Flow stats for exhaust manifolds -SURPRISING!!!! - Page 2 - GM Forum - Buick, Cadillac, Chev, Olds, GMC & Pontiac chat


Performance, Brainstorming & Tuning Talk about modifications, or anything else associated with performance enhancements. Have a new idea for performance/reliability? Post it here. No idea is stupid! (please use Detailing and Appearance for cosmetic ideas)

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-06-2006, 10:12 PM   #11
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Farmington, Minnesota =MWBF '05 SURVIVOR= =CEBF '06 SURVIVOR= =August '06 COTM=
Posts: 9,130
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
LakevilleSSEi is on a distinguished road
Default

Glad we all responded at the same time....

Hahaha
LakevilleSSEi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2006, 10:21 PM   #12
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans
Quote:
Originally Posted by willwren
1992 Series 1 L67 manifolds are different than the 93-95. We don't know what that difference is, or whether the 93-95 manifolds are backwards compatible to the 92.

"we dont know what the difference is" How do we know there is a difference then??????
Because the part numbers are different.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 02:06 AM   #13
Senior Member
Posts like a Corvette
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bolingbrook, IL Location: Clarkston, MI
Posts: 1,256
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
llBlazin_llLo is on a distinguished road
Default

Maybe becuase the N/A '92s didn't have an EGR?

Maybe one of the reasons that the front manifold flow better is because it is cast? IIRC cast will be better as long as it is smooth.

I'd like to see ported series 2'* get tested.
llBlazin_llLo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 08:33 AM   #14
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by llBlazin_llLo
Maybe becuase the N/A '92s didn't have an EGR?
No, sir. Even the L67 manifolds with the EGR are a different part number. I think there might be a difference with crossover pipes, but again, I'm unsure at this point until J Wikoff figures it out.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 09:14 AM   #15
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 7,030
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
lash is on a distinguished road
Default


Those are shocking numbers. This shows why actual testing is so important. Our intuition tells us that the front S2 manis would flow worse than the rear, when in fact they flow much better.

Thanks for testing those. Good info!
lash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 09:20 AM   #16
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lash

Those are shocking numbers. This shows why actual testing is so important. Our intuition tells us that the front S2 manis would flow worse than the rear, when in fact they flow much better.

Thanks for testing those. Good info!
Hector, of famed Admin rank and owner of ADTR flowbenched his L36 mani'* (99BonnevilleSE we're talking about here). His reccommendation 3 years ago was to leave the front mani stock, and only port the rear. This tends to match them, rather than getting the most out of each and being unmatched.

It seems this latest round of testing confirms that. I'm not going to make the call on the matching idea, but it'* something to think about.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 09:25 AM   #17
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 7,030
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
lash is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by willwren
Quote:
Originally Posted by lash

Those are shocking numbers. This shows why actual testing is so important. Our intuition tells us that the front S2 manis would flow worse than the rear, when in fact they flow much better.

Thanks for testing those. Good info!
Hector, of famed Admin rank and owner of ADTR flowbenched his L36 mani'* (99BonnevilleSE we're talking about here). His reccommendation 3 years ago was to leave the front mani stock, and only port the rear. This tends to match them, rather than getting the most out of each and being unmatched.

It seems this latest round of testing confirms that. I'm not going to make the call on the matching idea, but it'* something to think about.
Hmmmm...certainly is something to think about. Just out of curiousity, how much would a flowbench testing session cost?
lash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 09:34 AM   #18
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

Correction, I got it backwards. It seems Hector'* data conflicts with this new data. Maybe it varies by casting?

This however the first time anyone (to my knowledge unless ssei1995 has done it) has flowbenched the S1 manifolds. The S1 mani'* are widely considered (not just in our community) to be the best flowing stock manifolds ever produced by GM.

Here'* a link to some Hector manifold info:

http://www.bonnevilleclub.com/forum/...pic.php?t=3657

And some other info:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 99BonnevilleSE

We did some flow testing on the manifolds. We found out the Series II cast iron manifold ported outflows the rear tubular manifold (stock and ported versions). This is because it has much smother flow and the tubular just slams the exhaust gases into the walls. The rear exhaust manifold welded on the outside only gains a few cfm per port which is nothing. There ya go.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 10:13 AM   #19
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 7,030
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
lash is on a distinguished road
Default

I'm going to quote the meat from that link, because I think it adds to this discussion:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 99BonnevilleSE
We have learned quite a bit. We flow benched the front exhaust manifold stock and ported. Once ported, it flowed 22-25% greater over stock. So for example, rather than the exhaust ports being 20 cfm behind in flow, they are now 30-40cfm more than the stock exhaust ports can flow (a good thing). In our flow testing, we discovered that welding the rear exhaust manifold and grinding it out provides no gains. Even removing many of the casting bumps and large interior welds. It turns out that the ported front exhaust manifold outflows the rear exhaust manifold by around 5%. Funny how air does not act like you expect it to.
This is definitely contradictory to what Gordy found out above, but also not as specific, leaving a few questions to be answered.

Do the S2 exhaust manifold flows vary considerably between vehicles?

What benefit would there be to flow matching front and rear manis? I would think that it would be a good thing.

What extra data could be provided that would help answer these questions?

- flow testing of additional stock front and rear S2 manifolds.
- flow testing of ported front and rear S2 manifolds.

My thoughts are leaning towards the possibility that when someone gets a set of ported front and rear manifolds for a S2 3800, maybe, in addition to the extra total flow, they are getting a more evenly matched flow, front to back. That isn't to say that the rears shouldn't be done, as we already know of the tendency for weld cracking etc. on the rears and the welding-porting process on these helps durability if nothing else (though probably some flow increase per the quote in Bill'* post above from Hector).

What do you think?
lash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2006, 10:21 AM   #20
Senior Member
Posts like a 4 Banger
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Okc, OK
Posts: 105
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Blk2000SSEi is on a distinguished road
Default

Man this is getting confusing. I been reading alot of old threads and pretty much everybody says to do ported manifolds if can't afford headers. Now this info??? I was planing on ordering some mani'* soon I guess I'll hold off for awhile and see where this goes.
Blk2000SSEi is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Painting my Exhaust Manifolds, and soon other things too! h1081dan General GM Chat 39 10-28-2003 09:40 PM
Ugly a$$ exhaust manifolds...suggestions PLEASE bonnie94ssei General GM Chat 6 08-06-2003 01:18 AM
Porting Exhaust Manifolds. merlin Performance, Brainstorming & Tuning 2 07-08-2003 10:56 PM
How many exhaust manifolds are like jrs3800 ? lght1 1992-1999 11 06-03-2003 05:01 PM
Couldn't you port your own exhaust manifolds? brminder Performance, Brainstorming & Tuning 9 02-28-2003 02:35 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:31 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.