Anyone recognize this manifold?
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 12:00 AM
A board member of bf.c in the E24 section picked it up.
A board member of bf.c in the E24 section picked it up.
Page 1 of 1
A board member of bf.c in the E24 section picked it up.
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 1:02 AM
Looks like a Dinan.
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 2:46 AM
x2Kyle in NO wrote:Looks like a Dinan.
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 6:50 AM
Had one. It's a Dinan.
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 9:52 AM
That thing looks like it chokes down a little bit between 5 and 6, that can't be good for the top end.
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 10:12 AM
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.
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 10:21 AM
Yup,
Every time the downpipe is removed from my car, my mechanic curses me!
RussC
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.
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 10:40 AM
You think you could do a better job?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.
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 11:15 AM
T_C_D wrote:You think you could do a better job?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 can tell a good egg from a bad one and I'm not a chicken
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 11:16 AM
I can't, I'm not an engineer.T_C_D wrote:You think you could do a better job?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.
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 11:32 AM
I was going to post the same thing but GOD FORBID I say critical against another’s turbo kit design.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 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.
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 12:07 PM
What is the reasoning for placing the turbo that far back?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.
Posted: Jun 11, 2007 12:34 PM
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.///ARINUTS... wrote:What is the reasoning for placing the turbo that far back?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.