View Full Version : ATP hi-flow manifold vs. standard manifold
Koomorph
23-01-2007, 19:03
I've been considering whether the high flow manifold from ATP would be a worthwhile buy along with the GTRS eliminator - not from the perspective of cost - but 2 other reasons BOOST and RELIABILITY.
I'm considering doing the GTRS coversion using the OEM VAG manifold - basically becasue I assume that with the thinner runners, I would get less lag when compared to the hi-flow one. I understand that my end power figure would be compromised, but was wondering whether:
a) the standard manifold is as bad in terms of reliability (cracks etc..) as ATP claim? Would the GTRS be too much for it? Any opinion on this welcome....
b) the standard manifld would reduce lag?
c) the standard manifold would be still good for 300 brake?
My main concern here is lag - having seen some GTRS graphs showing the boost coming in mid rev range, I'm not sure I could live with 3Krpm+.... And if the hi-flow makes it worse...... then I'd really have to reconsider this option....
But I don't want to do the eliminator, only to find that the standard manifold can't take it and begins to fail...... or that it restricts top end majorly below 300 brake....
Thanks chaps
Raf
a) yes, many crack as OE gets hot too (but maybe not as many)
b) not, it'll be shit slot, and a massive restriciton
c) not a chance
if you can't live with boost coming on (strong) at 3000rpm, stick with k0x units
Koomorph
23-01-2007, 19:32
Righto -
a) What do you mean "(not as many)"
b) "not, it'll be shit slot"?? What do you mean? Why would it be a massive restriction at the bottom end of the rev range when you're not pumping as much gas through it?
Mark, so your recommendation would be to get the high flow manifold at the same time - if going the GTRS route.....
Cheers
Raf
yeah, if you go BT, you cannot use the original manifold (well you could.... but it'll be really restrictive)
More ATP ones crack as a percentage (but they're all on modded cars getting ragged I'll wager)
Larger internal volume of ATP = lower pressure = lower heat...........
cordobabrendy
23-01-2007, 19:46
the ko3x only really comes on from 2500 so another 500 later for longer would actually be just as driveable.
Koomorph
23-01-2007, 20:49
Mark - surely it's made for strength and relaibility when running a bigger turbo - doesn't fill me with any confidence if so many crack - even when used on applications where the car is modified... that's the whole point isn't it....better manifold for bigger turbo.... !
My Ko3s starts coming on strong at 2K and by 3K it's at full pelt - so if this starts coming on at 3K and not fully spooled until 4K plus.... that's quite a difference. I say this as I've recently been watching the way I drive... where I plant my right foot, where I cruise etc.... I'm thinking I may not enjoy it if get a load of "wait, wait wait wait... woooooooohoooooooooooo!" On second thoughts..... ;o)
Raf
ibizacupra
23-01-2007, 20:52
Larger internal volume of ATP = lower pressure = lower heat...........
unless bottled up in a small exhaust housing on k0x turbo
unless bottled up in a small exhaust housing on k0x turbo
Yes of course, but is the std mani more restrictive than the KO exhaust housing? (I think so).
ibizacupra
23-01-2007, 21:03
Mark - surely it's made for strength and relaibility when running a bigger turbo - doesn't fill me with any confidence if so many crack - even when used on applications where the car is modified... that's the whole point isn't it....better manifold for bigger turbo.... !
My Ko3s starts coming on strong at 2K and by 3K it's at full pelt - so if this starts coming on at 3K and not fully spooled until 4K plus.... that's quite a difference. I say this as I've recently been watching the way I drive... where I plant my right foot, where I cruise etc.... I'm thinking I may not enjoy it if get a load of "wait, wait wait wait... woooooooohoooooooooooo!" On second thoughts..... ;o)
Raf
sounds kinda like a diesel would suit you (sir) :D
low end power delivery is ok, but can also be abrupt...
the delay on the eliminators in power delivery vs their out and out power level does so far seem dissapointing.... Waiting a while for just over 300bhp. This is only 1/2 the story as transient spool (on-off-on throttle response) is the more significant on the road. On a dyno plant ya foot and it spools up to max boost and delivers power.. real world you are on and off the gas so transient is more important. You dont ever see this on a dyno to know how its likely to "feel"
Driven a few powerful garrett and IHI and other turbo'd cars, and the headline figures are all wel and good. One example of a well tweeked GT28 based turbo vs my at the time VF34 made it all to apparent. The garrett based car had 80bhp more, but transient boost was extremely laggy compared to my "lesser" powered VF34. I would bet mine would out accelerate it in real world on on track out of the corners tho.
The bad news I suspect is the 4K onwards power delivery of the eliminator is probably also poor transient also, relative to other models. Its only attribute as I see it is its apparent price and favourable $$ rate at the moment, and its lack of competition in the "bolt on" dept. It falls short of a BT tho, and has some compromises for its extra power delivered.
ATP's manifold's are not know for their quality, and their kits will always need "fettling" to make fit properly.
