MAM Tubular Manifold Install

Rainman

Member
:
2006 Black Mica MS6 GT + 2007 MS3 (2003.5 Yellow MSP = retired)
Finally got my MAM tubular manifold installed. Some outstanding technical issues that I have contacted Beau about and am awaiting his response on. However, I have some initial comments on the performance although I have not yet had the car dynoed (I'll wait until Beau has dealt with the technical stuff before I pay for the dyno time).

First, definite difference in mid- and hi-range power. Not much change at the low end though. This is even with stock boost.

Second, the EGT values are down quite a bit. Across the range, temps are down by about 200 degrees. Consequently, the engine RPM seems to be down a bit when cruising. Previously, at approx 130 km/h my EGTs were around 1130 degrees F, and my engine ran around 3600 RPM. In the city when just driving around normally, EGTs were around 950 degrees F.

Now, at 130 km/h the EGTs rest around 950-1000 degress F (RPM around 3100), while in the city around 750 degrees F. Moreover, my gas mileage increased by about 10% with the manifold. For this I am pleasantly surprised as I was not expecting these results. I imagine that it is all a function of decreased resistance to exhaust flow, which means more flow to the turbo and throughout the exhaust system with decreased temperature increases since the turbo works less hard to accelerate and compress the air flowing through it.

I suspect that once Beau takes care of the outstanding issues, the results will be evern more favourable, but I will have to report back on that later.

R
 
How does an exhaust manifold change your gear ratios?
 
BlkZoomZoom said:
How does an exhaust manifold change your gear ratios?

that's what i'm thinking! doens't make sense to me how a manifold will change your cruising RPMs when measured at the same speed.... in your case 130kmh
 
BlkZoomZoom said:
How does an exhaust manifold change your gear ratios?

I wondered about this as well, but apart from the manifold, I haven't changed anything esle, so I can only attribute it to that.

The numbers are definitely different. I don't know what else to attribute it to.

R
 
3mos? damn... I guess that's not as bad as getting a FMIC from ION or trying to buy ANYTHING at ANY TIME from an SHO vendor.
 
vindication said:
very nice. soo what are these "issues"

Gotta be fair to Beau, and give him a chance to deal with them first brother.

R
 
Rainman said:
I wondered about this as well, but apart from the manifold, I haven't changed anything esle, so I can only attribute it to that.

The numbers are definitely different. I don't know what else to attribute it to.

R

It's impossible for the manifold to change that. Maybe you were mistaken with the readings before. Or someone threw some taller tires on and you didn't notice yet.
 
BlkZoomZoom said:
It's impossible for the manifold to change that. Maybe you were mistaken with the readings before. Or someone threw some taller tires on and you didn't notice yet.

RPM = MPH * gear ratio * 336/tire diameter

336 is a constant value. What factors affect this constant?

I am not trying to dispute physics. But the fact is that I haven't changed anything other than the manifold and yet the difference is there. I try to keep track of engine parameters pretty closely so while it could be possible that I wasn't paying close enough attention previously, I don't think so. I had my WB02 installed before the manifold and it has the capacity to datalog engine RPM as one of the variables. I should have datalogged at a constant vehicle speed before and after the install except that I hadn't gotten the software to work properly on my Mac yet.

I might have thrown taller tires on when I wasn't paying attention...LOL, but I don't have enough money for another set and I only have my stockers and my winters. It definitely is not my winters that are on there now so unless I also came into some cash that I didn't tell myself about, taller tires didn't happen either.

R
 
The "Good" picture

A pic of the engine bay with the manifold and my current piping set-up. MAF is on the pressure-side and I recirculate my stock BPV without venting to the atmosphere.

R
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3824.webp
    IMG_3824.webp
    91.5 KB · Views: 177
BlkZoomZoom said:
It's impossible for the manifold to change that. Maybe you were mistaken with the readings before. Or someone threw some taller tires on and you didn't notice yet.

I now humbly submit to BZZ superior wisdom in this regard. After closer observationt his morning I find that I was wrong where the RPM was concerned.

Yesterday, when I was looking at the speed vs RPM relationship I did a quick on-ramp to off-ramp jaunt, running up to about 145 and then backing off to 130 before exiting the freeway. When I took the reading of RPM, I was not quite at a constant speed for an extended period, but rather decelerating from 145 to 130 (this is why I gave a range in my initial post).

Today, on my way to work I took a different route with a longer freeway run. I kept the cruising speed constant at 130 km/h for a several km stretch. I found that the RPM were around 3500-3600, a value that is the same as the value pre-manifold, considering statistical error, of course.

So, I'll have to strike that benefit OFF the MAM manifold list. However, I do stand by the others.

May I offer my sincerest apologies to BZZ in this automotive matter. LOL.

R (bowdown)
 
CasopoliS said:
nice, now clean that b****! Your mani ever hit the hot pipe?


Yeah, it is kinda dirty huh? I've been waiting until all the current mods are complete before I take the time to wash her up.

Got some other s*** to do as well. Some rock chips on the hood need to be addressed, as well as two dents on the rear driver's side door and C-pillar (parking lot retards who can't seem to open their doors right). Also, this past weekend, some f--kers tried to steal the car with a coat hanger and gouged the paint on the driver's side A-pillar. I was only gone from the car for 5 min. I wished that I had caught them in the act.

R
 
Back