Jump to content
SAU Community

Port Matching -7's To Rb26 Manifolds

snozzle

By snozzle,
in Engines & Forced Induction

 Share

Recommended Posts

snozzle Mentor

snozzle

Posted
Posted

hey all

im not sure if my manifolds have been port matched to the -7's i have installed so im thinking of removing them as i see its a common thing thats done on most twin setups.

is it worth taking them off to do this before my tune in 2 weeks? im hoping to run 1.3 bar through them

labour will be free but ofcourse ill have to use new gaskets so that will be the only cost

has anyone done back to back testing with and without port matched manifolds? would it be a waste of time for my 320kw goal?

thanks

oz

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/351038-port-matching-7s-to-rb26-manifolds/
Share on other sites
waxracing Experienced

waxracing

Posted
Posted

I have been porting engines for years and I would say you need to match port things if you want them to flow as best as they can.

even if the turbos are bigger than the manifolds you will create an eddy as it goes into a bigger area and the tumbling effect shows up in reduced flow.

This shows up on the flow bench big time.

waxracing Experienced

waxracing

Posted
Posted

And as plenty have proven - what occurs on a flow bench isn't necessarily what actually occurs under boost/pressure/heat etc.

And plenty has been proved on a flow bench as to what works as well.

If you dont want to port match its cool and up to you, its a free world after all.

GTScotT Grand Master

GTScotT

Posted
Posted

From memory I read the autospeed article about changing the GTR turbos and thought the overall result was less than mediocre. They port matched the manifolds and ran -7s IIRC.

Most people on here acheive close to the numbers you want without touching the manifolds, thus I would simply follow suit.

I have always wondered though, which turbos come with the cut size T25 flange and which come with the full size T25.... I would IMAGINE the full size flange to be on something -10 size or possibly even the -5s. Can anyone confirm?

Running a full size T25 entry turbine housing on the stock manifolds would definitely warrant porting IMHO.

BoostdR Mentor

BoostdR

Posted
Posted

Port matching will aid "max" flow.

Leaving the manifolds std with smaller turbo's is not a bad idea as response can be effected by opening up the mani outlets.

If the std mani's aren't a great restriction at your power level ie: less than 2.5 x boost pressure. The effort may not be worth it.

If you would rather 10kw up top rather than the mid range then go for it. I would be aiming for average power(nice meaty mid range)

matt

gtr fan Experienced

gtr fan

Posted
Posted

if there already on the car just leave it.

If they weren't on the car you would just have the turbo flange on the manifold opened up to match the turbine housing flange.

You wouldn't go to the expense of port matching the manifold to the head unless you were getting pretty competitive with your car.

Moodles2 Grand Master

Moodles2

Posted
Posted

I was thinking of port matching my standard manifold to match -9s, but everyone I've spoken to have said it's not worth it as response will be lost, but for -5s and bigger it's generally recommended to do the port matching

bigmikespec Veteran

bigmikespec

Posted
Posted

I am surprised how anyone can look at the fitment of turbine housing to exhaust manifold flange, notice the overlap, and not attack it with a die grinder at least so the ports match! I would be amazed if measurable response was lost; and I would feel better knowing I fixed something that looks like s**t.

XRATED Veteran

XRATED

Posted
Posted

thanks for all the responses guys, i have decided to leave them as is

cheers

It's not worth the effort to pull the whole lot down again... 6 years ago I made 400rwkw on my 130k 26 with stock- unported manifolds.

J.

Deano 1 Mentor

Deano 1

Posted
Posted

It's not worth the effort to pull the whole lot down again... 6 years ago I made 400rwkw on my 130k 26 with stock- unported manifolds.

J.

if you dont mind me asking, what turbos did u have bolted up at the time?

bigmikespec Veteran

bigmikespec

Posted
Posted

It's not worth the effort to pull the whole lot down again... 6 years ago I made 400rwkw on my 130k 26 with stock- unported manifolds.

J.

Yes you are right Justin; should have add, if they are already off... do it... if not; next time!

NSNPWR Rising Star

NSNPWR

Posted
Posted

Look at a 6BOOST maifold, particularly the flange...he has purposely left a lip around the flange and even gone as far as testing the shape of the exit at the flange, lip + oval shaped exit...his manifolds are second to none...

I think youre wasting your time match porting the flange, you then have the factory runners with all the bumps and casting lumps in them anyway. Just leave them, lot of work for little if any gain at all.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • GTSBoy
      R33 Fuel Pump & Brakes after alarm swap

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • GTSBoy
      After market rear camber arm adjustment

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Jarsky
      R33 Fuel Pump & Brakes after alarm swap

      By Jarsky · Posted

      Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Duncan
      After market rear camber arm adjustment

      By Duncan · Posted

      Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
    • V35Newbie
      After market rear camber arm adjustment

      By V35Newbie · Posted

      I know I have to get a wheel alignment but until then I just need to bring the rear tyres in a bit they're wearing to the belt on the inside and brand new on the outside edge. I did shorten the arms a bit but got it wrong now after a few klms the Slip and VDC lights come on. I'd just like to get it to a point where I can drive for another week or two before getting an alignment. I've had to pay a lot of other stuff recently so doing it myself is my only option 
×
×
  • Create New...