MiniTorque.com banner

101 - 115 of 115 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
Discussion Starter #101
You just want as much ignition advance as you can get without running into det. I would expect you could get another 2 or 3 degrees at the bottom end to lift the torque curve a bit but it's a trial and error thing so you'll have to play it by ear while all the time checking for det. You might want to trim out some fuel too but it will all take time to get right. The upper end looks ok in terms of advance, that's where your cams will come into their own.

If you try 60mph in 6th then drop to 4th and floor it. The only reason i was asking was to check if the overboost function was still active or if they've mapped it out and that's a good way of getting it to reliably activate.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Took the longer route home and made some runs. This link is 6th - 4th and then WOT.
What do you make of ignition advance on cylinder 1 going from 0.5, dropping a touch to -1.5 then up to a peak of 10.5 deg?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
326 Posts

Took the longer route home and made some runs. This link is 6th - 4th and then WOT.
What do you make of ignition advance on cylinder 1 going from 0.5, dropping a touch to -1.5 then up to a peak of 10.5 deg?
That's quite interesting. It looks like he's managed to map out the overboost function. It would be good to know how they did it. The timing looks like a fairly normal profile. You need to retard it as the boost comes in around peak torque to avoid det. As the revs climb you can start to advance a little more. You'll probably notice slightly less advance with your 4th gear run as compared to your 3rd gear run due to the increased engine load.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,213 Posts

Took the longer route home and made some runs. This link is 6th - 4th and then WOT.
What do you make of ignition advance on cylinder 1 going from 0.5, dropping a touch to -1.5 then up to a peak of 10.5 deg?
that's going to be knock detection? ECU pulling 2 degrees out so the map may need adjustment is the way I'd see it (didn't look at plot), hopefully oil isn't getting into the intake, catch cans won't necessarily mean it isn't, just a thought....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
it would seem the spec is nearer the 603 and 602 than 601, one set I think is similar to one of these Catcam profiles which is what I have here now, I need to measure something to confirm which version I got tbh and can get the data for them to share so will report back with that. The ones I have are on steel blanks and not intended for sale but I can get them in the chilled iron version which will be cheaper than Catcams.

the problem at the moment for me is I can't begin to say how a car would run with them, they're said to be reasonably aggressive, my engines are in bits plus I have no map or familiarity with maps on these as yet, so some information if required will be a while away. You guys are way ahead of me in messing with the actual mapping and turbo side etc.

they do actually have another profile which is also being sent now, these are apparently more aggressive again and similar to some Lohen tried which took some work to get running right, someone else tried and failed apparently which might give you some idea they aren't like the 601's haha. No idea what car Lohen tried these in, aware they have a 400hp+ demo so maybe in that or a race car who knows, I'll talk to someone else about that and try to let you know more. These are not in the public domain at all so there will be no info.

aware I'm not telling you a lot here, but can say the cams are imminent, blanks are in progress, pricing on both profiles will follow if people are interested, I appreciate people won't necessarily be up for running largely untested cams but it's important to let people know there are others available I'm sure you might agree.

working on the basis that the other Mini Newman cams are at least £60+ cheaper than others, this should give some indication that for the N14 they'll be ~£120+ cheaper than the Catcams if that helps.

If there is interest and there are a number of people wanting to experiment with this new option then I can probably do something for like 10 pairs to help get them out there and develop some feedback etc, or just wait ;O)
My concern about specs is because when Manic was tuning, they told me something like the 602 was too wild for their tunes, and the 603 was preferred. Since I have the 603's installed and am very happy with Manic's tune and performance, I try to share this info with others. I'd hate to see someone get hi-perf cams installed then not be able to get them to perform as expected. Maybe if there's a tuner out there that can ensure a proper tune with a cam set "wilder" than the 603's, there will be more interest in hi-perf cams. They are a significant improvement over OEM when tuned.

I'm sure that if you can publish specs and offer a "group buy", you'll get the response needed. Maybe even find a tuner to offer discounted services as part of the buy?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
I think the overall plan is to get the tubi manifold and a gtx on it, but I'd like to have the cams fitted and some meth. I've purchased a direct meth port kit from Speedtech Motorsport in the US to spray the meth to each cylinder rather than a single spray nozel. Not sure if there is anyone in the UK with that setup? It's their own kit, adaptor plate etc plus an extra nozel to spray post intercooler to reduce intake temps. Will probably pair that with an AEM setup, though they recommend Snow Performance it's a tad more expensive for a stage two kit.

I'll run that for a bit and in the meantime hopefully earn a few quid and find somewhere to do the downpipe.
I've seen a couple different "adapters" to accept nozzle's. Always been afraid of losing space behind the manifold, and causing air hose / plumbing fit problems. Not to mention engine "rocking" backwards under hard acceleration and having the manifold hit the firewall. Looks like a pretty complete kit. If you get a metal ICI pipe, similar to the one JMTC offers, it will be easier to mount the "fifth" nozzle --- tricky to mount anything in the plastic OEM air tube, and much better airflow with a larger diameter and smoother pipe. JMTC says their pipe is up to a 20HP gain.

