives. So a base, of what NA can achieve, would be great :D

HI EZ boy


How much would it be if we wanted one now.

This is for the peformance orientated person.

Have you thought of doing a manifold with the plenum cut in the middle, having the plenums tapered down towards the last cylinder in the line for added flow and to make sure it's not missing out on air or velocity and using a twin throttle body setup?

Or do a similar thing to RPW but instead of having twin's on each side with the air hitting each other in the same plenum, have 2 seperate plenums but without the tapering part, which would be easier to make.

But saying that I'm not the one making it, I can see problems occuring for people with standard computers but like I said, performance orientated persons.

So I can chuck my mood stabilizing medications (lithium, anticonvulsants, valproic acid, carbamazepine, valium, lamotrigine etc) to bin

Don't bin it! I know a chick who could use it!! lol

There are lots of options for high rpm peak power - larger plenum, larger TBs, multiple TBs, shorter runners, larger runners etc etc. But as you said; forget about the standard computer handling it. Tapering the plenum has advantages but loses resonance tuning as the plenum back wall is not an even distance from each cylinder.

People need to remember that chasing top end and big hp numbers on natch asp will give you a car that can't move below 2500rpm (all we need is a BIGGER flat spot :doubt: ) and dreadful fuel economy.

This particular plenum was designed to be a bolt-on for daily drivers with a 'strip' VIP pass when necessary. Both of which it will do very well.


This is for the peformance orientated person.

Have you thought of doing a manifold with the plenum cut in the middle, having the plenums tapered down towards the last cylinder in the line for added flow and to make sure it's not missing out on air or velocity and using a twin throttle body setup?

Or do a similar thing to RPW but instead of having twin's on each side with the air hitting each other in the same plenum, have 2 seperate plenums but without the tapering part, which would be easier to make.

But saying that I'm not the one making it, I can see problems occuring for people with standard computers but like I said, performance orientated persons.

(all we need is a BIGGER flat spot :doubt: )



twin cam FTW!!!!!!!!!1111!!!!!!one!!!!!

twin cam FTW!!!!!!!!!1111!!!!!!one!!!!!

shift-one!

Ian, just don't get in trouble with your missus or we will NEVER see you again...

Good luck with the work, I can't wait to see final results

Ian, just don't get in trouble with your missus or we will NEVER see you again...

Good luck with the work, I can't wait to see final results
If he does, we'll see him again, he probably won't see his wife again though...

I like what you said about your last manifold, that it would make an AWD go like a FWD. That got my attention.

I like what you said about your last manifold, that it would make an AWD go like a FWD. That got my attention.

This prototype when it had smaller runners was letting my AWD keep up with my dads BA falcon ute. Certainly a much more refined ride than the lumpy ford's straight 6 (belongs in a truck imho). Should freak him out with the bigger runner ports at the lower inlet manifold plate.

With the old steel manifold (and no extractors), which had the same port size as the manifold does now I've milled it out, I was chomping 3.8L VN commodores with 70mm TBs and full exhausts. Not bad at all for my big dozey AWD complete with slushbox....

In short, it's a MUST-HAVE for an AWD. You can actually start to push the AWD system and fool around a bit esp when it's wet. Supercharged would be sweet as - but I'm a few $K short! ;)

In short, it's a MUST-HAVE for an AWD. You can actually start to push the AWD system and fool around a bit esp when it's wet.

See that lil marketing ploy just subtlely tucked in there :)

A marketing ploy that's working - from my point of view. AWD and more acceleration would be the best of all worlds to me.

Forgot I didn't have my manifold on today and nearly got squashed under a 4by!! Fnck. The look from the mrs set the mood for the next 15minutes :redface:


UPDATE:

I'm waiting for Tonba or gas-hed to get in touch with me so we can get some on-car work done again. So if you're sitting next to one of these guys give them a smack in the arm and hand them a phone or the keyboard :cool:

Forgot I didn't have my manifold on today and nearly got squashed under a 4by!! Fnck. The look from the mrs set the mood for the next 15minutes :redface:


Forget about the 4by just don't get killed by the mrs, we'd like to see this finished.:shifty:

Forget about the 4by just don't get killed by the mrs, we'd like to see this finished.:shifty:

hahah :bowrofl:


btw ez PM sent

hahah :bowrofl:


btw ez PM sent

Thanks. I've had plenty of offers, naturally, but I'm trying to honor my earlier pledges to these 2 guys. If I get anymore antsy I will most likely take up yours or another offer.

Cheers.

Thanks. I've had plenty of offers, naturally, but I'm trying to honor my earlier pledges to these 2 guys. If I get anymore antsy I will most likely take up yours or another offer.

Cheers.

np mate the offer will be on the table.

Ive arranged to fit this beast this evening. Along with my long awaited TB.

Kinda excited :)

There are lots of options for high rpm peak power - larger plenum, larger TBs, multiple TBs, shorter runners, larger runners etc etc. But as you said; forget about the standard computer handling it. Tapering the plenum has advantages but loses resonance tuning as the plenum back wall is not an even distance from each cylinder.

People need to remember that chasing top end and big hp numbers on natch asp will give you a car that can't move below 2500rpm (all we need is a BIGGER flat spot :doubt: ) and dreadful fuel economy.

This particular plenum was designed to be a bolt-on for daily drivers with a 'strip' VIP pass when necessary. Both of which it will do very well.

I am interested to see how these go between a car with and with an ECU tune hp wise. I even found the RPW plenum made my car lean on idle to the tune of 15:1. I would be betting that those that have a piggyback will get the best use out of these plenums to add more fuel where required. Keep up the great work Ezy.

Forgot I didn't have my manifold on today and nearly got squashed under a 4by!! Fnck. The look from the mrs set the mood for the next 15minutes :redface:


UPDATE:

I'm waiting for Tonba or gas-hed to get in touch with me so we can get some on-car work done again. So if you're sitting next to one of these guys give them a smack in the arm and hand them a phone or the keyboard :cool:


got a tj 3.5 sports manual handy mate!!! :D

Ian I do really hope enlarging the ports gives you the result you are hoping for, so much work deserves success! Evidently you have no shortage of local AMCmembers happy to take over testing/dynoing it, that must make things easier :)


I am interested to see how these go between a car with and with an ECU tune hp wise. I even found the RPW plenum made my car lean on idle to the tune of 15:1. I would be betting that those that have a piggyback will get the best use out of these plenums to add more fuel where required. Keep up the great work Ezy.

AFAIK AFR's are supposed to be lean on idle, I've heard of cars idling leaner than 15:1 from the factory.

As I understand it, In theory extra airflow would be measured by the airflow sensor, and extra fuel injected to compensate, as long as the value detected is mapped. Whether this actually happens corectly I'm not sure.

A possible issue of a large plenum is excessive lean-out on initial throttle opening, as I believe with our ECUs accelerator pump settings is an open loop system. Though my impression is it won't be a big enough issue to be tangible/worth worrying about.

As you know Ian my new engine will be a tester for your inlet plenum to be put on and run. It will be good to see any power/torque changes that it will do on this heavily modded N/A 3.5L, hope it gives great results :P

A possible issue of a large plenum is excessive lean-out on initial throttle opening, as I believe with our ECUs accelerator pump settings is an open loop system. Though my impression is it won't be a big enough issue to be tangible/worth worrying about.

Hasn't been an issue on any of the 7x prototypes I've made. One had a plenum with 4L volume!! All were on-car tested with a High Flowed Throttle Body. The TPS has significant control over the fueling, more so than many of the air flow meter parameters from my experience. Jason can probably shed more light on the matrix involved but it's not really worth discussing atm.

As you know Ian my new engine will be a tester for your inlet plenum to be put on and run. It will be good to see any power/torque changes that it will do on this heavily modded N/A 3.5L, hope it gives great results :P

Rest assured I have your motor in my sights :D

It's on-car and being evaluated as we type:

Results ASAP please :D

Depending on results, this may sway me to go NA, rather than Supercharged.

cant wait. i should prob start saving now.
getting my TB next week along with a piggyback.
think i might go down the N/A track.

prob with getting me unichip already it means i have to get it re tuned every time i get a new mod. :(

oh yeh. back on track.
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. YOUR DOING AN AMAZING JOB FOR ALL US AMCER'S!!!

Well i have been testing the manifold for the last few days :D and all i can say is WOW great increases all round cant wait till i have one of my own. I have let a lucky few drive my car with it on and they are impressed with the results. Will keep testing and keep everyone posted.

Cheers
BJ31OS

Well i have been testing the manifold for the last few days :D and all i can say is WOW great increases all round cant wait till i have one of my own. I have let a lucky few drive my car with it on and they are impressed with the results. Will keep testing and keep everyone posted.

Cheers
BJ31OS

i was lucky enough to drive BJ31OS's car today, in comparsion to my car (TH magna auto with just a lukey box and a CAI/k&n) the new manifold and it feels so much better then my car, pulls a lot harder, crusing at 60 is effortless and the noise! omg its insane! cant wait till we get it dyno'ed very shortly. But it has made quite an improvement over stock

After testing the EZ manifold over the last few days it would be hands down one of the best mods ive seen the increases through the rev range is great and so smooth. put a big smile on me face and it has a great sound when you boot it.

After driving B. nuts with my constant text messaging I finally got behind the wheel of it yesterday arvo. Now that's one quick car. I'd never driven a 3L auto before so the long gears were new to me. Luckily B. has removed the gear shift tab so you just move the lever and the desired gear jumps to life. Flog 1st the car starts hauling from 3000-ish, into 2nd tyres wobble again to redline. Still pulling solidly at redline which was weird when it's in "D" since you're expecting the car to 'protect' itself and shift sooner than it did.

Doing a comparison dyno run this friday coming to get some power curve feedback.

What was noticeable was how smooth the motor seemed and how effortlessly it revved. My TF 3L manual used to fight with me a bit for revs and would struggle after 4500.

IN SUMMARY

The manifold is now doing what I wanted it to do. Motor revs freely, idle is perfect, torque is strong from 3k onwards, despite my best efforts (and 7x prototypes) low torque couldn't be improved greatly but the motor does seem to want to hold gears rather than downshift at cruising speeds - even with the throttle being progressively pushed harder trying to force a downshift without being a hoon ;)

The manifold works brilliantly with the stock ECU and no other mods. B. hasn't even got a high flowed TB!

