The reason (I think) that everyone keeps saying TSE is because it's cast. All of the built tubulars we know of, even the best ones like absurd and artech, have cases of cracking documented with heavy and long periods of track use. The cast unit, in theory, should fix this issue. it is annoying to keep hearing "proven" when the product hasn't been proven to last, for multiple years, by multiple un-biased heavy track users, yet. But that's a different topic

 

I want to be optimistic and agree with you on that, I'm a turbo guy at heart and Artech is good solid stuff, but I believe the TSE kit stands alone as the most comprehensively track-ready kit that exists. This is considering all of the associated bits as well, not just the big core items like manifold/DP.

But all that aside, you really won't be able to match with a turbo the reliability of a naturally aspirated K motor no matter which way we slice it.

 

You're definitely right about the K series being more reliable, long term, than any turbo setup.

and I hope you're right, and believe you're right about your statement on the TSE kit. BUT:

Totally agreed. We are trusting Andrew's engineering, and if I was in the market for a turbo kit, it's still no question the one I'd get. But we really don't know how it's going to hold up to long term track use yet, because nobody has done it yet.

 

I agree with that. I have little doubt in the TSE kit being the solution, proof is a matter of time. Give it a year and SuperMiata S1 will have a full season of abuse on the kits.

 

I thought absurdflow was holding up fine? Hadn't heard of any cracking.

cast manifolds can still crack.

I think the TSE kit is epic. I love me some good engineering. But I until I see multiple cars running them hard for a long time I will reserve my personal judgement.

To be clear I have recommended the kit to multiple people, and I believe it is the best kit you can currently buy.

 

I'd withhold that opinion until you know how many hours Andrew has on P1. IOW, no DPE, no care.

 

I'd love to be proven wrong. Seriously. I just hadn't seen it published yet.
​​​​​​

 

^yup.

So far it's been advertised as the most durable turbo kit available, but there hasn't been any published proof of durability testing. Also, it's one thing to show what it's been through during testing, and another to see what customers experience with the kit.

RE: absurdflow, remember my bellows, and Tim's statement that they all fail? no bueno. Though it did last all year this year.

 

You rode in Acamas at MRLS, which has manifold number one, the first-article that was cast and machined for quality control four months before the production batch was poured. Been in constant use for 14 months now, basically as long as it has existed. Something like a dozen track days in the same time period without touching any of the turbo parts, plus ~11k street miles in the same time period. After 12+ track days with no re-tightening or tweaks or touching required, I think it's safe to say that the parts work.

 

That's pretty fantastic! No question it still would be the kit I'd buy despite the newness.

 

So you stated "it is far from track proven", as if that were fact. Argh.

Some idiot then reads and regurgitates it verbatim. And just like that, it's "truth". That's what I deal with on a daily basis with my brand and I swear it's like pissing in the ocean sometimes.
As you are a respected regular around this forum, I would expect more discretion than that. IOW, don't Trump this place with conjecture. Be better than that.

/rant

 

I see where you are coming from. Statement edited to explain my thoughts a little better

 

It's really not a long wait now. It's out, people bought it, some have already done multiple track days. So far so good, and very promising, that's for sure.

 

Even as someone that has never owned a turbo BP, I really appreciate Andrew's approach to his setup. That manifold is art. At the end of the day though, anyone developing new product is in the same boat. Thankfully there are early adopters that are willing to do their research and take a calculated risk. That's why the TSE kit is doing well, as is the K swap.

We already started building a World Racing League enduro K24 NA for 2017 to keep proving reliability in all situations. S1 is certainly that additional proving ground for the TSE parts.

And yeah I need to start a build thread.

 

Cat awarded for building a WRL car. YOUBETTERMAKEABUILDTHREADTHO

 

I'd just like to point out than an n=1 is more of a proof of concept than anything I'd refer to as veritable reproducible truth. You just need more data points for that. Additionally when you take a product and mass produce it, small natural variations in how things come together can have pretty substantial results.

I'm not doubting TSE in the least, but things are conclusive when they can be successfully emulated and reproduced in different setups.

/pedant

 

With respect to both companies and their work, right now I don't think you can call either a "more reliable" setup. This is especially given that both products haven't been around for "years" as many people have stated. On paper, yes, the K Series should product less stress in most cases. My barometer is more of that guy who maybe cuts corners here and there on the up-keep and maintenance and still has a reliable car. Right now that just doesn't really exist for either product because typically early adopters are going give more attention to the details. Also, give everything a few years for the newness to wear off and the companies producing the products to start getting more lax. Not saying either one has evidence of it, but I've been around manufacturing and new product launches in other fields to see it happen eventually. Usually its not the fault of the designing company, but someone one or two tiers below trying to save a dollar or two.

 

My thread has been sent through the blades of a turbine. Unintentionally, and in part by myself.

 

Relevant:

 

Why not a turbo K? they can be built bulletproof for fairly cheap right?