Buschur Racing Ported Upper/lower Intake Manifold Gtr Review

#ane

Posted 15 October 2015 - 02:24 PM

Buschur Racing

Stage iv Member

• 
• Member
• two,360 posts
• Joined 19-September 13

• Location Wakeman, Ohio

POPULAR

Long interesting day on the dyno.

I started out this forenoon running the car but as it was on the 8.72 at 161 pass from a few weeks agone.  I made two pulls they were about identical but the better 1 came upwardly with 852 whp/677 ft lbs.  This was with our ported factory manifold and stock throttle bodies.

I swapped the throttle bodies out to a set of larger ones nosotros made here earlier this yr and the power up peak went up to 887 whp/682 ft lbs. The boost was merely slightly less, max maybe .75 psi.  The tune was not touched.

I then wanted to test the Driven Innovations intake, information technology has some really nice velocity stacks built into the stock modified intake along with a much larger plenum.  I've had this for a few years but it would fit with my stock rails.  I know have our billet rails on the automobile and unfortunately it still hits the fuel dampers slightly.  I'm non willing to remove those dampers and then no testing was done.  Dainty piece, I'd like to know what it does.

Then it was onto the other intake I had here, the carbon fiber one from JCR.

Pretty easy install.  The fuel rails need to exist loosened to go it in every bit the upper/lower is all one slice.  Fitment is splendid, I was able to use our short road BFIC intercooler pipes with zero mods, information technology bolted right on.

All this testing was done today, started around 10 am this morning time and finished up this afternoon.

I did two pulls with the stock ported intake/stock throttle trunk.  Then two with the stock ported intake and our ported throttle bodies.  Then ii with the JCR Carbon fiber intake with our ported throttle bodies on information technology.

The starting time ii pulls I did the power was nearly identical to the concluding ii I did with the stock intake/ported throttle bodies.  At present, before doing this testing, when I asked JCR if I could requite it a shot, he told me that the intake drops the knock counts and Intake Air Temps and the motorcar has to have more than timing added to see big gains in power.  Seemed a fleck odd to me to be dead honest just I'm up to seeing for myself.

So, I'thou on the dyno looking at the graphs and thinking, well that didn't gain much.  I sent JCR a message and told them the results.  He said, "OK and then now add together loads of ignition"  I told him I had the auto tuned already, was confident that I'one thousand non but a knock sensor watcher and that I had spent fourth dimension in getting the car tuned correctly......I then agreed to put a few degrees in it.

I added two degrees of timing from 5600 rpm up.  I expected the ability to drop off slightly or not gain based on the previous tuning I had washed on the car.  Well I was way off.  The next message he got from me was "WOW!"

The auto picked up for sure.  I then added ane more degree, for a total of three degrees over what the former gear up wanted.  Over again, large gains.

The one thing I want to also note, is over 6000 rpm the dyno graph smoothed out before and after the tuning.  This can be seen in the posted dyno run.

The pictures beneath are the intake manifold on my car.

The commencement dyno run is: Solid line ported intake with stock throttle bodies, minor dots JCR with +ii degrees and and so JCR with a total of +three degrees.

The second dyno sheet is:  Solid line ported intake with ported throttle bodies, minor dots JCR with +ii degrees and then JCR with a total of +3 degrees.

My AIT sensor is in my upper i/c pipe, I can see how the intake would have a substantial driblet in temps if information technology was measure in the plenum.  The plenum on this stays "cold" compared to the bandage aluminum one that is so hot you can't touch it.  Oddly enough, temps beyond a pull seemed to have dropped virtually ii degrees.

I'm going to effort to go a track solar day soon to see what the motorcar will run in the 1/4 now.....pretty late in the year.

