Intake Manifold Test
Jan 28, 2009, 01:27 AM
#16
Evolved Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 874
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- ported stock manifold + 65mm OE TB yields on average 15+hp with no sacrifices
- most of your popular aftermarket manifolds (VSR, Magnus V5, DI) yield 25-35hp but really only from ~6500+rpm.
- the popular wilson V2 was demonstrated by mr. buschur himself in another thread to perform damn near right inline with the DI manifold, yet it costs $600 more than a DI manifold. Granted it doesnt have any low end sacrifices, so keep that in mind. To some that will be worth $600, to others it may not.
Last edited by JC evo1; Jan 28, 2009 at 01:48 AM.
Jan 28, 2009, 01:51 AM
#17
Evolved Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 874
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jan 28, 2009, 01:52 AM
#18
Evolved Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 874
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jan 28, 2009, 06:51 AM
#19
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: West Chester, OH
Posts: 1,347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TheLab - Like "evorace" said, I think you get to a point where you want to make as much horsepower as possible and it doesn't matter how much it costs.
I currently have the BR ported stock manifold on my car. Can I go get the V2 and make another 35whp or whatever it is?? Yes. Would I rather hold on to my money right now and use it for other things besides a car that is already to fast for the street?? Yes.
JC evo1 - I think "TheLab" is saying the V2 isn't sacrificing low end power compared to the DI.
I currently have the BR ported stock manifold on my car. Can I go get the V2 and make another 35whp or whatever it is?? Yes. Would I rather hold on to my money right now and use it for other things besides a car that is already to fast for the street?? Yes.
JC evo1 - I think "TheLab" is saying the V2 isn't sacrificing low end power compared to the DI.
Jan 28, 2009, 07:25 AM
#20
This is the post you are looking for.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...nus-vs-oe.html
I wrote this article for EvoM back in early November posting it in the engine/turbo-section. Without looking at dates I believe the Dyno-section wasn't up yet.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...nus-vs-oe.html
I wrote this article for EvoM back in early November posting it in the engine/turbo-section. Without looking at dates I believe the Dyno-section wasn't up yet.
Jan 28, 2009, 08:19 AM
#22
Thanks for that link Keith. Is that the same story that is posted on the EVOtech forums? I can't see it and am not going to mess with trying to register there again.
The Wilson V2 DOES have losses in low end power. I did not say that it doesn't. There must be some confusion there somewhere.
EVERY SINGLE intake I have tested or seen tested loses power under about 5500 rpm compared to the stock or ported stock intake.
The only intake that doesn't give up ANYTHING is porting a stock one and I'd imagine if someone didn't know what they were doing, porting a stock one could be ruined down low too.
As for when you are under 5500 rpm in a drag race, well depending on your shift points in an EVO that would probably be never. Since I don't build many cars that are never under 5500 rpm I find it to be a large benefit to concentrate on that area of the curve too. The only car I can think of that I don't care about at all under 5500 rpm is our black drag EVO.
My RS has one of the best over power curves of any car we've ever built. I have spent more time on that car's combination and making sure the curve stays "fat" than any other in our history. All of that knowledge then goes into every build we do. I think the times that the car runs is proof enough that just making a peak number means very little.
Our black car made 865 whp on our dyno with 541 ft lbs of torque. My RS makes 677 whp with 543 ft lbs of torque and makes peak torque almost 2,000 rpm sooner. Which would you rather drive?
It's hard to carry on a conversation in here without reading the test from the other site.
I do agree with Keith's findings on some of his testing. I am quite sure that Magnus's new cast intake will make more power than his old one, it looks well designed this time and it certainly should make power. I also agree that the stock intake/throttle body will make more low/mid range. I have not however seen gains at higher rpm's using the old Magnus intake on any car I have had it on. Also, after this initial comment about any Magnus product I am not making anymore. I'm not trying to turn this into another debate. Simply stating what I have seen and what I agree with or don't.
The Wilson V2 DOES have losses in low end power. I did not say that it doesn't. There must be some confusion there somewhere.
EVERY SINGLE intake I have tested or seen tested loses power under about 5500 rpm compared to the stock or ported stock intake.
The only intake that doesn't give up ANYTHING is porting a stock one and I'd imagine if someone didn't know what they were doing, porting a stock one could be ruined down low too.
As for when you are under 5500 rpm in a drag race, well depending on your shift points in an EVO that would probably be never. Since I don't build many cars that are never under 5500 rpm I find it to be a large benefit to concentrate on that area of the curve too. The only car I can think of that I don't care about at all under 5500 rpm is our black drag EVO.
