greycar said:

Any part you buy has the potential of breaking, especially when you are pushing the envelope, but the best thing about the Magnus is I know for a fact Marco stands 110% behind his products, where other companies give the cold shoulder. And if you buy from Marco you can recieve real technical assistance if you are having problems, not some idiot that really has no idea.

Click to expand...

Very very true. I haven't seen any questions asked to repair them. I'd rather pay more and get good service than save a few pennies and be thrown into the jungle.. I guess that makes me not the so typical DSM'r

Mirage2LTurbo said:

Very very true. I haven't seen any questions asked to repair them. I'd rather pay more and get good service than save a few pennies and be thrown into the jungle.. I guess that makes me not the so typical DSM'r

Click to expand...

SO SO true

Amazing last post was on my birthday, Has anyone bothered to do a flow bench on the manifolds themselves? like using all manifolds that have been argued about put a 1G throttle body on it and get flow numbers though the third port at TPI not valve lift. This thread got out of hand when someone based figures with two different manifolds and two different grinds of cams. i might be a dumb Aussie but give me a break! i change cams and profiles of cams nearly daily on dynos and see huge gains and losses playing just with 2 degree's overlap. The difference i have found with 264's and 272's with a operational cyclone manifold is nearly 57rwhp on a 2.4/hybrid so dont guess on what you think show numbers. i wish i had access to all these manifolds i would do it for you's. you can argue all you like about manifolds but you have to relize its only part of the flow! You can run 11's on a stock manifold and you can run 11's on a Magnus aswell there's a lot in what comes after the inlet manifold gasket and what feeds it.

We have just done flow bench testing on a 1g head (stock) and lifted the floor in the inlet at .X50 (Guess) with stock valves and filling the cyclone mani' aswell to suit, but shaping and bending the butterfly's to redirect the air when open and CFM gains are very noticeable. "Polk" has done heaps with flows and different manifold designs and we learn off these people that experiment and take the steps further. Keep up the good info but slow down on the nitpicking!

I am not quite in the big leagues yet compared to some of you guys and I have a AGP RS49 with 264/272 combo.Have been seriously thinking of getting magnus intake lately and just about to pull the trigger.
I am slightly depressed hearing about a couple cracking thought that wasn't a problem with them only the venoms.

Also from an objective point of view it is true that all the tests show is that the COMBO of
magnus and 272 has the potential to make a lot more power than than 264/264 FRH.It is true in any scientific experiment you want to take out as many variables as possilbe so ideally that car with the 264 should have been tested with the magnus and the frh as well as the 272/272 car.
I have to wonder how much loss in rpm the 264 give.Don't they seriously reduce top end power just from the grind? From my point of view am also curious to see what a 264/272 combo would do for numbers but of course its easy enough to swap in another 272 if power merits it.

I am also curious to see if magnus or these other intakes will give big power gain on a smaller 50 trim like mine but have read quite a bit of dre's stuff and he did seem to get good power out of his 50 trim.

I don't have luxury of dyno anywhere near me right now so have to rely on you guys.

Hal, and the guy that work on these did a good job in my opinion.. The other thing that could play a factor is who did the head work, and how they port match it to the intake manifold. I have FRH do my head and i'm runing a FRH manifold, he port match it. But I have no numbers to back that up. AMS help with use of the dyno to make the FRH manifold, plus they have made lots of power on the manifold too. I'm not trying to start any fights.. Just puting in my .02 cents

Ed, FRH doesn't have a support bracket.

Ok instead of starting a new thread I am switching from a 6 bolt to 7 bolt head. With the heads I got two free intake manifolds. One is a venom and the other is absolutely stock 7 bolt. I have dual springs and retainers, hks272's. but a small turbo for now on around 30 psi. Which manifold should I use?

I don't think a venom is a good idea on a small turbo and a stock style turbine housing. If you're going to open up the airflow in AND out i'd say the venom. But, it all depends on your redline. I had a venom on my 2g with a 20g turbo. The 20g felt like a dog under 4.2k rpm, but fell out of steam before the venom could really shine.

Firist of all, there is no such thing as 7 bolt intake. I think that you mean 2G intake (remember, there were 7 bolt 1G's).

Second, we might need more into than "small turbo" I remember when 20G was a "BIG TURBO"!

BTW, I ran my best 14b times with a Venom intake! I do not think that it was helping me and it defintiely hurt my bottom end torque, but it also wasn't hurting the top end perfomance, ether.

Update on my intake: I parted out my GreenMachine shortly after my original post in this thread, back in '05. My Venom intake was purchased by my friend who went on to use few more years, running 40-55psi of boost! Eventually, it cracked, was repaired and cracked again! I definitely think that Venom NOT good for application over 40 psi!!!

Intake!!!

Is that for a honda? Pretty sexy. I think it will work good too considering our throttlebodies aren't centered in the manifold. I remember looking at the hawver manifold and its runners are slightly angled at the joint to the plenum. I wonder if this can maximize velocity.

Black95TSIawd said:

Is that for a honda? Pretty sexy. I think it will work good too considering our throttlebodies aren't centered in the manifold. I remember looking at the hawver manifold and its runners are slightly angled at the joint to the plenum. I wonder if this can maximize velocity.

Click to expand...

Pretty sure I snagged that pic off of dsmtalk a year or two ago. IIRC the guy who posted it didn't have any data on it yet.