Exhaust manifold runner diameter - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Engine Performance This section is for discussion on all engine building related questions.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-04-2011, 10:28 PM   #1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 1,479
Total Cats: 6
Default Exhaust manifold runner diameter

So I'm about to have a new turbo exhaust manifold made and I was presented with the options of either 1.25" or the standard 1.5" diameter runners. I tried to do some reading on this but am only coming across NA applications for runner diameter. I've seen some headway in a manifold thread, but it sort of ended.

Does anyone have any input on this?
dgmorr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 10:36 PM   #2
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 2,791
Total Cats: 71
Default

When I was talking to a manifold builder he suggested I go 1.25

This was because there is no real top end gains with similar manifolds until you exceed 500hp on a 4 cylinder.

I know it's a very general statement but that's all the input I have to offer.

Matt
shlammed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 10:40 PM   #3
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 1,479
Total Cats: 6
Default

Is that due to these 1.8's in the lower hp bracket not being able to capitalize on the 1.5" diameter of the current manifolds?
dgmorr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 12:27 AM   #4
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,454
Total Cats: 80
Default

1.25" runners can be ovalized at the ends to match the exhaust parts, AFAIK.

You don't want the exhaust gas to expand exiting the ports - the exhaust "puffs" lose energy doing that, which reduce the energy available for the turbine, and this affects spoolup.
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 02:26 AM   #5
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Anacortes, WA
Posts: 2,476
Total Cats: 114
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB View Post
1.25" runners can be ovalized at the ends to match the exhaust parts, AFAIK.

You don't want the exhaust gas to expand exiting the ports - the exhaust "puffs" lose energy doing that, which reduce the energy available for the turbine, and this affects spoolup.
This is correct measure the area of the port exiting the head at the flange. If you are going to neck it down to force it through a turbo at some point anyway then there is no pont in going any bigger pipes gatting to the turbo than this. More energy is lost by decreasing the velocity to flow in a bigger tube then accelerating it again to fit through the turbo than you will loose in skin friction forcing it through a slightly smaller tube at a more constant velocity all the way to the turbo.

I know my long equal length runner 1.25" schedule 40 weld ell manifold works well and spools a GT3071R quite well and makes plenty of power.

Bob
bbundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 10:11 AM   #6
Senior Member
iTrader: (14)
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Tinley Park, IL
Posts: 1,488
Total Cats: 0
Default

I tend to agree with the above points. I used a 1.625 runner on a previous manifold build. After switching to a 1.375 runner, the turbo spools 200-300 rpm sooner.

The spool seems more consistent as well. It used to spool slowly from 1-5 psi then skyrocket. The runner change seemed to alleviate this problem. It now spools up at a uniform speed from 0-20 psi.
lordrigamus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 01:49 PM   #7
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Anacortes, WA
Posts: 2,476
Total Cats: 114
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordrigamus View Post
I tend to agree with the above points. I used a 1.625 runner on a previous manifold build. After switching to a 1.375 runner, the turbo spools 200-300 rpm sooner.

The spool seems more consistent as well. It used to spool slowly from 1-5 psi then skyrocket. The runner change seemed to alleviate this problem. It now spools up at a uniform speed from 0-20 psi.
I should point out that 1-1/4 shedule 40 pipe actually has a 1.375" ID which can cause some confusion. I think it is a real good match for the outlet of the head.

My manifold has eqal length runners 16-1/2" long from the head to the turbo flange made of 1-1/4" shedule 40 pipe. nice linear spool to a 3071R turbo and it is making over 3000ft-lbs of torque by 4000 rpm at 18psi with the 2.0L. The spool is still good with a stock enternal 1.8L.

Bob
bbundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 02:09 PM   #8
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bellingham, Wa
Posts: 2,732
Total Cats: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbundy View Post
I should point out that 1-1/4 shedule 40 pipe actually has a 1.375" ID which can cause some confusion. I think it is a real good match for the outlet of the head.

