hay all just wondering if this would be worth the price tag of $$$1100.00 plus the $$ for the twin throttle body



http://www.rpw.com.au/shop/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&Itemid=36&category_id=92&product_id=484

i think they got a new product coming, you might as well wait for that, as it is cheaper and is larger or get the street fighter manifold from a member on here and its cheaper as well.

Go here (http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=49) instead.

i think they got a new product coming, you might as well wait for that, as it is cheaper and is larger or get the street fighter manifold from a member on here and its cheaper as well.

Problem is that the RPW unit has sure numbers, both dyno, and quarter mile time to prove it is better than the stock manifold.

This other manifold you are talking about dosnt have concrete numbers yet.

Go here (http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=49) instead.


As i have the final proto type of this manifold i can tell you im 100% happy with it and would recommend it as i know how much R&D has gone into it.

Im not sure about the RPW manifold ... but I will be able to answer the question early next week. In saying that the mid range torque and power figures are impressive but I feel the manifold restricts top end and or peak power output due to the lengthened runners and the internal ram tubes.

I have back to back dyno figures supporting this so watch the space for the updated information.

Im not sure about the RPW manifold ... but I will be able to answer the question early next week. In saying that the mid range torque and power figures are impressive but I feel the manifold restricts top end and or peak power output due to the lengthened runners and the internal ram tubes.

I have back to back dyno figures supporting this so watch the space for the updated information.

The RPW ones are a cut and shut manifold, as you can see on there site they use the original runners and put new bellhouse's on and a new end tank, polish it up and send it to you.

Ian's Manifold (Ezboys/Raptor SC) manifold has been designed ground up, with several units out on cars atm with good responses from owners, power figures and other members who have driven the vehicles. With Brads 3.0l we got 7kw over the standard manifold, from 103.something to 110.something With the stock ECU. Ian (ezboy) got 17kw from his AWD from 117 to 132, with a Morristech ECU as well.

Once Tim (Raptor SC) get the cores done and start selling them, more figures will flow through but since there is only 3 Manifolds in existance currently the data is a little limited for the time being, but should change come a month or so.


Also to all the naysayers, dont speak till you have driven a car with the manifold on there, changes the entire feel of the car and power delievery.

Im not sure about the RPW manifold ... but I will be able to answer the question early next week. In saying that the mid range torque and power figures are impressive but I feel the manifold restricts top end and or peak power output due to the lengthened runners and the internal ram tubes.

I have back to back dyno figures supporting this so watch the space for the updated information.

i tend to disagree(welcome aboard btw) It may be a case of manual v auto tho. I actually increased low and midrange as well as top when i put the rpw manifold on, and in fact it was the top end where i gained the momentum to push into the 14 sec bracket. I pushed over 6200rpm on gear changes to get there.

where abouts in QLD are you. you have some pretty interesting mods power atw????

i tend to disagree(welcome aboard btw) It may be a case of manual v auto tho. I actually increased low and midrange as well as top when i put the rpw manifold on, and in fact it was the top end where i gained the momentum to push into the 14 sec bracket. I pushed over 6200rpm on gear changes to get there.

where abouts in QLD are you. you have some pretty interesting mods power atw????
+ 1 on that. Mine subjectively made more power everywhere but the really obvious difference was the extra top end hit, end result was 124 ATW and barely tapering off.

All that being the case, I wouldn't hold your breath for the new RPW manifold, it's been months and months coming already. And if I were you I would do nothing until you have seen figures for or tried a Streetfighter. It was actually always my intention to have one of each - current RPW and Streetfighter - and compare them back-to-back. But EZ and I never quite got to that point unfortunatately. Hopefully someone out there will do this at some point.

+ 1 on that. Mine subjectively made more power everywhere but the really obvious difference was the extra top end hit, end result was 124 ATW and barely tapering off.

All that being the case, I wouldn't hold your breath for the new RPW manifold, it's been months and months coming already. And if I were you I would do nothing until you have seen figures for or tried a Streetfighter. It was actually always my intention to have one of each - current RPW and Streetfighter - and compare them back-to-back. But EZ and I never quite got to that point unfortunatately. Hopefully someone out there will do this at some point.

Someone send me one of each and i'll do it. lol

Someone send me one of each and i'll do it. lol

you might be the only guy someone would consider doing this with lol

Thanks for your opinions but I will make my own mind up on this one as I have the time and money to do so..... the point I am trying to make is when you reach 160KWATW IM not that sure that the RPW manifold handles top end power due to the extra length in the runners but as I said I will be able to answer this tomorrow as I am putting the standard manifold back on the car to compare the 2 dyno graphs side by side.... it will be interesting thats for sure.
:D

Thanks for your opinions but I will make my own mind up on this one as I have the time and money to do so..... the point I am trying to make is when you reach 160KWATW IM not that sure that the RPW manifold handles top end power due to the extra length in the runners but as I said I will be able to answer this tomorrow as I am putting the standard manifold back on the car to compare the 2 dyno graphs side by side.... it will be interesting thats for sure.
:D

Trust me on this, wait for Ians to come available, it is out within the month and it is a by far better design and isnt a hacked up standard one. As i said earlier, what he sells you can get elsewhere cheaper.

no worries .... Ezy :)

Thanks for your opinions but I will make my own mind up on this one as I have the time and money to do so..... the point I am trying to make is when you reach 160KWATW IM not that sure that the RPW manifold handles top end power due to the extra length in the runners but as I said I will be able to answer this tomorrow as I am putting the standard manifold back on the car to compare the 2 dyno graphs side by side.... it will be interesting thats for sure.
:D


Great,looking forward to those results.

Great,looking forward to those results.

Yeah tbh there is only a selected handful of people thats results i would trust for a ezboy/RPW/stock/Frankenstien Manifold dynothon. Its pretty easy to Skew the numbers in specific partys favour.....

Great,looking forward to those results.

