New n54 Intake manifold to enter the market.

Jeffman

Captain
Jan 7, 2017
1,116
Charge pipe finished and a plazmaman 3" clamp added for ease of installation and maintenance.

Testing will be carried out this week pending dyno availability.


View attachment 20987
Nice!
So the blow-off valve is in front off the pipe facing downward. If so, is it VTA?
{Now I see the benefit that a front mounted TB / intake provides; a much shorter (almost no) charge pipe having far less air volume to fill will result in faster throttle response and effectively less turbo lag compared to having the TB in the OEM location.}
Really beautiful design.
 

Aaron

Lieutenant
Nov 3, 2016
536
Colorado
Nice!
So the blow-off valve is in front off the pipe facing downward. If so, is it VTA?
{Now I see the benefit that a front mounted TB / intake provides; a much shorter (almost no) charge pipe having far less air volume to fill will result in faster throttle response and effectively less turbo lag compared to having the TB in the OEM location.}
Really beautiful design.
The reduction in charge pipe volume going to this design from stock will be negligible in noticed performance. Although it cuts down some volume, it is not only a small amount considering the overall charge volume, but turbochargers pressurize volume so quickly that'll you never notice.

Remember charge volume isn't what the N5X crowd refers to as the charge pipe. Charge piping includes outlets, FMIC, up-pipe, and the charge pipe.

This is in no way a significant benefit of this design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeffman

Jeffman

Captain
Jan 7, 2017
1,116
The reduction in charge pipe volume going to this design from stock will be negligible in noticed performance. Although it cuts down some volume, it is not only a small amount considering the overall charge volume, but turbochargers pressurize volume so quickly that'll you never notice.

Remember charge volume isn't what the N5X crowd refers to as the charge pipe. Charge piping includes outlets, FMIC, up-pipe, and the charge pipe.

This is in no way a significant benefit of this design.
Got it. Thanks for the clarification.
 

The Convert

Captain
Jun 4, 2017
1,012
The reduction in charge pipe volume going to this design from stock will be negligible in noticed performance. Although it cuts down some volume, it is not only a small amount considering the overall charge volume, but turbochargers pressurize volume so quickly that'll you never notice.

Remember charge volume isn't what the N5X crowd refers to as the charge pipe. Charge piping includes outlets, FMIC, up-pipe, and the charge pipe.

This is in no way a significant benefit of this design.
Did no one ever hug you as a child?
 

martymil

Lieutenant
Free Vendor
Sep 6, 2017
920
Down Under
All i can tell you guys the car feels stronger, more responsive and drives smoother and until i can get it on the dyno im not going to say anything, let the results do the talking
 
  • Like
Reactions: fmorelli

martymil

Lieutenant
Free Vendor
Sep 6, 2017
920
Down Under
Ok had some issues to sort out, so sorry for the delay.

Finally got some logs for you to ponder over on 93 unleaded with 20% e85 for knock control.

Ran out of time to test more boost, workshop was closing down for Christmas but the results are impressive thus far

Fab Factory / red line / 26 psi / 68f dyno cell - https://datazap.me/u/martymil/log-1545379757?log=0&data=3-22

Mad Auto / blue line / 20psi / 86f dyno cell - https://datazap.me/u/martymil/log-1545378742?log=0&data=3-23

Cant get back to back dyno charts as the up pipes are completely different and is a royal pain in the ass to change

Plus the conditions cant be replicated this time of year but after the new year I will run it up on 28psi for you guys and then switch over to e85.



20181221_171845.jpg
 
Last edited:

martymil

Lieutenant
Free Vendor
Sep 6, 2017
920
Down Under
Just going to say these are just numbers and not a true representation of the final results, there are a couple of small changes that need to be made to the manifold and the previous results are not back to back tests they are at least 3 to 4 months apart.

Until I get unbiased results they are just numbers.

If the manifold hits the same numbers as ff, I'll be truly happy as a pig in shit.

Results coming early 19.
 
Last edited:

martymil

Lieutenant
Free Vendor
Sep 6, 2017
920
Down Under
As promised same tune.

Iat's where almost 10 to 15f higher
Dyno room was 88f
But last and not least on e13 not e20 like before

So basically a small increase in power, much lighter manifold, no phenolic gasket.

Over the moon with result.

First result to show this run was not a fluke, both runs are 10 sec apart and back to back.

Fab Factory / red line / 26 psi / 68f dyno cell - https://datazap.me/u/martymil/log-1545379757?log=0&data=3-22
Mad Auto / blue line / 26psi / 88f dyno cell - 3-22https://datazap.me/u/martymil/log-1546930807?log=0&data=3-22

20190108_171800.jpg
20190108_171727.jpg
IMG_6006.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jeffman

The Convert

Captain
Jun 4, 2017
1,012
I’d like to see a little more revision to runner taper angle and adding a phenolic spacer. Totally not dismissing current results, but think you could squeeze a little more out of it and get back to back pull benefits from the two suggestions. It would also make me more likely to buy a manifold, because a few manifold has been on my wish list.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Torgus and martymil

martymil

Lieutenant
Free Vendor
Sep 6, 2017
920
Down Under
Yes we are currently adding another 1 to 2 deg to lower the plenum by 10mm to accommodate this.

But I wanted to see how hot this manifold could get in our extreme summers and see if it effected performance for those that don't want to run one.

Proven it does not need one but if you want to, you can. It's up to the individual.

I'll be running it up on e85 by the end of the week and we will post up some more results
 
  • Like
Reactions: Torgus

The Convert

Captain
Jun 4, 2017
1,012
Yes we are currently adding another 1 to 2 deg to lower the plenum by 10mm to accommodate this.

But I wanted to see how hot this manifold could get in our extreme summers and see if it effected performance for those that don't want to run one.

Proven it does not need one but if you want to, you can. It's up to the individual.

I'll be running it up on e85 by the end of the week and we will post up some more results
I don’t understand your first statement. Adding degrees to what and lowering the plenum how? I assume you’re saying the plan isn’t to reduce the taper angle a few degrees, but I don’t understand the plenum height statement.
 
Top