flat out which is better?????? I hear NER has a cooler designed manifold and the good ball bearing option.....i dont know squat about the diff between T4 and 16G Help.....some one do a comparison

Discussing Manifolds..

I'd still go with Hahn. I don't like the idea of tubular manifolds... they only do one useful thing: look good - to some people.

Apart from that they are big, radiate more heat to the engine bay (less to the turbo where it should be), and will have a bigger lag (now if the lag is noticeable, that's up to you).

Personally, I beileve that when you get in serious performance, every little bit adds up and helps.


Guy
RS_Guy



http://www.GTuned.com

LAST EDITED ON 04-Jun-01 AT 02:43 PM (PST)

Well......

"tubular manifolds... they only do one useful thing: look good - to some people."

Not true they out perform any other style of manifold because of airflow layout. Like the star manifold is LOG style your trying to shoot the Exhaust Gas of 4 Cycl into a 1 inch compartment and hope that all the air is delivered in a timely manner Flat out No good by going tubular your making the load fair per cycl. There for improving flow to the turbo and getting rid of any backpressure that is made when the air travels from the block to the turbo. Why do you think exhaust headers are 4-2-1 or 4-1 if one solid piece was better then there would be just a 1 header :) So if anything it would get rid of heat better because there is more flow in the manifold.

Tubliar Manifold had bigger lag ???? Once again NO lag is not an issue when it comes to the manifold its backpressure that is a problem. Here is a bad analogy; I would rather put a quarter in a slot that was made for a quarter then trying to shove a quarter into a dime slot.

I hate to post like this but there is allot of miss information in your post RS_Guy


Thanks
Shaun Frank

The Best Parts @ The Lowest Price
http://www.newedgeracing.com

Equal length manifolds are the shit. Check out every single DSM or Honda drag racer for that matter. All tubular manifolds. Hmm...must be a reason. Same reason aftermarket headers are of the tubular design. Quicker spool up time, and speeds up the expiditing of exhaust gases. That, and they look cool ;o)




"Yes, thats Shaun shooting the finger"

LAST EDITED ON 04-Jun-01 AT 07:55 PM (PST)

OK... Full-blown explanation required as I may have been misuderstood.

Please allow me to explain a few points to note about my previous comment:

Quoting Shaun:
"Not true they out perform any other style of manifold because of airflow layout."
END Quote

Theoretically true. If anyone could ever make 4 runners of *identical* length while keeping the runners short.... basically impossible in real life! (more about this further down)

Back to Marcus' original question. For this I have to apologize, becuase I was under the impression that the NER Exhaust manifold was an a "true" Tubular Exhaust manifold i.e. one that uses *equal* length runners... such as this one:



Here is a pic of the NER Manifold (below):


...I believe it is reffered to as "tubular" ... Well it is sort of, but looking at it, very obviously, runners 1 and 4 are significantly longer than runners 2 & 3.

Therefore it takes *longer* for the exhaust gases from the end cylinders to reach the outlet. Simple physics.

Quoting SaberKhan: "Equal length manifolds are the shit." END quote.
OK, So tell me, is the pic above of an "equal length" manifold?

Theoretically are two ways to have an "ideal" manifold.

The first is to have the best possible symmetrical manifold design (such as Hahns')and the other is an "real" tubular manifold with equal length runners that would end up looking like a spaghetti mess (Good looking to some people...)

Once again there are a few problems with the "spaghetti" equal-runner-legth tubular manifolds...

- They are big and bulky, take space
- Prone to cracking (due to various "hotter" heat points throughout the runners),
- They increase engine bay temps, and some heat is lost on the way to the turbo.
- More time taken for gases to flow to the turbo.
- They becomes not-so efficient on an "imperfect" engine... which all almost engines are. By "imperfect" I mean that the exact volume of exhaust gases coming out of a cylinder is never exactly the same to the volume of exhuast gases coming out of the next cylinder, or the amount of air coming out of a cylinder from a similar engine. Compression in engines is never 100% identical across all 4 cylinders. Most people overlook this point, and unfortunately that makes that flushes the theory of "equal-length-runners" down the drain...

As you can see they are not so "ideal" any more...

On the other hand, a *properly* designed symmetric manifolds, is much smaller (shorter too!), it is usually cast (less prone to cracking), conserves heat better, spools turbos faster, and compensates for any engine compression irregularities and therefore reduces backpressure to a minimum.



I really don't mean to start an argument, and I actually really hesitated getting myself into a trap argument (as ALL the "is X better than Y" discussions end up). I just wanted to help answer the question.

Peace!

