good lord, to much reading and bickering her to read at work, I will have to get my laughs when I get home.

 

Where's the data? (An homage to "Where's the beef?")

 

I just rechecked my paragraph and I DID say "LEANED" not learned. Indy EVO misread and then misquoted me.

The topic of the thread is intake manifolds of which I was trying to discuss until being pulled into an internet ***** size competition.

 

Gixxer , you are one of a kind man. Good posts.

 

Thank you DTM, I am also impressed with how you handled yourself in this thread. I think you might like a place called NABR.

 

Nice results

what year/years were these accomplishments achieved?

 

Agreed.

 

2002 w/ Robby Gordon I also spotted for him in the race. The intake was sold to Comptech who had it on Jeff Wards car the year after for Ganassi. I know two engine builders GW, GH, one tuner Billy, and one engineer in England. That manifold was worth 27 HP. By the way were working on the same project the one with closed wheels. You know thats about all I can say about it. Talk to GW and see what he thinks of my resume. C Ya

 

Thank you Brent! I was looking for some pics but I couldnt find anything. It used to be on Magnus website a while back and i know i wasnt wrong! I just dont feel like arguing its pointless.

 

The problem with your theory is that there really isn't a way to prove it so it's just speculation. If the manifold does some how reduce knock threshold by promoting favorable in-cylinder airflow movement, it was by shear luck, as I am doubting too many people on here have the computational capacity to even attempt to accurately model something like that. I'm not arguing that your theory is impossible or even improbable. However, I do think the data shows a more likely story.

The problem I have is that I am not that familiar with how the stock ECU treats all of this stuff. What I see in the datalogs would make a difference in power, this difference being a leaner A/F and more timing advance. Bear with me, I left the file at work, but I remember the trends well and have a very good idea of the exact numbers seen in the datalogs, although I am recalling this from memory.

First off, on the stock manifold runs, the fuel trims are all messed up. To me, I have to wonder if the ECU had just been reset and may not have fully adapted to the car before the testing started. With the later runs, after the manifold change, the fuel trims are more inline with where they should be. I have to wonder if this alone may explain the differences in the tunes? The ECU may have adapted to the car by the time the Magnus manifold was tested, offering more timing and leaner A/F ratios. As I said, I don't think the different tunes were intentional, just that the state of tune between the runs is different.

On Run 3, the stock manifold had some knock retard from 3000-4000 RPM. Would the knock have been high enough to potentially put the ECU into a lower octane map mode, there by reducing total ignition advance and running richer A/F ratios? At high RPM, the runs had zero knock retard, yet the timing advance on average did not go over 15 degrees. The timing advanced smoothly until ~6000 RPM then flatlines through the rest of the pull.

In the Magnus manifold run 7, there was noticeably less knock retard at low RPM and the total ignition advance was 1 degree higher below 5000 RPM. Combined with the leaner A/F ratios, I could see this helping keep the power between the manifolds similar at spool up. Above 6000 RPM however, the data log shows a small amount of knock retard, yet the ECU still advances the timing from 15 degrees at ~6000 RPM to 18 degrees by 7500 RPM. Combine it with leaner A/F ratios and I think it may be possible that the power gains simply came from the different state of tune.

At the very least, it forces me to question how valid the test was.

As I have said though, Marco has gone far above to try and prove his results by making the data available. If Buschur were to follow suit on his tests, I think he would find a whole lot less bull**** when he runs his tests.

Oh, and it's probably a moot point, but the runs on the Magnus intake (run 7 compared to run 3) also had 10 degree lower coolant temperatures and a few degree cooler intake temps. The Magnus manifold appears to have every potential advantage over the stock manifold in this test. I'm sure it was unintentional, but I think it is worth mentioning.

On a side note, Indy Evo, stop boasting about your accomplishments, nobody cares. You would be better off providing sound advice/opinion on this topic to prove your worth then just talking about yourself.

 

I can answer that. The ECU wasn't reset before the base runs. I drove 3 hours and then the car sat for a couple of hours before the base line runs with the stock manifold. It then went right on the dyno. Didn't even pop the hood until it was on the dyno.

 

Thank you for the correction Brent, I appreciate it. I thrive on correct information as well. I am still dubious about that intake manifold actually being a NIB special 2G race intake manifold, but the design is the same apparently.

JB

 

David,

As I stated before (in the list of things you convienently avoided adressing like a lot of things in this thread and others) your guy Al tested the "New" and "Old" Magnus intakes back to back and reported *NO* difference.

So which is it? Either you're saying that Al can't dynotest anything, or you say he can and the issue between "old" and "new" is negligible at best like his results showed?

I'm still waiting to hear an explination to this instead of you avoiding it, claiming that your test is "still valid", and hiding between the words "old" and "new".

 

Well I theory is speculation you are correct on that. Howerver, I am thinking and the reason why I suggested it was to try to give some ideas to DTM for testing methodologies since it seemed like he was game to put it through the ringer. I disagree though about not being able to prove it, I can think of several ways to test the theory.

DTM, would you be willing to log the data for this? What system are your standalone cars what are you using? Motec?

 

Interesting, any idea why the fuel trims may have changed so drastically? I'm just looking for a good explanation for what the data log shows. To me, it really looks like a timing advance difference being the source of the power gains. But I'm all ears on any good explanation behind what is seen in the logs.

Gixer, I'm interested in how you want to test it. Care to elaborate?