Yeah tbh there is only a selected handful of people thats results i would trust for a ezboy/RPW/stock/Frankenstien Manifold dynothon. Its pretty easy to Skew the numbers in specific partys favour.....

Agree 100% ..... Im not in the business of posting bull **** .... what I post will be honest and accurate...... same dyno same conditions same car same same same. The only difference will be the manifold oh and a fresh oil change :)

Dyno Graph attached for the before.... this is the RPW manifold dyno run.. note the flat spot from 5000RPM car certainly doesn't lose power but I would have expected it to climb for an additional 500-1000RPM with the cam profile I am running. new dyno graph tomorrow.

Note: Red Line is pre standard ECU tune ! ECU has been flashed tuned like Jason VRX No piggyback hear

Dyno Graph attached for the before.... this is the RPW manifold dyno run.. note the flat spot from 5000RPM car certainly doesn't lose power but I would have expected it to climb for an additional 500-1000RPM with the cam profile I am running. new dyno graph tomorrow.

Note: Red Line is pre standard ECU tune ! ECU has been flashed tuned like Jason VRX No piggyback hear
:shock: How did you manage that?

I dare say he`s running a TH series ECU as these are the only ones that can be cracked and flashed without the use of a piggyback,thne later ECU`s are locked and cannot be modded

Steve

Ok Its official please see the attached Dyno graph..... as I have said I replaced RPM manifold with the standard one for the purpose of showing you all that everything on the market doesn't necessarily stack up Blue line is the standard manifold & the red is the RPW manifold...... to be honest I was quiet shocked to see that I pickup 3KWATW with the standard manifold I really was hoping for the other way around but it was not to be.

When building a NA engine its always good to know what modifications do what.....:confused:

I have a new 72mm Billet TB going on tomorrow so stay tuned for the next update

PS.... anyone what to buy an RPW manifold ??? :cool:

where did you get the 72mm TB from and how much did it cost you?

Special Build from a local QLD company....... Its has been drawn up in a cad software package so reproduction would be a easy.... good thing about this TB is that it utilizes the factory TPS & Idle control motor if required.

Information will follow shortly.... $$$ 450 Inc GST

Ok Its official please see the attached Dyno graph..... as I have said I replaced RPM manifold with the standard one for the purpose of showing you all that everything on the market doesn't necessarily stack up Blue line is the standard manifold & the red is the RPW manifold...... to be honest I was quiet shocked to see that I pickup 3KWATW with the standard manifold I really was hoping for the other way around but it was not to be.

When building a NA engine its always good to know what modifications do what.....:confused:

I have a new 72mm Billet TB going on tomorrow so stay tuned for the next update

PS.... anyone what to buy an RPW manifold ??? :cool:

Couldve told ya that about the "modified" stock manifold from that place in WA :badgrin:

The TB will help you but i get the feeling there is something else holding your engine back. As the very first 3.5L engine i built made 171.2Kws@wheels and it had the same 10:1 pistons as you, remapped factory ECU, mildly ported heads, mild (256deg duration/standard ralliart lift) prototype "ralliart" cams, stock plenum and a offset machined/bored out to 71.3mm factory TB as well as the pacemakers and full 2 1/2" exhaust.

Jason did you receive my PM ?? keen to chat

Ok Its official please see the attached Dyno graph..... as I have said I replaced RPM manifold with the standard one for the purpose of showing you all that everything on the market doesn't necessarily stack up Blue line is the standard manifold & the red is the RPW manifold...... to be honest I was quiet shocked to see that I pickup 3KWATW with the standard manifold I really was hoping for the other way around but it was not to be.

When building a NA engine its always good to know what modifications do what.....:confused:

I have a new 72mm Billet TB going on tomorrow so stay tuned for the next update

PS.... anyone what to buy an RPW manifold ??? :cool:

Wow that is interesting. I have dyno sheets showing totally the opposite and picking up 8kwatw by putting on an RPW Plenum. What else was the tuner looking for? We see there was more than 15 power runs between figures shown.
Looking forward to seeing(riding) in this car of yours. Maybe on a cruise next year. Really sounds like you have some thing a bit different to the rest up here.;)

hmmm Jason and Chaddy... where the hell did you get your ECUs flashed??????

A secret agent that happens to live in SA so you are in luck PM me and I may be able to assist

hmmm Jason and Chaddy... where the hell did you get your ECUs flashed??????

The security "lock" codes on mine were cracked whilst i was working for MMAL and first flashed by the same guy who did chaddys but after that (in 2001) i obtained my own copy of the software and the means to reflash my own in realtime on a dyno.

Unfortunately i didnt find out how the security codes were manipulated, so i cant do anyone elses with my software/hardware.

Yeah Jason you know the drill !! The ECU I have in my car is an engineering sample ECU so its already unlocked... but Im sure if you talk to the right people anything is possible.

I had to fly the tuner & his software from SA to brisbane for the day to do the job for me but hey I got to meet a real nice guy in the process and might I add he knows his **** when it comes to flashing ECU in these cars.lol

It would be awesome to see the Dyno graph of your 172KWATW Jason if you still have it lying around? Please Post

It seems the Streetfighter will knock the opposition products ............ head over heals :D

This could be the case very keen to give one a go !! PM me with your details cheers... how long before this will be available ?

The info on some details as they are known at present are here

http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61690&page=8


Probably have them on the road (freight) around Dec 12th

....
Also to all the naysayers, dont speak till you have driven a car with the manifold on there, changes the entire feel of the car and power delievery.

How, exactly? :cool:

Keen to try one thats for sure but Im not paying for something until I try it or have solid proof on my car ! Once bitten twice shy :cry: . If we can work a deal that accommodates for my needs and produces the results I'm good to go, the fact that you are in QLD is a positive.... I look forward to you reply email.

Ok Its official please see the attached Dyno graph..... as I have said I replaced RPM manifold with the standard one for the purpose of showing you all that everything on the market doesn't necessarily stack up Blue line is the standard manifold & the red is the RPW manifold...... to be honest I was quiet shocked to see that I pickup 3KWATW with the standard manifold I really was hoping for the other way around but it was not to be.