2 people who have driven B.'s car have placed orders for it without even speaking to me - so that is a big word of encouragement to me after the near 2yrs it's been since the 1st Frankenstein manifold which many of you would remember. :D


HOW TO ORDER


PRICE is normally $A850.00 + freight. I need a minimum of 5x orders fully paid by this coming friday to get the ball rolling and show the foundary that we're serious. As a one-time offer I will either give FREE freight to these first 5x orders OR $50 off for local pickups - available to ALL orders received and paid by this friday 7/3/08. The expected time for delivery is approx 28days for this first batch as I will be getting some minor adjustments made to the mold in respect to the enhancements made to the prototype.

THIS IS NOT THE SAME MANIFOLD THAT WAS DYNO'D ON CHISHOLM's CAR! THIS MANIFOLD HAS BEEN EXTENSIVELY ENHANCED. The manifold previously dyno'd was cast to try and improve low and mid range by using smaller diameter ports and a tapered bore. The combination of a vacuum leak during the dyno and top end being less spirited during on-car testing convinced me to mill the ports open to concentrate on mid and top end performance.

Understand that low rpm power has not been lost. When I say 'chasing mid and high rpm' doesn't mean 'take from here to give to there', it simply means the motors are oversquare and make power higher in the rpm band. No point fighting physics - best to run with it, so I have.

PM me with your interest, model and level of mods.

Freight will be a serious component so people need to allow upto $50 freight due to the weight. I will provide firm quotations for people in advance.

By all means bombard BJ13OS with specific questions on driveability, power, fuel economy, his wife's impressions, anything you can think of as relevant. I think he may be making the car available to Newcastle members for in-car drive/ride etc.

Interested. have pmed you.

I think he may be making the car available to Newcastle members for in-car drive/ride etc.


Yep anyone form newcastle or who wants to travell is more than welcome to have a drive feel free to shoot me a pm or a Text on 0401363238 and we will organise something.

looking good ez :thumbsup:
whats the final cost of these?
and if i was to get a hi-flow throttle body would you do a deal on both?

looking good ez :thumbsup:
whats the final cost of these?
and if i was to get a hi-flow throttle body would you do a deal on both?

Oops, fixed. The price is normally $850 + freight.

For a TB and Manifold package the freight cost for both items anywhere in Australia is FREE.

Extra Info:

* Each manifold is fully cast, so you can keep your stock manifold in the shed incase you ever need to revert to stock.

* Manifolds will be bead blasted for ease of cleaning and to enhance appearance.

* Each manifold is NUMBERED to ensure the item is an original and retains value.

* Will cover ALL magna 24valve V6 models from TE and KE thru to TW and KW, including traction controlled.

* Full fitting instructions will be provided.

IMPORTANT:

EGR is not supported. Most extractors do not support EGR so the manifold is technically no more or less legal than extractors. Feel free to modify the manifold to your hearts content if you want EGT attached or if you want a larger TB etc etc.

4x Takers in 1hr, I'm blown away. Thanks guys. If there are more than the minimum 5 I will extend the offer until friday 7th March for full payment along with the discounted offer. :thumbsup:

4x Takers in 1hr, I'm blown away. Thanks guys. If there are more than the minimum 5 I will extend the offer until friday 7th March for full payment along with the discounted offer. :thumbsup:

4 already? damn that is quick!

Thought I might do a nice write up for you guys to give you a bit more information
Sorry about the long post… but it’s worth the read.


RPM and SHIFTING
Test done on 3ltr auto
Have noticed the car will rev to redline in 1st, 2nd and 3rd gear. Haven’t gone close to 4th yet as 3rd is already well over the speed limit where the car would NOT do that before. In doing this the car also revs to redline smoothly and without any hassles at all. I have also noticed a nice increase through the rev range especially around 3000 RPM. It also downshifts gears a lot nicer whereas before it use to hold its gears on the downshift, now it just freely downshifts i.e. 60kms/h is about 1500 revs.

FUEL ECONOMY
As I don’t have a trip meter I have found this a little hard to find out and this is only my opinion. Usually once my tank goes to half full I can only get around 100 – 150 Kms to that last half. Using the manifold and giving the car hell seems to be getting more kms in that last ½. To me fuel economy has improved. If you have a trip metre you may be able to recognize this, but unfortunately I don’t have one.

FITTING
Well what can I say? 1 hour?? If that. Removal of old manifold consists of the throttle body = 5 bolts (one on back attaching to block), manifold itself = 5 bolts, accelerator cable = 2 bolts, the old manifold mounts that attach to the block = 3 bolts.. these have no affects on the running of the engine and have to be moved and don’t attach to the new manifold. So all up it took me around an hour if that. There are also a few screwed on parts on the old manifold. These get unscrewed and screwed back onto the new manifold in the same spots.

DIFFERENT FINDINGS
Some of you may know this if you have an auto, when you speed up and take your foot off the accelerator and then put it down again, your car will sometimes rev and then chunk into gear. Since having the manifold I haven’t had this issue at all which I find great no more unnecessary revving.


SOUND
Starting the car in the morning, the manifold creates a beautiful sound from the engine. Also a nice deeper note from the exhaust and also amazing sound when giving the car a boot full.
All I can say for this is WOW


IDLE
Before I had the manifold, I had a rough idle. Since having it on I have noticed that the idle has definitely gotten smoother. Which my wife and baby are happy about, no more shaking at the lights 


OTHERS OPINIONS

Wife: “I never saw the difference in Brads car when he had his car fitted with the exhaust and extractors and never believed him when he said he noticed a difference. After him begging me to take the car for a spin with the manifold on telling me that I will definitely notice a difference this time I agreed.. And agree! There is a difference. Made me not want to get back into my 3ltr Magna. My car isn’t modified but I will definitely be in for one of these.”

Magna00: “I was lucky enough to drive BJ31OS's car today, in comparsion to my car (TH magna auto with just a lukey box and a CAI/k&n) the new manifold and it feels so much better then my car, pulls a lot harder, crusing at 60 is effortless and the noise! omg its insane! cant wait till we get it dyno'ed very shortly. But it has made quite an improvement over stock.”

EZ boy previous post
The manifold is now doing what I wanted it to do. Motor revs freely, idle is perfect, torque is strong from 3k onwards, despite my best efforts (and 7x prototypes) low torque couldn't be improved greatly but the motor does seem to want to hold gears rather than downshift at cruising speeds - even with the throttle being progressively pushed harder trying to force a downshift without being a hoon




I am happy and 100% confident in what I had said here in my findings and anyone from Newcastle, or whoever is willing to Travel to Newcastle, can shoot me a PM or SMS on 0401363238 and we can organize a test drive.
If you have any question please don’t hesitate to PM me.
Thanks
Brad

…P.S - EZ boy (you’re a legend!)

Next Project....

Inlet Manifold
... 2nd gen V6

:D

Ollie

i'll be interested in one aswell as a hi-flow throttle body
will be in contact soon ez-boy :D

i must say congrads dude very happy for you.
Im super keen to know what these would do to a ralliart :badgrin:

looking forward to the dyno readout later in the week.

i bet your missezzz will be happy when you start throwen thousand dollar bulks at her :bowrofl:

will wait to see the dyno results. but im blowing way to much money atm.

I'm starting to think my "highest N/A auto magna" title is gonna been gone before i can savour it:cry:
Nice work, good to see the results are positive.

Next Project....Inlet Manifold... 2nd gen V6 :D Ollie

As long as you can live without variable length runners.


I'm starting to think my "highest N/A auto magna" title is gonna been gone before i can savour it http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/images/smilies/acry.gif Nice work, good to see the results are positive.

Not unless you get a manifold ;) But seriously I expect to see better quarter mile and track results from people with more usable torque.



i bet your missezzz will be happy when you start throwen thousand dollar bulks at her

That'd be the day. I'll start by recouping the 3000 already spent, and then paying off the tab I've already rung up at the foundary that they seem to have forgotten about....

thats awesome stuff. When ever you are ready Ian, we can test it on the sports.

Great wright up Brad. your testimonials sound like something off of a paid presentation TV ad, lol, i loved it.

hmmmmmmm methinks Ian, you should try and find a larger TB that is compatible with magna sensors and make a run of manifolds to suit...

the one thing i have always thought badly about with our magnas is that they feel like they have a lot of bottled up power that could be unleashed by opening up our intake. TB and Manifold.

I have been driving a nissan for a bit now and they have 4 butterfly valves within the inner runners of the manifold on the CA18 that open up at anything over 4K RPM. And it doesnt feel like it runs out of breathe like the magna does.

abit off topic sorry. But i know of some1 who had a "RB30" throttle body on a 3lt Manual Te and was makeing the same torque as a Ralliart.

Sounds like this plenum is going to work well on my new engine ian, currently max power on the engine dyno is at 6600rpm. Hopefully this plenum and the 90mm TB that will be going on with it, will let it breathe well into the 7's that the motor has been built for.

I may need a couple of minor mods to the plenum though Ian, but i will discuss that over the phone with you.

Sounds like this plenum is going to work well on my new engine ian, currently max power on the engine dyno is at 6600rpm. Hopefully this plenum and the 90mm TB that will be going on with it, will let it breathe well into the 7's that the motor has been built for.

I may need a couple of minor mods to the plenum though Ian, but i will discuss that over the phone with you.
someone posted above you about a bigger throttle body for the plenium. Could you share with the community what TB you have sourced to suit the magna, i would even be interested for my s/c

someone posted above you about a bigger throttle body for the plenium. Could you share with the community what TB you have sourced to suit the magna, i would even be interested for my s/c

ive heard ego's running a mustang 90mm throttle body, but myself ian and brad were talking about this yesterday wouldnt be too hard to make an adaptor to fit this manifold to fit an aftermarket holley TB or eqivalent.

someone posted above you about a bigger throttle body for the plenium. Could you share with the community what TB you have sourced to suit the magna, i would even be interested for my s/c

It is a holley 90mm TB to suit the LS2 chevs.

Its going to need a fair amount of adapting fabrication to get it to fit and work (and im not 100% that it will work yet :shock: ), hence why im playing around with it on the stock plenum first.
If it doesnt work i know of a few people who have offered to buy it off of me for there HSV's

Here is a link to what it looks like: http://www.holley.net.au/pdfs/(2006-09)%20holley%20ls2%20throttle%20bodies.pdf

Great wright up Brad. your testimonials sound like something off of a paid presentation TV ad, lol, i loved it. Give him a break - it took a lot of prodding to get more than 2 sentences typed per post lol

The good thing about this manifold is the aluminium used welds very well. Cutting and pasting a manifold to suit larger or preferrably multiple TBs is easier to do than on the stock manifold. Even swapping sides of the TB is easy enuf. Eg: imagine you had a FMIC and the pipe came up the beltside of the motor.