Attached Images

• Tim, ian.r, HiBoost and 4 others similar this

www.buschurracing.com

BR160 packet, stock turbofolds, 8.33@168.68 mph, E80 fuel.
BR160 bundle, stock turbofolds, viii.74@160.08 mph, 93 octane.
Standing 1/2 mile 199.29 mph

COBB TUNING DEALER AND PRO TUNER

BUSCHUR RACING on FACEBOOK

BR SHOOTOUT on FACEBOOK

#ii

thehelix112

Posted 15 October 2015 - 02:39 PM

thehelix112

Phase 4 Member

• 
• OEM Member
• 4,623 posts
• Joined 14-June 13

• Location Arroyo Grande, CA

Nice results David!

For the tertiary run you added more timing lower downward too?

#3

Tony1

Posted fifteen October 2015 - 02:54 PM

Tony1

Stage 4 Member

• 
• Vendors
• 958 posts
• Joined 28-December 12

Hmm, AMS picked up a ton of ability with no additional ignition timing and this one picks up nothing until y'all add together timing?  That doesn't seem right at all.

http://www.gtrherita...-gas-gtr/page-2

With the air speed at WOT, how much heat do you retrieve the air is really picking up in the aluminum intake?

If that'southward the reason that this fabricated more power so it's but because the motorcar was knock limited.

Cooler air in the cylinder would have made more power in itself with no timing added if that was the deal.

Maybe i'm missing something, only that just doesn't add up at all.

T1racedevelopment.com

Injectordynamics.com

214-607-9022

#4

CasualObserver

Posted 15 October 2015 - 03:16 PM

CasualObserver

Stage four Member

• 
• Member
• 627 posts
• Joined 11-August 14

Just a few questions for you David since yous don't seem to have a horse in the race.

As I remember y'all take tested the AMS unit also, and from what I know y'all are the outset person to have tested both, this interests me.

To become gains on the AMS piece did you have to add together timing?  I am not an accomplished tuner all the same my feelings echo those of Tony; adding timing seems similar that would pick up ability regardless of IM used?  Too as far every bit lowered intake temps the smooth walls of intake runners exercise not seem terribly good at heating air that is passing through at adequately high velocity.  Carbon conducts rut at a lower rate the AL.  As far as feeling libation/hotter to the touch I would be willing to bet it has to do with the fact that it cannot deport rut into your hand as fast, same reason room temp metal feels cool to the affect and forest doesn't.  I guess I wonder how big of a factor material choice for the runners really is for actual charge air temp?

I am non sure that the setup/conditions for both manifold tests were the aforementioned, merely do you have a feel for the summit gains relative to the two pieces?

Overall if you were building your car and cost wasn't an issue; what manifold would you choose to run?

Edited by CasualObserver, 15 October 2015 - 03:20 PM.

#five

ian.r

Posted fifteen Oct 2015 - 04:02 PM

ian.r

Stage 4 Fellow member

• 
• OEM Member
• half-dozen,587 posts
• Joined nineteen-December 12

• Location near Chicago

call up Nick, ask him to bring the AMS piece. set timing back, practice ii stock runs then test each Manifold. done.

scientific discipline

#6

240Z TwinTurbo

Posted 15 October 2015 - 04:07 PM

240Z TwinTurbo

Stage 2.5 Member

• 
• Member
• 273 posts
• Joined 06-February fourteen

• Location Charlotte, N Carolina

Hmm, AMS picked up a ton of power with no additional ignition timing and this ane picks up nothing until you add timing?  That doesn't seem right at all.

http://world wide web.gtrherita...-gas-gtr/page-two

With the air speed at WOT, how much heat do you lot remember the air is actually picking upward in the aluminum intake?

If that's the reason that this made more than ability then information technology's simply considering the machine was knock limited.

Libation air in the cylinder would have made more than ability in itself with no timing added if that was the bargain.

Maybe i'one thousand missing something, merely that just doesn't add up at all.

No criticism on what Dave has done and I capeesh seeing the results, but I tend to agree with your comments.  With all the intake manifold testing I take done on various cars I expect to meet improvements with no change in melody.  With that said, if Dave switched back to the stock ported intake with the additional timing and information technology knocks and so the results speak for themselves.