Guy
RS_Guy



http://www.GTuned.com

LAST EDITED ON 04-Jun-01 AT 09:42 PM (PST)

Add a little something about long runner equal length manifolds on race car turbos (I'm hardly an expert of course).:

Long runner tubular manifolds are used on the turbo race cars because the long runners are required to TUNE the exhaust pulses to a certain rpm range. A race car of course doesn't need to be tuned for any low end torque and a big turbo isn't going to spool at 2500rpms anyway so who cares if the turbo is a foot in a half from the exhaust ports. At 6000rpms and up on a race car the damn turbo's still gonna spool (and I would think compression plays a role and all these guys aren't running low compression like you think). prone to cracking: its a race car, how much cracking is gonna take place unloading it from a trailer and the 9 seconds it takes to run down the track. If it does put on the spare. Heat: again its a race car, things can be done not to mention ceramics and sheilding.

With typical space limited street manifolds like we use, the only things that really matter for all practicle purposes is that it flows well enough and that the 2,3 cyl and 1,4 cyl ports are the same length since they fire together. all 4 equal lengths would be great when practicle but come on are we at the edge of tuning all facets of engine development. I think not.

And you thought the sequence for mounting the star manifold was odd, try bolting that "real" tubular manifold to the head.

My 2 cents



Stan2gnt
Stan2va@aol.com
95 Talon 420A-Turbo
Former and future nitrous user

I told you guyz not to post these type of questions.. but noooooooo... no one listens... now you guyz should be ashamed of urselves fighting over an exhaust manifold. :P


ENKEI RP02 17" x 7"
AF/X UDP (still have to install:))
K&N Filter
springs/coilovers (still searchin' :D)





Junoon
97-RS
automotive/industrial design student :-)
Michigan

LAST EDITED ON 04-Jun-01 AT 09:42 PM (PST)

delete

the only super well designed equal length runner manifold I have ever seen come on Greddy turbo kits (I.e. the tdo5H-18G kit for the new SI). From what I remember, the manifold looked cast, but it actually had a channel that went OVER the hroizontal tube section that made cyl's 2 and 3 equal length of 1 and 4, and they all emptied into the turbocharger. it was about the size of hrc's manifold, or just a little bit bigger. tubular manifolds are more prone to cracking under extreme temps. they usu. have to hold up a turbocharger, and usu, don't have any support brackets of their own, and that hurries the crackign process along pretty quick. I think that that is the reason the front manifold on my vr-4 is tubular, and the rear is cast( the rear is in a HOLE). the front also has good sized brackets on the turbo assembly (manifold, turbo, o2 housing), where as the rear's extra support isn't as extensive (If I rememebr correctly, only one extra bracket, with 1 bolt). I believe all the major racers use tubular manifolds is because 1. most of them can repair the cracks that they get for little of nothing, and don't mind fixing them, 2. equal-length runners do help performance a little.....it is different when compairing this to headers....I can explain that in the next paragraph, 3. casting your own custom manifold is a LOT more expensive than bending header pipe and welding it together. 4. they usu. invest in enough header wrap, and ceramic coating and heat shields that they keep a lot of heat in (sometimes at the expense of the metal's life.....but that is up for discussion at a different time).

when you talk about 4 into 2 into 1 headers and 4 into 1 headers and turbocharging, it is really 2 different concepts (now, I am not the "guru" of flow technology, but these are just a few things that I have learned over the years). when you have a 4 into 2 into 1 header, that design usu. helps mid range and torque, whereas 4 into 1 usu. only helps top end......do you know why? from what I understand you have to think of the whole process in slow motion. number 1 cylinder fires exhaust gas out, and then #3 (I am pulling random numbers in this example. don't reem me if I ge tthe firin order wrong). then number 2 then number 4. when 1 fires, it shoots out exhaust, and actually pulls a little bit of vaccuum from the other cylinders it is connected to in the header or manifold (in this case #3), and then #3 fires. the exhaust gas doesn't have to fight a lot of backpressure because of the vaccuum caused by #1 firing. This helps flow, and increases torque. Since it is just a LITTLE vaccuum caused by this, it really doesn't benefit that much in a standard manifold because of the excess space in the wrong directions (not in the direction of flow I mean). 4 into 1 headers make more top end power because they have less to restrict them (no joins or funky bends). they don't usu. make as much mid range power as the 4-2-1 because of the first theory I spouted. when you have a turbocharger in the way, there is usu. too much backpressure in the manifold to apply the vaccuum theory (that's where turbo-spec cams can help.......I will explain that at a later time as well). the faster the exhaust gasses get past the turbo, the less pressure you have, and then the first rule begins to apply again, but that only last for a short time (usu. on top end, higher rps, where the wastegate is open). at this time, you really just want the most flow anyway, so running all kinds of funky pipe aren't to your advantage (just gives more time for the manifold to radiate heat). plus the shorter the distange from the head to the turbo (flow wise) the easier it is to pressurize the exhaust manifold, and generally, the quicker your turbo response will be (i.e. less lag).

