Thanks vtsnake, much appreciated.

David

 

What about using one of these on your BR series turbos? Maybe Tubular manifold and ball bearing/water cooled options to satisfy the guys that must have a tubular manifold and BB/water cooled turbo.... Just an idea..

P.S. " You know what this tells me, that this DAMN THING doesn't work!" Back to the future.

 

Thanks David, I didn't realize those coated manifolds were ported, my bad. Maybe I missed this somewhere but what gains were realized with the ported stock manifold? Was there a boost dropped recorded with that as well.

Keep up the good work!

 

Mayhem,

Please take a look in the Buschur Racing dyno thread on here. I believe that information is in there. If not it will be next week as I am going to re-hash it all in condensed form.

I have headers for our BR series turbos. Ron has built a few for us and I have built a few too. Pictures of the two I built can be found in this section of the forums too.

We sent our BR580 BB turbo out to Pruven to be tested. Dejan (Dan) Cokic, the owner put the kit on his car and made 606 whp with the kit. We then sent Dejan one of our headers for the kit and he re-dyno'd. The WHP was less with the header than with our cast manifold. When I asked Dejan about it he said the boost was 1.5 to 2 psi less with the header but the HP was also down 15-20 and he didn't see any sense in beating the car to try and gain back what was lost.

What I am saying is a decently designed cast iron manifold not only will last forever it also doesn't seem to hurt HP at all. These are not the first tests we have conducted that have proven this.

David Buschur
www.buschurracing.com

 

It was an intersting test to say the least - and very teling when I go to the track and see a guy like you or Shepherd running cast manifolds on 8 second or faster cars

 

Nice work, great looking manifold for only a few hours work!

The results are as I expected... I've seen your cast manifolds that come with your turbo kits, and I do like them. The tubular manifold does look nice though, very nice work.

Do you think a different design might have netted more horsepower? The runners do seem rather wide... do you think that might have anything to do with it? Also, do you think on a larger turbo setup, these headers might have gained hp rather than lost? Maybe on your BR580?

Thanks in advance.

 

Its nice to see other shops test products before selling them. Many don't, they just assume something will work on a car and sell it to you guys and you end up being disappointed with the results.

And people wonder why the fast and smart guys spend that extra 5-10% extra and go with shops like AMS and BR. We don't always see eye to eye on everything, but you can be assured a car equipped with parts from either is gonna knock the socks off a car full of parts from some guy in some basement somewhere selling stuff for 10% over cost that doesnt even know how they work or how to install them.

 

Hey, ya know I have a JIC Stainless header you can borrow to test.. I have to send a bunch of junk down to you to have coated.. If you want you can use that header and thrash on it a bit then have it coated (or have it coated and thrash on it)

I can send the JIC header and DNP Stainless O2 housing.. you can test with it, have it coated or whatever you need, and ship them back when your done, I only wanted to have the parts coated and a EGT bung welded on the header.

 

Looks like a quality piece, too bad it didn't make more juice. Has anyone been able to get their hands on a used Ralliart manifold? Maybe a little reverse engineering in order? I can't imagine a full CGI treatment would cost more than a couple K.

 

so, in total, a ported and coated stock manifold will do the trick plenty fine with say a br500 or a 3037???? that what you telling me?

its nice to be able to trust you, and if what i think im reading is right, could very well save me $500 bucks or so...

 

David, I'm glad I could help "motivate" you, and I'm not knocking your product, if that's the way you took my comments, the fine, but that's not the way there were intended. However, I did make some observations about your design right off the bat...

Your 1 and 4 cylinders are paired as are the 2 and 3, which is exactly as it should be, but look at the runner length difference between the 1 & 4 runners and the 2 & 3 runners. The number 1 runner is nearly twice as long, and the 4 runner isn't that far off from being twice as long either. Most companies pair the 1 & 4 runners into the scroll opening closest to the motor, that turbine inlet favors the center of the head more lending the 1&4 runners to be nearly equal length, the 2 & 3 runners are then routed to the twin scroll inlet that is farther from the head. This increases those runner lengths to be closer to the length of the 1 & 4 runners. This is an important charecteristic of the twin scroll design. If you have two of the runners entering one port significantly longer than the two runners entering the other port, the benefits of the twin scoll design are diminished. The exhaust pulses have to hit their respective scroll inlets at sequential intervals to maximize the design benefit. If you increase the length of a pair of runners enough the pulses will no longer hit the turbine sequentialy, but closer to the same time, making your twin scroll setup more similar to a single inlet setup, increasing lag and decreasing performance. This may be one of the contributing factors of your decreased boost level with this manifold. The other issue I noticed is the "big fat runners" that everyone seems to love. While, yes, they are capable of flowing more exhaust, you are still ultimately limited by the amount of exhaust that can flow through that turbine housing, so instead of increasing system flow, you introduced an expansion chamber prior to the turbo that essentially makes the exhaust gas lose stored up energy before it reaches the turbo, again decreasing response and boost potential.

For anyone who actually bothered to read what I wrote and doesn't just quote it as "bla bla bla" take it for what it is, I offer my criticism with some education behind it, not blind hatred. And that's why it takes more than 5 hours and some flanges to make a manifold that will work well. I also wouldn't charecterize these results as what you would expect out of some of the other headers on the market.

- Steve

 

Product looks great to bad it didn't work out.

 

I'm glad I saw that thread, will spend money somewhere else.

Nice thread, now I'm sure stock EM is fair enough for the stock turbo.

Thx.

P.s: how about the 02 Housing Turbo Outlet, helix claim 6 to 15 HP?
Anyone would like make a test?

 

I'm a huge fan of Buschur products, but I have turbine housing and an aftermarket manifold sitting on my desk and made the same observations..
I don't think anything you observed can be construed as anything other than observation.. Looking at my exhaust header, the features it has is fairly small runners, and an attempt to keep runner lengths equal (or at least the pairing of the runners to the scroll ports in some form of symmetry so the flow is fairly similar into the ports) (FWIW my header is a JIC)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperHatch
For anyone who actually bothered to read what I wrote and doesn't just quote it as "bla bla bla" take it for what it is, I offer my criticism with some education behind it, not blind hatred. And that's why it takes more than 5 hours and some flanges to make a manifold that will work well. I also wouldn't charecterize these results as what you would expect out of some of the other headers on the market.

- Steve


I took it at face value, and agree whole heartedly. My little cheap ceramic coated manifold made a difference you could feel with my set up. Unlike an exhaust upgrade, it produced no more noise to add to a "placebo effect". If there were ever an AWD dyno in my area I cared to use, I might test the theory myself.