My RS has one of the best over power curves of any car we've ever built. I have spent more time on that car's combination and making sure the curve stays "fat" than any other in our history. All of that knowledge then goes into every build we do. I think the times that the car runs is proof enough that just making a peak number means very little.
Our black car made 865 whp on our dyno with 541 ft lbs of torque. My RS makes 677 whp with 543 ft lbs of torque and makes peak torque almost 2,000 rpm sooner. Which would you rather drive?
It's hard to carry on a conversation in here without reading the test from the other site.
I do agree with Keith's findings on some of his testing. I am quite sure that Magnus's new cast intake will make more power than his old one, it looks well designed this time and it certainly should make power. I also agree that the stock intake/throttle body will make more low/mid range. I have not however seen gains at higher rpm's using the old Magnus intake on any car I have had it on. Also, after this initial comment about any Magnus product I am not making anymore. I'm not trying to turn this into another debate. Simply stating what I have seen and what I agree with or don't.
Jan 28, 2009, 08:29 AM
#23
Post # 1 from EVOTech thread:
Tests were performed October 2008
First things first... The point of reference will be the Magnus Street Intake Manifold (MSIM) which was on the car originally when we finished the new turbo setup. The MSIM had been on the car for 3-4yrs already so we used it for the build
However, we were looking for more on the existing setup and needed a new intake manifold to take better advantage of the turbo and headwork.
First will be the dyno graph of the MSIM. This is the manifold without the velocity stacks.
Test were performed on our Mustang Dynamometer MD-1100-AWD-SE.
All Manifolds A/F's were tuned for a true comparison.
Magnus Street Intake Manifold
Car: 2003 Evo 8
Engine: Pure Stage3 2.0L w/ Pure Spec-C Cylinder Head
Fuel: 93 octane
Turbo: Borg Warner S259
Intake Manifold: Magnus (Street)
Throttle Body: OE Knife Edged and Radiused
Cams: HKS 272
Max Boost: 23psi
Atmospheric Temp: 76Deg
Relative Humidity: 5.7%
I also decided to weigh the manifolds with all fittings. I didn't feel it was fair without since the stock OE intake manifolds are pressed in. The MSIM cam in at 2519.6grams which is 5.56lbs.
Next:
Magnus V5 Intake Manifold Dyno Test
The graph shows the Magnus Street vs the Magnus V5. Nothing else mechanical was changed for this test other than the length of the upper intercooler pipe to accommodate the intake manifold. Past 6000rpm the M-V5 did exactly what we wanted.
Car: 2003 Evo 8
Engine: Pure Stage3 2.0L w/ Pure Spec-C Cylinder Head
Fuel: 93 octane
Turbo: Borg Warner S259
Intake Manifold: Magnus V5
Throttle Body: OE Knife Edged and Radiused
Cams: HKS 272
Max Boost: 23psi
Atmospheric Temp: 59Deg
Relative Humidity: 0%
Peak Gain of 20.8whp over the older Magnus Manifold!
The Magnus V5 was the heaviest at 3988.8grams / 8.79lbs.
Next:
OE Intake Manifold Unported
We decided to do this test because everyone seems to think the stock intake manifold is better than the older Magnus manifolds.
The stock intake manifold was not ported or modified in any way that would affect power. This was done for a true off the shelf comparison since porting can induce inconsistencies depending on who does it and how it is done.
The SIM's A/F were tuned to match both Magnus intake manifolds so this could be as true of a comparison as possible. The ambient air temps were much cooler than the day we tested the MSIM by 16degs with a little better humidity also. The graphs posted always use the SAE correction factor so we can try to make up for the temperature discrepancy, so take it for what it's worth.
So before anyone comments on it...
The boost maximums shown on the dyno graph are just that. The maximum reading is from the initial boost spike at 4300-4550 depending on which graph you are looking at. Once past that initial hump the boost settles in and maintains the mid 23psi curve to redline as you can tell from the 24psi x-axis point.
The test yielded some interesting results. Spool up was increased by a consistent 150rpm making peak boost by 4400rpm instead of 4550rpm. There was a peak gain of 15whp around 5200rpm with a solid whp improvement from 4800rpm to 5400rpm. There is a slight increase in power at 5900rpm and from 65-6800rpm which is directly correlated to the increase in boost at those points if you look at the boost mapping. After 6900rpm the SIM looses it's *** with a peak loss of 17whp at 7600rpm.
Without adjusting the cams or porting the SIM, the diff in ambient temp, and the diff in weight between the two manifolds the Magnus Street Intake Manifold wins without question. I however would probably still stay with the SIM for the spool and the mid-range power.