Does Speedtech offer a variety of jet sizes, or is it a fixed set? I've arbitrarily selected 0.4mm nozzles for my setup, with the "fifth" nozzle having slightly less flow than the others --- compliments of Howerton / Aquamist.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
Discussion Starter #106
I've seen a couple different "adapters" to accept nozzle's. Always been afraid of losing space behind the manifold, and causing air hose / plumbing fit problems. Not to mention engine "rocking" backwards under hard acceleration and having the manifold hit the firewall. Looks like a pretty complete kit. If you get a metal ICI pipe, similar to the one JMTC offers, it will be easier to mount the "fifth" nozzle --- tricky to mount anything in the plastic OEM air tube, and much better airflow with a larger diameter and smoother pipe. JMTC says their pipe is up to a 20HP gain.

Does Speedtech offer a variety of jet sizes, or is it a fixed set? I've arbitrarily selected 0.4mm nozzles for my setup, with the "fifth" nozzle having slightly less flow than the others --- compliments of Howerton / Aquamist.
Morning all! From what I've seen and what I've been told space isn't an issue. It can fit around a stock airbox and an AEM setup, but as I have my own CAI I have even more space so no issues there.

Yep I'll probably look to upgrade the ICI pipe to a hard pipe and larger bore over the stock item. I've seen those projected gains but probably take that with a punch of salt. I know Lorenzo seems to not be too fussed over that. I think his Dyno data shows it doesn't make much difference on their setups to run a bigger diameter ICI pipe.

The nozel sizes are custom and have been dialed in through testing. They arent a standard size. The kit will support up to 320whp on these nozels before an upgrade is required. So enough for my needs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
Discussion Starter #107
I've had the SAS manifold now a few days but kept forgetting to get new pics up. So here they are. In the flesh it's quite small and compact measuring 31.5cm wide by 19.5cm deep on the tube to cylinder 2 0.5cm further out that than cylinder 4.

I'm not a welder, or fabricator but externally the welds look fairly decent. Where my concerns start are with restrictions on some of the angles of pipe, and the angles the tubes leave the exhaust ports, I think they could be done a bit better, slightly longer before they bend. Of course this could be to house the turbo above which I don't have to mock up.

Perhaps these are insignificant and when under boost won't effect flow too much. Someone who has more experience and knowledge of making headers and exhausts can comment.

For instance on exhaust port 2 it sweeps up immediately visually reducing the bore size when compared to the exhaust opening dimensions.

102283


Whilst I have it, could it be worthwhile taking it to a fabricator and getting them to modify it and improve on it or just say can you produce something like this only better? I'd be up for selling these if I could have it reproduced if there was a market for it.

Cylinder 1:

102284

Cylinder 2:
102285

Cylinder 3:
102287

Cylinder 4:
102288


102289

Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18 Show Content
102290

102291

102292

102293
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
Discussion Starter #108
102294

The joins between these pieces of tubing seem a little pointy and I'd imagine wouldn't flow as well as they could be, could have done a better job with a single piece put through a pipe bender? Again just from an outsider's view point, maybe that's not possible.
102295

102296

102297

102298

102299
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
326 Posts
That's actually not bad. I've made manifolds for myself in the past and I don't think I could do any better. You can get most of the welds with the TIG but sequencing is really important so you can get to everything and you don't end up blocking access. There's no option but to use the stick welder in some places. Is that schedule 40 steam pipe they've used? That's what I use too. It should be strong

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
Discussion Starter #110
That's actually not bad. I've made manifolds for myself in the past and I don't think I could do any better. You can get most of the welds with the TIG but sequencing is really important so you can get to everything and you don't end up blocking access. There's no option but to use the stick welder in some places. Is that schedule 40 steam pipe they've used? That's what I use too. It should be strong

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Ok good to know! Tbh I've no idea, I'll check the SAS website and see if they're stipulate what the manifolds are made from.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
Discussion Starter #111
Messaged SAS on FB it's 3mm 304T stainless steel tubing. He said runner design will do 600bhp but they have had customer cars with this doing over 400.

Asking for links to any of those cars if possible as I'd love to know what setups those are running.

102301
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
737 Posts
It’s not the best flow path for port 3, but it’s not a bad overall design considering the mini space constraints.

I wouldn’t worry too much on the weld finishing, thicker untidied welds will always be stronger. So I wouldn’t grind them down for flow improvement if I were you. The only real way to better it is with a billet collector.