Give him a break - it took a lot of prodding to get more than 2 sentences typed per post lol

The good thing about this manifold is the aluminium used welds very well. Cutting and pasting a manifold to suit larger or preferrably multiple TBs is easier to do than on the stock manifold. Even swapping sides of the TB is easy enuf. Eg: imagine you had a FMIC and the pipe came up the beltside of the motor.

Dual TBs FTW guys.

Yummmm

Dual TBs FTW guys.

Yummmm


FTW fo sho!!!

Awesome work EZ!!!! Very glad it's working out for you. :D


abit off topic sorry. But i know of some1 who had a "RB30" throttle body on a 3lt Manual Te and was makeing the same torque as a Ralliart.

I'm afraid if it was just a TB change then thats impossible. The 6g72 in the 3rd gen made 255Nm stock while the ralliart 6g74 made 333Nm via half a litre higher capacity, upgraded cams and importaintlly....higher compression.

I don't see how changing the stock 65mm throttle body for an RB30 55mm (yes 10mm SMALLER) throttle body is going to give 78Nm of torque. lol

To get close to 80Nm torque increase in a 6g72 will require either forced induction or some serious NA work.

TB upgrades work well ONLY when they are a restriction in the system.

Haaahhh! Finally! Congrats Ian.
I was starting to sweat in horror a week ago for not hearing further news. Now I can sleep again. :D
Unfortunately, I'll be on holidays this Wed (driving to QLD) and cannot place orders etc now.
Looks like for once I have a real reason to return back home....
Until then, all the best and I'll get back to the issue after Easter.

The good thing about this manifold is the aluminium used welds very well. Cutting and pasting a manifold to suit larger or preferrably multiple TBs is easier to do than on the stock manifold. Even swapping sides of the TB is easy enuf. Eg: imagine you had a FMIC and the pipe came up the beltside of the motor.


Great to hear... now are the bolt holes the same on the inlet manifold for a 2nd gen v6.

i know the thottle is on the wrong side, thats why its great news its clean alluminium... i can relocate the TB, to the other side. maybe a good option for a 2nd gen proto...:badgrin:

I'll buy a lower inlet manifold and match port it to yours,(or even change the bolt holes to suit) whala instapowaaaaa

I'm all ears(eyes)... lol

Awesome work EZ!!!! Very glad it's working out for you. :D



I'm afraid if it was just a TB change then thats impossible. The 6g72 in the 3rd gen made 255Nm stock while the ralliart 6g74 made 333Nm via half a litre higher capacity, upgraded cams and importaintlly....higher compression.

I don't see how changing the stock 65mm throttle body for an RB30 55mm (yes 10mm SMALLER) throttle body is going to give 78Nm of torque. lol

To get close to 80Nm torque increase in a 6g72 will require either forced induction or some serious NA work.

TB upgrades work well ONLY when they are a restriction in the system.


Hmmmm DUNNO THEN lol

Cmon get the Dyno already LOL

Hmmmm DUNNO THEN lol

Cmon get the Dyno already LOL


will be dynoed (spelling ?)b4 the end of the week in a secret location

will be dynoed (spelling ?)b4 the end of the week in a secret location

Secret? What are you trying to keep the media away from this? :P

']Secret? What are you trying to keep the media away from this? :P
:bowrofl: hahaha nah its if everyone knows to loc everyone will pull in to have a yarn :P

:bowrofl: hahaha nah its if everyone knows to loc everyone will pull in to have a yarn :P

I can picture you guys getting billed for 7 hours of dyno time as the dyno run turns into the biggest club event for the year.

I can picture you guys getting billed for 7 hours of dyno time as the dyno run turns into the biggest club event for the year.

yeah isnt it nice though we arent getting billed per hour, 3 runs per car in shootout to get the best of 3. And at 54 a car isnt too bad a value

I should pop in and put you all to shame on said dyno day.

I should pop in and put you all to shame on said dyno day.

its on like donkey kong :bowrofl: i will have a secret weapon at my disposal!

:bowrofl: hahaha nah its if everyone knows to loc everyone will pull in to have a yarn :P

And suddenly 10hrs have gone and nothing has been done ;)

Each dyno run consists of 3 or so quick blurts thru the rpm band and the most representative average taken.

Looks like I can't get the time off but the dyno will still proceed.

dynod yet?

dynod yet?

no not yet friday dude less then 24hours away till we have it on the dyno making uber numbers!

uber numbers? i can live with uber numbers

Does anybody else have an issue with the way the dyno is being done?

Basically heres what I see is going to be dyno'd, correct me if Im wrong:

- 3.0L Auto TE - Bog Stock
- 3.0L Auto TF - with Manifold, Headers, TB, Exhaust, Fuel Rail Kit, K&N, CAI (usless on dyno I know, but still)
- 3.5L Auto TH - with Muffler

I dont see what the results here are realy going to show.

Sure they will show what a standard 3.0L Auto makes, and a TH with a rear box makes, but they arent going to demonstrate what difference this manifold makes as the TF is already reasonably modded intake/exhaust wise, and without a before figure, what is really being proven?

y not run the tf twice once with the ez manifold on once with the stock one on

Dont get me wrong, I have faith in the product (except the fact that I wasted about 3 hours with it on my car only to find it ****ed my TCL/EGR up and had to remove it again).

It makes me wish I still had my KE with no EGR/TCL, would have been a fun drive.

I have driven Brads 3.0L with the manifold on and it does seem to rev freely, but the 3.0L has always revved freely compared to the 3.5L as the 3.5 has a larger stroke.

Problem being is that driving a modded 3.0L and trying to compare it to my 3.5L is a bit hard, the 3.5L pulls harder from 0, and I dont often go revving my 3.5L to 4000-6000rpm to be able to tell you if the 3.0L revs better with the manifold.

Hopefully the dyno shows 4000HP ATW, then we will all be happy....

y not run the tf twice once with the ez manifold on once with the stock one on

Thats what I have suggested, but I also accept that swapping manifolds can be a hassle, so now Ill just sit, patiently awaiting dyno results...............

Thats what I have suggested, but I also accept that swapping manifolds can be a hassle, so now Ill just sit, patiently awaiting dyno results...............

if we get enough time we will see if we can do that, then the numbers will be more accurate in how much the manifold pulls.

Guys I agree with Gas_Hed.

The only credible dyno result is if back to-back runs are done on the same car with the factory manifold, and then the new one swapped over. If this is not done then there is no credibility and only wasted dyno time/money. Please do it the right way, for the sake of Ian and the whole of AMC.

It makes absolutely no sense to spend so much time/money on development and then not test it the right way.

Also I've come to realise bum-dyno counts for diddly-squat when the difference isn't massive and emotional investment is involved. Hell, I didn't even pick the missing 10 wheel kw on my test blat between my dyno runs.

I haven't finalised the dyno procedure yet with Brad yet. We ARE DOING a before and after because it is obviously relevant and logical.


This forum suffers a dyno mentallity. How many kw with this air filter and that exhaust. It doesn't matter a ****. Each component adds a little but in combination with OTHER component the results are compounded.

Eg if you will:

Stock 3.5 with a ralliart cam, rest of car stock. Instead of 155/317 it might crack 163/322.

But add extractors, increase compression, de-shroud the valves suddenly the power has crept upto 180/335.

Not every mod done to a car will increase PEAK output. Some mods might only improve the power band between certain rpm.

The manifold dyno might for example show a minimal gain at peak but might flatten the power curve out making the car very pleasant to drive rather than a peaking car that has to be revved constantly to get anywhere.

Consider these theoretical power curves:

I agree with you there Ian.

But the point that myself and Andy are making is that without a before/after dyno with only one variable (the manifold) then they results may be a little skewed/inaccurate.

We are not dissing the work/product man, just the perceived testing...........

So which curve'd car would you want to drive/own? Both have the same peak power.

Gas_Hed: this manifold has worked on TFs and TJs (mine), the TCL an it's interaction/plumbing needs to be followed up and a working solution made which is certainly do-able. You haven't 'wasted' 3hrs, you've put your hand up to help get this project accross the line and you will be looked after - trust me mate :cool:

Originally it was just appealling to not have to remove and refit anything by running a stock 3L vs the modded 3L. Esp after I forgot to reclamp a line on the prev dyno run. Would've been nice to do the Chisholm run at full capacity but nevermind. The smaller runners on that manifold probably wouldn't have shown up significantly down low on a dyno - which was the rpm band that manifold was trying deliberately to enhance.

That's why the manifold was re-ported and is now on BJELOS' car atm.

Have faith folks, this isn't a mod for me or to make me a big dlck (I like walking around the street and not having anyone know me), it's to give our magnas affordable options for power gains and driveabilty enhancement. If it's doesn't go to plan tomorrow and people want to flame me personally, then go fnck yourself, if you want to offer commiserations and words of encouragement, then thank you for putting your heart and mind in the right place. Be competitive on the track - not the forum.

Enuf said, gimme some dyno time!

Gunna be a nervous nights sleep :cry:

I agree with you there Ian.

But the point that myself and Andy are making is that without a before/after dyno with only one variable (the manifold) then they results may be a little skewed/inaccurate.

We are not dissing the work/product man, just the perceived testing...........

I agree, that's why we're getting off our humps and doing it properly, we owe to you guys and the rest of AMC. :thumbsup:

We were also considering getting it done in HP to eccentuate the curves variances which can be hard to differenciate sometimes.

i must say congrads dude very happy for you.
Im super keen to know what these would do to a ralliart :badgrin:

looking forward to the dyno readout later in the week.

i bet your missezzz will be happy when you start throwen thousand dollar bulks at her :bowrofl:

hey EZ how are going to explain all the cash rolling in now and the sudden success of the manifold , when you werent supposed to be working on it? :D

Gas_Hed: this manifold has worked on TFs and TJs (mine), the TCL an it's interaction/plumbing needs to be followed up and a working solution made which is certainly do-able. You haven't 'wasted' 3hrs, you've put your hand up to help get this project accross the line and you will be looked after

I guess I didnt word that correctly, It seemed like a waste of 3 hours at the time, but now I realised that without me "wasting" that 3 hours, then we would never have discovered the TCL/EGR issue, so in a way it was beneficial, just ****ing annoying in the end I guess.

I guess I didnt word that correctly, It seemed like a waste of 3 hours at the time, but now I realised that without me "wasting" that 3 hours, then we would never have discovered the TCL/EGR issue, so in a way it was beneficial, just ****ing annoying in the end I guess.

I hear you mate, this is the 7th manifold protype. 4x of the earlier proto's broke when I threw them at the shed floor :redface: . I think I've got the TCL issue licked too ;)

What really upset the mrs was the time I'd spent for no real result in the past, she'll be right this time. Maybe.

