It should never be looked at a restriction. Why? because it gains low end torque? So it MUST lose topend power? That's antiquated with the old tech that inspires the thought. A 2g manifold sacrifices topend for low end. The whole point of dual runners is not to lose topend for the sake of early torque.
It's not like anyone has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the cyclone flows so much less than the stock 1g manifold at full song and normal redline.
And I agree that Gtech is rather accurate. I saw the video where ET gustimates are very, very close to actual results, time and time again. Any program that accurately calculates load and either bases engine speed on rpm input or bases it on an accelerometer is pretty much dead on with any dyno. A stationary dyno does the same thing, guesses horsepower based on a known load and extrapolates using an rpm signal. You DO NOT need to spend hundreds ona dyno to get an accurate measurement. You'll have likely lower load than what the actual car exhibits, so spool will be off on the rollers; and intake temps are usually not going to be realistic. But mainly it's the precision. Such an instrument is as consistant as a real dyno. So the DIFFERENCE is what we're all after and such a tuning tool can really show what's really going on.
____________________________
Matt
dd '90 GST, Holset H1C
Advertisement
To browse the forums without the advertisements above, Login/Register
An extrude honed 1g is NOT proven to add 70hp on EVERY setup. Most companies that perform this process report ~20-25hp.
Also that HUGE dip in power in your graph right before 7k on the stock one is very suspicious and not natural. Looks like something went wrong there. That is where you're seeing the 70hp gain. Nobody is arguing that the Extrude process is worth something when done on whichever intake. The thead I posted a few up with the hand ported cyclone seems pretty realistic with a slight gain in upper power due to the porting. Without it, they would pretty much be about the same in the high rpm.
I am definitely not saying they make that on every setup guys... I just simply was relating the G-TECH data to the dyno sheet I posted because these cars seem to be making around the same power.... So that definitely makes that power gain more relevant to the only setup and data I was questioning.. 94awdcoupe did state the car actually made 411hp/410tq on a dyno, and then went on to post the G-TECH data. The data also shows a peak of 366hp with extrude hone intake manifold, and 367hp with the cyclone... Its relevant data even though the cyclone made more peak power supposedly? And please look at the rest of the dyno sheet I posted, the dip you are talking about makes up 20 of the 70hp I spoke of... The 1g extrude hone intake manifold is actually making ~20hp/20tq more then stock at 6000rpm and then it goes up from there by ~50hp/40tq at 7000rpm over stock, and what I like the most is that it carries an extra ~40hp/40tq past 7000rpm. The peak between the stock 1g intake manifold and the 1g extrude hone intake manifold increased by 24hp/5tq, which is about what most of you claim to be true of its performance... I thought were talking about more then just peak power here... Especially sense this is a cyclone intake manifold thread
I am not trying to argue that the extrude hone intake should be adored by all SMIM's... I was simply trying to tell everybody, as soon as I saw that data, that something seems wrong. I in no way, shape, or form was trying to put down the cyclone intake manifold. I too looked into the cyclone intake manifold for a while before finding and purchasing a used 1g extrude honed intake manifold. You guys are right about die grinding a cyclone to give it the extrude hone touch, but you cannot do this to a normal 1g intake manifold because the runners are too long for any grinding tool to reach the middle... I would have done it that way if I could lol...
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsm-onster
It should never be looked at a restriction. Why? because it gains low end torque? So it MUST lose topend power? That's antiquated with the old tech that inspires the thought. A 2g manifold sacrifices topend for low end. The whole point of dual runners is not to lose topend for the sake of early torque.
It's not like anyone has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the cyclone flows so much less than the stock 1g manifold at full song and normal redline.
And I agree that Gtech is rather accurate. I saw the video where ET gustimates are very, very close to actual results, time and time again. Any program that accurately calculates load and either bases engine speed on rpm input or bases it on an accelerometer is pretty much dead on with any dyno. A stationary dyno does the same thing, guesses horsepower based on a known load and extrapolates using an rpm signal. You DO NOT need to spend hundreds ona dyno to get an accurate measurement. You'll have likely lower load than what the actual car exhibits, so spool will be off on the rollers; and intake temps are usually not going to be realistic. But mainly it's the precision. Such an instrument is as consistant as a real dyno. So the DIFFERENCE is what we're all after and such a tuning tool can really show what's really going on.
I do not believe that the cyclone flows much less then a stock 1g intake manifold on the top end.
I agree that the G-TECH is accurate for all the reasons you mentioned above, except the educated guess it takes at horsepower and torque. He stated the car made 411hp/410tq on a dyno.... I do not think a 44hp difference between the data(Peak of 367hp) and the actual dyno is accurate..
I always look forward to hearing from you guys on this forum and have a lot of respect for all of you. Please never take my constant questioning of things as bashing, it will never be.. After all, not matter what intake manifold you have on the car, its a DSM, and DSM's are just plain sick. Later.
