Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I mean, I think half the reason  they sound so good is  because they are not using traditional  merge collectors. The original gtsr unit has a flat style collector, the reproductions shown in this thread have angle-cut pipes, but the collection is still "flat".  

Could  one not just use two 3-1 flat collectors and the exact same pipe lengths as the original item?  

new2.jpg

Then again,  I can't fabricate so I could be missing something obvious here.

Whilst i would absolutely love a genuine R31house item i would never support speedtek in any way shape or form, even if i was receiving a free manifold from them. f**k speedtek.

  • 3 weeks later...

The speedtek manifolds don't even come close to the quality of the R31house equal length, single piece, hand bend runners.....
They're no where near equal length either.

I've spend literally hundreds of hours searching and attempting to translate any info over the years on gts-r manifolds and especially the R31house manifolds and his journey to recreate "that sound" and from what I have found, there's been three iterations all up now.

The first was the long large diameter merge type:
97E6C78C-10D9-4D41-ADB9-C15C32B43D8D-5123-0000063BFA4F06F5.jpg

The second iteration is the one I have called "max" :
5FF90BCA-8BB0-47B6-B06C-A0BC431E9548-5123-0000063E1F594F72.jpg

And the latest version 3 is the "premium" which just launched a few months ago, here's a pic of one with an original gts-r:
70F899B2-14FC-4115-9A17-F3804AB108EE-5123-0000063C6ED80F52.jpg

I managed to translate a blog post from R31house from a few months ago stating that the particular sound that R31house refer to as "that sound" comes from the pressed plate steel merge collector on the original Hr31 gts-r manifold and they've only now with modern tech been able to 100% recreate the original and finally achieve the 20 year long goal.

Another interesting translation was that he said he felt his car lost response and power with the v3 "premium" compared to the v2 "max" because the runners end at the start of the plate steel merge with the openings facing directly at the inner front flat face of the merge collector and this creates turbulence BUT is the precise cause of "that sound".

I also have seen two versions of the actual RB20det-R GTS-R manifolds as well, the normal 1-800 homologation Hr31 gts-r manifold with press bent like runners and heaps of splatter from the welds Etc.:
CBC79FA4-5113-48DB-8669-D8AE6D6047B4-6000-000007637DDD7D0A.jpg

Then there's the Hr31's that the racing teams like Reebok, Calsonic and Gibson etc. received and the manifolds they had was the same design with much, much higher quality materials, runner bending and welding...
20445ADF-C786-4781-9BFA-5425D791157B-2011-0000028F0599B25A.jpg

The ReeBok car:
6918F5F0-638F-493F-B4AE-F6D85490BEB1-2011-0000028F22266D07.jpg

I even tracked one down 5-6 years ago on a sale thread and contacted the guy selling it and it turned out he was an actual mechanic for Gibson Motorsport and the manifold he had (sold) was unused because when they received the hr31 race cars, Gibson removed the manifolds immediately in place for the custom Aussie made Gibson manifolds, this is that actual for sale thread photograph:
5EB460E2-8F36-4B31-A317-AABF92CA409E-2011-0000028FCC76C4F1.jpg

And obviously this is the Gibson manifold:
53ED634A-6ECA-4905-9B1A-C704EEA78CB0-5123-0000063B7DD0983B.jpg

*all photos taken from google

  • Like 3

I genuinely love these manifolds and live to share the information to those who also have a genuine interest (:

And I have actually left out a couple of others hahah...

The Hr31 Autech had shorter runners and a smaller merge collector into a t28 flange which was widely rumoured to spool a lot faster and produce better numbers than the gts-r manifold even though it's wasn't equal length:
C1198965-A125-4825-9FE9-58E9EB6E8C18-5123-0000063C2A870DED.jpg
6F5DB30E-0565-462F-820F-B74935F4581F-3519-00000424458B82A8.jpg

R31house has also done a couple of the Autech recreations in the "max" v2 style, note the unequal runners:
3E9A4CE7-24EF-4146-B013-16B303A496B2-3519-00000424C07ADF4A.jpg

  • 2 months later...

Just had this arrive fresh from the motherland, a piece from the owner of R31house’s personal inventory..... A brand new completely unused GTS-R turbo manifold still with the original Nissan part number label on it ?
Feast your eyes.....

IMG_5354.jpgIMG_5355.jpgIMG_5356.jpgIMG_5357.jpgIMG_5358.jpgIMG_5359.jpg

  • Like 1
  • 1 month later...

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

    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
×
×
  • Create New...