EZBoy I agree there are allot of people who take the final peak kW figure as a measure of the mods performance. But believe me there are many of us who understand it's the whole power/torque curve thats important.

Don't be disheartened now mate, you're near the end. We all want dyno for exactly that reason, we want to see the difference in power curves. When I did the 3.5 conversion, I only picked up about 10kW peak power, but throughout the mid range the power and torque difference was VERY noticeable, day to day drivabillity increase way more then that little 10kW peak change mattered.

Who gives a rats about the kW figure, its the torque curve Im interested in.

Also interested in the Modded 3.0L vs Stock 3.5L curve.

The manifold dyno might for example show a minimal gain at peak but might flatten the power curve out making the car very pleasant to drive rather than a peaking car that has to be revved constantly to get anywhere.


Agreed, the shape of the power curve is just as important as the peak figure. It's all about how much power is being made on average over the revrange. If all goes well it's possible to get a minimal peak kw gain but tangible midrange, especially with the factory cams. This is why it's important to get the graphs overlayed to compare the shape.

Neither me or Luke are having a go at ya, just wanto see that the testing is done properly so there can be no dispute over the results, good or bad. The problem with comparing runs between 2 of the same car is there are still lots of variables that can skew results. Apart from the cars themselves, things like different tyre size/compound/pressure can skew the results on a roller dyno.

Ian I wish you the best of luck, either way AMC loves you :)


Who gives a rats about the kW figure, its the torque curve Im interested in.


Torque curve is unneeded, power curve will tell the whole story. Any change in the torque curve is reflected in the power curve, after all power = torque x rpm. Plus on a dyno you don't get a torque figure comparable to flywheel ratings, only tractive effort at the wheels.

What the dyno doesn't measure is part-throttle response. E.g flowed TB gives more responsive part-throttle response but doesn't make any improvement at WOT output. Though obviously at the end the day most of us are mainly interested in the WOT power curve, nice throttle response is a nice bonus.

Also interested in the Modded 3.0L vs Stock 3.5L curve.

I'll see if I can dig up my old Dyno graphs, while both are modded, they had the exact same mods (and I mean same, I transfered the catback and intake across:P).

So we should be able to see the torque difference between the 3.0 and 3.5 if the graph resolution is close between the two.

...if you want to offer commiserations and words of encouragement, then thank you for putting your heart and mind in the right place...
...Ian I wish you the best of luck, either way AMC loves you :)...Agreed!

Good luck for tomorrow.
I'd like to go on the record now, before the Dyno run.
You deserve a medal for trying and for all the time, funds and effort you've put into this.

If you get the results your looking for (be that peak kW figure, power/torque curve, whatever!), I say... well done, congratulations and thank you.

If the results are inconclusive or disappointing, I say... well done and thank you. Oh, and congratulations for being the one to give this a go, I'm sure you learned from the exercise anyway.

Good Luck! :thumbsup:

This is awesome Ian. I really commend all the work you have put into it. I will definately be getting my hand on at least one of these babies in the months to come.


Chris

3x people have already pre-paid their manifolds and I will get one done for myself and AMC as I honour my earlier commitment. So a kw here or there does n't phase me - I know which manifold I want on my car. :cool:

As more cars are equipped I might obtain additional dyno readings with the cooperation of the car's owners.

I agree that seeing the numbers increase makes you feel all warm and fuzzy and gooes towards justifying the $ outlay - esp $850. Funny that a lot of people have paid upto $700 for extractors and shrug when asked how much better their car goes!

EDIT:
http://img230.imageshack.us/my.php?image=07032008005if2.jpg
pic of my car on the dyno
http://img220.imageshack.us/my.php?image=07032008004he3.jpg
pic of brads 3.0l with the manifold on
http://img150.imageshack.us/my.php?image=07032008007sv8.jpg
pic of brads car on the dyno

Results will be posted by ezboy later on this afternoon.

Results will be posted by ezboy later on this afternoon.
*starts refreshing thread*
F5!
F5!
F5!
F5!
F5!
F5!


Can't wait till Ian gets home and gets a chance to write up the numbers.

It's looking like a possibility for me to be able to actually afford one of these babies within a few months and I'm really looking forward to it. :)

I know the numbers, have done for hours, got a nice little SMS from Ian.

Im too scared to post because last time I posted in this thread my housemate (BJ31OS) had a whinge at me, so Ill just not say anything and you can all wait until either Ian or Brad posts on here, therefore avoiding getting beaten around the ears again if I say the wrong thing :D lol

I know the numbers, have done for hours, got a nice little SMS from Ian.

Im too scared to post because last time I posted in this thread my housemate (BJ31OS) had a whinge at me, so Ill just not say anything and you can all wait until either Ian or Brad posts on here, therefore avoiding getting beaten around the ears again if I say the wrong thing :D lol

correct. Ian has all the dyno sheets including mine so he will be posting haha

RESULTS:

WE MADE POWER, then lost it up top. Gained 5kw ATW on a 3L auto from 1750 - 2500 before it tappered off and lost 3kw at peak rpm approx 5000-5500. No wonder it's felt so much better to drive.

I think the results are very encouraging and the changes to be made, outlined below, will nail this for sure.

DISCUSSION:

Still it's showing it's potential when I get the runner diameters correct. I was able to make the foundary and put the verniers on the runner mold and their diameters are too small. Certainly smaller than I remember them being :redface: That happens when you've got too many fingers in too many pies.

The dual runners are working very effectively down low and providing steady, constant flow as shown.

The dynos were done back to back - no manifold 1st, then with manifold on. The ECU didn't have any time to learn each manifold. Anyone who's reset their ECU will atest that it takes a few wks for the car to 'find it's way again'. Also the motor was VERY hot after the 1st dyno runs. Sweet off Brads melon hit the stock manifold and sizzled into nothing during the swap outs. The heatsoak into the proto manifold was then so severe Brad was struggling to get the TB mount bolts in without burning himself.

Most importantly a baseline was established and I look forward to the 3rd proto being tested.

COURSE OF ACTION:

Increase the runner diameters to permit higher rpm air flow.
Increase the cross section of the runner union.
Increase the outer edge volume of the runners at the curve.
Improve port matching between upper and lower manifolds.
Improve the runner bellmouthing.

So there is more to do, a rework of the mold and I will pour another unit and retest. Should be able to bag it with my new measurements.

EXISTING PAID ORDERS:

It's upto the individuals concerned it they wish to stay onboard or withdraw pending the new prototype, I'm content to offer an out or whatever for those people. No pressure at all. I will not be using these funds to accelerate the prototype pouring so that no one is out of pocket - exept me but :doubt: , it's only money.

man i seriously need to work out why my 3.5 is running so damn rich haha. The 2nd graph is a standard 3.5l with a lukey rear box and a K&n filter, i put it on the dyno for a reference to compare the 3.0l to the 3.5lt

Have been speaking to EZ boy over the night and told him as soon as the new manifold is done i will get it Dynoed again for him that way you boys will have the results aswell.

Would also like to thank EZ boy for all his work.

The modded 3.0L got its **** handed to it by the least powerful 3.5L ever made.......

Much lawls.

On topic however, glad we now have a base figure for the 3.0 with the standard intake/exhaust mods, so now we can see what differences the different revisions of the manifold make.

We have faith in you man.

btw Ian I got your message, but I have a nasty habit of reading peoples messages, and saying to myself "Ill reply in a minute" and leaving it at that.......

I'm gunna keep fiddling with it until it's right. I could easily take people's money and hand them a product that I feel isn't upto the task but that's not me.

So my apologies for the additional delay but it's necessary to do some modding and get the product doing what it should be doing - hauling magna a*5e!

The modded 3.0L got its **** handed to it by the least powerful 3.5L ever made.......

You sure? Interesting to run the manifold when its been on a reset ecu for a fortnight thou.

For interest:

3.5L vs 3L The only difference is flowed tb and extractors.

1500rpm +5kw
2000rpm +3-4kw
2500rpm +2.5-3kw
3000rpm +5.5kw
3500rpm +5.5kw
4000rpm +manifold runners choked up
4500rpm " " " "

Not far behind at all if anyone could tell by driving it. I see a 3L that pulls nearly as hard as a 3.5 throu the low and start of the mid. Looking forward to the reworked manifold now.

This is the spark I needed to get off my hump!

man i seriously need to work out why my 3.5 is running so damn rich haha. The 2nd graph is a standard 3.5l with a lukey rear box and a K&n filter, i put it on the dyno for a reference to compare the 3.0l to the 3.5lt

Good sales pitch for a piggy back ecu! An a good excuse to order cams too - gotta make the most of the ecu ;)

I should read lol

The 3.5 graph has different figures down the bottom so simply lining the boxes up against eachother (like I did) doesnt really show anything :rant:

Sorry man, still interesting that the stocko 3.5L ran "not far" in front of a 3.0L with all this crap hanging off it. We need one of these on a modded 3.5L (preferably a Manual), then Ian can have a nice big smile on his face.

For those who want to see what the graphs would look like on top of each other, I've scaled the 3L to fit over the top of the 3.5L as closely as I possiby can (without re-taking the data points manually and completely re-graphing it)

I scaled it so that all appropriate speeds on the horizontal axis were as close as I could get them to matching between the two charts.

On close inspection, I estimate the power increase at the marked point over the stock 3L to be closer to 8kw than 5kw. I've inserted red bars in between the 3L standard line and the 3L EZBOY line. Those red bars are as close as I could get (with the current pixel size) to being 5kw high. Thus they mark (as accurately as I could) the point at which the custom manifold gets over 5kw more and then the point where it comes back under.
As you can see from the graph, it continues to grow past that 5kw difference.

While it's a shame to lose that top end bit, gaining greater than 5kw of low-down power from 94kph to 104kph like that is phenomenal, it would translate to a very impressive on-road-feel.

The result:
http://www.adam.com.au/mjd26/dyno_merge.jpg

I agree with your planned changes for the next proto.

Looks like the current model is running out in the higher rpm ranges (obviously, lol), one would imagine that this top end "down fall" might be larger on a 3.5L due to the added airflow.