The graph shows the Magnus Street vs OE Stock Intake Manifold. Nothing else mechanical was changed for this test other than the length of the upper intercooler pipe to accommodate the intake manifold.
Car: 2003 Evo 8
Engine: Pure Stage3 2.0L w/ Pure Spec-C Cylinder Head
Fuel: 93 octane
Turbo: Borg Warner S259 / Open T3 .55ar Stainless Turbine Housing
Intake Manifold: OE Unported
Throttle Body: OE Knife Edged and Radiused
Cams: HKS 272
Max Boost: 23psi
Atmospheric Temp: 60Deg
Relative Humidity: 0%
The OE Intake Manifold was the mid-weight at 3242.2 / 7.15lbs.
Last a graph of all three overlapping each other.
Magnus V5 with a peak gain of 20.8whp / 15ftlbs. over the Magnus SIM
Magnus V5 with a peak gain of 37whp / 27ftlbs over the OE Intake Manifold
Magnus SIM with a peak gain of 17 whp / 12ftlbs. over the OE Intake Manifold
OE Intake Manifold with 150rpm better spool and 15whp / 14ftlbs. at 5200rpm over both Magnus Manifolds.
Thanks for viewing.
First things first... The point of reference will be the Magnus Street Intake Manifold (MSIM) which was on the car originally when we finished the new turbo setup. The MSIM had been on the car for 3-4yrs already so we used it for the build
However, we were looking for more on the existing setup and needed a new intake manifold to take better advantage of the turbo and headwork.
First will be the dyno graph of the MSIM. This is the manifold without the velocity stacks.
Test were performed on our Mustang Dynamometer MD-1100-AWD-SE.
All Manifolds A/F's were tuned for a true comparison.
Magnus Street Intake Manifold
Car: 2003 Evo 8
Engine: Pure Stage3 2.0L w/ Pure Spec-C Cylinder Head
Fuel: 93 octane
Turbo: Borg Warner S259
Intake Manifold: Magnus (Street)
Throttle Body: OE Knife Edged and Radiused
Cams: HKS 272
Max Boost: 23psi
Atmospheric Temp: 76Deg
Relative Humidity: 5.7%
I also decided to weigh the manifolds with all fittings. I didn't feel it was fair without since the stock OE intake manifolds are pressed in. The MSIM cam in at 2519.6grams which is 5.56lbs.
Next:
Magnus V5 Intake Manifold Dyno Test
The graph shows the Magnus Street vs the Magnus V5. Nothing else mechanical was changed for this test other than the length of the upper intercooler pipe to accommodate the intake manifold. Past 6000rpm the M-V5 did exactly what we wanted.
Car: 2003 Evo 8
Engine: Pure Stage3 2.0L w/ Pure Spec-C Cylinder Head
Fuel: 93 octane
Turbo: Borg Warner S259
Intake Manifold: Magnus V5
Throttle Body: OE Knife Edged and Radiused
Cams: HKS 272
Max Boost: 23psi
Atmospheric Temp: 59Deg
Relative Humidity: 0%
Peak Gain of 20.8whp over the older Magnus Manifold!
The Magnus V5 was the heaviest at 3988.8grams / 8.79lbs.
Next:
OE Intake Manifold Unported
We decided to do this test because everyone seems to think the stock intake manifold is better than the older Magnus manifolds.
The stock intake manifold was not ported or modified in any way that would affect power. This was done for a true off the shelf comparison since porting can induce inconsistencies depending on who does it and how it is done.
The SIM's A/F were tuned to match both Magnus intake manifolds so this could be as true of a comparison as possible. The ambient air temps were much cooler than the day we tested the MSIM by 16degs with a little better humidity also. The graphs posted always use the SAE correction factor so we can try to make up for the temperature discrepancy, so take it for what it's worth.
So before anyone comments on it...
The boost maximums shown on the dyno graph are just that. The maximum reading is from the initial boost spike at 4300-4550 depending on which graph you are looking at. Once past that initial hump the boost settles in and maintains the mid 23psi curve to redline as you can tell from the 24psi x-axis point.
The test yielded some interesting results. Spool up was increased by a consistent 150rpm making peak boost by 4400rpm instead of 4550rpm. There was a peak gain of 15whp around 5200rpm with a solid whp improvement from 4800rpm to 5400rpm. There is a slight increase in power at 5900rpm and from 65-6800rpm which is directly correlated to the increase in boost at those points if you look at the boost mapping. After 6900rpm the SIM looses it's *** with a peak loss of 17whp at 7600rpm.
