about cosworth ex manifold ...from other topic
14-12-2006, 09:50 PM
#1
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: enfield
Posts: 3,905
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
about cosworth ex manifold ...from other topic
ok follow on form a topic about ex manifold so the cosworth one is good for 600bhp why have some people changed to the tubular ones then other
14-12-2006, 10:01 PM
#3
Originally Posted by Bosch-Man
..well not strictly that bhp..i know of one that went bang cause of a suspected problem with the flow of the 2wd manifold
..SAFE is upto 550bhp.
..SAFE is upto 550bhp.
14-12-2006, 10:08 PM
#6
DEYTUKURJERBS
went bang why? if it was mapped right (ie for that manifold) the flow (or lack of, and possible backpressure) of the manifold wouldnt ever make the engine go bang
14-12-2006, 10:11 PM
#7
Originally Posted by Stavros
went bang why? if it was mapped right (ie for that manifold) the flow (or lack of, and possible backpressure) of the manifold wouldnt ever make the engine go bang
Phil what engine are you on about??
Trending Topics
14-12-2006, 10:20 PM
#11
Originally Posted by Bosch-Man
Please also bare in mind when i say 550bhp i mean INCAR...Porkies is around that INCAR so shouldnt give any problems 
Same as your Millington engine Martin gotta lose 60 odd BHP when INCAR.
Same as your Millington engine Martin gotta lose 60 odd BHP when INCAR.
14-12-2006, 10:20 PM
#12
DEYTUKURJERBS
So what engine you talking about that blew up at over 600 IN CAR then phil?
As barring the little mans, i cant think of any with more power?
And unequal flow should STILL be compensated for with the mapping, so its still not the manifold thatd ever blow the engine, an unequal flowing manifold is an inconveniance, but should be mapped around still.
As barring the little mans, i cant think of any with more power?
And unequal flow should STILL be compensated for with the mapping, so its still not the manifold thatd ever blow the engine, an unequal flowing manifold is an inconveniance, but should be mapped around still.
14-12-2006, 10:23 PM
#13
Martin i only ever quote incar ..you know that as i wont go out my front door let alone dyno an engine 
Not saying what engine as i aint a snitch....its just something i heard about the 2wd maniford from a very reliable source.
..you know that as i wont go out my front door let alone dyno an engine Not saying what engine as i aint a snitch....its just something i heard about the 2wd maniford from a very reliable source.
14-12-2006, 10:56 PM
#17
DEYTUKURJERBS
Originally Posted by Bosch-Man
MARTIN if you say so...i am loyal to friends..i was just stating a possible problem with saying a std 2wd manifold is good for 600+bhp 
Most cars have unequal flowing manifolds of some description, hence my most managments have individual cyl trim.
15-12-2006, 08:43 AM
#18
There is nothing wrong with the 2wd manifold 
. I have been doing some investigating on this, and a tubular one may give slightly more low down power, but the length and flow of the standard item is not a problem up to 600bhp .
The cast standard one, will also withstand FAR more heat abuse as well. I have yet to see or hear of an engine that has definitively found the limit of the standard manifold, as to using this as an excuse for an engine failure - it is nothing more than that...
. I have been doing some investigating on this, and a tubular one may give slightly more low down power, but the length and flow of the standard item is not a problem up to 600bhp .The cast standard one, will also withstand FAR more heat abuse as well. I have yet to see or hear of an engine that has definitively found the limit of the standard manifold, as to using this as an excuse for an engine failure - it is nothing more than that...
15-12-2006, 09:25 AM
#19
Testing the future
Originally Posted by Stavros
Most cars have unequal flowing manifolds of some description, hence my most managments have individual cyl trim.
15-12-2006, 09:54 AM
#21
10K+ Poster!!
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 11,383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
There is nothing wrong with the 2wd manifold . I have been doing some investigating on this, and a tubular one may give slightly more low down power, but the length and flow of the standard item is not a problem up to 600bhp .
The cast standard one, will also withstand FAR more heat abuse as well. I have yet to see or hear of an engine that has definitively found the limit of the standard manifold, as to using this as an excuse for an engine failure - it is nothing more than that...
. I have been doing some investigating on this, and a tubular one may give slightly more low down power, but the length and flow of the standard item is not a problem up to 600bhp .The cast standard one, will also withstand FAR more heat abuse as well. I have yet to see or hear of an engine that has definitively found the limit of the standard manifold, as to using this as an excuse for an engine failure - it is nothing more than that...
Like if i win the lottery!
15-12-2006, 09:58 AM
#22
Originally Posted by Bosch-Man
Mike 600 on the dyno yes i agree ...incar i will say you need to upgrade
...incar i will say you need to upgrade What a crock of shit, if it makes 600bhp on the dyno, it will still be 600bhp IRRESPECTIVE of it being fitted in the car, you just have to accept that once installed in the engine bay, there are certain power sapping ancilliaries that reduce that power down by 20-30bhp, but it doesn't make the manifold any less efficient going from dyno to car
.Jay,
Nope, 4x4 is more responsive at your power level, only change when needed.
