[s-cars] An EM upgrade question/poll

[Trevor Frank]

I heard that the RS2 manifold was actually a copy of a manifold Lehmann
made and that IA's manifold is a copy of Lehmann's not of the RS2.  Not
entirely pertinent but may lead to some insight as to the design.

Who is up for and equal length 321 S.S. or 625 Inconel?  I have cad
drawings with a removable merger and "everything".  When my wife has
recovered this will be my next project, as well as the rest of the
exhaust. I already have the 3.5" 321 SS tubing for the down tube and the
3.5" Ti for the rest of the exhaust including a 6" Ti tube to make a
muffler.  The gotcha is I need to either bend it or get it bent.

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Pastore [mailto:rpastore at animalfeeds.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 11:40 AM
To: 'mlped at qwest.net'; Dave Forgie; s-cars
Subject: RE: [s-cars] An EM upgrade question/poll


This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not
understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Mike:

I had my rs2 EM  Jethot coated when new, and with the
turbo-ingests-stock-bypass valve incident, had occasion to take the
turbo off only a few months and a single track event later. Inside the
manifold, where the 5 runners come together, there were already cracks
in all the webs between the runners.  I did nothing about it, bolted on
my rebuilt turbo, and have pounded it for the last 4 or 5 years.  No
problems at all, and the cracks have not spread to the outside.

Maybe, just maybe, the redesign of the rs2 EM  from the AAN/3B 20v
manifold has more to do with clearance for the intake tube in the rs2
than it does with exhaust flow.

Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: mlp qwest [mailto:mlped at qwest.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 11:59 AM
To: Dave Forgie; s-cars
Subject: RE: [s-cars] An EM upgrade question/poll


Dave - In my limited experience, the RS2 EM is no guarantee against
cracking.  BT,ST.  A pure guess on my part, and it is only a guess, is
either EM, stock or RS2, run about the same risk for cracking, unless
they've been spec'd for manufacture from different materials.  In a
pinch or,... OK crack I guess, one might take a look at
http://www.aremco.com/PDFs/A3.pdf

I don't know for sure about the EM's, but I was told in several
conversation with two different aftermarket turbo manufacturers,
sometimes it isn't the thing you can see that make the biggest
differences in durability etc. of the hotside turbo housings.
Apparently there can be some huge differences in the quality & type of
iron used in these types of castings. e.g.
http://www.mesacastings.com/product_4.htm  I've been told if you look
carefully on the OEM pieces, you should find a symbol indicating the
factory castings have a high nickel content.  Hopefully, any aftermarket
type castings can supply this info as well.

As far as the stock design vs. the RS2 we're all only guessing the its
"better" partly based on:

(1) I paid a bunch of dinero for it, so it must be an improvement;

(2) my eyeball tells me the exhaust path for 5&1 from head to turbo
hotside "looks" straighter, ergo it must be/run cooler; and

(3) it was in the RS2 package, therefore there must be some additional
engineering that went into this thing that makes it an improvement;

that the RS2 version helps cylinders #5 & maybe #1 run a bit cooler by
letting some of the exhaust gases out faster.  What we don't have is any
confirmation of (a) changing the one component is in fact good for an
xxx (you supply the number) power gain; or (b) a xx psi drop in exhaust
manifold pressure before the turbo; or (c) an xx drop in exhaust gas
temp in cylinder runner 1, or 2 or .... 5.

Anyone got a "It's good for xxx bhp number" AND an explanation for how
the gain was determined or established?

I suspect manifold durability may be more closely related to heat cycles
and engine shutdown events etc. after particularly hard drives, i.e.
something like a big splash of cold water at the wrong time would be of
more significance than RS2 vs. stock design and layout.

What the heck, Dave I guess we'll just go on living dangerously :-)

Mike "off to watch the submarine races" Pederson

~-----Original Message-----
~From: Dave Forgie

~
~S-gruppees: The recent post about the cracked Stock EM leads me to ask
~the question:  How many people have successfully gone beyond Stage 1
~(say 280 hp chip upgrade) to say 300 hp and above without changing the
~Stock EM and have not have problems with a) cracked stock EM,  b) burnt
~valves (say No. 1 and No. 5), c) cracked valves seats/head or d) all of
~the above?  Being cautiously  paranoid, I would always upgrade the EM
to ~RS2 or Ned's improved RS2 clone before adding serious HP (> 280
say). ~For the same reason, I will always add more brakes before adding
more ~HP. (to prevent the "OSS", i.e. the Oh, Sh*t!! syndrome that
occurs when ~you have too much HP and overdrive the brakes. ~ ~So what
say ye?  EM upgrade or live dangerously? ~ ~Dave F. ~


_______________________________________________
S-CAR-List mailing list
S-CAR-List at audifans.com
http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
_______________________________________________
S-CAR-List mailing list
S-CAR-List at audifans.com
http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list

=======
Notice: This e-mail message, together with any attachments, contains
information of Symyx Technologies, Inc. that may be confidential,
proprietary, copyrighted, privileged and/or protected work product,
and is meant solely for the intended recipient. If you are not the
intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please
contact the sender immediately, permanently delete the original and
any copies of this email and any attachments thereto.