Very impressve so far however, I think with the planned changes, up top power is going to be much improved.

imagine that, more power down low, and up high. yayy :D

This will be perfect for me, as i am getting stage 2 cams for my auto, therefore this will gain the low down power i will be loosing, i cant wait. i might even break into the 14's, yay.

mike

This will be perfect for me, as i am getting stage 2 cams for my auto, therefore this will gain the low down power i will be loosing, i cant wait. i might even break into the 14's, yay.

mike

You probably won't lose as much power as you think down low. Have a look at the dyno chart in my signature for an idea. This graph shows my car at stock, with stage-1, and stage-crazy cams.

wouldnt it be different though since ur manual, i was told they maintain most of there low down power, and autos loose some low down power and become rough.

mike

Edit: what is each line on your dyno, sorry if this is a stupid question????

I think the loss in low down torque most people talk about is from a relative point of view. By that I mean look at cthulhu's Dyno graphs. The wild cam has the same torque down low than the basic cam, however, imaging driving the two cars. The wild cam would feel slow down low, comparred to the massive power up high.

I hope that kinda made sense, lol.

Edit: what is each line on your dyno, sorry if this is a stupid question????

red line: extractors only
blue line: rpw "stage 1" cams, haltech interceptor, head work, twin throttles (http://www.wermspowke.net/images/engine-bay.jpg)
green line: as per my profile listing

the top three lines are power, the bottom three are tractive effort.


The wild cam would feel slow down low, comparred to the massive power up high

You got that right :)

/end thread hijack :redface:

Ian as already said I think your results are positive, you have already dramatically reduced top-end restriction compared to when we did the dyno runs. Hopefully with opening up the runners/ports more we'll see the top-end gains we are hoping for:) Will be interesting to see how opening up the runners/ports affects the low-mid rpm gains. Hopefully your dual runner design will keep intake velocity up to still maintain good gains here.



The dynos were done back to back - no manifold 1st, then with manifold on. The ECU didn't have any time to learn each manifold. Anyone who's reset their ECU will atest that it takes a few wks for the car to 'find it's way again'.

I'm gonna have to disagree on this. I believe the only parameters the ECU "learns" are to do with idling. WOT fuel and ignition maps are what they are, the ECU does not have the capacity to change them. Except possible in some kind of cold start mode and limp mode. However If I have got it wrong I'm happy to be shown so.

In my experience (and I've done many ecu resets) it idles rough/hunts for a little while, but straight off the bat I'ver never noticed any difference when giving it a bootful.

Hey guys, I have been watching this with great interest, and congrats for the effort regardless of the results. You have posted KW results but not torque, 5kw is a good gain, but how much more torque did the engine make. If you "only" made 5kw but gained 20 or so nm of torque it would be impressive, especially at low rpm when an auto needs to climb out of the hole and move its a55. I have recently put a 3.5ltr engine in my wifes TE Altera 3ltr and the difference at low rpm is staggering, so any improvement in low rpm torque is a bonus.
Just my 2c worth
John

Hey guys, I have been watching this with great interest, and congrats for the effort regardless of the results. You have posted KW results but not torque, 5kw is a good gain, but how much more torque did the engine make. If you "only" made 5kw but gained 20 or so nm of torque it would be impressive, especially at low rpm when an auto needs to climb out of the hole and move its a55. I have recently put a 3.5ltr engine in my wifes TE Altera 3ltr and the difference at low rpm is staggering, so any improvement in low rpm torque is a bonus.
Just my 2c worth
John

yeah when we get the new one made up and dyno'ed again we can get all 3 done aka kw,hp and nm.

This is an interesting read, forget about the Honda related story, these two pages are a good reference for the manifold runner calculations....
http://www.team-integra.net/sections/articles/showArticle.asp?ArticleID=466

I had the manifold and previous versions on my car for many wks esp the Frankenstein one. When I removed it my car still felt strong for approx 10days then just died in a heap - it became doughy, unwilling, and a general pita. So in my experience the ecu can learn mods to some capacity (probably similar to the Ford I6 pre-Barra ecus that could learn a new cam), not making excuses simply wanting to provide quality data.


Ian as already said I think your results are positive, you have already dramatically reduced top-end restriction compared to when we did the dyno runs. Hopefully with opening up the runners/ports more we'll see the top-end gains we are hoping for:) Will be interesting to see how opening up the runners/ports affects the low-mid rpm gains. Hopefully your dual runner design will keep intake velocity up to still maintain good gains here.



I'm gonna have to disagree on this. I believe the only parameters the ECU "learns" are to do with idling. WOT fuel and ignition maps are what they are, the ECU does not have the capacity to change them. Except possible in some kind of cold start mode and limp mode. However If I have got it wrong I'm happy to be shown so.

In my experience (and I've done many ecu resets) it idles rough/hunts for a little while, but straight off the bat I'ver never noticed any difference when giving it a bootful.

EXISTING PAID ORDERS:

It's upto the individuals concerned it they wish to stay onboard or withdraw pending the new prototype, I'm content to offer an out or whatever for those people. No pressure at all. I will not be using these funds to accelerate the prototype pouring so that no one is out of pocket - exept me but :doubt: , it's only money.

THANKS FOR YOUR WORK! I also appreciate the current "out" but want the next manifold. (Out of control this month on panel work and wheels etc.) Your honesty in reporting the dyno when the "seat of the pants" seems to give and improvement is great. Watching my tacho in "D" in the AWD. A lot of the driving is in the rev range where you have improved performance.

I have spent significant time re-measuring, recalculating etc and am busting to get to the foundary this wk to implement my changes with the mold maker.

Blessed playdough has allowed me to trial several trumpet designs and modify the area surrounding the trumpet's inlet for increased feed zone.

The port has been extensively redrawn and I am happy with the collector shape and volume now. Should flow it's head off this time AND still retain its low and low-mid punch, if not improve it :cool:

I have spent significant time re-measuring, recalculating etc and am busting to get to the foundary this wk to implement my changes with the mold maker.

Blessed playdough has allowed me to trial several trumpet designs and modify the area surrounding the trumpet's inlet for increased feed zone.

The port has been extensively redrawn and I am happy with the collector shape and volume now. Should flow it's head off this time AND still retain its low and low-mid punch, if not improve it :cool:


Sweet cant wait to test this baby out sounds like im going to enjoy this one more than the last one also cant wait till i get it on the dyno.

...The port has been extensively redrawn and I am happy with the collector shape and volume now. Should flow it's head off this time AND still retain its low and low-mid punch, if not improve it :cool:

Nice work EZ Boy, look forward to seeing the results.

Once they're up I'll re-do an overlay with all of the results on it.

One request however; I would love to see it being dyno'd on a 3.5L this time. :)

can be worked out just that pesky EGR valve to plug and unplug between runs as we dont have a hell of a lot of time between them.

Nice work EZ Boy, look forward to seeing the results.

Once they're up I'll re-do an overlay with all of the results on it.

One request however; I would love to see it being dyno'd on a 3.5L this time. :)

if you use the same dyno, they should be able to show the overlay when they dyno and print it out. just ask them to print the AFR/speed on one sheet and the lbs/rpm on another

i can get them overlayed just have to ask the guy who does it will do next time.

can be worked out just that pesky EGR valve to plug and unplug between runs as we dont have a hell of a lot of time between them.

the EGR comes off with the plenum, all you need is a sump plug from a VX commodore that screws nicely into the exhaust hole left by the egr pipe

the EGR comes off with the plenum, all you need is a sump plug from a VX commodore that screws nicely into the exhaust hole left by the egr pipe

sweet, hey ezboy make 2 proto's so we can do a run on both mine and brads car! :P

sweet, hey ezboy make 2 proto's so we can do a run on both mine and brads car! :P

But there's so many 3L owners that want to see you pipped by 10-15kw across the board lol

Met with the Foundary today and made a total of 12 changes that I can remember atm. Runner diameters are increased, main merge port is much larger and better shaped, new mounting lugs, longer TB cable mounts so the plenum doesn't need to be breached for the bolt holes hence reducing the likelihood of leaks.

Hoping to have a casting mid-late next wk if all there other jobs move along smoothly. Exciting stuff folks. :dancin:

I have RPW Race Extractors, a panel filter, a high flowed TB and a Lukey on the back. I have read that the Race extractors will lose power down low RPM, but gain in the top range. Would this mean that this EZ Boy manifold might just be the solution i am after?

(Possibly throw in a interceptor and cams down the track!)

Yes, interceptors are the answer for your needs.

But there's so many 3L owners that want to see you pipped by 10-15kw across the board lol

Met with the Foundary today and made a total of 12 changes that I can remember atm. Runner diameters are increased, main merge port is much larger and better shaped, new mounting lugs, longer TB cable mounts so the plenum doesn't need to be breached for the bolt holes hence reducing the likelihood of leaks.

Hoping to have a casting mid-late next wk if all there other jobs move along smoothly. Exciting stuff folks. :dancin:
Cool cant wait to get this on my car and dyno it agree with the comment about seeing the 3litre beat the 3.5

Cool cant wait to get this on my car and dyno it agree with the comment about seeing the 3litre beat the 3.5

lies and slander even if i have to sell my left kidney it wont make more power then mine :bowrofl:

will this have the same effects on the 3.5l as it will to the 3l??

will this have the same effects on the 3.5l as it will to the 3l??

ez will come along shortly but my uneducated guess that the 3.5l will use the larger runners more effectively due to different cams and bore. (aka more air being able to be used)

:stoopid:

Same heads, slight cam changes and bore/stroke changes are pretty small but the extra low down torque of the 3.5L is certainly noticeable to those who drive/have driven both.

In short, yes, the 3.5l will gain at least as much but I expect larger gains from the 3.5L and 3.8L cars.

You read correctly: 3.8L cars.

Ill express mega interest in this item one more. My NA build is now in the planning process, and this manifold might give me those extra 5-10kw (considering the extra work on the car etc).

Ezy, did you think about adapting a larger throttle body some how. I think I read in the past that you considered the idea, but it ended up being a no go? How come, what issues were present ?

Ill express mega interest in this item one more. My NA build is now in the planning process, and this manifold might give me those extra 5-10kw (considering the extra work on the car etc).

The more mods the more power can be obtained as each item works in synergy (usually) with each mod. Rather than adding a given hp, each mod will work with a multiplication factor. So with extra compression, head work, tune, some motors may gain 20+ bolt on kw from a manifold swap. Looking forward to the new prototype next wk.


Ezy, did you think about adapting a larger throttle body some how. I think I read in the past that you considered the idea, but it ended up being a no go? How come, what issues were present ?

Sure did. It's upto the individual to source, fit, calibrate, tune. The alloy is weldable, so cutting and adding a suitable TB flange and enlarging the plenum neck if necessary is easy to do. Finding a suitable tb is the fun bit. Might make some yet - you know - while I'm at the foundary and all... :roll:

Biggest issues with another TB will be the TPS, AIC and cruise. AIC and cruise can be gotten around with a drop in driveability (ie. stalling or high idle + no cruise - hmmm sounds like my old FIAT) TPS will either need to be adapted, or a small intercepter will need to be built - magna TPS is a variable resistor, with 5V across it. Easy enough if you swap with another with a resistive element, (just use an opamp to adjust the offset+gain) not so easy if its just a switch.

