Effects of undivided ext. gate spacer on divided manifold & turbine housing

The Header you made for the 07 in that thread, looks great. I am not dogging your fab skills at all. But there is no way that this:
cummins1.jpg



Can do any better than this:
03-07-24v-cdtdemDSC01179.JPG



Now If it all depends on Flow and etc, then this manifold would be junk. But it works pretty darn good.
 
The Header you made for the 07 in that thread, looks great. I am not dogging your fab skills at all. But there is no way that this:
cummins1.jpg



Can do any better than this:
03-07-24v-cdtdemDSC01179.JPG



Now If it all depends on Flow and etc, then this manifold would be junk. But it works pretty darn good.

Actually that is untrue. Here is why, the manifold I built utilizes flow and energy from all individual cylinders, each exhaust pulse maintains much of its original energy that it had back in the exhaust port. The velocity is much higher due to the fact that it does not collide with any of the other exhaust pulses, at any point, they are separated right into the wheel.
Because the log manifold joins all the pulses together, and does not keep them separate they collide and slow down, because they slow down they loose a lot of energy to drive the turbine and because they are moving slower there is more residual pressure left in the manifold and port, making it more difficult for the cylinder to evacuate the exhaust gas.
 
The Header you made for the 07 in that thread, looks great. I am not dogging your fab skills at all. But there is no way that this:
cummins1.jpg



Can do any better than this:
03-07-24v-cdtdemDSC01179.JPG



Now If it all depends on Flow and etc, then this manifold would be junk. But it works pretty darn good.


I doubt that. Is that manifold divided?
 
What about it?

How much heat is lost with the equal length header compared to a log style? I am pretty sure that is what everybody is getting at.

We all know heat is used to drive the turbo, now is it more beneficial to tune the pulses with a equal length header and loose some heat, or keep the heat and not have the pulses tuned as well? Is it really worth the trouble on $$ for an equal length header?
 
How much heat is lost with the equal length header compared to a log style? I am pretty sure that is what everybody is getting at.

We all know heat is used to drive the turbo, now is it more beneficial to tune the pulses with a equal length header and loose some heat, or keep the heat and not have the pulses tuned as well? Is it really worth the trouble on $$ for an equal length header?

That's the $100 question


Let's not let this turn into a pissing match!

this derail started with Passenger's discussion of adding turbulence into the flow path with an unnecessary addition of 'volume' - which was the proposed suggestion for my loss of performance when throwing in an undivided wastegate plate with a divided manifold & turbine housing. Assuming I have no other stupid (i.e. overlooked) malfunctions in the system like an exhaust leak or un-tuned wastegate, I will be looking to install a divided plate to see if the problem is remedied.
 
Naw man, I am not trying to start a pissing match, we are just discussing. We can start another thread if you like?
 
There is surely a sweet spot for header design based on the rpm band you wish to utilize, cubic displacement, size of turbo, etc, etc.

That being said, take a look at the tractor guys with real money invested into their engines, making between 2500 and 3000 hp. They have been testing parts for longer than the p7100 pump has been put in production on dodge pickups. Do you think they use individual runner or log type exhaust manifolds...
 
How much heat is lost with the equal length header compared to a log style? I am pretty sure that is what everybody is getting at.

We all know heat is used to drive the turbo, now is it more beneficial to tune the pulses with a equal length header and loose some heat, or keep the heat and not have the pulses tuned as well? Is it really worth the trouble on $$ for an equal length header?

Heat, in its self, does not drive the turbine. The reason people believe this is because heat, is a by product of what really drives the turbine, gas velocity, and density.

Lets say you have a manifold and turbo sitting in a room with no air movement. At room temperature, the wheel does not spin. If that room was 1400* you would have the same result.
With tubular manifolds, its not so much you are losing heat, as much as not creating it in the form of turbulence. Log manifolds create a lot of heat, because you have a lot of pulse collisions, slowing the exhaust speed, which hinders the cylinders ability to evacuate the exhaust gas, so you are left with more residual exhaust/heat. That energy unfortunately is being wasted, instead of utilized.

That's the $100 question


Let's not let this turn into a pissing match!

this derail started with Passenger's discussion of adding turbulence into the flow path with an unnecessary addition of 'volume' - which was the proposed suggestion for my loss of performance when throwing in an undivided wastegate plate with a divided manifold & turbine housing. Assuming I have no other stupid (i.e. overlooked) malfunctions in the system like an exhaust leak or un-tuned wastegate, I will be looking to install a divided plate to see if the problem is remedied.

