When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
i was unable to source a ported CB IM. The skunk looked like the next best option. Got the STM porting for an extra $300. Those seemed steep but I assumed it would be an extensive port job.
when I received it the porting was so minimal I asked STM if they had shipped a non ported IM. The porting is 1.5 to 1.75” deep. There are still casting marks through out.
move done a small
amount of porting and this looks like 10-15 min worth of effort.
Sounds/looks about right. That likely took the intern a whole day to do and clean lol. Standard bit depth is right at 1.75 right? More like port "matching" rather then true "porting". I had MAP porting done and it was about the same. My MAP stage 2 engine lasted a whole half day.
However, my CB engine still runs just needs bearings/rings after 2 years before I swapped to the spare. CB intake was hella ported.
Quality is impossible to come by these days. Tis why we ....always....end up doing sh*t ourselves we really don't have time for right?
Wow, thats pretty sad for $300. Theirs no "secret sauce" or "significant effort" for that cost, its just mild cleaning and probably make zero difference.
As for the magnus, I know thats the hot **** for top end power but cant it only come at the sacrifice of bottom end? I mean, physics are physics and different approaches can only flow so much or hold so much runner velocity or plenum volume.
I always loved the cyclone manifold on DSM s because of the ability to have long runners at low or spooling RPM and then open it all up for top end flow.
I actually had my FP race manifold done by Curt Brown and I was saddened how much didn't get touched. Perhaps they just don't bother when the runners get bigger than the gasket?
Wow, thats pretty sad for $300. Theirs no "secret sauce" or "significant effort" for that cost, its just mild cleaning and probably make zero difference.
As for the magnus, I know thats the hot **** for top end power but cant it only come at the sacrifice of bottom end? I mean, physics are physics and different approaches can only flow so much or hold so much runner velocity or plenum volume.
I always loved the cyclone manifold on DSM s because of the ability to have long runners at low or spooling RPM and then open it all up for top end flow.
I would never put a magnus on an autocross. But with the right size turbo (like 30r sized), the slight bottom end losses don't hurt a road course car since its really helping extend peak power.
Originally Posted by Terror Rising
I actually had my FP race manifold done by Curt Brown and I was saddened how much didn't get touched. Perhaps they just don't bother when the runners get bigger than the gasket?