Cheers
Heath Young

Ok Heath, does an Op-amp take into consideration the no-linear air flow changes as the TB opens? What about those Jaycar kits? Stick an A:F meter up the tail and track the TPS voltage adjustments that way?

How about a twin TB idea, using two magna TBs. Im sure there are enough running around at the wreckers.

Ok Heath, does an Op-amp take into consideration the no-linear air flow changes as the TB opens? What about those Jaycar kits? Stick an A:F meter up the tail and track the TPS voltage adjustments that way?

You can alter the gain structure of an opamp easily enough, but mapping it to a whole lot of points with high resolution is simpler. The jaycar adjustment kits are OTT for this type of application. I could give you a unit that you program with an inbuilt LCD, and then copy the data onto a microprocessor to do the work as an interceptor - all housed in a sealed diecast box not much bigger than a matchbox.

Its only a matter of using a PIC with an ADC to sample the output of the TPS, and then generate a voltage using a high frequency PWM. 'Snot hard. Its just a basic curve adjustment. I wouldn't be using AF meters for this, what you really need to keep in mind is manifold absolute pressure vs TB opening.

'T' a map sensor (just a cheap GM 1 bar sensor is fine on NA vehicles) and measure the voltage across it VS the voltage on the standard TPS at various throttle openings. Then do the same with the throttle body under test. Compare your results. This should give you a pretty good baseline figure.

MAP is good for mapping low throttle openings. Remember that you need to have the engine under load and varying conditions.

Hmmm.... Had a bit more of a think about this, its quite possible to design this so that its easier to programme - at point 0 (0V in) the setting is 0 (0V out) and the same at 256.

Real-time programming as well, you open the throttlebody and adjust the value for maximum power. I could probably provide a serial interface for a laptop, but we'll see :)

How about a twin TB idea, using two magna TBs. Im sure there are enough running around at the wreckers.

We've been there before, problem is with measuring the airflow, the bottleneck is the AFM - you have to run both TB's through the AFM. With a map sensor its easy. IIRC Chiptorque did this on a hyundai excel (which uses MAP) easily enough - they only use a switch TPS setup (idle and WOT, and cable for ATX kickdown).

Has anyone actually gotten a bigass throttlebody and grafted a magna TPS on it and gone for a burn yet? Is there actually a problem?

We've been there before, problem is with measuring the airflow, the bottleneck is the AFM - you have to run both TB's through the AFM. With a map sensor its easy. IIRC Chiptorque did this on a hyundai excel (which uses MAP) easily enough - they only use a switch TPS setup (idle and WOT, and cable for ATX kickdown).
would this only be a problem with the stock ecu if you have a replacement would you not be able to run 2 maf sensors or map sensors for that matter?

We've been there before, problem is with measuring the airflow, the bottleneck is the AFM - you have to run both TB's through the AFM.

:stoopid:

With my setup (http://www.wermspowke.net/images/engine-bay.jpg), all those years ago, the difference in the power curve was negligible. Although the throttle response was markedly improved. And I did get to test that back-to-back as the TB linkage cable broke a couple of times mid-trip and it was a very noticeably different car to drive on one throttle.


With a map sensor its easy.

:stoopid: also done this with the same manifold as above, and it works.

would this only be a problem with the stock ecu if you have a replacement would you not be able to run 2 maf sensors or map sensors for that matter?

It's not even necessarily a problem with the stock ECU so long as you have an interceptor modifying the MAS signal. Autospeed did an article (http://www.autospeed.com/cms/A_2424/article.html) where they built a bypass around the MAS in one of their play cars to allow more air into the engine. Then they programmed the interceptor to boost the MAS signal (which would be artificially low since not all the air entering the engine would have been metered) so that the fueling was once again correct.

Of course this breaks if there isn't enough headroom in the MAS signal to prevent it clipping.

Running two MASs probably creates more problems than it solves because you somehow need to average the two signals. Perhaps not so hard with a voltage based MAS but a bit trickier with the karman-vortex style used on the Magna. (maybe not for heathyoung though :) )

There'd be no point running two MAPs since you've only got one manifold to read pressure in anyway ;)

:stoopid:

With my setup (http://www.wermspowke.net/images/engine-bay.jpg), all those years ago, the difference in the power curve was negligible. Although the throttle response was markedly improved. And I did get to test that back-to-back as the TB linkage cable broke a couple of times mid-trip and it was a very noticeably different car to drive on one throttle.



:stoopid: also done this with the same manifold as above, and it works.

with your setup cthulhu, wouldnt most of the air flow gone directly into the standard TB as it will be the path of least resistance? Then the secondary tb just playing scavanger for cyl 6 and/or 5 as needed?

There'd be no point running two MAPs since you've only got one manifold to read pressure in anyway ;)
yea i was meaning one map vs 2 mafs

with your setup cthulhu, wouldnt most of the air flow gone directly into the standard TB as it will be the path of least resistance? Then the secondary tb just playing scavanger for cyl 6 and/or 5 as needed?

As with most Street Torque mods it was based on a gut feel approach and never tested empirically, but what you say makes some sense. But that said, it was immediately noticeable when I lost one throttle, so it can't have been doing nothing.

well your getting twice the throttle opening with minimal foot movement having the 2 TB's...

but going through the same AFM

you could put 10 TB on and it wont affect anything aslong as only one has the TPS hooked up and the single AFM

well your getting twice the throttle opening with minimal foot movement having the 2 TB's...

but going through the same AFM

you could put 10 TB on and it wont affect anything aslong as only one has the TPS hooked up and the single AFM

That assumes that the AFM is flowing as much as it possibly can in a stock motor. The Evo has the same AFM but makes 25% more power than the Magna, and there are a couple of turbo-charged cars out there making more power than that with the stock AFM, so your logic is wrong.

Over the last few weeks i have been going to Sydney and have had to drive a friend home each time.(To Newcastle)

First time stock Manifold
Second time EZ Manifold

Driving home this afternoon form Sydney and he comes out with the comment gees the car is running alot more smoother than last time, Thought i would just let you boys know how much smoother it is with the EZ manifold if someone who has been in your car twice can notice the difference.

Can't wait to get this new Manifold on the car and dynoed :cool:

Cheers Brad

That assumes that the AFM is flowing as much as it possibly can in a stock motor. The Evo has the same AFM but makes 25% more power than the Magna, and there are a couple of turbo-charged cars out there making more power than that with the stock AFM, so your logic is wrong.


I'm talking bout TB's and throttle response... the more TB's you have the less your foot will move to get the same air input.... the AFM only reads the air going in... has no idea whats going on down stream. 25% throttle will give 25%X2 TB's opening so this equals more air at less foot movement thats all i was saying.

hense the throttle response he gained, just like Hi Flowing your TB gives more air for less movement....:nuts:

My logic is correct, your reading skills need improving....lol

My logic is correct, your reading skills need improving....lol :tantrum: :P

As with most Street Torque mods it was based on a gut feel approach and never tested empirically, but what you say makes some sense. But that said, it was immediately noticeable when I lost one throttle, so it can't have been doing nothing.


Wasnt suggesting it was doing nothing. I have thought about twin tb's for a while, in that similar set up. IIRC, didnt BOOYA have a similar setup when he was N/A?

If people are running turbos and S/C's through our stock size t/b's and AFMs surely they are not at the limit of their flowing capacity. The only thing that gets me a bit concerned is if the actual sensor is at its maximum when we are at WOT without mods.

Wasnt suggesting it was doing nothing. I have thought about twin tb's for a while, in that similar set up. IIRC, didnt BOOYA have a similar setup when he was N/A?

Yeah, Booya and I ended up running similar setups, except Booya was using Falcon TBs and I was using Magna TBs. In Booya's, as in mine when I went to the E6X as well, they were both breathing from almost directly attached pod filters.


If people are running turbos and S/C's through our stock size t/b's and AFMs surely they are not at the limit of their flowing capacity. The only thing that gets me a bit concerned is if the actual sensor is at its maximum when we are at WOT without mods.

I guarantee it's not. I did some data capture when I had my stage 1's in and was making 150kW ATW. Based on workshop manual specs the MAF had plenty of headroom left before it would hit its max frequency output.

Yeah, Booya and I ended up running similar setups, except Booya was using Falcon TBs and I was using Magna TBs. In Booya's, as in mine when I went to the E6X as well, they were both breathing from almost directly attached pod filters.

so you both bypassed the maf completely with this setup?


I guarantee it's not. I did some data capture when I had my stage 1's in and was making 150kW ATW. Based on workshop manual specs the MAF had plenty of headroom left before it would hit its max frequency output.

thats great news about it having plenty of headroom. It was an interesting read that article about the maf bypass on the excel. Wouldnt that cause it to run lean up high in the rev range?

got a date set for the next casting? its great to see this has come along so far cant wait to see the results

There are so few performance parts for Magnas. That I continue to follow this with interest.

got a date set for the next casting? its great to see this has come along so far cant wait to see the results

yeah sometime this week he reckons so its on brads car for a week then back onto the dyno

yeah sometime this week he reckons so its on brads car for a week then back onto the dyno


Cant wait getting so excited :thumbsup:

Foundary taking their sweet time re-working the mold :rant: I will continue to pressure them into action. I am very excited about the changes to be me made - should (99% certainty) get the mid and top gains I'm chasing to supplement and possibly enhance the improved bottom end output.

My respects for keeping at this project. You are the Edison of manifolds!

Foundary taking their sweet time re-working the mold :rant: I will continue to pressure them into action...Mate, Those AMCers who intend to buy these will patiently wait a bit longer - the rest of us have a few more weeks to win a little bit in Tattslotto lol
Seriously, don't stress too much about it - have a Great Easter - :bowdown: you deserve it.

I approved the new pattern/mold this afternoon :dancin:

The changes are beautiful. There are several cosmetic mods and numerous small functional changes. The big changes occur in the runners and port size. I am expecting some solid numbers throughout the WHOLE rev range with this one. Expect to be cast late next wk, early the next.

:D :D cant wait to get my hands on this:D :D

any updates

any updates

Thinking the same thing.. updates :)

New manifold will be on the car in around a week(:D cant wait) and then it will be dynoed asap to get some figures for you lovely people at AMC:D

New manifold will be on the car in around a week(:D cant wait) and then it will be dynoed asap to get some figures for you lovely people at AMC:D

shotgunnnnnnnnnn being there again, thank god we dont have to switch the manifolds around again lol.

