This would be fantastic. Truth is, ach manifold will require different supporting mods to reach absolute optimum power, but it would be a good gauge as a general comparison.
MAM Vs. Thunder Mani pics
- Thread starter ForceFed
- Start date
This would be fantastic. Truth is, ach manifold will require different supporting mods to reach absolute optimum power, but it would be a good gauge as a general comparison.
I would say to ask 505zoom,forcefed or whoever has a MAM manifold if they want to do a dyno comparison. I don't see if happening because there will be nothing in it for them.
steedspeed
Member
Perhaps 505 can do a test pull for me. I'll see if he's interested once I have all the manifolds finished.
I agree, there is not alot in it for somebody to test these manifolds.
This is a common problem, and most are just tested on a dyno for the number.
There is defiantely a place for science, but I'm just not sure it pays at the end of the day.
The HP differences at under 20lbs of boost would quite possibly be hard to justify. From my short stay on this board, I would have to agree that a stock-replacement style manifold is the best bet in terms of sales and market.
This is a common problem, and most are just tested on a dyno for the number.
There is defiantely a place for science, but I'm just not sure it pays at the end of the day.
The HP differences at under 20lbs of boost would quite possibly be hard to justify. From my short stay on this board, I would have to agree that a stock-replacement style manifold is the best bet in terms of sales and market.
I somewhat agree with what you are saying here, but if something makes sense to me scientifically, I have a hard time arguing with it in my own head. I grew up in a heavily physics dominated town, and it has twisted my brain into a very analytical one.
In this case of the manifolds, in my mind, the runners should be as close to equal length as possible, and the collector should merge the runners into one as evenly (and as close to the turbine flange) as possible. Anything else just makes my brain hurt when I try to decipher the actual effects of what is going on. You can have runners blowing into each other and/or fighting with each other, turbulence being created in a very much less than ideal spot, etc.
With a well designed collector and equal length runners, none of this is a problem, and the system just flat out works the way it ideally should. Each runner effectively spins the turbine without being hindered by another runner... no need for a real world test to show me this, it is clearly visible in the design.
Whether or not I push enough boost or make enough power to actually see the difference is something I never give any thought, because I want something that will perform in theory as well as it does in actuality. Now, I am not bashing all of the other manifolds here. I just think that everything has it's own place, and to say that one manifold might perform just like another, while disregarding the scientific facts of how gases flow in a system like this, is almost silly.
Where is the point that someone in the real world will see a difference?... dunno... but I am opposite from you guys here when I say that they are very different until proven equal, not equal until proven different.
Just my .02
I would be down to do the pulls, and would also be down to do the wrenching to swap on/off/on/off/on/off manifolds, but I would demand that a disinterested third party witness everything, and that the dyno runs were not paid for by me. Just so nobody tries to say anything about the validity. Not sure who could fit that bill around here in ol' New Mexico... hell, I can't even get a small mazda bbq going here in the biggest city of the state, haha.
I would also prefer that the test car had a built motor and good EMS so we could all see the results at different boost ranges all the way up to 300+ whp. My car does not currently fit that bill unfortunately. I also do not plan to purchase another manifold, so someone else would have to provide the other manifolds for the testing at no cost. Looks like I might not be the best option here, but I am open to discussion on all this.
Heres a couple pics of the MAM with my GT28 Strapped to it.
You should consider some nice new bolts for that connection. Sorry not trying to dog ya at all, but that turbo and mani is something to be proud of and deserves some fresh hardware. Grade 10+ can be snagged at autozone for this, and doesn't cost much. Looks a million times better than old rusty bolts and will give some peace of mind.
Sorry but comments like this still feel like a dig at me in a way..."many other members, are losers"...???... I'm sorry, but how are the members that actually got parts to blame? I haven't figured out why there is still animosity towards the people running MAM parts. (dunno)
The guy got sued for basically "making race parts for street cars", and in turn went bankrupt and inadvertently screwed over some people with outstanding orders. He wasn't the devil, and probably isn't in Maui wiping his ass and lighting his cigars with the "msprotege scam fund". Most of you guys forget that at one point he was in way deeper here on this forum from getting behind due to demand, and yet he still came through with everything for those people. Regardless of my own personal issues that went down with Beau, the negativity throughout the board about MAM and their parts bothers me, and I have zipped my lip til now. I still wouldn't be surprised if he gets squared up with everyone in the end.
It's definitely not as easy as you are thinking man. In the early stages of drawing out a intake manifold, I looked at a ton of published pictures from several companies to get ideas. It is astonishing how much the design varies between companies, even on similar 4 cylinder motors. Taking what you see in the pictures and modifying it into your own is not easy, and you certainly can't just copycat something from seeing a few pictures. It is the basic principles that shine through in the good ones that a trained eye can pick out.
This is the kicker... limited market, so much cost, too much trouble, so little return.