#seven

Tony1

Posted 15 October 2015 - 04:10 PM

Tony1

Phase 4 Fellow member

• 
• Vendors
• 958 posts
• Joined 28-December 12

Been some discussion in a FB group.   Dave said the motorcar wasn't knock express before and that it was tuned to MBT, which would hateful it doesn't take anything to do with the manifold preventing knock.

T1racedevelopment.com

Injectordynamics.com

214-607-9022

#8

240Z TwinTurbo

Posted xv October 2015 - 04:xvi PM

240Z TwinTurbo

Stage 2.5 Fellow member

• 
• Member
• 273 posts
• Joined 06-Feb fourteen

• Location Charlotte, North Carolina

Been some discussion in a FB group.   Dave said the motorcar wasn't knock limited earlier and that it was tuned to MBT, which would mean it doesn't take anything to practice with the manifold preventing knock.

If that's the example so information technology won't knock if he switches back.

#ix

Buschur Racing

Posted fifteen October 2015 - 04:25 PM

Buschur Racing

Stage 4 Member

• 
• Member
• two,360 posts
• Joined 19-September 13

• Location Wakeman, Ohio

You are all VERY WELCOME for the total examination information......glad I could provide it.

Our shop is for auction, all y'all ballers and experts can buy information technology all up for a low price and be legit.

• Ben and Crissy like this

www.buschurracing.com

BR160 bundle, stock turbofolds, 8.33@168.68 mph, E80 fuel.
BR160 package, stock turbofolds, 8.74@160.08 mph, 93 octane.
Standing 1/2 mile 199.29 mph

COBB TUNING DEALER AND PRO TUNER

BUSCHUR RACING on FACEBOOK

BR SHOOTOUT on FACEBOOK

#x

JCR_GTR

Posted xv October 2015 - 05:08 PM

JCR_GTR

Stage i Member

• 
• Member
• 108 posts
• Joined 12-December 14

• Location United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland

three degrees additional timing on the previous manifold and the machine would be dead within 1 dyno run..

Make of that what you will

• mikelmarion likes this

#11

CasualObserver

Posted fifteen October 2015 - 05:11 PM

CasualObserver

Stage 4 Member

• 
• Fellow member
• 627 posts
• Joined 11-August 14

All of this is skilful. I recall the confusion lies in the fact that people aren't/weren't sure that he attempted to add timing to other manifolds such every bit AMS' piece when he did testing. That is information technology.

#12

godzila2009

Posted 15 October 2015 - 05:19 PM

godzila2009

Stage iv Fellow member

• 
• Fellow member
• 938 posts
• Joined 26-December 12

is this manifold using 12 injs

#13

Jimefam

Posted 15 October 2015 - 05:47 PM

Jimefam

Stage 4 Member

• 
• OEM Member
• 523 posts
• Joined 18-February 13

3 degrees additional timing on the previous manifold and the car would be dead within one dyno run..

Make of that what you will

David said he added timing before to the stock one and it didn't make more power but also that it didn't knock.

#fourteen

Jimefam

Posted xv October 2015 - 05:48 PM

Jimefam

Stage 4 Member

• 
• OEM Member
• 523 posts
• Joined xviii-February 13

is this manifold using 12 injs

They don't come in 12 injector version yet.

#15

Buschur Racing

Posted xv October 2015 - 05:59 PM

Buschur Racing

Stage 4 Member

• 
• Member
• ii,360 posts
• Joined 19-September 13

• Location Wakeman, Ohio

POPULAR

Hither is 1 more chip of insight.

My theory on this is this intake has more fifty-fifty airflow across the cylinders. That is the merely way I can remember of that would permit the improver of more timing that the engine would not accept previously. The last fourth dimension I had three more degrees of timing on this combination I burned the tip off of #three spark plug.