15-12-2006, 10:05 AM
#23
600BHP ON A DYNO...not like 600bhp incar though is it...if you USE the car aggressively its surely more stressful to the engine
There has to be a point somewhere when you need to change..and 550bhp incar is the safe limit..if its the cause of just one engine failure it needs changing..IMO
There has to be a point somewhere when you need to change..and 550bhp incar is the safe limit..if its the cause of just one engine failure it needs changing..IMO
15-12-2006, 10:06 AM
#24
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
There is nothing wrong with the 2wd manifold . I have been doing some investigating on this, and a tubular one may give slightly more low down power, but the length and flow of the standard item is not a problem up to 600bhp .
The cast standard one, will also withstand FAR more heat abuse as well. I have yet to see or hear of an engine that has definitively found the limit of the standard manifold, as to using this as an excuse for an engine failure - it is nothing more than that...
. I have been doing some investigating on this, and a tubular one may give slightly more low down power, but the length and flow of the standard item is not a problem up to 600bhp .The cast standard one, will also withstand FAR more heat abuse as well. I have yet to see or hear of an engine that has definitively found the limit of the standard manifold, as to using this as an excuse for an engine failure - it is nothing more than that...
Mike your find that 600bhp is about the limit on a 2wd manifold.
Maybe ok for a quick short blast on a dyno (TUV OR NOT) but maybe not for a 17+sec blast in 5th gear
15-12-2006, 10:09 AM
#25
15K+ Super Poster!!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 18,589
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my one has lasted 9yrs on a race car without cracking once, and on a 600HP moutune engine.
so it was enough for me to get one.
plus i wanted the ease of upgrading the turbo later on should i want 600+ as im only @ 500.
plus i can imagine the stadard item does cause some slight restriction even at 450-500
so it was enough for me to get one.
plus i wanted the ease of upgrading the turbo later on should i want 600+ as im only @ 500.
plus i can imagine the stadard item does cause some slight restriction even at 450-500
15-12-2006, 10:14 AM
#27
Originally Posted by Ryan
my one has lasted 9yrs on a race car without cracking once, and on a 600HP moutune engine.
so it was enough for me to get one.
plus i wanted the ease of upgrading the turbo later on should i want 600+ as im only @ 500.
plus i can imagine the stadard item does cause some slight restriction even at 450-500
so it was enough for me to get one.
plus i wanted the ease of upgrading the turbo later on should i want 600+ as im only @ 500.
plus i can imagine the stadard item does cause some slight restriction even at 450-500
15-12-2006, 11:02 AM
#30
Ryan,
I think it is swings and roundabouts, you might loose that down the bottom end compared to a tubular 4-1 design, but would gain it at the top end (until the true restriction came into force), which is AFAICMA around 600bhp.
Phil,
You need more than 550bhp to do 194mph within the confines of Brunters, so that blows your theory right out the window.
I think it is swings and roundabouts, you might loose that down the bottom end compared to a tubular 4-1 design, but would gain it at the top end (until the true restriction came into force), which is AFAICMA around 600bhp.
Phil,
You need more than 550bhp to do 194mph within the confines of Brunters, so that blows your theory right out the window
.
15-12-2006, 01:05 PM
#32
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Yum, as you will see I agree that you wouldn't want to push it beyond this .
Regarding your second statement, Martin has already disagreed with that - 194mph is proof enough.
.Regarding your second statement, Martin has already disagreed with that - 194mph is proof enough
.Take it that Martins was running external gate think your find its a diffrent bull game with internal gate
15-12-2006, 01:42 PM
#33
Originally Posted by MAD YUM
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Yum, as you will see I agree that you wouldn't want to push it beyond this .
Regarding your second statement, Martin has already disagreed with that - 194mph is proof enough.
.Regarding your second statement, Martin has already disagreed with that - 194mph is proof enough
.Take it that Martins was running external gate think your find its a diffrent bull game with internal gate
- that would only increase the flow capability of the exhaust after the turbo (if he had a screamer pipe fitted). Please clarify your reasoning .
15-12-2006, 01:47 PM
#35
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by MAD YUM
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Yum, as you will see I agree that you wouldn't want to push it beyond this .
Regarding your second statement, Martin has already disagreed with that - 194mph is proof enough.
.Regarding your second statement, Martin has already disagreed with that - 194mph is proof enough
.Take it that Martins was running external gate think your find its a diffrent bull game with internal gate
- that would only increase the flow capability of the exhaust after the turbo (if he had a screamer pipe fitted). Please clarify your reasoning .
15-12-2006, 02:06 PM
#40
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by MAD YUM
Originally Posted by CossieRich
Dave,
Mike is just on the phone asking Harvey if you are correct and then will let us know his answer
Mike is just on the phone asking Harvey if you are correct and then will let us know his answer
I bet
I made that up anyway
.
Is that aimed at me or Dave or both of us