Now we are at the beauty of the part in my opinion. It has the canted turbo angle for the MSP setup. It has no designs for external WG because the stock turbo has no need for it. It retains the "soul" of the MSP setup. If someone wants a huge turbo and an external WG to begin with, they don't need the canted/twisted setup. They will go with a new mani and DP and have it straight. If they want a upgraded msp part, then that is what it needs to be.
I plan on it...But the bolts that are in there now are not removable without cutting them out...I dont know how the hell he got it in there unless he put those two in before welding the mani up.
The two are just sitting here in the pic..not even bolted together.
They were sitting next to each other on my floor and I was like "Hmmmm"?
SO I slapped them toegther.
The only way I can see putting new bolts in ,is to run the bolt through the bottom with the nut on the top.
Actually....now that I looked at it....I cant even do it that way on the one near the O2 sensor...The Turbine housing nor the mani will allow me to put in a new bolt?
I am thinking I am gonna have to tap it for a Stud.
Any other suggestions?
Is yours like this Rich?
Last edited:
I can respect that, but it is a difference of opinion. The blind following of an unproven theory-based design is a little disconcerting though. Show me a race car that wins with this manifold over others, show me testing that proves that he applied all of the theories correctly. This is not bashing or anything, it is just an urge to test theories.
I believe science is needed to get the most out of any application. My car is a perfect example. I have tested every theory involved, and some have come up bunk, others look plausible, while others still are right on. I test my car as often as possible, and against as many other cars and parts as I can.
This is how you get to be fast. Take a solid idea, reference the theory involved, and test it based on the design. I have dynod my car 11 times, 9 of which were completer re-tunes. We tested parts, different gases, and different tune-ups. We learned alot, and continue to do so.
The car has over 200 passes at the strip, but dyno testing to the limits of the parts and the car has proven to pay the best on race day. I ran 13.5@101mph at 3500ft with all Honda parts, stock internals on a naturally aspirated 2.0L. This is not some incredible thing, but it shows the value of testing and trial and error. The simple bolt-ons I have would not achieve those numbers without it.
Last edited:
That is not hard at all. Look at any professional and winning race team. You will not find one with a log, cast style turbo manifold. The science and idea of how a turbo works has been proven. You can't reinvent the wheel. You can make it more efficient and that is going off what has already been done (in this case a tubular manifold).
Your manifold is a nice piece, but it's not going to as efficient as a tubular manifold. Your manifold does not have a 4-1 pyramid collector, equal length or tuned runners. These are some of the tools needed to make a manifold perform more efficiently. This can't be argued. It's a proven fact.
Here is the video of one of the test cars.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8739471279263637590
Full weight P5, stock head, stock intake, 8.0-1, 18psi. Corrected elevation is around 5000-5100 FT
I was there the day they went 12.00 @118 on 18psi. They where still tuning the car in. For a Protege this really good. Our cars are not Honda's. The technology is not there for us.
Last edited:
yellowmsp035
Member
- :
- Yellow 2003.5 MSP
if all these tubular manifolds are soo good then why did Hiboost choose not to use one... even on their big turbo kit they use the cast manifold and have some of the highest horsepower pros using it... im not trying to argue anything , rather just bringing up another point.
Because cast is alot cheaper, quicker and easier to produce. You have to remember MAM turbo kit was like $4500 without engine management. Hiboost is like $3200 with a Haltech.
They do NOT have some of the highest HP cars. CWILL made 409whp on 24psi.
Thread
http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?t=123643129
Cwill also went 12.44 @115 on pump gas, NO LSD and 14psi.
http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?t=123625106
Here is a Hiboost big boost turbo car.
http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?t=115523
Juan also went 11.98 @ 114 at sea level, 32psi with a fully built and gutted car.
http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?t=123641726
Apple to apples MAM still to this day probably has the highest HP street proteges.
Last edited:
Mine was tricky to get the nuts and bolts hooked up, I ended up having to put the bolt in through the bottom on the front ones, and you have to kind of leave a gap between the manifold flange and turbine flange to get it started, so the bolt isn't pushed all the way through... if that makes any sense.
Not sure how you can get that one out by the o2 sensor bung without cutting it off though, looks like it must have been put on there before it was welded up.
The Steedspeed manifold is not mine. I just weld it for him.
I was also referring to this manifold in particular. Horsepower Freaks chose a Steedspeed manifold over the tubular kinds for their 600-1000hp kits. My understanding was that there was a very small difference in power, and a large difference in repeatibility and longevity. This is on their 16g's M3 kit. There is more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not arguing that tubular manifolds can be better, I was just saying it doesn't always pay. It could be maybe 5-10whp better than the Steedspeed one at 18psi, but we don't know that yet. Corrected altitude is alot different on a turbo car with boost control. It is a very small factor. 12.0@ 18psi is ok, how much power did it make?