:stoopid: Leave your oven mits, sunscreen and outdoor airconditioner at home this time round.

LATEST NEWS:

The foundary is doing a stocktake (?! wtf ?!) tomorrow and will be closed but they are 90% sure I will have the next (hopefully "final") proto on friday. :dancin:

:stoopid: Leave your oven mits, sunscreen and outdoor airconditioner at home this time round.

LATEST NEWS:

The foundary is doing a stocktake (?! wtf ?!) tomorrow and will be closed but they are 90% sure I will have the next (hopefully "final") proto on friday. :dancin:

Bugger.

With all this wait, you better promise the end result is bloddy fantastic ;D

Bugger.

With all this wait, you better promise the end result is bloddy fantastic ;D

so does 99% of this forum as well hehe

next (hopefully "final") proto on friday. :dancin:



cant wait cant wait cant wait getting to excited lol

Bugger.

With all this wait, you better promise the end result is bloddy fantastic ;D

Edit: EZ Boy searches the smiley board in vain as he seeks a smiley that's sweeting like a pig!

You got any nice pics of these, looked back a few pages but didn't see anything

I reckon your manifold + Raptor ProStreet kit will be wild lol

You got any nice pics of these, looked back a few pages but didn't see anything

I reckon your manifold + Raptor ProStreet kit will be wild lol

You'd think so; but you actually want less volume after the TB for a SC (depending on boost curve) so runners are generally quite short but larger diameter. It would be good on a laggy turbo or centrifugal - but might increase the lag a few rpm. :think: Only one way to find out...:D


Here are some OLD PICS and a newer one of the recently dyno'd manifold on Brad's car.

There are significant changes on the latest prototype due this wk!!! Pics as soon as I'm holding it!

Work commitments meant I couldn't pick it up this arvo but that suited the foundary as the 1st pour had a hole and some quick modding was done to give more clearance to the affected runner and another was sucessfully cast. It needs to be dusted off and the spouts lopped off etc. Will pick it up monday 9am :dancin:

Well im ready to have it dynoed anytime for you just say the word and its done :D

The runner wall was too thin after the increase in runner internal diameter so we recast this afternoon. I guess tomorrow is the day now :cry:

:pray: hope its ready for you today

Cast proto #3 is alive:

Plenty of changes as previously discussed.

Pics:

1) New look plenum with several small visible changes.

2) Enlarged ports - yes they're not port matched and yes, there's a secret reason for it.

3) Changes to the rear for improved clearance, mounting, Traction Control vehicle compliance and no more plenum penetrating bolts.

4) Internal view of the dual runner union above the lower port.

wow that looks awsome :)

i cant wait till i get the money :D

I need some bigger smiley faces.

mike

http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/5143/iconmuppetph2.pnghttp://img153.imageshack.us/img153/5143/iconmuppetph2.pnghttp://img153.imageshack.us/img153/5143/iconmuppetph2.pnghttp://img153.imageshack.us/img153/5143/iconmuppetph2.pnghttp://img153.imageshack.us/img153/5143/iconmuppetph2.png looks AWESOME

Srs biz question: Ian, have you considered using some software to simulate airflow instead of recasting it each time? Pretty sure stuff like Pro Engineer can do this.

That thing looks like a beast

Ian good to see the port size practically doubled, hopefully you will get the result you are hoping for now:)

2) Enlarged ports - yes they're not port matched and yes, there's a secret reason for it.



Now now we aren't allowed secrets here :P
When do we find out what the secret is? I'm scratching my head wondering...

Looks SWEET though!

Now now we aren't allowed secrets here :P
When do we find out what the secret is? I'm scratching my head wondering...

Looks SWEET though!

i smell tuned ports.....

btw ez wtb a manifold before friday! :bowrofl:

I'm getting restless again.....:D Yeeesyeeess - patiencepatience :rant:

I'm getting restless again.....:D Yeeesyeeess - patiencepatience :rant:

You need patience??? I don't even get to put it on MY car!! :cry:

I just want my flippin manifold back on so I can start grinning again, start enjoying life, look forward to each new day....

so whens the big dyno day then?
cant wait to see results.
lets hope its the results we have all been waiting for *fingers crossed*

I was at the muff shop yesterday doing some final prep work and in walks Graham Bell! We spent a solid 1.5hrs talking magna. He's just bought a TL AWD and wants more low-down go! It will be very interesting to see what he can pull out of the hat given his knowledge on the subject! Highlight of my year so far! :cool:

Graham Bell! We spent a solid 1.5hrs talking magna.

Hu? I thought he only talks phones. But that was long ago. Very long ago..... :D

EZ, Are you meaning this Graham Bell? (see attachment)

If yes...
Wow - what a score! Don't blame you for doing nothing else but talk & listen.
Did you tell him about AMC ?

ha ha does the "A" stand for alexander by any chance? :D

i wish i could spare some cash for one of these by the way :-(
if there are any around in a year or 2 i reckon i will be in on it.
top work EZ

Thats the man! Maitland resident. Told him about AMC of course! But mostly just stood there and pretended to understand what the he11 he was talking about lol .


EZ, Are you meaning this Graham Bell? (see attachment)

If yes...
Wow - what a score! Don't blame you for doing nothing else but talk & listen.
Did you tell him about AMC ?

Thats the man! Maitland resident. Told him about AMC of course! But mostly just stood there and pretended to understand what the he11 he was talking about lol .

yeah i originally got into contact with Graham when he wanted some prices for gear oil for his TL, ended up talking to him for an hour or so on the phone, i directed him to Ezboy's Fathers Exhaust shop where from what Graham was telling me spent a good deal of time talking about the magnas and that, Graham had an interesting idea of using adjustable gears to help with the lowdown or lack of.

Btw i got a copy of his book and an awesome read so far, thrown my whole knowledge of Engine Modification right out the window!

yeah i originally got into contact with Graham when he wanted some prices for gear oil for his TL, ended up talking to him for an hour or so on the phone, i directed him to Ezboy's Fathers Exhaust shop where from what Graham was telling me spent a good deal of time talking about the magnas and that, Graham had an interesting idea of using adjustable gears to help with the lowdown or lack of.

Btw i got a copy of his book and an awesome read so far, thrown my whole knowledge of Engine Modification right out the window!

Yeah you have to sit down and clear your head for a few days after talking to the man or reading his literature.

We discussed offset keyways for the cams and/or crank pulley. Also had a discussion about the very large inlet ports found in production heads these days esp the japanese and LS v8 motors. No wonder they're useless down low and heavy on fuel as the ports are too large to give good high velocity air flow at low and med rpm. Rod ratios came up and many other topics. Pity the magna motor is so time consuming to access.

I was secretly chuffed that in all his days he'd never seen or heard of a dual-runner per cylinder manifold. There you all go - this manifold will be a world exclusive lol

I was secretly chuffed that in all his days he'd never seen or heard of a dual-runner per cylinder manifold. There you all go - this manifold will be a world exclusive lol

Well some of the Toyota 4AGE motors (earlier 16 valve units) use a duel runner manifold, but instead of running both runners all the time, they have butterfly valves to block half the runners under 4500rpm and use only one channel, while using both after that point. This isn't a variable length manifold like in earlier Magnas or AU-BA Falcons, as the runners are of equal length. But the idea is the same, to boost low-mid range torque, while still catering for the high rpm flow demand. :)


Also had a discussion about the very large inlet ports found in production heads these days esp the japanese and LS v8 motors. No wonder they're useless down low


I don't know how they do it (large capacity?) but the LS2 makes almost peak torque (about 90-95%) from 2,000rpm. I agree about the LS1's, they don't really make much down low.

Well some of the Toyota 4AGE motors (earlier 16 valve units) use a duel runner manifold, but instead of running both runners all the time, they have butterfly valves to block half the runners.

the 3S-GE(ST162 Celica) had these as well. I remember when i pulled my motor out of my celica, that they had yamaha on them. They were actuated by a vacuum valve.

I'm not talking variable inlets or multi-stage runner systems that we can't afford to reproduce and tune; simply 2x runners with a common port and no actuation system. Not stating definatively that it hasn't been done, just saying Graham hadn't seen it before. There is certainly merit in holding back one runner - however the addition of a butterfly to the airstream causes tremendous disturbance to air flow, and I would like to bet; cost power vs non butterflied dual runners. The other consideration is the air now beginning to move down a 2nd pathway will disrupt the existing flow as the runners compete for air. I decided it was best to leave this phenomenon and it's complexities alone and play with runner and port size combinations. I hope I've got it this time.

UPDATE: Need to remove some dags inside the plenum and then bolt it on for some AWD time. The dags will be eliminated in production units, they were under my whip to get it cast so they skipped sealing around the runner/plenum cores :rant:

UPDATE: they were under my whip to get it cast so they skipped sealing around the runner/plenum cores :rant:



Slack buggers.....sounds good though.

I'm not talking variable inlets or multi-stage runner systems that we can't afford to reproduce and tune; simply 2x runners with a common port and no actuation system. Not stating definatively that it hasn't been done, just saying Graham hadn't seen it before. There is certainly merit in holding back one runner - however the addition of a butterfly to the airstream causes tremendous disturbance to air flow, and I would like to bet; cost power vs non butterflied dual runners. The other consideration is the air now beginning to move down a 2nd pathway will disrupt the existing flow as the runners compete for air. I decided it was best to leave this phenomenon and it's complexities alone and play with runner and port size combinations. I hope I've got it this time.


I wasn't talking about variable inlets either, I just simply stated Toyota have in the past used equal length dual runner setups, pneumatic actuation or not. I wasn't in any way trying to make your manifold seem any less significant (hope you didn't think that), I'm following this thread very intently even though I no longer have a Magna. :)

PS: they butterfly system is actually very simple (I can get you pics as my cousin has a 4AGE in pieces), it's just a plate sandwiched (like a phenolic spacer), splitting the intake manifold into two pieces, not to dissimilar to the Magna intake. Still I am in no way implying you should do something like this, I'm just having a discussion. :D

I wasn't talking about variable inlets either, I just simply stated Toyota have in the past used equal length dual runner setups, pneumatic actuation or not. I wasn't in any way trying to make your manifold seem any less significant (hope you didn't think that), I'm following this thread very intently even though I no longer have a Magna. :)

PS: they butterfly system is actually very simple (I can get you pics as my cousin has a 4AGE in pieces), it's just a plate sandwiched (like a phenolic spacer), splitting the intake manifold into two pieces, not to dissimilar to the Magna intake. Still I am in no way implying you should do something like this, I'm just having a discussion. :D

For sure, that's how ideas become reality - different perspectives. I did see a Nissan manifold at a wreckers last year with dual stage butterflies = 12 butterflies in total!