Interesting. This was certainly not my experience. Stock 98kw, RPW untuned 110kw, RPW tuned with Haltech interceptor 124.3kw. Interesting too that you say there was a flat spot above 5,000 RPM. Again, not my experience. I found there were multiple little dead zones around the 1800 to 3800rpm zone and then the thing woke up in big hurry. Again, with the Haltech tuned all this went away and it's just one smooth headlong rush. Ian and I spent loads of time chatting about this and whilst we both agreed that the Streetfighter (as now known) would always need a piggyback ECU to the get the best from it, the aim was to have it give a smoother delivery than the RPW unit in the first place.

I'd still really love to see someone test the RPW and Streetfighter back to to back on the one car tho...

Schnell Im not for one second saying that you didn't gain any power from your manifold change and or tune..... but when you are in the 150KWATW + range the playing field is a little different .... Im sure you can understand what Im saying! Mate in my testing i didn't get Jack & Im confident on my findings... as I was there the whole time ! I would luv to test the streetfighter manifold on my car..... I welcome the opportunity in fact and will pay for the installation and Dyno time if anyone is willing to give me the chance to test pilot the design.... bring it ON ! :D

Chaddy

Deleted content.

Have called chaddy and we have a rough plan in place for a manifold test in the future

WOT only tells you about 10% of the story too. The SF is strong in the part throttle 30-70% and very strong 70+.

Getting compatible components is critical too, imagine your cams are strong from 4500 - 6500 but the manifold's bellmouths are restricting airflow entry into the plenum AND lengthening the runners, which is hurting top end (5200+). The manifold may be peaking just as your cams are building momentum. The larger TB is trying to help the top but the manifold is likely to be slowing things up in the high rpm and hence peak power figures.

Did you adjust timing to suit or just pnp? What octane fuel are you using I assume 95-98?

With a tune my AWD with Streetfighter (2nd last proto) jumped from 114 to 132 at all 4 treads - that's a 15% gain over untuned at the wheels. Both results on 98ron - which I'm actually using less of thanks to the tune! Barely had 105 2yrs ago when I had it dyno'd. Huge on-road difference. Loads of torque and delivery is very linear. Check the attached dyno.

To bring newcomers upto speed, Schnell is directly responsible for the manifold project getting off my drawing board. The 3L and 3.5L have glaring low rpm deficiencies and that was always my priority especially given I have an AWD with it's 5spd auto and extra weight. The SF hits at 3200 and pulls in a very linear fashion from then on. Top end slows a little as the runner diameter finally impedes flow - but that's a deliberate function of the huge low and mid range torque gains which require a smaller diameter to achieve higher velocity.

If you wanted the Streetfighter for a track car then I would be comfortable with people machining/die grinding the ports open upto the runner union, along with tidying up the lower inlet manifold. Opening up the ports on the 1st proto gave significant gains all over the curve. Just remember that going nuts here will raise the rpm onset of the Streetfighters torque fury.

Remember peak power is still a function of torque vs rpm.

Thanks Ian... Understand your design is for a AWD model magna.... altho I haven't done allot of posting.... believe me I have done allot of reading over the last year on this very forum.... TBH I haven't needed to post due to the required information being readily available if you look hard enough!
Newcomer I may be but I have a genuine 160+ kWATW with great torque figures to boot, if I can help people gain additional knowledge on what really works on these cars & what doesn't then I have been to true to myself & the people reading these forums with the hope of spending hard earned money on performance items that net healthy gains!
The streetfighter manifold looks interesting in design with a **** load of R&D that has obviously gone into it & and from the dyno graph you have presented it indicates healthy midrange gains with a solid overall performance gains which is awesome... but again as I have stated earlier there are 2 many factors that can change a dyno reading:confused:
Im happy to trial and install with every intension of purchasing the SF manifolds but again if I cant test it in my environment under identical conditions I don't really have anything to go off as I certainly would not buy any performance part that shows the results on a dyno graph that doesn't show any important figures that can alter a reading IE.... IT,AT,BP,RR etc etc.....

Now I can add my experience.

Put my Ralliart on a dyno on Thurs 16th Oct - 169hp at the wheels.
Fitted the RPW manifold (from another Magna) the next day and put it back on the dyno.
Result? 169hp at the wheels, but at 200rpm earlier, with slight increases (2-4hp) midrange.
Also the RPW manifold drops off more rapidly after peak power.

Sat 18th Oct - removed the manifold and put back the original.

I have always tried to support RPW but feel a bit let down here esp after paying $1,000.
Their quoted figures were from their T/T magna, and maybe some other changes occured at the same time to give their power increase.

It seems the Streetfighter will knock the opposition products ............ head over heals :D

I hope you will build on Ian's hard work by doing conclusive back-to-back testing vs the factory manifold before the product is released. the ONLY way to sell a performace product is to provide concrete credible test data.

This means back-to-back testing against the factory manifold on the same car, on the same dyno, and on the same day with minimal down-time between the runs. This is the ONLY way to provide results that are 100% (or as close as possible) credible.

We're talking about a relatively small amout of power either way, so IMO even runs done on the same dyno but not on the same day is simply not substantial enough evidence (my tuner tells me there is a bit of variance even on the same dyno when the runs aren't done on the same day). Of course when you're talking about power gains of like 50kw, variances of 5-10% no longer matter much, but that's not the case with this product.

I hope you are able to provide the product with concrete test data up front that AMC members deserve..I'm sick and tired of seeing people being sold products that obviously underachieve on what was promised (not having a go at anyone in particular, just an general observation about the car modding scene/business).


Ok Its official please see the attached Dyno graph..... as I have said I replaced RPM manifold with the standard one for the purpose of showing you all that everything on the market doesn't necessarily stack up Blue line is the standard manifold & the red is the RPW manifold...... to be honest I was quiet shocked to see that I pickup 3KWATW with the standard manifold I really was hoping for the other way around but it was not to be.