There are alot of factors, like smoothness of runner I.D, number of turns, runner length,etc.
I'm only suggesting that nobody has tested the bang-for-buck theory yet. I'm not trying to say Steedspeed manifolds are the best in the world, just not sure the MAM is either. At 32psi does it really matter alot? What is 10whp when we are talking 5-600?
What is the overall cost? I really doubt it is worth it to make a nicer one, as nobody really wants to do a test as there is little to be gained but to settle an argument.
Buy parts that meet your needs and goals, whatever they may be.
Last edited:
Companies all have the $ in mind when it comes to their parts. It's tough to say why they choose a non-tubular manifold over a tubular one. It could be cost, availablity, turnaround time and so on. As for 600-1000Hp kits, companies market their stuff with big numbers. The customer wants to see the numbers and having a bigger one than your competion will potienally get them the sell. MAM used to market their turbo kit for 400-500HP. Hiboost jumped on and said 500-600HP if I remember right. It's a numbers game. If it could really do it or not that is another story.
Correction factors for turbo cars are bigger than you think.
You ran a 12.0 @ 118 MPH at 5000' elevation track. The correction factors are .9380 and 1.0661 for 5000ft. (12.0 * .9380) = 11.26 , (118 * 1.0661) = 125.80 MPH. So the corrected timeslip would be 11.26 @ 125.80 MPH at sea level. Looks like a big diffence.
As for 5-10whp, I doubt that. These guys did a comparison.
http://www.full-race.com/articles/Bseriestest_writeup.pdf
The MAM is a prized piece no doubt. Does it make more power than the Steed? Maybe...it's got proven theory behind it for sure. To it's credit as well it seems like 9 times out of 10 when you see a high HP setup, a tubular equal length manifold is part of the equation.
Couldn't agree with this statement more. Even if we assume the MAM does make more HP you still have to look at how much more it makes at "x" psi and whether or not it warrants the extra cost and waiting for one to pop up for sale. Of course that will differ from person to person as no two setups are the same. The guy trying to squeeze every last drop out of his motor will find it totally worth it while others might not.
The way I see it, MAM is gone...in all likely hood this manifold will never see production again. In the past when there were no other options I tried to get SLS to make a few one offs but it never materialized. Why? No one was interested enough to pay the 1K price tag. Lets face it, the Protege community isn't full of high rollers. The Steed and Thunder are readily available and probably more affordable to the average Joe. I don't need to have the fastest, baddest MSP on the road. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have a MAM, but I don't have time to troll the FS threads 24/7 looking for one. My goal is 300whp, I think the Steed will more than suffice for me. Just my $.02
revhard said:
Couldn't agree with this statement more. Even if we assume the MAM does make more HP you still have to look at how much more it makes at "x" psi and whether or not it warrants the extra cost and waiting for one to pop up for sale. Of course that will differ from person to person as no two setups are the same. The guy trying to squeeze every last drop out of his motor will find it totally worth it while others might not.
The way I see it, MAM is gone...in all likely hood this manifold will never see production again. In the past when there were no other options I tried to get SLS to make a few one offs but it never materialized. Why? No one was interested enough to pay the 1K price tag. Lets face it, the Protege community isn't full of high rollers. The Steed and Thunder are readily available and probably more affordable to the average Joe. I don't need to have the fastest, baddest MSP on the road. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have a MAM, but I don't have time to troll the FS threads 24/7 looking for one. My goal is 300whp, I think the Steed will more than suffice for me. Just my $.02
I agree with you 100%. As for SLS and the manifolds, I recently heard that that own the MAM tubular manifold jigs. I might see if I can get a hold of them.
No, that is not even close. Try here:
http://www.nhra.com/tech_specs/altitude.html
Read carefully to use 1/2 factors in the top chart, and that is even considered
optimistic for turbo set-ups. An n/a car will be about 11.2, and the turbo car would be about 11.7. 1/2 second is big in my mind when we are talking 12-second cars.
Also, the comparison of the log and full race is not even close to this.
The log manifold fires directly across at opposing runners. Steed's does no such thing. It's not apples to apples at all, we will have to wait for a real test at a later date.
Last edited:
I don't know where you have raced at, but any hardcore knowledgeable racer will tell you altitude plays a huge roll in both NA and forced induction.
The amount of oxygen particles become less with altitude. The air density is changed with altitude. It's straight science. You can turn up the boost, but we are not discussing that. The calculations on the NHRA site is set for divisions.
Here:
http://www.tsrsoftware.com/nhra elevation correction factors.htm
http://www.smokemup.com/auto_math/nhra_correction_factors.php
I'm going to talk with 505zoom and see if he will do the test. You send him a manifold and I'll pay for the dyno. Steedspeed can donate the manifold, you donate your welding time to weld it up and I donate the money for the dyno. Sound good?
Last edited:
