Turbo Tech Racing LNF Intake Manifold!!
10-25-2012, 04:53 PM
#176
No. They isn't anything rubbing/tapping on the manifold, been on my car for 7months now without one problem. In the first post, it was stated that the DI Fuel line (Dampener) will need to be adjusted a tad for fitment.
The solenoid can be mounted anywhere the owner chooses to put it.
The solenoid can be mounted anywhere the owner chooses to put it.
. The hose going to the evap sol. is not hitting/rubbing the manifold. Some may even want to run a new line to the evap sol and not have the line run over the manifold... Hate to have a hold down, and then have it not be used... But again this would not be a direct bolt on. It is just as it is stock, hangs slighly above the stock manifold. Everything else has a home 
10-25-2012, 05:00 PM
#177
TTR Powered
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: 04-15-11
Location: Vinemont AL
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This, plus in all honesty, who wants all this clamps and such welded/bolted to your intake manifold. It allows you to tuck it to the side, as Richard did with zip ties. That valve mounted to the top would look ugly . The hose going to the evap sol. is not hitting/rubbing the manifold. It is just as it is stock. Everything else has a home
. The hose going to the evap sol. is not hitting/rubbing the manifold. It is just as it is stock. Everything else has a home VERY WELL SAID Aaron
Plus, This is an aftermarket Performance Manifold. if you want to have the proper accessory mounting points in the same place as the stock manifold.
Then just stick with the Factory Manifold.
When it comes to adding Performance to your car, You Can't always get the "Proper" Look and Mounting points. Sometimes, It has to be custom. even with Zip ties
gotta Pay, to Play.
10-25-2012, 07:17 PM
#178
Also those few members asking about a stock turbo setup, wanting it tested on a stock turbo; we notice those have 1 or 2 very basic performance mods and most likely NO tune. Maybe this mod is not for you? It will not have as much gains as the BNR, it will be scalled back some. EFR (larger turbos) will see more gains.
Maybe those questioning a stock turbo, need to sit back and wait for a member to purchase and dyno test to know if you are not ready to commit. Chances are their setup will not be exactly like yours and you will question it again. But life does go on.
Maybe those questioning a stock turbo, need to sit back and wait for a member to purchase and dyno test to know if you are not ready to commit. Chances are their setup will not be exactly like yours and you will question it again. But life does go on.
this is a new mod and it looks great! it seems to be technically sound and backed by vendors and people who know their stuff...
the last paragraph has to be the most negative sales pitch i have ever heard. maybe this product is not for me? Seems that way. im on a canned tune and i think that kinda puts me lower on the hierarchy in this thread...
you notice those wanting it tested have 1 or 2 very basic mods...i stated that was my case prior to posting my question so that expectations can be set....
anyhow im backing out, good luck with this, i will surely take a look eventually.
Last edited by wol-shiver; 10-25-2012 at 07:19 PM. Reason: thoughts
10-25-2012, 08:04 PM
#179
So your backing out because you want tangible proof on a stock ko4? First off the fact your on a canned tune that basically limits power there because your wot is very conservative along with boost. So here is the thing! If we were to test this intake mani on a car we wouldn't swap it on a car and call it a day. That isn't the purpose of the manifold. Tuning allows to get the most of out the mod, so with a gmstage1 car I can still see gains! But so moated to a tuned k04 it'll be different because as stated, I was able to achieve 17/18* simply and leaned it out and no ramp just to see with 30/31lbs. And if we were to dyno I that, god save us lol.
I understand your frustrated but it would cost turbotechracing even more money to do this. We may be testing a car soon with a k04 but ill be working with the owner to get results. This does take a good amount of time. Tune and all....
We appreciate your interest though!
I understand your frustrated but it would cost turbotechracing even more money to do this. We may be testing a car soon with a k04 but ill be working with the owner to get results. This does take a good amount of time. Tune and all....
We appreciate your interest though!
10-26-2012, 02:13 AM
#180
ppl continue to bitch about this gain with the stock K04 like really how damn hard are you goin to push the lil engine that could(stock turbo) then you blow it and i have to read a thread of you complaining of boost issues and how your dealer isnt going to cover it, The damn thing just came out literally let them see where the product goes then stretch the level of research later on, if your ass baked cookies do you want me walking in there asking for cake?
10-26-2012, 08:11 AM
#183
TTR Powered
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: 04-15-11
Location: Vinemont AL
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ppl continue to bitch about this gain with the stock K04 like really how damn hard are you goin to push the lil engine that could(stock turbo) then you blow it and i have to read a thread of you complaining of boost issues and how your dealer isnt going to cover it, The damn thing just came out literally let them see where the product goes then stretch the level of research later on, if your ass baked cookies do you want me walking in there asking for cake?