Without adjusting the cams or porting the SIM, the diff in ambient temp, and the diff in weight between the two manifolds the Magnus Street Intake Manifold wins without question. I however would probably still stay with the SIM for the spool and the mid-range power.
The graph shows the Magnus Street vs OE Stock Intake Manifold. Nothing else mechanical was changed for this test other than the length of the upper intercooler pipe to accommodate the intake manifold.
Car: 2003 Evo 8
Engine: Pure Stage3 2.0L w/ Pure Spec-C Cylinder Head
Fuel: 93 octane
Turbo: Borg Warner S259 / Open T3 .55ar Stainless Turbine Housing
Intake Manifold: OE Unported
Throttle Body: OE Knife Edged and Radiused
Cams: HKS 272
Max Boost: 23psi
Atmospheric Temp: 60Deg
Relative Humidity: 0%
The OE Intake Manifold was the mid-weight at 3242.2 / 7.15lbs.
Last a graph of all three overlapping each other.
Magnus V5 with a peak gain of 20.8whp / 15ftlbs. over the Magnus SIM
Magnus V5 with a peak gain of 37whp / 27ftlbs over the OE Intake Manifold
Magnus SIM with a peak gain of 17 whp / 12ftlbs. over the OE Intake Manifold
OE Intake Manifold with 150rpm better spool and 15whp / 14ftlbs. at 5200rpm over both Magnus Manifolds.
Thanks for viewing.
Jan 28, 2009, 08:43 AM
#24
Heres the deal with me... I live 2 hours each way from the nearest track... it isn't even monitarily feasible for me to spend $1000 on a new intake manifold for 35 HP above 6000 RPM. For most people this is the same scenario, HOWEVER... if my car was a track queen like most people that have chimed in I would already have the Magnus Cast manifold/Skunk2 throttle body and numerous other parts on my car... I still like hearing different opinions and theories so keep them posts coming!
Jan 28, 2009, 09:28 AM
#25
There ARE some of us who reach for the best, maximum power that we can develop. We also buy enclosed trailers to carry our cars. There are many, many options that racers make concerning their 'racing experience'. Many are much more expensive than others. Take a carbon fiber trunk to save 10-12 lbs. When our cars reach maximum power with all of the cheap parts already used, the only thing left is to begin using the expensive parts which have less return on the investment. No one is right or wrong in this situation. It's just a personal call on how much each additional horsepower is worth. If an additional 35whp can be picked up for $600 that's doable. Then a custom radiator allows another airbox to be added, which in turn increases airflow (read that as horsepower up top) but the radiator and airbox costs $1200 and nets another 2 psi of boost or about 25 whp, now we've added 50 whp for $1800 total. The porting of the head added about 15-20 whp and costs another $1300. Total so far of the 'hard/expensive stuff' is $3100, but we've now added 50-70 whp. Keep in mind, all of the easy stuff like $4000 for a turbo kit have already been done. Anyone would swap paying $4000 to make an additional 250 whp vs $3100 for only 70 whp, but that choice 'HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE'.
All of this is why the old saying still holds true 'How fast do you want to go?'. The final 100 whp is by far the most expensive. Not for everyone, but definitely for some.
All of this is why the old saying still holds true 'How fast do you want to go?'. The final 100 whp is by far the most expensive. Not for everyone, but definitely for some.
Jan 28, 2009, 09:41 AM
#26
Thank you for putting the post from the other site up here. It is the same one Keith posted then from the testing awhile back and posted here on EVOm.
I guess I've said what I wanted to in that case.
9sec9, I am 110% in agreement with everything you said.
I guess I've said what I wanted to in that case.
9sec9, I am 110% in agreement with everything you said.
Jan 28, 2009, 11:10 AM
#27
The way I interpreted Dave's testing was that there was plently of low end lost when going to the V2. The V2 beat the DI on the low end thoroughly, but the DI had far more losses in the low end compared to the Hypertune and HKS.
So to say that the V2 naturally has more low end grunt because it is based on a stock piece is incorrect. Look at Dave's testing and from what I saw, it had worse low end than the HKS or Hypertune when comparing via the DI as a bridge.
So to say that the V2 naturally has more low end grunt because it is based on a stock piece is incorrect. Look at Dave's testing and from what I saw, it had worse low end than the HKS or Hypertune when comparing via the DI as a bridge.
Jan 28, 2009, 01:51 PM
#28
Account Disabled
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hatfield, PA
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
David,
I suppose I'm confused in what you're saying.
You've posted on here and on your own forum stating that the Magnus only loses power according to your tests, and that you welcome independent testing on the *ORIGINAL* Magnus unit to prove you wrong.