When building a NA engine its always good to know what modifications do what.....:confused:

I have a new 72mm Billet TB going on tomorrow so stay tuned for the next update

PS.... anyone what to buy an RPW manifold ??? :cool:

That's interesting Chris, guess we were headed in the right direction discussing trying the factory manifold back on, it does look less flat at the top now. Although I agree given your cam profile, the top-end of your build still seems to being held back, I was hoping you'd see more of an improvement going back to the stock manifold. Is it possible your cams were ground incorrectly? Not the first time I've heard of this happening? I'm thinking the cams were ground incorrectly, or the heads weren't done quite right (flowbench results?). But I hope it's something more trival/cheap to change!


Im not sure about the RPW manifold ... but I will be able to answer the question early next week. In saying that the mid range torque and power figures are impressive but I feel the manifold restricts top end and or peak power output due to the lengthened runners and the internal ram tubes.


On the money again, the key to good top-end in terms of manifold design is relatively short and big runners, while longer/smaller runners will help further down the revrange by promoting higher air velocity (up to a point, too small = restriction).

Thanks Andy... your feedback and support is very much appreciated. I am beginning to think there is an issue with the camshafts as well :cry: But Im all over it as we speak.... I will email you in the next couple of days with a very interesting development !

I hope you will build on Ian's hard work by doing conclusive back-to-back testing vs the factory manifold before the product is released. the ONLY way to sell a performace product is to provide concrete credible test data.


The information put forward by EZBOY and BJ310S is the only information for the streetfighter. EZBOY can inform you how the test was conducted, I believe his before runs with the Streetfighter and the tuned runs all occurred the same day. What dyno runs he has/had with stock manifold on that engine I don't know but feel certain you will see his explanation.

Anyone buying the Streetfighter is buying it BASED ON EZBOY'S RESULTS, no more and no less.

The information put forward by EZBOY and BJ310S is the only information for the streetfighter. EZBOY can inform you how the test was conducted, I believe his before runs with the Streetfighter and the tuned runs all occurred the same day. What dyno runs he has/had with stock manifold on that engine I don't know but feel certain you will see his explanation.

Anyone buying the Streetfighter is buying it BASED ON EZBOY'S RESULTS, no more and no less.

I believe Ian has freely admitted the method of testing wasn't ideal (I believe the runs were done on different days? Please correct me If I'm wrong), but himself and those involved did the best they could with time constraints etc. Back-to-back dyno runs on the same car, day and dyno was always Ian's intented method of testing from the beginning (I know, I was involved).

By the looks of it, you represent a well-equipped and reputable workshop, and presumably are going to making money off selling this product. Surely a reputable workshop selling a performance product at a profit would do the RnD to provide conrete test data BEFORE selling it?

I'm sorry, but the idea of selling the manifold without what I believe would be conclusive testing is absurd, you aren't a backyard tinkerer, you are a substantial business in the car modding market. We are talking about a relative pittance in resources/cost to provide final conclusive test results for a product you are selling at some considerable price.

This is just my opinion from a business stand point of view, please don't take it as me trying to bad-mouth your operation. I just believe if you are going to be selling the manifold, AMCers deserve to have conclusive test results to back up the product they are buying, when you no doubt have the resouces to provide it.

Btw I don't know what the exact arrangement is between you, Ian and the previous "silent backer", I'm just commenting from my viewpoint.

I'm sorry, but the idea of selling the manifold without what I believe would be conclusive testing is absurd, you aren't a backyard tinkerer, you are a substantial business in the car modding market. We are talking about a relative pittance in resources/cost to provide final conclusive test results for a product you are selling at some considerable price.


No need to be sorry. Firstly you are wrong, about the relative pittance and nothing is easy even if it might seem so at your end. We might be selling at a price you consider is a reasonable amount but the profit margin is barely making it even worth starting on. So minor profit versus any cost increase leave a cost benefit gap on my end. Some things can be a high price but do not necessarily represent a product that is making someone rich anytime soon.


This is just my opinion from a business stand point of view, please don't take it as me trying to bad-mouth your operation. I just believe if you are going to be selling the manifold, AMCers deserve to have conclusive test results to back up the product they are buying, when you no doubt have the resouces to provide it.

Can't do much bad mouthing when nothing has been even cast yet, no money collected or anything else apart from the first sand cores having been formed and ready for casting this coming Monday. So long as you don't slide into slandering you will be ok


I have also made it 100% clear in the manifold thread that anyone purchasing the product is buying it on the understanding that EZBOY's and BJ310S results are the only results for the product. At this point in time Raptor is merely reproducing the manifold and for the most part supply back to people who had their long standing orders with EZBOY. If they are happy with this understanding then it is enough, there are no other promises that have been made.


AMCer's, your turn to speak on this as well, do you want to see this manifold with you by Christmas or sometime later next year. Reason for next year delay would be we have christmas coming up (businesses closing) and we have to align car/s and dyno and time to do the required testing the above member is believing you want.

I believe Ian has freely admitted the method of testing wasn't ideal (I believe the runs were done on different days? Please correct me If I'm wrong), but himself and those involved did the best they could with time constraints etc. Back-to-back dyno runs on the same car, day and dyno was always Ian's intented method of testing from the beginning (I know, I was involved).

By the looks of it, you represent a well-equipped and reputable workshop, and presumably are going to making money off selling this product. Surely a reputable workshop selling a performance product at a profit would do the RnD to provide conrete test data BEFORE selling it?

I'm sorry, but the idea of selling the manifold without what I believe would be conclusive testing is absurd, you aren't a backyard tinkerer, you are a substantial business in the car modding market. We are talking about a relative pittance in resources/cost to provide final conclusive test results for a product you are selling at some considerable price.