now, the new edge racing manifold doesn't look too shabby. it actually looks pretty good, but I would just make sure that those welds are SUPER GOOD. beleive me, there have been SEVERAL instances of manifolds cracking because they just weren't strong enough, and unfortunately, the only way people find out stuff like that is either with long drawn out physics equations, or experience. I personally like the hrc kit because they test all their stuff for LONG periods of time before they sell it (beleive me, I had been itching, calling, and scratching for a LONG time before they released the stage 5 to the public). I hope to end up with the ultimate street turbo setup for my car, and I think I am on the right track so far. now If I could just get it to run..........

bring it on............

Ok...

I was hoping that my kit would not get caught up in a vs. post but that was wishful thinking on my part. I am withdrawing my fist post because I see this turning into an I know more then you know post. I made this manifold in direct comp of the star kits manifold. The Star Manifold and my manifold have been bench tested next to each other and all I know is my design flowed 38% better @ 5000RPM's. That’s just hard numbers no way around that. So for everyone who likes the manifold GREAT for those who do not I am sorry. I am not a pro on the proper airflow of a Log/Tubular manifold but the person who made it for me IS with over 15 years of experience and knowledge. That’s why I have allot of faith in this kit all the setups and layouts were done by people that know what they’re talking about not just sounding like they know. As Far as testing well. If you ask around this kit have been a project for just about a half a year not something that was put together over night.

I hope this will be my last post to this topic and sorry if I came off rude or anything. If you have any questions about Flow and detailed specs please E-mail me Shaun@Newedgeracing.com or call 409-794-9146

Thanks
Shaun Frank


The Best Parts @ The Lowest Price
http://www.newedgeracing.com

LAST EDITED ON 04-Jun-01 AT 11:34 PM (PST)

Manifold looks good to me. Is that "project car" turbo'd yet? BTW my testimony came from so called experts as I dont know sh*t (although irrelavent as none of the kits come with long runnered equal length manifolds). I thought I held out long enough as far as turbo kits for our car (damn cars stopped production in 99')and here you come not even two months into my turboing and for less $$. Damn you and Damn Wyatt too :o Whats your price on the Autometer ultralite 2" EGT gauge (the new for 2001 model)?


Stan2gnt
Stan2va@aol.com
95 Talon 420A-Turbo
Former and future nitrous user

I think it is silly to argue over which part is better when they are BOTH good. I am just set in my ways with HRC (they have been pretty good to me so far), and that is what I prefer. I say boost it which ever way feels right to you.

Bring it on............

Shaun... I wish to apologize.

I completely understand that you have a product to sell and that it is in your best interest to defend it. I also understand that your kit is quite superior to Stars'. Your turbo kit obviously looks much more well thought out and designed. I really did not intend this as a "kit" comparison question, but merely as a design of manifolds comparison.

I should never have even gotten myself into something like this. Someone always comes off badly. For that, it is my fault entirely.

We are here to help each other constructively and this thread was heading away from this.

Please accept my apology,

Guy
RS_Guy



http://www.GTuned.com

well i understand we are here to help each other so in my opinion discussing different kits makes for constructive criticism. Anyway because of you guys i now have a better grasp on the difference between tubular and other types of manifolds. Dont stop being critical of products that come out for our cars..Give honest and thought out answers to questions. If your product is good it should be able to be compared to other products like it......(this is a general comment directed to no particular member).......I think we all feel that 2 to 3 Grand is a lot of money to spend and i just wanna know what is the best for me, and the only way to get that info is from non biased consumers like ourselves.

Hey..

Well RS_Guy do not take it as a attack on you or anything I just have put allot of work a though into this kit there for I want to make sure that all the info put to this online community is as true and accurate as possible. I have allot of respect for HRC and the path they chose to market and test their kits. I am trying to do the same for the people who have a love for the Garrett turbo lineup.

Magnus said it best "I think we all feel that 2 to 3 Grand is a lot of money to spend and I just want to know what is the best for me, and the only way to get that info is from non biased consumers like ourselves"

And that’s what makes this all good we all have common ground here so the best thing to do is ask questions and not guess the answer before the question has been asked.

NE Ways RS_Guy there was no need for the apology but I am very applicative for it.

Thanks
Shaun Frank
www.NewEdgeRacing.com


The Best Parts @ The Lowest Price
http://www.newedgeracing.com