I agree that the G-TECH is accurate for all the reasons you mentioned above, except the educated guess it takes at horsepower and torque. He stated the car made 411hp/410tq on a dyno.... I do not think a 44hp difference between the data(Peak of 367hp) and the actual dyno is accurate..
stock evo8 dyno runs vary around the country from 200whp to 270whp. no two types of dyno read the same. the important part is they read accurate from one run to the next which they are all good at. including a g-tech. a g-tech would give about 225hp for stock evo 8. your logic that the g-tech is inaccurate because it read 44hp different than a dynojet is completely illogical and incorrect.
Yea. The Gtech usually supports mustangdyno or dyno dynamic numbers, not dynojet numbers. The dyno like gtech is jsut a tuning tool. Glad we all agree on that. I did get confused by your extrude honing gains arguement No issues. Just having a discussion where I'm on the other side. Mutual respect.
Back to the cyclone! I REALLY want to try to modify the cyclone manifold. I'm looking to pick one up now. I think it will fit nicely with my project. It's a twinscroll setup, 2Liter motor, and I feel a manifold that provides as broad a powerband as the cyclone (especially after attempting modify it to increase topend flow) would match well for a small motor with a broad powerband turbo.
____________________________
Matt
dd '90 GST, Holset H1C
the cyclone should surely benefit from port matching. the factory slop between transitions of the three pieces is nothing short of horrible. I just have never taken the time to do it. works really well in stock form.
Yea. The Gtech usually supports mustangdyno or dyno dynamic numbers, not dynojet numbers. The dyno like gtech is jsut a tuning tool. Glad we all agree on that. I did get confused by your extrude honing gains arguement No issues. Just having a discussion where I'm on the other side. Mutual respect.
Back to the cyclone! I REALLY want to try to modify the cyclone manifold. I'm looking to pick one up now. I think it will fit nicely with my project. It's a twinscroll setup, 2Liter motor, and I feel a manifold that provides as broad a powerband as the cyclone (especially after attempting modify it to increase topend flow) would match well for a small motor with a broad powerband turbo.
Cool. I would go with the cyclone and hog it out. Twinscroll and a cyclone pretty much seems to mean instant spool. Good luck man.
Well, got a little bored today. I decided to fab up a spare wastegate actuator to work. I have a few spare 14bs and a 13g wg. It looked like the 13g one popped out a little farther with the air compressor. With some cutting, grinding and little welding I got it set up. I was testing it on the car with the compressor at the 23psi that I run. It opens the butterflies about 95% at this level. I then jumped the compressor up a few more psi and it opened them up the rest. So on the car, I guess they are opening the 95%, but it doesn't seem to hinder the flow at all. Tomorrow, i'll see if I can mess with it some more
thanks for this thread. i actually pmed matt asking if i should get a smim or retain using my cyclone intake manifold for my hx35 project.
i think im going to stick with my hx35 project. right now im using a bone stock 7 bolt motor using dsm link v2 and a garrett t3. spools fast but yes i do notice a power loss above 5k.
now my question is that is the jdm cyclone IM different from the USDM? reason why i am asking is because i read the thread about how to properly run a cyclone IM and it says that i need a "canister" and some device to open the second batch of flappers.
my problem is that when i bought my engine, it already came with the cyclone IM and i dont see any canisters that came with it. secondly, i know i can use the dsmlink nitrous feature to activate the 2nd batch of flappers but that's not an option for me coz im using it to activate my meth injection system.
here's a pic of my engine bay with the cyclone IM. i know you need a more close up look but is there anything lacking you see by just looking at the pics?
Cyclones on car, and its clear were the cyclone excels, I was cruising home on the highway last night and it rides at 0 on the boost gauge at anything over 70mph, and any hair touch of the throttle it immediately starts boosting, its almost boosting TOO fast despite that these bigger cams have softened the lower rpm torque blow, spool up is nuts right now. Was a nice 50degs outside late last night and I went to pass a semi in 5th and literally 35 percent throttle car flung to full boost of 26psi without me even trying and the acceleration felt really smooth and strong. That little pass around the semi resulted me quickly going from 70mph to 100mph partial throttle without even trying.
I figured out how I'm going to keep the runners closed longer (since 16g spools so fast), which will make it produce a lot more torque, Im going to tap a mbc on the line going to the t25 actuator on the cyclone to increase pressure needed to open it. I want to try to keep runners closed till I reach full boost. I know many of you are probably disagreeing w/ this manifold but it beats the stock 1g manifold hands down and I only had to spend 60bucks on it. Top end is not measurably affected by the cyclone.
Its terrific to hear such great results on this manifold. Not to hijack the thread, but just a real quick question, what did you do for the gasket at the head? I've been digging for answers and most just say use gasket paper and roll your own. However, the one I received has been ported and it appears that a 1g manifold gasket fits perfect besides the egr hole. I havn't bolted it up and pressure tested it so unsure if this will work.
____________________________
91 Talon TSi
91 Eclipse GS
94 Nissan Sentra
. Later.