This is just my opinion from a business stand point of view, please don't take it as me trying to bad-mouth your operation. I just believe if you are going to be selling the manifold, AMCers deserve to have conclusive test results to back up the product they are buying, when you no doubt have the resouces to provide it.

Btw I don't know what the exact arrangement is between you, Ian and the previous "silent backer", I'm just commenting from my viewpoint.

here here

it doesnt sound like youre bagging him at all, if anything youre singing their praises and expecting a little more out of such a reputable operation

It seems most comment is coming from people whocan't buy the product anyway, a Sprintex and this manifold can't happen. That being the case your intense interest suggests you have an axe to grind over something somewhere in the past with EZBOY

I believe this will come to light

I have also asked EZBOY if he can organise same day back to back tests, might be easier to bring together than I thought

i dont think people have an axe to grind here, remember that we magna owners are used to getting ****ed over, sad but true

please dont take anything personal, cause its not, these guys just look out for their and always take an interest in new products

You've driven my car haven't you? Did it feel like a 1700kg, four wheel drive tank with a slushbox?

People who I can remember that have driven my car:

Screamin TE
BJ31OS
Magna00
NZ_Tamago
Graham A. Bell
Heath Young.

2 of these people have a Sprintex on now or at the time, be interesting to hear their feedback given the amount of torque from the SC vs how much torque my car had available.

I am not sure whats going on here, but I agree with what Chisholm is saying.

Reliable data should be provided.

Btw I don't know what the exact arrangement is between you, Ian and the previous "silent backer", I'm just commenting from my viewpoint.
I'm not a silent backer any more. This was an arrangement strictly between Ian and I to benefit all AMC members. The new operation is a different kettle of fish.

My own view on this is that the manifolds should be cast and supplied to the people who have orders. We can quibble all we like about what the exact extent of the gains may be but at the moment three irrefutable pieces of evidence stack up in favour of the gains being both obvious and worthwhile:

the sheer time and research put into this project by Ian. This was no chuck it together project. Ian did his homework on gas flow principles, tested real world prototypes over a number of iterations and consulted specilaists such as Graham Bell

dyno testing showed tangible gains AT LEAST equivalent to the gains with the much more expensive RPW unit. Ian and I exchanged results right the way through the process of me fitting then tuning the RPW unit. And bear in the mind the aim was always to produce something that would outperform that unit

a number of people who I trust (Brad and Chris chief amongst them) and who know these cars/motors well have driven the manifold and found the gains obvious.

So I vote we go ahead with casting this year.

Btw I don't know what the exact arrangement is between you, Ian and the previous "silent backer", I'm just commenting from my viewpoint.

Since the post was presumably about data testing/performance results etc I wonder what this sentence is all about? I say to Chisholm ........ if you have problems with Ian take them to him directly as I am certain he will address your questions. You are local to him I believe so go do it.





Schnell

Thankyou, you have dispelled one myth there, the 3rd party one, I didn't know anything about it but if I needed to know Ian would have told me, all good! Done and Dead, thankyou.

The second thing is to get Ian's car back to the dyno and spend a few hours with stock manifold etc etc then modified manifold ....... all done on same day.

I think we would invite any AMC members who want to witness the results to be there. The results on that day (providing we can make it happen) will be final and the basis of all claims.

I'm not aware of any issue btwn myself and Andy, even thou Andy's car was used to test the very 1st prototype (the details of that prototype and it's goals have been discussed to death). We are now at Prototype #4 and this is production ready.

MAD35L has volunteered some of his time tomorrow to put my car thou it's paces and to showcase the manual conversion for his car - which I'm really looking forward to doing :D

I will look to obtain a stock manifold (sold mine as I figured I'd never ever need it again :cool: ) and organise some *more* testing.

I'm not aware of any issue btwn myself and Andy, even thou Andy's car was used to test the very 1st prototype (the details of that prototype and it's goals have been discussed to death). We are now at Prototype #4 and this is production ready.

MAD35L has volunteered some of his time tomorrow to put my car thou it's paces and to showcase the manual conversion for his car - which I'm really looking forward to doing :D

I will look to obtain a stock manifold (sold mine as I figured I'd never ever need it again :cool: ) and organise some *more* testing.

i have a manifold im willing to donate

It seems most comment is coming from people whocan't buy the product anyway, a Sprintex and this manifold can't happen. That being the case your intense interest suggests you have an axe to grind over something somewhere in the past with EZBOY



Nope, no axe to grind here, Ian is a very nice bloke and I have no issues with him at all (or anyone else involved in the project including Martin). I think the RnD of the product could have been done a bit differently, but of course it's easy to say that with the benefit of hindsight and as an "outsider" after the 1st prototype was tested on my car.

I was under the impression you'd be selling the manifold at a considerably profit margin and in fairly large volumes. However since you seem to be saying that's not the case, it's understandable if you aren't prepared to do further testing on it (although it would be nice if SOMEONE did).

Personally I'd rather the product be priced slightly higher if it means same day back-to-back testing can be done once and for all on the final product, but that's just me.

I'm well aware of the fact that the main aim of the manifold now is to improve part-throttle driveability, which isn't going to show up on a WOT dyno run, even if it may be quite a dramatic difference in real terms. Nonetheless, IMO it would be great to have same-day back-to-back dyno results for those who wanto look at WOT numbers.

As I ended up going with a Sprintex setup, I'm never going to be buying this product, so no longer have any "investment" in it. I'm just putting in my 2 cents because I want AMC members looked after as much as possible, that's all. I apologise if I came off too harsh, that wasn't my intent.

I was under the impression you'd be selling the manifold at a considerably profit margin and in fairly large volumes.

Volumes? I know nothing about any volume other than 14 or so pre Christmas orders and on the profit......... you think I am a ripp off????

There is not one Magna product I offer at present that is very interesting $$$ wise, more a service to the Magna world and long term hope of moderate volume to offset costs.

Volumes? I know nothing about any volume other than 14 or so pre Christmas orders and on the profit......... you think I am a ripp off????