Yeah sorry for the derail man, its still a bit in topic though. In your situation I would still rule out premature waste gate opening first, as this common problem. However if the cause is the divider alone, the minimal amount of additional volume is not the issue, its the turbulence caused by having an open pocket. I've increased manifold volume around 40 times more than that divider is worth and haven't had response issues.

Naw man, I am not trying to start a pissing match, we are just discussing. We can start another thread if you like?


I don't feel this is a pissing match at all, just a wee bit side tracked is all.

There is surely a sweet spot for header design based on the rpm band you wish to utilize, cubic displacement, size of turbo, etc, etc.

That being said, take a look at the tractor guys with real money invested into their engines, making between 2500 and 3000 hp. They have been testing parts for longer than the p7100 pump has been put in production on dodge pickups. Do you think they use individual runner or log type exhaust manifolds...


Absolutely there is a sweet spot. I haven't looked much into tractor pulling engines, but I won't for second believe they wouldn't benefit from some really well designed manifolds, and log manifolds are anything but that. Not saying you can't make power with a log manifold, its just a good ways from good.
 
yeah guys dont worry about it, it's all relative... just didnt want to go to the 'jim bob's header is beatter" debate

Yeah sorry for the derail man, its still a bit in topic though. In you situation I would still rule out premature waste gate opening, as this common problem. However if the cause is the divider alone, the minimal amount of additional volume is not the issue, its the turbulence caused by having an open pocket. I've increased manifold volume around 40 times more than that divider is worth and haven't had response issues.

I'm in full agreeance - and i'll be honest my communication skills are poor at best - with the explaination of the turbulence being an issue.

Unfortunately for me I will have to delay my testing of this issue until I get my injectors back from Weston.
 
There is surely a sweet spot for header design based on the rpm band you wish to utilize, cubic displacement, size of turbo, etc, etc.

That being said, take a look at the tractor guys with real money invested into their engines, making between 2500 and 3000 hp. They have been testing parts for longer than the p7100 pump has been put in production on dodge pickups. Do you think they use individual runner or log type exhaust manifolds...

This is a great question. I have seen both. The rare V8s (Perkins in the Masseys) I have only seen individual tube headers on. The the I-6 engines, I have seen both. Which is more popular, I have no idea....fill us in.

I couldn't find many pics real quick, but Hypermax sells plain old log style.
 
Heat, in its self, does not drive the turbine. The reason people believe this is because heat, is a by product of what really drives the turbine, gas velocity, and density.

Lets say you have a manifold and turbo sitting in a room with no air movement. At room temperature, the wheel does not spin. If that room was 1400* you would have the same result.
With tubular manifolds, its not so much you are losing heat, as much as not creating it in the form of turbulence. Log manifolds create a lot of heat, because you have a lot of pulse collisions, slowing the exhaust speed, which hinders the cylinders ability to evacuate the exhaust gas, so you are left with more residual exhaust/heat. That energy unfortunately is being wasted, instead of utilized.

you're kinda reaching with that analogy...

take two headers, one just raw steel, the other coated and heavily wrapped to hold heat in... which do you think will spool better?
 
The Header you made for the 07 in that thread, looks great. I am not dogging your fab skills at all. But there is no way that this: (tube header)

Can do any better than this: (stainless log)


Until you've tried both, how can you know for sure?

I had an old friend who often said "one experiment is worth a thousand expert opinions."

I just don't think you can draw such a conclusion without DATA. I sure would love to see a direct comparison, on a good dyno.
 
you're kinda reaching with that analogy...

take two headers, one just raw steel, the other coated and heavily wrapped to hold heat in... which do you think will spool better?


I follow you Forrest, but again is everyone using ass-dyno or someone have real data? 100% agree that coating can't ever be a negative, but I'd like to see some quantification of it. Is it like journal bearing vs. ball bearing? I mean if we spool 0.3 seconds faster, is that something that is really felt versus "I sure wanted to feel it, so I did."
 
I follow you Forrest, but again is everyone using ass-dyno or someone have real data? 100% agree that coating can't ever be a negative, but I'd like to see some quantification of it. Is it like journal bearing vs. ball bearing? I mean if we spool 0.3 seconds faster, is that something that is really felt versus "I sure wanted to feel it, so I did."

