TU Cast Iron Header

[amelnikov]

Quote:

Originally Posted by speeduphoria Exactly, the detonation threshold changes with a 4-1 or 4-2-1 header, equal length or not. You have less reversion then you do with ANY log manifold. Thats why I was saying you can do many mods then using a larger cam you will have more reversion(hot air in the cyls).

true but better flowing log manifold will also lessen exhaust restriction. Back to my WRX as an example. While tubular header was great for peak power and I loved the sound it made at high rpms, I also hated the fact that it made my turbo spool a lot slower. One weakend I decided to do a test and ported the hell out of stockers and used a larger cross-over pipe. Took me the whole weekend to port those but the end result was so worth it! Not only my turbo spools almost instantly, I also have a lot more power at lower rpm and still make pretty much the same power at high rpm. I've not noticed any knock at all and low end torque is up so much that I finally broke my tranny ( long story, US WRX's 5 speed just can't handle more than 300#'s of torque for long).
So by porting the stockers I not only made them flow better, I also increased internal volume and that combination was enough to improve power and knock resistance.

Alex...

[speeduphoria]

there are many things that come into play when talking headers and exhaust manifolds. Personally I cannot comment on your setup b/c I have not seen or measured the manifolds in question.

One thing I can tell you is that comparing cast log manifolds on an inline 4 cylinder motor to cast manifolds on a boxer 4 cyl motor is apples to oranges.

[amelnikov]

Quote:

Originally Posted by speeduphoria One thing I can tell you is that comparing cast log manifolds on an inline 4 cylinder motor to cast manifolds on a boxer 4 cyl motor is apples to oranges.

LOL, don't take this personally but that's stating the obvious. One thing that does not change is if you restict exhaust on any engine, you will increase chances of detonation, which I would like to avoid if at all possible in my CSX.
This tread is going kind of tangent though. I would love to hear from somebody that has run this manifold and can share his experience.

Alex...

[vw505]

so if i was going for 300Hp is the tu header worth the money?

[tryingbe]

Again, if you want to have the ability to change turbo without taking the head off, use a T04 type turbo without using the two 90 degree bends or cut the head, having a higher flow log header, etc

BUY THE TU HEADER.

Fixed.

[GLHNSLHT2]

Just remember porting and moving things around are required. And I think it's "BUY" the TU Header

[JamesL]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vw505 so if i was going for 300Hp is the tu header worth the money?

You can make that power without the TU exhaust manifold or a real header. I say exhaust manifold because I think some folks have a pretty loose definition of a header; its not a bad marketing trick though. "Shadow" runs 11.06 with 450 HP on a ported t2 manifold so it’s quite obvious what’s possible without the hassle of relocating the turbo. There might well be a small gain but the real advantage is in the ease of access to the turbo. That’s not without its pitfalls either. There are several other things that will need to be redone to accommodate the new location especially in an L-body. If you are finding yourself servicing your turbo often, you might want to reconsider your turbo provider. Gains made with this type of log manifold are theoretical at best IME. My own experience trying to use a log "header" and a 3" TU swing valve was less then impressive. I had several problems with the swing valve sticking so I sold it and ended up back to my ported stock manifold and 2.5 SV for best results (7.0X in the 8th). I'm getting the itch to update my car again so I will have an opportunity to put our tubular header on along with my own 3.5” swing valve and do some tuning. If it all works out, I'll have several more headers made likely in 321SS as our mild steel header is quite hefty.

[tmef]

[quote=JamesL;1293927]I had several problems with the swing valve sticking so I sold it

I am curious to know if anyone else has had this problem? There are probably a couple hundred TU 3" swingvalves running around out there but this is the first I have heard of this.

[tryingbe]

From what I understand, that particular 3 inch swingvalve was a earlier production and was machined incorrectly...

Somehow FWD performance alway left that part out.

[JamesL]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tryingbe From what I understand, that particular 3 inch swingvalve was a earlier production and was machined incorrectly... Somehow FWD performance alway left that part out.

I don't think I've actually ever discussed my experience with this SV publicly. Anyway the valve would stick if fully opened and it would not close because the puck would hang up against the exhaust hole. Of course I had to find this out after I sent it out for some nice coating work and installed it on my car. I'm sure it was an early production model but that didn't change the fact that it didn't work and that I couldn't get my money back. Machined incorrectly, cast incorrectly, welded incorrectly or whatever...it was a bad piece I ended up stuck with and bottom line....it really didn't do anything for power when it did work. I ended up cutting the puck off and relocating it myself so I could sell it. It wouldn't have been right to stick someone with the POS but then TU always left that part out too. I'm sure he got a good laugh all the way to the bank.

[vw505]

ok, i guess i will pass on this then. my 2.5 is going in a kit car so room to work is nnot a problem.

[The Pope]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesL I don't think I've actually ever discussed my experience with this SV publicly. Anyway the valve would stick if fully opened and it would not close because the puck would hang up against the exhaust hole. Of course I had to find this out after I sent it out for some nice coating work and installed it on my car. I'm sure it was an early production model but that didn't change the fact that it didn't work and that I couldn't get my money back. Machined incorrectly, cast incorrectly, welded incorrectly or whatever...it was a bad piece I ended up stuck with and bottom line....it really didn't do anything for power when it did work. I ended up cutting the puck off and relocating it myself so I could sell it. It wouldn't have been right to stick someone with the POS but then TU always left that part out too. I'm sure he got a good laugh all the way to the bank.

My coated 3" SV sticks to the donut and chews on it

The worst thing about the 3" systems is trying to make the DP fit to a 2.5 SV. Rick D made an incredible donut that was solid SS, the thing was sweet. But more important is that the rick D donut was the right angle to match the 2.5" SV. Every current one I've got is cut on the TU 3" SV angle, which is at least 30 degrees different than a stock 2.5". My wagon has now crushed the donut in the 2.5 SV and is trying to spit the thing out.

You get the porduct out the door, then you listen to what everyone has to say about it. Then you make the changes to the next batch. Free R & D work!

[Reaper1]

^^Sounds like Microsoft!!

[tmef]

Found my answer.

[JamesL]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmef Found my answer.

Yea there is a thread titled "Wastegate/swingvalve not opening?" on another board where the issue was discussed.