3rd gen manifold on FC
11-03-2005, 06:25 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wayne, NJ
Posts: 4,837
Originally Posted by ColinRX7' post='775002' date='Nov 2 2005, 11:18 PM
Who needs an exact dyno number to tell you that straighter runners and bigger secondary plates are better for your ported engine?
the uninformed?
kevin.
11-03-2005, 10:38 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Boston Ma.
Posts: 1,420
I think thats a valid question!
It may be better for a ported engine, but how much better. is it worth it? Does it even feel different when you drive it?
No one has been able to show a significant improvement other than just looking better.
I see 2 issues with the setup
1 You still have the most restrictive part, the TII LIM.
2 The transition between manifolds looks like it would cause turbulance that may or may not have issues.
It may be better for a ported engine, but how much better. is it worth it? Does it even feel different when you drive it?
No one has been able to show a significant improvement other than just looking better.
I see 2 issues with the setup
1 You still have the most restrictive part, the TII LIM.
2 The transition between manifolds looks like it would cause turbulance that may or may not have issues.
11-03-2005, 10:45 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Mike is a Liar!
Posts: 4,848
my buddy has one on his fc.. he had a machinist friend of his make him the adapter to go inbetween the FC LIM and FD UIM.. as far as other plugs and stuff.. I have no clue since he has a microtech standalone.
11-04-2005, 06:26 PM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,502
Originally Posted by RONIN FC' post='775340' date='Nov 3 2005, 11:38 PM
I think thats a valid question!
It may be better for a ported engine, but how much better. is it worth it? Does it even feel different when you drive it?
No one has been able to show a significant improvement other than just looking better.
I see 2 issues with the setup
1 You still have the most restrictive part, the TII LIM.
2 The transition between manifolds looks like it would cause turbulance that may or may not have issues.
Speaking of turbulence, have you looked at a TII UIM lately? Just the way they put it together to work with the top mount?
11-04-2005, 07:16 PM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Boston Ma.
Posts: 1,420
Originally Posted by ColinRX7' post='775581' date='Nov 4 2005, 07:26 PM
Speaking of turbulence, have you looked at a TII UIM lately? Just the way they put it together to work with the top mount?
Its actually focused with independent primary and secondary dynamic chambers. The throttle body needs to be near 90 degrees from the direct path of the intake runner to maximize the "ping pong" effect between front and rear rotor. This design probably increased torque working together with the double throttle system sorta ironing out the feeling of turbo lag. If anything, it seems the TMIC is compramized to work with the manifolds having nearly 2 consecutive 90 degree bends.
Ive never seen the 13b RE manifold in person, but I immagine it uses alot of the same design aspects trying to ramp up torque to pull a large Cosmo
11-05-2005, 11:25 AM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Boston Ma.
Posts: 1,420
I dont have one around be able to do that, but I know what I would see...
A couple of merged pipes which barely makes up a couple of dynamic chambers.
I think your missing my point. I know the FD manifolds are better, when used together.
But the TII uim isnt bad enough to make that big a difference, especially when you put the FD mani on the TII lim.
Unless you care to show me other wise.
A couple of merged pipes which barely makes up a couple of dynamic chambers.
I think your missing my point. I know the FD manifolds are better, when used together.
But the TII uim isnt bad enough to make that big a difference, especially when you put the FD mani on the TII lim.
Unless you care to show me other wise.