Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I couldnt find the thread in which i posted the extrude honed manifold flow results(??), if anyone can find it please link.

I found another thread and will follow on from this..

"There is one bloke. I forget his alias. Orange R33 in his Sig.

I believe he had UAS power port/extrude hone his std exh. manifold but he is/was oversea's so he was unable to test.

He's running a gt2835 and currently making up around 280rwkw.

I'm very keen on seeing his results. Maybe UAS could shed some light on if the extrude honed std exh. manifold allows it to push considerably more than the 300rwkw brick wall the std exh. manifold usually see's."

Well the car has just been dynoed, and.....

no power increase at all. I havent seen the dyno sheet as im still overseas, but from what i heard from my brother was that they played around with it for ages in search of more, but came up with nothing. If anything it made the same power at slightly less boost im told.

It is certain that the extrude honed manifold flows more, and i think the lack of results is most likely due to the turbo itself, maybe even the wastegate issue that many people mention (but personally i just think its out of puff). Seeing that the 2835 is not commonly known to push up and past 300rwkw, id really need to put a 3037 on there to see if the stock manifolds brick wall can be pushed.

I know many were eagerly awaiting these results, its a shame theres nothing exciting to share,

cheers :/

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Could you have a graph overlay posted up showing before/after comparison?

Shame that there was no quantifiable improvement, but it'd be interesting to hear if there was any different on-road feel to how it drives. I tend to agree that ~280rwkW should be pushing the max flow capabilities of the 2835.

What sort of price range to have the extrude hone done?

it may be some time until i get the graph but will see what i can do.

Spoke to my engine builder today and he thinks the same, that with a bigger turbo you would most likely see differences compared to the stock mani.

dont quote me as im not sure (was a long time ago) from memory just over $400? And was done buy a place in melbourne i think, if anyone can dig up the original thread there should be the details... ill have another look.

what size is the rear housing on the 2835? I'd say that is the problem if its only a 0.63.

Then again, the compressor technically shouldn't go any higher than 280rwkw as it just isn't designed to.

Shame the turbo isn't a GT3037.

I've had an SR20 6boost manifold done by Andrew Sanders at Specialised Power Porting who is based out of Mt Helen (near Ballarat I believe - not sure because I'm in Perth). From memory cost was around $550.

i do not see how it will add power

i can see how it would increase car response ramping on boost but not power increase

its likely youll gain some more torque / power earlier but overall peak should be the same

if you did the same to the turbine housing then i would say peak power could increase

In much the same way as increasing A/R size of the turbine housing, extrude honing should allow the manifold to increase its mass-flow capacity. ie. it can just put more exhaust flow through more efficiently. You have to look at it from the perspective of pressure gradient across the engine, not just inlet boost pressure. That the car did not make any higher peak power supports the general observation that the stock manifold is good for ~ 300rwkW of flow, and a 2835 with 0.68 A/R turbine is a touch short.

Waiting for comments from those who have exceeded 300kW with those components, but also want to know how comfortably and reliably it was done...

I'm glad you shared the results.

For better or worse it adds to the knowledge base and takes it a step beyond the "i reckon based on numbers" type thinking that a lot of us end up having to do based on lack of actual results.

Simple answer, $400 can be better spent elsewhere if chasing sub 300rwkw, much like .63 IW 3071 doesn't work :D

Another interesting test would be to swap for an aftermarket low mount manifold made from stainless or similar. As there seem to be a whole bunch of sceptics about what performance gains a Jap brand exhaust manifold actually produces. Although not sure there are too many RB25 low mount off-the-shelf manifolds kicking around. Throw in tuned length and there are so many combinations that I would like to test haha :D

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
    • You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...