There is not one Magna product I offer at present that is very interesting $$$ wise, more a service to the Magna world and long term hope of moderate volume to offset costs.

Note I said I was under the impression, you clarified what the situation is a few posts back :)

Never suggested you are trying to rip people off.

If you had been around here for a long time, you'd understand why some of us magna modders tend to get a bit cautious/defensive towards aftermarket products/people. The amount of crap/rip offs/whatever some of us have to do put with over the years is absurd (although that goes with the car modding game in general, I'd say it's definantely been MUCH worse for those like us modding something with non-existent mainstream backing).

However IMO these days it's definantely improving greatly, finally we are getting some "off the shelf" quality products/support coming through (such as yours hopefully).


Since the post was presumably about data testing/performance results etc I wonder what this sentence is all about?

I was simply referring to the fact that I didn't know what the terms of the agreement were between you Ian and Martin (e.g I thought maybe you were going to be selling them, but Ian was still going to do further testing etc).

Ahhh its times like these that im glad i do my own R&D and engine buildups/mods for only my car lol

Now lets ALL just wait and see these manifolds actually get on some cars (maybe mine included) and out there on the street..... then and ONLY THEN can we make clear and definate decisions. As they say when the flag drops the bull-s-h-i-t stops.....

Yeah Jason I understand what you are talking about ..... but again if you have important information to broadcast that can save people time and money from your R&D and knowledge that also can be useful...... I guess thats what a forum is for but from what I can pickup there seems to be allot of fence sitting going on.... and the people with the knowledge are reluctant to broadcast it & if they do it in tongues or riddles if you pickup what Im putting down !!:confused:

Ahhh its times like these that im glad i do my own R&D and engine buildups/mods for only my car lol

Now lets ALL just wait and see these manifolds actually get on some cars (maybe mine included) and out there on the street..... then and ONLY THEN can we make clear and definate decisions. As they say when the flag drops the bull-s-h-i-t stops.....

lol Well said, 1/4 mile times will show more then dyno readouts.

Yeah Jason I understand what you are talking about ..... but again if you have important information to broadcast that can save people time and money from your R&D and knowledge that also can be useful...... I guess thats what a forum is for but from what I can pickup there seems to be allot of fence sitting going on.... and the people with the knowledge are reluctant to broadcast it & if they do it in tongues or riddles if you pickup what Im putting down !!:confused:

when it comes to buying products and the like, I'm all for full disclosure.

when it involves an individual's personal research and development (which other less scrupulous individuals would certainly use for profit), then it becomes very hard to justify freely giving that away by broadcasting it over the internet. unfortunately, it doesn't only help the people of the forums.

if you're after tips and suggestions, it's my opinion that a kindly worded PM usually goes a long way.

cheers,
.wook

Thanks Wook,

Agree 110% I guess PM work if people reply.... that was my point ! I have had a couple of really important questions for people in the know about camshaft & Manifold related issues that have come to light in my quest to get the best out of my build.

Also I guess if we look back in this very post there was an important piece of information that someone had which would have saved allot of time and money for people trying to gain max top end power from NA builds.

But hey its all good !!

Thanks Wook,

Agree 110% I guess PM work if people reply.... that was my point ! I have had a couple of really important questions for people in the know about camshaft & Manifold related issues that have come to light in my quest to get the best out of my build.

Also I guess if we look back in this very post there was an important piece of information that someone had which would have saved allot of time and money for people trying to gain max top end power from NA builds.

But hey its all good !!

All i can say chaddy is that after being on here for over 3yrs now, ive learnt to play my cards very very close to my chest. I have helped a few people on various forums only to have been stuffed around hence my feeling to not disclose my R&D/product information, hell it took alot of my time and effort (and a bit of money) to achieve what i have. I honestly dont feel the need to blurt out exactly what i have and havnt done on a public forum. :badgrin:

There are some on here that ive opened my knowledge up to because i trust them and so far they havnt let me down. Ian aka EZboy is one of them that has my trust. Call me arrogant and maybe i am but it doesnt worry me cos as they say once bitten twice shy.

Ive also learnt that alot of people dont have the actual skills to do alot of the major work on there cars

I could probably market some of my parts as power up/buildup "kits" that work on a NA engine but in all hoesty would it be worth it for me... No, the money outlaid wouldnt be recovered, i guess at the end of the day my magna is a hobby car for me and thats all it will ever be. I dont even get excited about driving it anymore, i suppose after owning it for 9yrs the shine has worn of completely lol

Oh and one last thing our magna engines are just the same as other NA engines, if you want NA power it needs to be revved and to do that ya need it to breath well. Thats why for the majority on here its better for them to go the forced induction route like raptor or sprintex or turbo. If the boost is kept lowish it will be reliable and put out reasonable grunt that doesnt require the engine to have its tits revved off.

"Here IT All Is:"

Back to the beginning:

The Problem/Background:
The 3.5 and 3L are doughy at best under 3000rpm, my AWD lives in the 1500-2400 band all day - often in 5th gear at 60kph trying to pull uphill. Fuel economy needs improvement. These are pretty modern engines by many standards (released in 1996 like 8years ahead of a 4valve Holden V6!) - 4valve heads, pentroof combustion chambers, cross flow heads, good squish area. So why the hell don't they make more power?? Apart from the cams and compression ratio, all the ground work for good airflow into the combustion chambers appear to be in place. The battle is volumetric efficiency. I've said this to death on here but here goes: The EOM runners are long to support low and mid as is the small plenum size BUT the runner cross section is TOO large to bring these components together. The manifold hasn't decided what it wants to do and hence does nothing well - just adequate.

Plan:
Reproduce sucess of a mild-steel manifold I made earlier dubbed "Frankenstein" into a readily reproducable item and make it affordable. Not adversely effect fuel economy, if possible improve milage.