• Tim, ian.r, HiBoost and 4 others like this

www.buschurracing.com

BR160 package, stock turbofolds, 8.33@168.68 mph, E80 fuel.
BR160 parcel, stock turbofolds, 8.74@160.08 mph, 93 octane.
Continuing 1/2 mile 199.29 mph

COBB TUNING DEALER AND PRO TUNER

BUSCHUR RACING on FACEBOOK

BR SHOOTOUT on FACEBOOK

#16

JCR_GTR

Posted fifteen October 2015 - 06:33 PM

JCR_GTR

Stage one Member

• 
• Member
• 108 posts
• Joined 12-December 14

• Location United kingdom

Very interesting discussion

• Tim likes this

#17

240Z TwinTurbo

Posted 15 October 2015 - 07:12 PM

240Z TwinTurbo

Stage two.five Fellow member

• 
• Fellow member
• 273 posts
• Joined 06-February 14

• Location Charlotte, North Carolina

Very interesting discussion

The claiming for anyone considering your manifold based on this review is the test leaves them uncertain whether the results are based on the new intake or simply additional timing.  Keep in mind the straight bandy in this test resulted in no improvements vs a ported stocker with no other changes.  In comparison, the AMS unit had solid gains with no other changes and at a like price.  I am not saying your manifold isn't improve or that it can't accept boosted timing vs the stocker, but that is a $6K hazard IMO.

#xviii

JCR_GTR

Posted 15 Oct 2015 - 08:46 PM

JCR_GTR

Stage 1 Member

• 
• Member
• 108 posts
• Joined 12-December xiv

• Location UK

The claiming for anyone because your manifold based on this review is the test leaves them uncertain whether the results are based on the new intake or simply additional timing. Keep in mind the direct swap in this test resulted in no improvements vs a ported stocker with no other changes. In comparing, the AMS unit had solid gains with no other changes and at a similar cost. I am non proverb your manifold isn't better or that it can't take additional timing vs the stocker, but that is a $6K run a risk IMO.

Optimised vs optimised is the point hither.. Yous wouldn't plan to install larger turbos and then run stock boost force per unit area. Y'all wouldn't install larger injectors and not alter injector cal, y'all wouldn't bandy out cams and expect them to make ability without optimising the tune. You would melody to extract the best possible gains. The same as with any performance hardware part.

Our office requires tuning to extract the true potential, that'southward quite normal. The manifold gained a clamper of ability over stock ported optimised vs optimised. I'grand not sure how that takes anything abroad from the function itself and its overall potential.

This test is X manifold optimised vs Y manifold optimised .. Both of which the ECU tune is on the safe limit as David noted

• Ancalagon likes this

#19

240Z TwinTurbo

Posted 15 October 2015 - 09:10 PM

240Z TwinTurbo

Stage two.5 Fellow member

• 
• Member
• 273 posts
• Joined 06-February 14

• Location Charlotte, North Carolina

^

I sympathize the signal y'all are trying to make, but peradventure you can convince Dave to redyno with your manifold logging knock, then bandy to his ported stocker and log knock with no other modify in melody.  This assumes some baller didn't purchase his shop.

#20

HiBoost

Posted fifteen October 2015 - 09:54 PM

HiBoost

Phase three.9 Fellow member

• 
• OEM Fellow member
• 3,911 posts
• Joined 12-February 13

• Location Ozarks

Hither is one more fleck of insight.

My theory on this is this intake has more than fifty-fifty airflow across the cylinders. That is the only manner I can think of that would allow the addition of more than timing that the engine would not take previously. The last time I had three more degrees of timing on this combination I burned the tip off of #3 spark plug.

As an idiot on the sidelines this seems completely possible to me.  Perhaps the AMS intake leads to more than air/fuel beingness ingested, thus at the same timing more power is made.  In contrast, the JCR intake may ingest roughly the aforementioned air/fuel mass as a ported stock piece but its design improves swirl and distribution thus the mixture is more stable and tin handle more timing.  Would exist a like scenario to, say, 20 psi and xvi degrees of timing vs 18 psi and xx degrees of timing both making the aforementioned ability.

In any example, I promise the bank check bounces and yous keep BR under your ownership because we all value your testing and sharing of results!!!

• Tim, ian.r, Evolunchbox and 1 other similar this

-Jeff

bryanttaings.blogspot.com

Source: http://www.gtrheritage.com/topic/5130-intake-manifold-testing-todayjcr/

Share this post