Just make sure you have a good flexi in your downpipe. Shy away from solid / polyurethane engine mounts too. Else you could end up with cracking on the tubes. Likely it will happen at some point anyway, the down sides to tubulars manifold sadly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
Now I'm kicking myself for not taking pics of my Scara73 manifold inlets. Pretty sure they have a smoother transition from flange to tube. Main reason I chose Scara73 was the material used --- 310S. The little bit of research I did indicated 310 was preferred over 304 for exhaust manifolds. However, in defense of SAS, I found no info on the 304's "T" suffix, so it might be as good or better. I'll leave that for the experienced ones to decide.

From the experience I had installing Scara73's unit, I hope SAS's ad is correct about fitting in a confined space. Based on your pics, there shouldn't be any significant problems. And as for flow, remember, this is a 1.6L engine, not 6 - 7L, where there's so much more air to flow. For a goal of 3 - 400BHP, trust them, you're not pushing any limits. When you start looking at 600BHP, then think about cleaning up the rough / questionable parts. In the meantime, this looks like a good start to a big HP engine.

If you have the time and resources, consider getting this manifold ceramic coated. There's a lot of surface area to radiate heat, and it's gonna be messy to wrap or cover it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
Discussion Starter #114
Now I'm kicking myself for not taking pics of my Scara73 manifold inlets. Pretty sure they have a smoother transition from flange to tube. Main reason I chose Scara73 was the material used --- 310S. The little bit of research I did indicated 310 was preferred over 304 for exhaust manifolds. However, in defense of SAS, I found no info on the 304's "T" suffix, so it might be as good or better. I'll leave that for the experienced ones to decide.

From the experience I had installing Scara73's unit, I hope SAS's ad is correct about fitting in a confined space. Based on your pics, there shouldn't be any significant problems. And as for flow, remember, this is a 1.6L engine, not 6 - 7L, where there's so much more air to flow. For a goal of 3 - 400BHP, trust them, you're not pushing any limits. When you start looking at 600BHP, then think about cleaning up the rough / questionable parts. In the meantime, this looks like a good start to a big HP engine.

If you have the time and resources, consider getting this manifold ceramic coated. There's a lot of surface area to radiate heat, and it's gonna be messy to wrap or cover it.
Picked up the Garrett today, went with the GTX2860r 0.60 cold side and 0.64 hotside. Wish I didn't buy the Turbo Systems when I did now.. this is what I really wanted, but you live and learn. Decided to mock it up with some old nuts and bolts as I wanted to see how high it sat above the manifold flange (approx 150mm).

Will have a look for some custom oil and coolant lines to fit to it. If anyone has experience of what length and maybe where to go for them please feel free to comment.

Here's the setup:
102323

102324

102325

102326

102327
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
Looking good!

One of the first things to do should be to move the compressor housing around to where the outlet hose wants to be. As shown, it's aimed at the radiator. Probably wants to be aimed downwards --- mine was aimed down and slightly towards the engine block. Just a simple matter of loosening the housing mounting hardware a little bit and rotating it. Before tightening this hardware, install the WG actuator mounting bracket, then the actuator. Ensure the actuator doesn't have any funny angles. This is all easiest to do before installing it on the engine --- hardware access.

Once the compressor housing is oriented the way you want it, order a couple elbows and any size adapters you might need, compressor outlet size might be different than FMIC inlet. Also think about the turbo DV / BOV and how you want it configured. After lotsa trial-and-error, I decided on DV but taken off near the throttle body, not between turbo and FMIC. But others have done the BOV option with no apparent problems. Trial-and-error involves different hoses and fittings --- time consuming and costly, but maybe necessary, depending on how your build responds. Adapting the 3" compressor inlet to your air filter (2 ¾"? --- I have an MAF) can be done now too --- wrong length can be easily shortened, but harder to stretch so don't skimp on hose length. And allow for a OCC "T" adapter too (starting to get messy?).
A couple examples of "T" adapters, metal version was fab'd by a local shop out of off-the-shelf couplings.
IMG_2178.JPG


I used banjo fittings for coolant --- no space available to install elbows. Actual oil / coolant hose length is best decided after installation --- hose length's are affected by routing around manifold tubes and large compressor housing. Hopefully Garrett sent installation instructions. If not, make sure the oil drain line is on the bottom and install this hose / fitting before installing the turbo. It's one of the most difficult hoses to replace once installed. And make sure it's well insulated from the manifold tubes or it will burn / melt --- another benefit from ceramic coating is minimizing this hose problem.

When choosing turbo / manifold mounting hardware, think about removal / installation for repairs (i.e. gasket) --- getting tools and fingers into tight spaces.

So much to do --- I hope others following this thread and thinking about this upgrade are taking notes. This is NOT an easy "plug-n-play" install. Besides big money for parts, there's other choices to be made, each affected by the specific build and goals.

Have fun ---
 
  • Like
Reactions: knt
101 - 115 of 115 Posts
Top