I've run two different turbos with and without Turbo Performances turbine blankets (always had the manifold blanket in place but not the turbine housing blanket). I can assure you I noticed a difference of about 150 rpm or so. The difference between 0-5 psi is very very noticeable. I don't have a data logger. This is my daily driver tractor motor'd 12v pickup which is the common place you're going to see the use of these blankets on this web site. Most of us aren't logging data but it's not hard to see a difference noted. I would invite you to spend the small $100 for one of his turbine blankets and see for yourself. Point, heat helps drive the turbo better. I must volunteer that it's possible the reduction in under the hood temps is responsible for this although I think it's the heat retained by the blanket. IN my experience egt's are slower to drop with the use of the blanket.

Regarding the comments about tractor pullers some of these guys are spending $5000-$10000 per turbo. I'm pretty sure if they were gaining anything with a header they'd be running them.

I've run SPEEDSHIFT's t4 header and a PDI t4 header back to back on a turbonetics t66. The PDI piece was a ton better to drive making boost from 0-10 psi much much faster. After 10psi SPEEDSHIFT's t4 header worked a little better and provided less exhaust gas temps. The header used a t4 divided flange just like the pdi t4 manifold. The difference noted on 0 to 10 psi with the manifold was far greater than the difference after 10 psi with the header.

Given the nature of this website it's going to be hard to put these observations into clearly defined numbers. If I had the lute for data loggers and what have you i'd have two enormous turbos and a sigma on my DD lol:Cheer:
 
Heat, in its self, does not drive the turbine. The reason people believe this is because heat, is a by product of what really drives the turbine, gas velocity, and density.

Lets say you have a manifold and turbo sitting in a room with no air movement. At room temperature, the wheel does not spin. If that room was 1400* you would have the same result.
With tubular manifolds, its not so much you are losing heat, as much as not creating it in the form of turbulence. Log manifolds create a lot of heat, because you have a lot of pulse collisions, slowing the exhaust speed, which hinders the cylinders ability to evacuate the exhaust gas, so you are left with more residual exhaust/heat. That energy unfortunately is being wasted, instead of utilized.



Yeah sorry for the derail man, its still a bit in topic though. In your situation I would still rule out premature waste gate opening first, as this common problem. However if the cause is the divider alone, the minimal amount of additional volume is not the issue, its the turbulence caused by having an open pocket. I've increased manifold volume around 40 times more than that divider is worth and haven't had response issues.




I don't feel this is a pissing match at all, just a wee bit side tracked is all.




Absolutely there is a sweet spot. I haven't looked much into tractor pulling engines, but I won't for second believe they wouldn't benefit from some really well designed manifolds, and log manifolds are anything but that. Not saying you can't make power with a log manifold, its just a good ways from good.

I am saying the heat is something that needs to be maintained all the way to the turbocharger. Take a tire air it to 80lbs in a 80* room, then heat it up to 1400*, see how much psi it has then, it will gain psi with heat. That is the theory that I am referring to when I say heat drives a turbo, not heat alone bug it is a big enough factor worth discussing.

So, how much heat is lost with a equal length header, that is really long therefore giving the exhaust gas more time to cool and contract before it hits the turbine wheel? Is it alot, a little, or none? Heat is why we run turbo blankets, to keep the heat IN, and the drive pressure UP, to utilize the air we have to drive the turbine faster, and not just let that energy dissipate.
 
you're kinda reaching with that analogy...

take two headers, one just raw steel, the other coated and heavily wrapped to hold heat in... which do you think will spool better?

I'll go to a local shop where I tested this and see if they still have the graphs.
In short we didn't make any additional power. We did plot the boost pressure on the graphs as well, iirc there wasn't any difference.

I'm more into coating for keep heat out of the material (internal coating) and to help keep under hood temps in check.
 
Heat, in its self, does not drive the turbine. The reason people believe this is because heat, is a by product of what really drives the turbine, gas velocity, and density.

Lets say you have a manifold and turbo sitting in a room with no air movement. At room temperature, the wheel does not spin. If that room was 1400* you would have the same result.
With tubular manifolds, its not so much you are losing heat, as much as not creating it in the form of turbulence. Log manifolds create a lot of heat, because you have a lot of pulse collisions, slowing the exhaust speed, which hinders the cylinders ability to evacuate the exhaust gas, so you are left with more residual exhaust/heat. That energy unfortunately is being wasted, instead of utilized.


So now your trying to tell us gas temperature has no effect on on velocity through the turbine?
 
Back
Top