Its just normal for people to judge something without trying it first.
10-28-2012, 11:55 AM
#184
Former Vendor
1. Clutch slippage occured.
2. Each test was run on difference tires.
3. The rpm pickup or calculation was set up inconsistently.
Regardless of which of these happened, we can not accurately determine that there were actual gains of 20+ ft lbs. To me, it appears that the torque gain was more along the lines of 5 ft lbs, not 20, but we wouldn't know without a properly conducted test.
10-28-2012, 12:55 PM
#185
I have a discrepancy with this claim. In the dyno graphs on the 1st page, the horsepower is equal at 72mph where the two curves cross each other. Basic math tells us that the torque would also be equal at the same speed unless the rpm (or the rpm reading) has changed. However, the graph shows about a 15 ft lb difference at that point in the graph. This means 1 of 3 things happened:
1. Clutch slippage occured.
2. Each test was run on difference tires.
3. The rpm pickup or calculation was set up inconsistently.
Regardless of which of these happened, we can not accurately determine that there were actual gains of 20+ ft lbs. To me, it appears that the torque gain was more along the lines of 5 ft lbs, not 20, but we wouldn't know without a properly conducted test.
1. Clutch slippage occured.
2. Each test was run on difference tires.
3. The rpm pickup or calculation was set up inconsistently.
Regardless of which of these happened, we can not accurately determine that there were actual gains of 20+ ft lbs. To me, it appears that the torque gain was more along the lines of 5 ft lbs, not 20, but we wouldn't know without a properly conducted test.
Thanks!
10-28-2012, 02:13 PM
#186
TTR Powered
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: 04-15-11
Location: Vinemont AL
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a discrepancy with this claim. In the dyno graphs on the 1st page, the horsepower is equal at 72mph where the two curves cross each other. Basic math tells us that the torque would also be equal at the same speed unless the rpm (or the rpm reading) has changed. However, the graph shows about a 15 ft lb difference at that point in the graph. This means 1 of 3 things happened:
1. Clutch slippage occured.
2. Each test was run on difference tires.
3. The rpm pickup or calculation was set up inconsistently.
Regardless of which of these happened, we can not accurately determine that there were actual gains of 20+ ft lbs. To me, it appears that the torque gain was more along the lines of 5 ft lbs, not 20, but we wouldn't know without a properly conducted test.
1. Clutch slippage occured.
2. Each test was run on difference tires.
3. The rpm pickup or calculation was set up inconsistently.
Regardless of which of these happened, we can not accurately determine that there were actual gains of 20+ ft lbs. To me, it appears that the torque gain was more along the lines of 5 ft lbs, not 20, but we wouldn't know without a properly conducted test.
The dyno was all done under the same conditions as stated.
I dont know where you think that this was done with different tires /etc.
The gains are there. The manifold does improve trq by 20+.
It has been tested side by side with the stock manifold from day one.
Not only can you see the gains in the sheet. But you can FEEL them in the seat.
Last edited by Team SS; 10-28-2012 at 02:24 PM.
10-28-2012, 02:41 PM
#187
I do have to say 1 thing... Matt you were pretty quick to claim 5 torque numbers, if you were looking for explanation, that is one thing, but you instantly wanted to knock it. If the MPH reading went the opposite way you thought (which is very well could have) the gains would be even BETTER than shown. But you did want to get off on your foot and claim less.
I know ZZP will be hard on this manifold, and so be it; Mostly becuase they were not the first to come up with the idea, test it, or such. You guys are pioneers for many of the cobalt items, but no way can be for every item. I give you guys props for taking it to this level in the community we are at now.
Also just wanted to state at least we dyno tested before and after with no other changes. Many of your bolt on items at ZZP do not even offer this information on your site; along with many other companies.
I know ZZP will be hard on this manifold, and so be it; Mostly becuase they were not the first to come up with the idea, test it, or such. You guys are pioneers for many of the cobalt items, but no way can be for every item. I give you guys props for taking it to this level in the community we are at now.
Also just wanted to state at least we dyno tested before and after with no other changes. Many of your bolt on items at ZZP do not even offer this information on your site; along with many other companies.
10-28-2012, 03:20 PM
#191
Former Vendor
NO SLIPPING CLUTCH. SAME TIRES. SAME DYNO. SAME DAY. SAME CONDITIONS.
The dyno was all done under the same conditions as stated.
I dont know where you think that this was done with different tires /etc.