My manifold has eqal length runners 16-1/2" long from the head to the turbo flange made of 1-1/4" shedule 40 pipe. nice linear spool to a 3071R turbo and it is making over 3000ft-lbs of torque by 4000 rpm at 18psi with the 2.0L. The spool is still good with a stock enternal 1.8L.

Bob
Incredible!

The few manifolds i've made using a weirtech head flange and 1.5" schedule 40 pipe the tubes were slightly smaller than the ID of the exhaust primaries on the flange. I actually had to port them a little bit with a dremel. More so on the 1.6 than 1.8. However, schedule 10 pipe does leave room for the exhaust to expand once it leaves the head.
wayne_curr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 02:10 PM   #9
Elite Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Canton, Ga
Posts: 1,707
Total Cats: 19
Default

damn. like a freight train engine swap.
Stealth97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 02:34 PM   #10
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Anacortes, WA
Posts: 2,476
Total Cats: 114
Default

oops got an exta 0 in there.
bbundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 02:44 PM   #11
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Anacortes, WA
Posts: 2,476
Total Cats: 114
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wayne_curr View Post
Incredible!

The few manifolds i've made using a weirtech head flange and 1.5" schedule 40 pipe the tubes were slightly smaller than the ID of the exhaust primaries on the flange. I actually had to port them a little bit with a dremel. More so on the 1.6 than 1.8. However, schedule 10 pipe does leave room for the exhaust to expand once it leaves the head.
I used a JGS flange.
http://www.jgsturbo.com/index2.html

It comes with the ports machined to adapt a gasket match on the head side and almost perfectly fit the 1.375 Id round pipe on the other. Some minor smoothing done.

Bob
bbundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 05:19 PM   #12
y8s
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
 
y8s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,038
Total Cats: 406
Default

It appears my ETD was 1-1/4 "STD" pipe which happens to be the same wall as sch40. it's 1.38 ID.

y8s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 05:28 PM   #13
Elite Member
iTrader: (9)
 
TurboTim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chesterfield, NJ
Posts: 6,482
Total Cats: 248
Default

So far all of mine have been 1.5" sch. 40 pipe (well I did do one sch 10). It matched the profile of the port better when ovalized with a bearing press. But I can see 1.25" pipe being better to a certain extent.
TurboTim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 07:25 PM   #14
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,454
Total Cats: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbundy View Post
oops got an exta 0 in there.
Damn and I thought you were even studlier than I previously thought.
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2011, 09:01 PM   #15
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bellingham, Wa
Posts: 2,732
Total Cats: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbundy View Post
I used a JGS flange.
http://www.jgsturbo.com/index2.html

It comes with the ports machined to adapt a gasket match on the head side and almost perfectly fit the 1.375 Id round pipe on the other. Some minor smoothing done.

Bob
Those JGS flanges sure are slick but I just cannot justify the $80 price tag when weirtech flanges are 22 dollars.
wayne_curr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2011, 04:52 PM   #16
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 1,479
Total Cats: 6
Default

Well, I've decided to go with the 1.25". I hope it does great things.
dgmorr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2013, 12:34 AM   #17
Junior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 377
Total Cats: 0
Default

I had a thought today and I was wondering if anyone had tried 1" with a flared end toward the head. In my head it seemed it would help with gas velocity and overall manifold dimensions.

Any experiences?
3rdCarMX5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2013, 11:08 AM   #18
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 2,791
Total Cats: 71
Default

have not done it, but purely based on flow you would be capped at around 250whp just because of the flow restriction based on the cross sectional area and experience on pipe size vs power.

you wont gain much in terms of response. maybe 200rpm.
shlammed is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Project Gemini - Turbo Civic on the Cheap Full_Tilt_Boogie Build Threads 57 07-19-2017 05:11 PM
OTS Bilstein to motorsports ASN conversion stoves Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 5 04-21-2016 04:00 PM
Moroso Air Oil Separator Catch Can Aroundcorner Miata parts for sale/trade 2 10-01-2015 04:20 PM
ISO 1.6 turbo cast iron manifold cale saurage DIY Turbo Discussion 16 10-01-2015 12:25 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:39 PM.