Here's a test by an independent shop showing a gain (as opposed to your testing which you've admitted that you have a "reason" (as opposed to "vendetta" which you've argued against)) showing an absolute gain.
Looking at the date of this test and your results (which clearly conflict 100%) can you at least admit that *ONE* of the tests is completely incorrect at this point????
You say that you're just showing a case of where something you've sold didn't produce the results that you were comfortable selling.
I admire that. I'm the same way in fact. I don't want to sell people in this limited market something that they might not get a gain from as it's a small market we're all trying to appease, and we want to keep them happy.
You're testing a manifold that was introduced early into the scheme of things and acknowledge that it hasn't been made for years, openly ask for "independent testing" (which has been available for a while now, but you still refuse to recognize it on here and your own forums) but yet, I ask you: Where's the test of your DSM manifold that you sold for years?
To that, I say: "I've got a Buschur DSM Manifold" and would like to conduct testing to see if it produces power that the original $950 asking price (when I got it) was worthwhile--was worth it?
If you want to go back to historical results like you're testing, I'd be glad to pipe up as well.
Fair is fair, and results are results, right? Let's not keep the public out of this, and just speak the truth, correct?
I just want to get the real word out there to support the community. Let me know if you approve of this so that I can get it under way.
Thanks!
I suppose I'm confused in what you're saying.
You've posted on here and on your own forum stating that the Magnus only loses power according to your tests, and that you welcome independent testing on the *ORIGINAL* Magnus unit to prove you wrong.
Here's a test by an independent shop showing a gain (as opposed to your testing which you've admitted that you have a "reason" (as opposed to "vendetta" which you've argued against)) showing an absolute gain.
Looking at the date of this test and your results (which clearly conflict 100%) can you at least admit that *ONE* of the tests is completely incorrect at this point????
You say that you're just showing a case of where something you've sold didn't produce the results that you were comfortable selling.
I admire that. I'm the same way in fact. I don't want to sell people in this limited market something that they might not get a gain from as it's a small market we're all trying to appease, and we want to keep them happy.
You're testing a manifold that was introduced early into the scheme of things and acknowledge that it hasn't been made for years, openly ask for "independent testing" (which has been available for a while now, but you still refuse to recognize it on here and your own forums) but yet, I ask you: Where's the test of your DSM manifold that you sold for years?
To that, I say: "I've got a Buschur DSM Manifold" and would like to conduct testing to see if it produces power that the original $950 asking price (when I got it) was worthwhile--was worth it?
If you want to go back to historical results like you're testing, I'd be glad to pipe up as well.
Fair is fair, and results are results, right? Let's not keep the public out of this, and just speak the truth, correct?
I just want to get the real word out there to support the community. Let me know if you approve of this so that I can get it under way.
Thanks!
Last edited by DSSA; Jan 28, 2009 at 01:55 PM.
Jan 28, 2009, 02:29 PM
#29
Newbie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't this test just another statement of what us "old school" dsm guys already knew for years? My point is that a large plenum short runner design favors higher horsepower cars on the top end of the rpm range. I am just glad Keith posted that on http://www.evo-tech.net so that the hardcore technical gurus could critically look at the testing and make a decision on their own without any type of agenda.
Jan 28, 2009, 05:25 PM
#30
What a surprise to find you in here DSSA.......cut and paste my boy, cut and paste, NABR is waiting on you.
You must not have read what I just said about talking about any other Magnus testing, go back and read my post again.
The DSM Sheetmetal intake we built was never dyno tested and I never sold a single sheetmetal intake we produced with any horsepower claims. That is much different than the 45+ whp gains that the other intakes were sold claiming...........
My original design DSM intake ran 7.81 at 175 mph on a stock ECU and VPC in my tube car and is currently running 7.60's in Aruba on Albert's car. None of them ever split open either
Test away if you like. If they make power or if they don't doesn't matter much when there were never any claims in the first place. People bought them because they were on our cars setting records at the time.
You must not have read what I just said about talking about any other Magnus testing, go back and read my post again.
The DSM Sheetmetal intake we built was never dyno tested and I never sold a single sheetmetal intake we produced with any horsepower claims. That is much different than the 45+ whp gains that the other intakes were sold claiming...........
My original design DSM intake ran 7.81 at 175 mph on a stock ECU and VPC in my tube car and is currently running 7.60's in Aruba on Albert's car. None of them ever split open either
Test away if you like. If they make power or if they don't doesn't matter much when there were never any claims in the first place. People bought them because they were on our cars setting records at the time.