The gains are there. The manifold does improve trq by 20+.
It has been tested side by side with the stock manifold from day one.
Not only can you see the gains in the sheet. But you can FEEL them in the seat.
The dyno was all done under the same conditions as stated.
I dont know where you think that this was done with different tires /etc.
The gains are there. The manifold does improve trq by 20+.
It has been tested side by side with the stock manifold from day one.
Not only can you see the gains in the sheet. But you can FEEL them in the seat.
10-28-2012, 03:29 PM
#192
Whatever HP you have at 5252 is how much torque you have at 5252.
T = [HP x 5252] / rpm
T = torque (in lb-ft)
HP = horsepower
5252 = constant
rpm = revolutions per minute
However the "before" in your terms is the HP chart, your "after" is the torque chart. each graph contains a before and after. Yes they both have the same HP at this point, but if it is not at 5252 rpm torque will NOT match/cross at this point with it.
What you and Matt are not remembering is HP crossing is not necessarily at 5252 RPM the HP chart.
10-28-2012, 03:30 PM
#193
Former Vendor
I do have to say 1 thing... Matt you were pretty quick to claim 5 torque numbers, if you were looking for explanation, that is one thing, but you instantly wanted to knock it. If the MPH reading went the opposite way you thought (which is very well could have) the gains would be even BETTER than shown. But you did want to get off on your foot and claim less.
I know ZZP will be hard on this manifold, and so be it; Mostly becuase they were not the first to come up with the idea, test it, or such. You guys are pioneers for many of the cobalt items, but no way can be for every item. I give you guys props for taking it to this level in the community we are at now.
Also just wanted to state at least we dyno tested before and after with no other changes. Many of your bolt on items at ZZP do not even offer this information on your site; along with many other companies.
I know ZZP will be hard on this manifold, and so be it; Mostly becuase they were not the first to come up with the idea, test it, or such. You guys are pioneers for many of the cobalt items, but no way can be for every item. I give you guys props for taking it to this level in the community we are at now.
Also just wanted to state at least we dyno tested before and after with no other changes. Many of your bolt on items at ZZP do not even offer this information on your site; along with many other companies.
As far as zzp knocking your intake, you are again way off. Your statemant is what's backwards. You said that we are knocking your product because we don't sell one. Now lets be realistic- If we did sell one, would we be more inclined to praise yours? Seriously?
Lastly, you must be joking about our dyno testing. We dyno test more Cobalt parts and modifications than you could possibly imagine. The numbers are out there. I just take a more careful approach to releasing numbers, meaning that I am cautious with claims that can easily vary drastically out in the field.
10-28-2012, 03:34 PM
#194
Former Vendor
They do not always cross... But they are always the SAME @ 5252.
Whatever HP you have at 5252 is how much torque you have at 5252.
T = [HP x 5252] / rpm
T = torque (in lb-ft)
HP = horsepower
5252 = constant
rpm = revolutions per minute
However the "before" in your terms is the HP chart, your "after" is the torque chart. each graph contains a before and after. Yes they both have the same HP at this point, but if it is not at 5252 rpm torque will NOT match/cross at this point with it.
What you and Matt are not remembering is HP crossing is not necessarily at 5252 RPM.
Whatever HP you have at 5252 is how much torque you have at 5252.
T = [HP x 5252] / rpm
T = torque (in lb-ft)
HP = horsepower
5252 = constant
rpm = revolutions per minute
However the "before" in your terms is the HP chart, your "after" is the torque chart. each graph contains a before and after. Yes they both have the same HP at this point, but if it is not at 5252 rpm torque will NOT match/cross at this point with it.
What you and Matt are not remembering is HP crossing is not necessarily at 5252 RPM.
10-28-2012, 03:50 PM
#196
Former Vendor
After looking at the charts closer, I don't believe that it is clutch slip. The percentage of error seems to be a little over 4% regardless of where I check on the chart. At 73mph, torque should be equal, but the new intake shows a little over 4% more torque. At abour 96.5mph, the hp is again the same, but torque varies by a little over 4% once again. My conclusion is that the rpm calibration was altered a little more than 4% between these tests, whether intentional or not.
Remember, this is math, not opinions.
Remember, this is math, not opinions.
10-28-2012, 03:52 PM
#197
Former Vendor
10-31-2012, 04:21 PM
#200
We will be doing a 20, 25 and 30 PSI pull with the stock manifold. Then a 20, 25 and 30 psi pull with the TTR manifold.
We will compare each manifold before and after on the same graph.
We will watch to make sure we dont see clutch slip or pickup calabration error again.