P1 - Test the use of smaller dual runners and a smaller port diam to max out air velocity at low and mid rpm. Result: significant loss of peak power (which was expected due to the restricted runner diams). At WOT the curve never caught the oem. However, part throttle was sharp and Chisholm reported significant fuel economy improvements.

That was inspiring but I want more power - I believed that ALL design criteria could be met.

P1.5 - The P1 manifold was ported out by hand at the flange to the lower mani. Result: peak power on the day was down 3kw BUT the low and mid had firmed up and was even ahead of a 3.5L dynod at the same time. The runners needed to be enlarged and so to the port to get max benefit everywhere. I suspect some bottom end may be sacrificed to keep the top happy but it's all about experimentation.

P3 - My car. My car AWD was dyno'd over 2yrs ago in Newcastle and scraped in with 105atw. With the P3 on and no tune, power was up on those figures even thou I've lost the printout which annoys me because I wanted to compare the curves. Took my car to Hunter AWD Dyno the friday before the scheduled Club dyno day. I wanted to get a tune done with the Moristech ECU as I thought it would be a fantastic surprise on the sunday when an AWD touched up the FWD crew! lol Unfortunately HAWDD couldn't get a cable to connect their laptop to my Moristech to work and when we finally worked it out the laptop battery died and we'd run out of time. I was absolutely spewing. The same ramp rate was used on sunday. I would have expected to be putting down the numbers as a 3.5 manual. (see chart).

Several weeks later I went back to HAWDD and we reopened the previous file and used it to make the map. With some timing advance changes I'd made on the road with the laptop the peak output at wot was 123, with the ECU bypassed we could only muster 112-3 from memory after 4runs. So with 98ron in the tank and the ECU on, we started tuning. I sat in the passengers side with the laptop while old-mate operated the dyno. We achieved good gains ALL OVER the matrix with several exeptions where timing changes made no improvement. In some spots an extra 20deg of spark was added. We did the WOT tuning first and worked backwards - the car got bl00dy hot and we were constantly letting it cool down during this time. I was stunned at the numbers continued to climb throught the WOT band (90%+) as timing was added and fuel richened and trimmed as necessary. It took around 4hours to get the map done - we were pretty cautious the whole time. So again we let it idle down to cool and then we did 2x power runs. The 2nd run was 132 and I didn't think the car needed to do a 3rd - I just wanted a damn drive!! :D

P4 FINAL MARK - Tested on an Auto 3L. Same ramprates etc as previous runs, same facility and dyno. P1.5/2 tested AM bright sunny day, P4 tested mid afternoon also a bright sunny day. Turned a 101 into 110 peak, improvements ALL throughout the curve. Good result for a 3L auto untuned. The intake was relocated to OEM position and the faulty MAF sensor connections (broken) were fixed when the P4 was installed. The MAF lowmount wires were damaged when getting reversed onto the dyno at HAWDD dyno day with AMC/NMC. Had Brad scratching his head for a few days - random stalling, poor running.

Comments: The hot day was probably taking it's toll on final figures, and it didn't help that the dyno fan wasn't getting ANY air even close to the inlet opening. So open road output would theoretically be higher still. Brad wont give the manifold back, even his Mrs noticed straight away that something was different with the car when she drove it (we did the install on the stealth ;) ). Car is much more driveable over the entire rpm band and throttle positions, fuel economy is the same or slightly better.

Criteria met. Mission accomplished. Sure the dyno results weren't conducted on the same days but the in-car experience is the testimony. Car's motor runs smoother, revs freely, pulls hard, maintains traffic speed with ease. Brad has offered to let people drive/ride in his car to experience the difference for themselves. Magna00 has driven the car too which was a very interesting comparison for him given Brad has a 3L 4spAuto and Daniel a 3.5L 4spAuto. It'd be useful to hear some of Daniels feedback on this comparison and also his feedback from driving my car.

thats a mega post with plenty of info to satisfy, but so much for lying low.

theres only so many times you can use www.youporn.com as an excuse for sneaking the laptop into the toilet to post on amc, pretty sure the mrs will catch on mate ;)

thats a mega post with plenty of info to satisfy, but so much for lying low.

theres only so many times you can use www.youporn.com (http://www.youporn.com) as an excuse for sneaking the laptop into the toilet to post on amc, pretty sure the mrs will catch on mate ;)

Youporn hey? Thanks..... :shifty:

now ya know why im up all night

Thanks for your honesty Jason.... now I know where I stand ! I have attempted to be as open and honest as I can to gain the knowledge I required..... I completely respect your situation & decision .... you are correct Im not somebody that can get the job done myself I rely on other people to perform the implementation of modifications based on my limited knowledge but hey for someone with limited knowledge I have got pretty close I guess :D

I have since found out today what as been limiting my top end i think ..... the lobe separation on the 2 camshafts are different.... 5 degrees in fact... so the camshafts as fighting each other... new cam is being reproduced as I speak so hopefully that will help along with the new 72mm billet TB I might just achieve what I would have been expecting..... if not the heads will be removed and the porting work that I had done will be reviewed... failing that the exhaust & inlet will be reviewed..... I have the money to get this done and 2BH I would be happy to pay you for your knowledge but I will leave that one with you to ponder.... knowledge is everything in this game and you obviously know the 6g74 engine allot better than i.

I have never got excited about driving any car TBH well maybe the GT3 but what I do get excited about is achieving results from something I have built up from my limited knowledge.... it certainly keeps me coming back for more much to my wife's disgust !

Thanks again for your help

Chris


All i can say chaddy is that after being on here for over 3yrs now, ive learnt to play my cards very very close to my chest. I have helped a few people on various forums only to have been stuffed around hence my feeling to not disclose my R&D/product information, hell it took alot of my time and effort (and a bit of money) to achieve what i have. I honestly dont feel the need to blurt out exactly what i have and havnt done on a public forum. :badgrin:

There are some on here that ive opened my knowledge up to because i trust them and so far they havnt let me down. Ian aka EZboy is one of them that has my trust. Call me arrogant and maybe i am but it doesnt worry me cos as they say once bitten twice shy.