How is the manifold going any updates

** PICS UPDATE **

On my car atm, needs the rest of the week for me to fully evaluate. Atm there's a big kick in the pants from 3100-5300 with smooth operation above 2000. Effortless cruising and overtaking. Even holding top gear to accelerate from 80-110 is a piece of cake. More feedback as I get more time behind it. :dancin:

This manifold hasn't been bead blasted - it's just prepd for evaluation and dyno time.

Note the excellent strut brace clearance.

So whens it getting dynoed ?

looking good Ian cant wait to here your evaluation

Still performing well in the 3000-5000band with 2000-3000 smooth and noticeably more willing. Fuel economy is at least identical to oem manifold - I can run it very frugally but the extra grunt is addictive :doubt: :D

*** GOOD NEWS!!! ***

Discount to previously mentioned price is looking very likely! Why? Because all the mold reworking I've had done was going to cost me nearly $2000 - has been erased, wiped clean :dancin:

Additionally the machining costs have come down because there is now less setting up due to the changes made on this prototype.

Also, Dad and I are going to buy our own sand blaster and bead blasting unit to do the finishing work in-house while allowing Dad to do blasting and finishing work for his clients. Previously this was to be outsourced at considerable cost. IMHO the prices were bmllshlt but no doubt that was because the work was for a Magna. Aren't we all sick of that attitude from the aftermarket automotive and service industry!!

Price range is looking to be UNDER $740.00!! For the people who have pre-paid you WILL be getting the balance refunded once the final price is confirmed. So I will keep everyone updated and I look forward to showcasing a product ready for AMCer's in the next wk or so. :thumbsup:

EZ

keep up the good work buddy
sounds like it'll be a monster manifold
would the manifold be alright with the raptor supercharger? or is it more setup for N/A?
flame me if you wish for asking a dumb question :redface:

The manifold should actually complement the supercharger. The centrifugal SC builds boost proportionately to rpm, so the replacement inlet manifold will supplement the low and mid to get the rpm up faster so that boost is available earlier, along with making torque available in low boost rpm. The other advantage is that the very large plenum is ready for boosted induction AND an oversized TB can be cheaply and simply adapted :D I wonder how that got designed into it........:cool:

As far as 'monster' manifold, people need to realise that the gains will be proportionate to supporting mods; understand now that the limiting factor becomes the cam profile, other inlet restrictions etc. While another brick in the wall but a very useful, noticable and welcome one. It's still a replacement inlet manifold and not a bottle of NOx or forced induction, simply improved delivery of air to the inlet valves.

Looks very good mate, I was in the middle of developing my own plenum for my ralliart, But after reading and seeing the amount of time and r and d and passion that you have put into this project i would be crazy not to buy off you. Can't wait until there available, This will be my next mod. Also keep up the good work, Its people like you that make us members never want to sell our magnas .....cheers brett:bowrofl:

I knocked off work (my 3rd job) at 10pm tonight, ambient air temp barely 14deg. The scene was set.

SV6 auto at cnr New England Hwy and that road that runs up the guts of Ashtonfield just up from the TAFE. Anyways, in my dosey AWD he barely had 2 lengths. The drama was braking for the lights at the Molly Morgan!! Thank the Lord for those Ralliart stoppers.

Still feels very solid from 3/3200 to 5500 and will pull in any gear. Just need to upgrade my stally now.

sounds nice cant wait to give it a test

I knocked off work (my 3rd job) at 10pm tonight, ambient air temp barely 14deg. The scene was set.

SV6 auto at cnr New England Hwy and that road that runs up the guts of Ashtonfield just up from the TAFE. Anyways, in my dosey AWD he barely had 2 lengths. The drama was braking for the lights at the Molly Morgan!! Thank the Lord for those Ralliart stoppers.

Still feels very solid from 3/3200 to 5500 and will pull in any gear. Just need to upgrade my stally now.
Just think how much faster you woulda gone mate if the manifold was mirror polished.....lol

Just think how much faster you woulda gone mate if the manifold was mirror polished.....lol

And even faster with 20" chromies:P

And even faster with 20" chromies:P

Had to pick myself up off the floor after this lol

Hey EZ, wasn't it in Newcastle in the 70's that your car went faster if you had twin overhead foxtails???

And even faster with 20" chromies:P


Words i never thought i would here coming from you

Had to pick myself up off the floor after this lol

Hey EZ, wasn't it in Newcastle in the 70's that your car went faster if you had twin overhead foxtails???

lol even uphill!

dont forget to change your blinker fluid (http://www.geocities.com/changeyourblinkerfluid/)

** Update **

As much as I don't want to do it, as most people are stoked at the way my car drives now, I am going to perform some revisions of the runner design.

Of interest to me (with the runner core box sitting on my lap as I type) is the angle of entry/merge of the 2 runners into a single runner and the distance above the flange plate that this occurs. The foundary are concerned that the ideas I penned today may make the unit uncastable but have made some suggestions for me to ponder and ponder I have.

My philosophy is hence unchanged: It's taken an aweful long time to get to this point so another 3wks wont matter much, given that I have an unprecidented opportunity to produce a balls-n-all manifold for AMCers without having to produce or release revisions later that outperform the previous releases and hence devalue the manifolds initially purchased - since that is grossly unfair to the people that have put their money up front and who rightly so deserve a 1st Class product with maximum retained value and performance.

Regards,

Ian.

** Update **

As much as I don't want to do it, as most people are stoked at the way my car drives now, I am going to perform some revisions of the runner design.

Of interest to me (with the runner core box sitting on my lap as I type) is the angle of entry/merge of the 2 runners into a single runner and the distance above the flange plate that this occurs. The foundary are concerned that the ideas I penned today may make the unit uncastable but have made some suggestions for me to ponder and ponder I have.

My philosophy is hence unchanged: It's taken an aweful long time to get to this point so another 3wks wont matter much, given that I have an unprecidented opportunity to produce a balls-n-all manifold for AMCers without having to produce or release revisions later that outperform the previous releases and hence devalue the manifolds initially purchased - since that is grossly unfair to the people that have put their money up front and who rightly so deserve a 1st Class product with maximum retained value and performance.

Regards,

Ian.

excellent

Just think how much faster you woulda gone mate if the manifold was mirror polished.....lol
Nah man that would make it slower, what are you talking about :nuts:

:bowrofl:

This manifold is going to be a beast

** Update **

My philosophy is hence unchanged: It's taken an aweful long time to get to this point so another 3wks wont matter much, given that I have an unprecidented opportunity to produce a balls-n-all manifold for AMCers without having to produce or release revisions later that outperform the previous releases and hence devalue the manifolds initially purchased - since that is grossly unfair to the people that have put their money up front and who rightly so deserve a 1st Class product with maximum retained value and performance.

Regards,

Ian.


hell yeah!

hmmmm, we have had plenty of pics............ so

dynoorban?:badgrin:


hmmm i wonder if I could shoehorn this onto a pajero motor.
Its gotta work better than the poor excuse of an inlet manifold it currently has.

Goodluck with the next prototype, I hope it performs as you are hoping for.

hmmmm, we have had plenty of pics............ so

dynoorban?:badgrin:


hmmm i wonder if I could shoehorn this onto a pajero motor.
Its gotta work better than the poor excuse of an inlet manifold it currently has.

Goodluck with the next prototype, I hope it performs as you are hoping for.

we had the old prototype dyno'ed its in this thread somewhere it made around 4-5kw more down low but ended up losing 3kw top end. This was on a TF 3.0l auto. Also there is the dyno with my dynograph (3.5l mainly stock for the moment) overlayed ontop to give a comparison. The current proto is on his awd, which ive seen it off the car but not on the car yet. Speaking of which Ian whenever you see this can you PM me plz? or better yet let me know when your working next and ill pop down and have a chat.

For those who want to see what the graphs would look like on top of each other, I've scaled the 3L to fit over the top of the 3.5L as closely as I possiby can (without re-taking the data points manually and completely re-graphing it)

I scaled it so that all appropriate speeds on the horizontal axis were as close as I could get them to matching between the two charts.

On close inspection, I estimate the power increase at the marked point over the stock 3L to be closer to 8kw than 5kw. I've inserted red bars in between the 3L standard line and the 3L EZBOY line. Those red bars are as close as I could get (with the current pixel size) to being 5kw high. Thus they mark (as accurately as I could) the point at which the custom manifold gets over 5kw more and then the point where it comes back under.
As you can see from the graph, it continues to grow past that 5kw difference.

While it's a shame to lose that top end bit, gaining greater than 5kw of low-down power from 94kph to 104kph like that is phenomenal, it would translate to a very impressive on-road-feel.

The result:
http://www.adam.com.au/mjd26/dyno_merge.jpg


theres the dyno overlay

green line is the 3.5l and the 2 others are the standard manifold and the other is the ez manifold. Bear in mind that this is the old one the new one Ian reckons he has the top end flow sorted.

Sorry Folks, I've been sick as a dog with a stomach olcer (again) and haven't gotten much done in the last wk. I am making a change where the two runners join ahead of the flange to improve flow and I think that will do it. The results just with the larger runner have been promising for the mid range and top end as I think too much concentration down low is flogging a dead horse - esp since any cam upgrades will promote more mid range anyway.

From the cars I've driven only the awd really needs the low rpm grunt as the fwd variants are able to get moving easier with less weigth and drivetrain loss - I'm not saying the AWD wont benefit, because mine sure has, just trying to make the glove fit everyone.

Thanks.

Alrighty, was speaking to Ian and Chris (screaming TE) and ended up taking ians car for a quick spin, and the low end has improved by a fair margin (compared to the old manifold) and the noise is unbelieveable! cant wait my friend gonna be so awesome.

im getting more excited every time i read this thread looking forward to getting the new manifold dynoed .

Alrighty, was speaking to Ian and Chris (screaming TE) and ended up taking ians car for a quick spin, and the low end has improved by a fair margin (compared to the old manifold) and the noise is unbelieveable! cant wait my friend gonna be so awesome.
Noise? I like noise... :D

Noise? I like noise... :D

The car has attitude now :badgrin:

Any news??

so hows the manifold going?

i have a feeling with tax returns in a few months there will be a few more people after your manifold. lol.

cant wait to see some dyno readouts, would love to compare it to RPW's one to.

but anything to support a fellow amc member.