Intake manifolds: EVO III vs Magnus V4?

[b00stedtalon2]

Looking for a comparison of a EVO 3 intake manifold vs Magnus V4. Dyno, butt dyno or track results.

 

[GST with PSI]

Comparison on what?

How your car is set up, power level, and what the car is being built for will determine the pros/cons for each...Just like every other part on the car.

 

[b00stedtalon2]

Comparison on what?

How your car is set up, power level, and what the car is being built for will determine the pros/cons for each...Just like every other part on the car.

I'm looking for a back to back comparison with both manifolds to see spool characteristics, power band and HP/TQ changes. I'd suspect a loss in TQ and a nice gain in power depending on the liter of the engine and other parts.

I'm quite aware of that. It would be nice to see some data regardless of what setup someones car has. No one has probably done this test but it doesn't hurt to ask.

 

[GST with PSI]

Again, that data wouldn't matter unless you plan to mirror whatever setup the data came from.

The Magnus flows well and has tons of volume. The Evo 3 is as about as good as a stock 4G63 manifold gets. Both could potentially out perform the other on a particular setup, hence the question which was posed to you above.

What your asking doesn't make any sense absent a particular application where each manifold is applied, since, each should perform optimally when implemented correctly on a given setup.

 

[Vegas Smith]

Surely you can learn something from a back to back test. This is an acceptable scientific method. The results may not tell you everything but they may tell you something you didn't know before. To say that you couldn't learn anything from a back-to-back manifold test because it's not exactly like your setup would be equivalent to saying you cant learn about a drug because it wasn't tested on your body or someone exactly like you.

 

[GST with PSI]

Without an end goal for a basis of the comparison, what do your results actually mean? They surely don't prove one manifold is superior to the other? Now, when I say "Magnus V4 vs Evo 3 IM comparison on my 700hp drag car", that actually means something, does it not? So when I can show the Magnus V4 performs better than the Evo 3, or vise versa, people can actually put it into context. Hence, me asking comparison on what.

Simply put, if you swapped an Evo 3 intake manifold in place of a Magnus V4 when the car was built for a Magnus V4, you're probably going to see losses in both torque and power. That's not because the Evo 3 intake manifold is inferior, it's because it's not the best application for that setup. If you do see gains, then the build probably wasn't suited for a V4 in the first place, which again, doesn't suggest one manifold is better than the other, only that the wrong part was used for the application. Now, if we were talking about cams for example, I think that would be a different discussion, since cams can be degreed, and even further suited/tailored to an individual build. But an intake manifold (especially the two in question) is more cut and dry as far as how and when it is designed to perform optimally. These factors can be accounted for by looking at volume, design and some other basic features of the manifold to ensure the manifold achieves whatever the end goal is.

IMO, you can't make blanket comparisons with real world numbers on two parts that are night and day different and expect to get any meaningful data to compare as a result. I'd venture to say that's probably also why you won't find many people comparing the two manifolds mentioned back to back. I think most builds suited to a Magnus V4 (like a full on drag car) wouldn't be better off in an Evo 3 manifold, so you won't be likely to see those results. That's not to say some full on drag cars aren't using E3 IM's, but once again, the important piece is the application of the part, and proper implementation according to the overall performance goal.

As with the majority of my posts, that's just my personal hypothesis based on common sense, current data readily available for both intake manifolds, and personal experience using both intake manifolds in question. That being said, I'm always open to being proven wrong.

 

[lasthope05]

@GST with PSI . Did you previously have a V3? I have both but still haven't gotten around to installing the V4. I have a ported/deshrouded 1g cylinder head and I haven't started the headwork on the 2g head I have, so it wouldnt be good comparative data.

 

[Boomdeeze]

I commented on your thread on ECMLink but I would be willing to compare the two if someone would lend me the V4. I could overlay the two dyno's to compare. Nothing has changed on my car from the first dyno so it would be a good comparison.

 

[bastarddsm]

I don't know on the top end, but here's what I can tell you.

I ran a evo3 on a 6 bolt head. All I did was weld up the flange to cover the ports. Little Port into small. Car made decent top end and huge bottom over my old big port home made smim, no top end loss.

I am now on a 6 bolt billet jmf race. Killed bottom. If you are marginal on coverter with the Evo, you will likely not get on it with a Magnus. I do believe it helped power probably at least 30whp, but maybe as much as 100. Car picked up 3mph, but then I drove it different and it picked up 10. So who knows.

Your probably going to have to test it on your own, I don't know on that id trust results of other anyway. Too easy for results to be skewed by other factors.

 

[GST with PSI]

@GST with PSI . Did you previously have a V3? I have both but still haven't gotten around to installing the V4. I have a ported/deshrouded 1g cylinder head and I haven't started the headwork on the 2g head I have, so it wouldnt be good comparative data.

On 1837, I've had a stock 1g manifold, a Magnus street SMIM, and now a Magnus V4. I don't have good data to compare, since my setup changed quite a bit between each manifold, and I never ran the Evo 3 IM on that car.

On 820, I've had a stock 1g manifold, Evo 3 IM (with 2g head), and now I'm on a Cyclone manifold (back to a 1g head).

I changed manifolds as I collected data from each setup, shooting for specific results from each.

 

[GST with PSI]

If you are marginal on coverter with the Evo, you will likely not get on it with a Magnus.

Isn't Scott using N2O to get up on the converter? @b00stedtalon2

I can't imagine the Magnus V4 killing bottom end on most setups, much less a 9 sec auto drag car. I'd guess the V4 would be good for gains across the board over the Evo 3 in this case .

 

[bastarddsm]

Dude, it's night and day down low. It was at least a 1000rpm change in boost threshhold. Didn't change much at the track. But cruising around town it helped a lot.

 

[GST with PSI]

Dude, it's night and day down low. It was at least a 1000rpm change in boost threshhold. Didn't change much at the track. But cruising around town it helped a lot.

I assumed his car was track only.

I ran the V4 previously on a tiny 68HTA and it made pretty good power down low, especially considering how laggy that turbo is. My current 3052 has rediculous low end response.

I'd be curious to know what low end gains could be had on the Evo 3, but a back to back swap isn't practical since I'm running a 1G V4 flanged Magnus manifold, and the Evo 3 IM has small ports. I can't imagine the Evo 3 IM flows better up top over the Magnus though, especially on a drag car running 40+ psi, but I'd be curious to see some hard data either way.

 

[bastarddsm]

Have one modified. It takes an hour, a tighter, and a file.

Track car or not everything benefits from more bottom end.

 

[bastarddsm]

Also psi has nothing to do with flow up top, it's all cams and rpm. Counterintuitively it actually opposite, a given turbo will have a higher rpm range at lower boost. The intake will have a bigger gains at high RPM running less boost.