Anyone recognize this manifold?

Discussion pertaining to positive pressure E28s.
Post Reply
clevertd
Posts: 70
Joined: Dec 29, 2006 11:54 AM
Location: Raleigh, NC

Anyone recognize this manifold?

Post by clevertd »

Image
Image
Image

A board member of bf.c in the E24 section picked it up.
Kyle in NO
Posts: 17638
Joined: Feb 12, 2006 12:00 PM
Location: Nasty Orleans------> Batten-Rooehjch------>More Souther LA

Post by Kyle in NO »

Looks like a Dinan.
M635CSi
Posts: 1587
Joined: Apr 09, 2006 6:25 PM
Location: .From Sea to Shining Sea

Post by M635CSi »

Kyle in NO wrote:Looks like a Dinan.
x2
Boru
Posts: 1028
Joined: Jul 04, 2008 10:09 AM

Post by Boru »

Had one. It's a Dinan.
DMNaskale
Posts: 1686
Joined: Feb 12, 2006 12:00 PM
Location: Tampa Bay USA

Post by DMNaskale »

That thing looks like it chokes down a little bit between 5 and 6, that can't be good for the top end.
Boru
Posts: 1028
Joined: Jul 04, 2008 10:09 AM

Post by Boru »

It's actually a poor design. The turbo is placed too far rearward requiring the down pipe bend to be "cheated". Turbulence and/or restriction just after the turbine hampers the turbos performance.
russc
Posts: 1759
Joined: Feb 12, 2006 12:00 PM
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Contact:

Post by russc »

Yup,
Every time the downpipe is removed from my car, my mechanic curses me!

RussC
Sweeney wrote:It's actually a poor design. The turbo is placed too far rearward requiring the down pipe bend to be "cheated". Turbulence and/or restriction just after the turbine hampers the turbos performance.
T_C_D
Posts: 7733
Joined: May 27, 2009 11:42 AM
Location: Twin Cities
Contact:

Post by T_C_D »

Sweeney wrote:It's actually a poor design. The turbo is placed too far rearward requiring the down pipe bend to be "cheated". Turbulence and/or restriction just after the turbine hampers the turbos performance.
You think you could do a better job? ;)
Tusker
Posts: 1435
Joined: Feb 12, 2006 12:00 PM

Post by Tusker »

T_C_D wrote:
Sweeney wrote:It's actually a poor design. The turbo is placed too far rearward requiring the down pipe bend to be "cheated". Turbulence and/or restriction just after the turbine hampers the turbos performance.
You think you could do a better job? ;)

I can tell a good egg from a bad one and I'm not a chicken :laugh:
Boru
Posts: 1028
Joined: Jul 04, 2008 10:09 AM

Post by Boru »

T_C_D wrote:
Sweeney wrote:It's actually a poor design. The turbo is placed too far rearward requiring the down pipe bend to be "cheated". Turbulence and/or restriction just after the turbine hampers the turbos performance.
You think you could do a better job? ;)
I can't, I'm not an engineer.
Duke
Posts: 9986
Joined: Feb 12, 2006 12:00 PM
Location: Ormond Beach, FL

Post by Duke »

Sweeney wrote:It's actually a poor design. The turbo is placed too far rearward requiring the down pipe bend to be "cheated". Turbulence and/or restriction just after the turbine hampers the turbos performance.
I was going to post the same thing but GOD FORBID I say critical against another’s turbo kit design.

I am sure that that Dinan kit will make over 300 HP (not much more) and lots of people would be happy with that. As they were in the 80's.

The above statment does not apply to Russ C's modified Dinan system.
Last edited by Duke on Jun 11, 2007 2:13 PM, edited 1 time in total.
///ARINUTS...
Posts: 425
Joined: Feb 12, 2006 12:00 PM

Post by ///ARINUTS... »

russc wrote:Yup,
Every time the downpipe is removed from my car, my mechanic curses me!

RussC
Sweeney wrote:It's actually a poor design. The turbo is placed too far rearward requiring the down pipe bend to be "cheated". Turbulence and/or restriction just after the turbine hampers the turbos performance.
What is the reasoning for placing the turbo that far back?
turbodan
Posts: 9223
Joined: Jan 09, 2007 10:19 PM

Post by turbodan »

///ARINUTS... wrote:
russc wrote:Yup,
Every time the downpipe is removed from my car, my mechanic curses me!

RussC
Sweeney wrote:It's actually a poor design. The turbo is placed too far rearward requiring the down pipe bend to be "cheated". Turbulence and/or restriction just after the turbine hampers the turbos performance.
What is the reasoning for placing the turbo that far back?
If I wanted to act like I knew what I was talking about, I'd say it was to keep the #6 exhaust port from creating turbulence right at the turbine inlet. This way it would have #6 going with the flow through the rest of the manifold. It makes sense, but then again I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Post Reply