Wow.



THANK YOU DAVE!!!!!!!

This is an incredibly valuable thread.

Scorke

 

Would you DARE test the AMS F1-I, as it is the only real competitor to the Magnus yet the Magnus is much cheaper...but if its leaving power on the table it might be worth it.

Scorke

 

Magnus (at large) do you plan to make changed to account for all these modifications required to fit this manifold?

Scorke

 

+1 one the modifcations part, i mean its not that big of a deal but it would be nice to just open up out of the box and "bolt on" but regaurdless its a very nice mainfold indeed i always thought that when it first came out magnus!!!!

 

Is it really? This kind of product is one that's geared toward peak power. When you are drag racing, where do the RPM's stay when you're going through the gears? Certainly nowhere near 5600RPM. This manifold is doing exactly what it was designed to do. IMO, it does it better than anything else on the market from what I've seen too....

 

Is Marco in PR now? If so that would explain why he hasn't chimed in on any of the threads or an email I sent, he might just be busy too.

I am willing to test anything, AMS's included. The catch is I am not buying anymore intake manifolds. The other catch is I am not doing it after I am done with this round of testing. I don't know if you guys realize how much work this is and how much work it keeps us from completing on other projects at the shop. The quest for the best is always a lot of work but nobody is getting paid for this and the hours spent doing it is rediculous. Money out of my pocket on this so far is probably close to $2,000. That doesn't include a minute of my time, Ted's or Trent's time. If I put just our pay in there and not the money lost from doing customer work I'd venture to say we are into this for $4,000.

I am personally working on two more intakes as I have mentioned. I like the power band from the intake I built (baseline run against Magnus's). I am concentrating on street car builds more than a drag build. As Marco told me, "I will gladly give up the low end for top end on a drag car." I will to on a drag car, absolutely. I am just not concentrating on that end of the graph solely. For myself, if I can get the same power curve as the intake I built but get it to fit in the car as a bolt in affair I will probably end up with that type of intake on my car.

It was sure nice talking to Marco without us both yelling. I'd like that to continue. We made a mess for ourselves and the DSM/EVO world as a whole last year with us both handling things the way we did.

Oh, one more thing. I am guessing if the Magnus intake was run with the throttle body it was actually designed for it would gain even more top end, possibly a great deal actually. Marco said this intake was built for transient response and 1,000 hp+ and 10,000 rpm. Makes sense to use a large throttle body on a build like that.

Thanks for the support.

 

I know what your saying and for sure it beats down a stocker If what Dave had posted saying this is layed over his previous best IM dyno pull. some of that would definitly be missed in a street car.

Would it hurt you in the 1/4 No Not at all. I am just pointing out that there are area's that some are concerned with and may want to pay attention to thats all. Me personally I fall into the drag racer more than anything so this manifold would probably work well for me.

You know that many on this board would cry if their curve got moved to the right , Just looking at the graph thats all

I am not saying that it isnt doing the job it was meant to do

 

Dave, I have been reading this thread with interest. It's spurred me to learn more about gas flow.

Do you have any comment on how the conditions of the flow bench parlay into real life? No one is driving their car around at 28 inches of vacuum. I understand that this is a method to apply similar conditions to each manifold for testing but it's not a realistic condition.

From what I have learned and discussed, CFM is potentially a bad way to measure the performance since it measures volume and not mass. Since the mass can change with atmospheric pressure and compound further with boost, CFM doesn't tell the whole story.

I think also that the relationship between flowbench results and dyno results isn't as close as it might seem. CFM is really nothing when the runners can flow more than the engine can take. You have proven that because the delta in flow per given cylinder hasn't affected the dyno results.

Ergo, something you mentioned earlier probably influences performance and dyno numbers more than the CFM measurements, that's the plenum size, runner entry diameter, design and runner length, runner shape, intended engine speed and range of operation etc. There are so many variables that might make things work better on your car and not a stock Evo that it's hard to say which one is "best"



Frustrating, complicated.

 

WOW - sounds like the new Magnus intake is a really great unit. Great news indeed.

I may have to try one on my evo - and the price is right!

Al

 

i 2nd al i think im going to order one as well

 

I hope Magnus will revised their design to fit Injectors(fat design) like PTE without any modification.
Props to BR for testing this mani and sharing the result to us

 

Just a few things I've learned from the computer simulations and just looking at tests I have seen others do. Maybe you can put it to use...maybe not.

Much of the airflow comes from directly above the runner. If the runners come straight in, this means a taller plenum will provide more flow area to the runner then a wide plenum, if that makes sense?

Runner taper will not increase peak numbers, but man it will fatten up the entire powerband.

Long runners...the longest you can get...are a very good thing for making a sick powerband. I feel this is why the OEM works so well. They curve the runners to increase the length.

The head is part of the runner too. Do some measurements in the head port and see what kind of taper is in there. Match up all the angles correctly so there are no abrupt changes. Bolt the runners up before putting the plenum on and verify everything blends perfectly.

Alignment...Maybe consider adding in some locating dowels during testing to insure the manifold alignment is always EXACTLY the same. Bolt clearance holes are not very accurate.

There are a couple ways to even out airflow, not just on a bench, but actually how the motor operates. 1. Cause a LOT of turbulence, abrupt changes in cross sectional area will accomplish this, but I'm not saying it's the best way to do it. 2. Create an even pressure differential across a flow channel that distributes the air (look at Audi Lemans for a good example), this usually packs a pretty high pressure loss though which will hurt you off boost. 3. Be DAMN GOOD with CFD work and design a plenum that distributes air evenly without posing any restriction I've been trying to figure this one out for about 3 years now. 4. Make the plenum big and live with bad throttle response.

I'm not saying the reverse collector won't work, but keep in mind, those V8s with carbs are wet flow manifolds that do not use pulse-flow resonance tuning. They are designed that way to keep the fuel from dropping out of suspension. Not really a problem on a Fuel Injected motor. But to reference what you said, YES the intercooler pipe and intercooler endtank act as secondary air reservoirs. If you were to do a through helmholtz resonance tuning analysis, you would find that the IC pipe will create a couple new peaks, as will the inercooler endtank. They will be much less powerful then the runner tuning peaks though.

 

The flow bench has not told me much but it's part of the testing now and I am going to keep using it to try and put it all together as I go. It shows me turbulance in the intake. It tells me the total CFM which I thought showed me the intake would make more or less power and where it made it in the power band. That has now been proven not to apply either completely because the intake we built had the best low/mid range of all the aftermarket intakes I have tested to date. As for the flow at 28", I don't know why that much pull is put on the intake, I'd assume to simulate a LOT of flow such as what a car would see at high HP/RPM.

Your last paragraph is the one thing I agree with completely. Next week if we get all our parts I am going to put much more of this to the test. The runner length and plenum size definetely play a large roll in all this. I am shrinking the plenum size even smaller than our first intake on the next one. Runner length will remain the same. One of the next intakes will for sure have an adjustable runner length incorporated into it for testing.

 

This is great testing you're doing Dave.

 

Thanks bimmubishi, I am trying to figure it all out. For me it's a lot of trial and error or should I say "trial and learn"?