Ive also learnt that alot of people dont have the actual skills to do alot of the major work on there cars

I could probably market some of my parts as power up/buildup "kits" that work on a NA engine but in all hoesty would it be worth it for me... No, the money outlaid wouldnt be recovered, i guess at the end of the day my magna is a hobby car for me and thats all it will ever be. I dont even get excited about driving it anymore, i suppose after owning it for 9yrs the shine has worn of completely lol

Oh and one last thing our magna engines are just the same as other NA engines, if you want NA power it needs to be revved and to do that ya need it to breath well. Thats why for the majority on here its better for them to go the forced induction route like raptor or sprintex or turbo. If the boost is kept lowish it will be reliable and put out reasonable grunt that doesnt require the engine to have its tits revved off.

I have since found out today what as been limiting my top end i think ..... the lobe separation on the 2 camshafts are different.... 5 degrees in fact... so the camshafts as fighting each other... new cam is being reproduced as I speak so hopefully that will help along with the new 72mm billet TB I might just achieve what I would have been expecting..... if not the heads will be removed and the porting work that I had done will be reviewed... failing that the exhaust & inlet will be reviewed..... I have the money to get this done and 2BH I would be happy to pay you for your knowledge but I will leave that one with you to ponder.... knowledge is everything in this game and you obviously know the 6g74 engine allot better than i.


Chris

Thats only a small lobe seperation difference which shouldnt really effect the top end too much as the factory magna cams have different lobe centres/seperation between the front and the back cams. Eg 3.5L KF-KH/3.5 TH number "4" cams have around 8degrees difference between them, also the prototype "ralliart"cams that were in my original built up engine had a difference between them.

Ok... many thanks Jason.... I guess at this stage for me its a process of elimination but again thanks for the heads up ! Cheers Chris :confused:

Chaddy74: Did your rpw manifold have the internal bellmouths? My opinion is that they would upset top end air delivery, but enhance it between 3-4000. Manifolds will perform slightly, but noticably differently between the 3L and the larger 3.5. Because the 3.5 draws in 16.67% more air each rpm, it is drawing more air hence a higher velocity down the runners and better VE - until the equilibrium is passed, then there is restriction to peak VE. Therefore the 3.5 will be less efficient up top with the bellmouths intact. The taper-off has occurred pretty well where you would expect it to given this information.

Hi Ian,

Yeah its the bell mouth model please see attached .... thanks for the info! :)

Yeah. Starting to make a bit of sense now. It seems to be in conflict with your other mods, namely cam profile and large bore TB, rather than complimenting them. It's true too that going all peak output will diminish the daily driver side of the car and hence it's practicallity day to day.

Apart from the WOT numbers, how does it appear to drive vs oem?

TBH Ian I cant feel to many differences between them but in saying that your comment on mid range power at part throttle is consistent I think.... its so hard to tell ! Its not a big enough change or difference for me to be confident ... that make sense :doubt:

TBH Ian I cant feel to many differences between them but in saying that your comment on mid range power at part throttle is consistent I think.... its so hard to tell ! Its not a big enough change or difference for me to be confident ... that make sense :doubt:

Were both manifolds TUNED individually or just bolted on and dyno'd? Wondering too if the factory ECU had some tuning memory from the rpw one while the oem manifold was being dyno'd. People scoff at me but I've done 20+ manifold swaps and you can drive the car daily for upto a week with a noticable enough difference btwn manifolds then at the 5-7days mark the car just hits the wall. The start up and running averages in the ECU finally wipeout all the goodness of the non oem manifold and the car becomes sad and doughy. To prove that this phenomia is real, I immediately bolt the SF or whatever I'm playing with back on and the difference is staggering. Again wine vs water. I've also observed this a lot with TBs, HF vs oem TBs as I've often had to supply my personal HFTB to make up orders. For the first week I think to myself that the oem TB is 'fine', 'no real change at all'. Then the car just becomes a doughy, lethargic, lump. Put a HFTB back on and it's all crisp and responsive again. Go figure. Not always an exact science this car modding stuff.

anyone out there thinking of buying a streetfighter........ youre gunna love the sound from this bad boy, very growly. EZBOYs AWD has plenty of grunt.

i just wish i had that growl with the whine of the sprintex!

There is going to be a few people with both the Street Fighter and the ProStreet supercharger system fitted enjoying physical and audible pleasure :bowrofl: SIK

I have ordered mine santa's coming to me...... no harm in giving one of these bad boy's a go.....:badgrin:

You won't be dissapointed :badgrin:

Yeah Im really looking forward to this !!! :D

"Here IT All Is:"


Criteria met. Mission accomplished. Sure the dyno results weren't conducted on the same days but the in-car experience is the testimony. Car's motor runs smoother, revs freely, pulls hard, maintains traffic speed with ease. Brad has offered to let people drive/ride in his car to experience the difference for themselves. Magna00 has driven the car too which was a very interesting comparison for him given Brad has a 3L 4spAuto and Daniel a 3.5L 4spAuto. It'd be useful to hear some of Daniels feedback on this comparison and also his feedback from driving my car.


Back when we had No3 on Brads car i drove it in comparison to my car (which was NA at the time with just a lukey rear box) Brad's had fair margin down low, and because of the 3.0l's ability to rev really well in comparison to the 3.5l it was a noticeable improvement on the ye old butt dyno. After i supercharged my current car we swapped cars again, this time he had the production manifold on (no4) and again it revved a bit better then before, pulled well throughout the range and felt really good.

We ended up with a 9kw difference at the end of the day, untuned on a fairly stock 3l auto compared to the 101 he got originally. Sure the dyno runs were on different day's but they were on the exact same dyno with the same operator.

I really hope Tim/another member is able to do back to back's of the standard/rpw/Ians manifold in the not to distant future in shootout mode. That will put everything to rest once and for all.