It will be a surprise for some but my old MK4 golf when 1st IHI'd was actually on a std manifold, ported, and running an adaptor plate to mount the IHI onto. That went like stink! Get the dremmel out... lol
ibizacupra
23-01-2007, 21:06
Yes of course, but is the std mani more restrictive than the KO exhaust housing? (I think so).
when you look at them 4 x exhaust manifold ports vs k0x intake.... its pretty even.
has anyone done just a manifold change and logged before and after?
cordobabrendy
23-01-2007, 21:07
bill, any pics of the mount the vf sat on? would you say it would be worth trying before buying a more expensive fab'ed manifold?
martyn did some pretty extensive logging I think..
ibizacupra
23-01-2007, 21:15
did marts post it up anywhere?
be interesting to see.. was on k03s was'nt it?
ibizacupra
23-01-2007, 21:18
bill, any pics of the mount the vf sat on? would you say it would be worth trying before buying a more expensive fab'ed manifold?
no pics from that no.
if you stand a JS mani next to a stock one, they look remarkably similar in origin. Fatten up an stock one (which the downside its then a complete 'mare to fit) and you have a similar looking unit. Bore sizes being larger and round of course for the extra flow. Fatten up a stock one and its an ATP one, and equally a pig to fit. no pain no gain i spose.
Yup, it was k03s, I'll have a search to see what I can find
Koomorph
23-01-2007, 21:47
Thanks for the good input Bill - transient spool is somethign I hadn't considered on this.... and so the outlook only seems to get worse... as you say, if it wasn't for the relatively low cost invovled.......
Do you think I would be better off spending the £200+ instead of the ATP manifold - on a port job on the standard one? Surely that would make it even weaker if I were to go GTRS? And then a ported one would struggle to delivier over 300 brake? (No?) But it would be less laggy surely....?
If you had to go GTRS route - would you go ATP manifold or ported OEM ? (not including the option of a custom fabbed one... )
Raf
PS - I love tractors....
Thanks for the good input Bill - transient spool is somethign I hadn't considered on this.... and so the outlook only seems to get worse... as you say, if it wasn't for the relatively low cost invovled.......
Do you think I would be better off spending the £200+ instead of the ATP manifold - on a port job on the standard one? Surely that would make it even weaker if I were to go GTRS? And then a ported one would struggle to delivier over 300 brake? (No?) But it would be less laggy surely....?
If you had to go GTRS route - would you go ATP manifold or ported OEM ? (not including the option of a custom fabbed one... )
Raf
PS - I love tractors....
No way you could port a standard manifold. Too little meat on the walls.
ibizacupra
23-01-2007, 22:04
Thanks for the good input Bill - transient spool is somethign I hadn't considered on this.... and so the outlook only seems to get worse... as you say, if it wasn't for the relatively low cost invovled.......
Do you think I would be better off spending the £200+ instead of the ATP manifold - on a port job on the standard one? Surely that would make it even weaker if I were to go GTRS? And then a ported one would struggle to delivier over 300 brake? (No?) But it would be less laggy surely....?
If you had to go GTRS route - would you go ATP manifold or ported OEM ? (not including the option of a custom fabbed one... )
Raf
PS - I love tractors....
its a difficult call to be honest.
tempting for the bang for buck side of things, but those coming from a pokey k03s motor with good strong willing urge may not like the extra wait for the extra power when it comes. It will be more, and tailoring driving style to suit will accomodate it I would have thought. Being lazy and just riding the wave of k03s type torque however in gear wont be the same when waiting for 4K to wind on the clock. Search for a gear down plant it and hang on for it to power in hard...
The only way is to find someone with one and try it out. not that, thats easy.
hogging out a stock mani has got to weaken it for sure. ATP's are reportedly cracking tho in not that long a service either. Its not that ATP's are exclusively cracking cos every cast mani I have seen & used can crack, and or warp.
£200 notes is cheap for a mani... so its got to be tempting... just not a job you would want to do twice if fitting yourself.
ibizacupra
23-01-2007, 22:06
No way you could port a standard manifold. Too little meat on the walls.
now maybe its not its size which is its problem.... and the oversize nature of the ATP mani is in fact contributing to the lag experienced. Eliminators spools slower then their GT based cousins. Why is that?
£200 notes is cheap for a mani... so its got to be tempting... just not a job you would want to do twice if fitting yourself.
You're right about not wanting to do it twice. One of the fiddliest jobs I've ever done.:blink:
Here (http://www.seatcupra.net/forums/showthread.php?t=108411) are my logs post ATP fitting. Bit bloody useless without before, but I fitted the ATP to solve a cracked mani prob. :rolleyes: Butt dyno says it's better tho.
Koomorph
23-01-2007, 22:58
Dave, I was getting readings of 180+g/s peak (184 I think) after my LC was mapped by James at CC (phase 1) with only a forge 007 and Green cotton panel filter..... and obviously I haven't got the ATP manifold or Forge TIP.........
Maybe the standard manifold would be up to the job - and reduce the lag.....
Do KO4 manifolds have wider runners? The restriction in these being the turbo running out of puff at 270 brake - not the manifold.....
Raf
ibizacupra
23-01-2007, 22:58
your right...
without a before.. its just a log
thanks anyway tho
Dave, I was getting readings of 180+g/s peak (184 I think) after my LC was mapped by James at CC (phase 1) with only a forge 007 and Green cotton panel filter..... and obviously I haven't got the ATP manifold or Forge TIP.........
Maybe the standard manifold would be up to the job - and reduce the lag.....
Do KO4 manifolds have wider runners? The restriction in these being the turbo running out of puff at 270 brake - not the manifold.....
Raf
Raf, I wasn't posting or logging to willy-wave. I'm sure there are more powerful K03S powered cars than mine. I'm here to learn and question. Please note that those logs were done with a bog-standard paper filter with 8k miles under its belt. My car has shown 193+ g/s with a RamAir fitted. At this sort of level, the K03S is out of puff and maxed-out anyway. I'm more interested in what happens on the way there.
Sure, with a different plan I'd have had the K03S off a long time ago and the mani would be a banana bunch.
There's no difference between LC / K03S exhaust manis and the LCR / KO4 item. Have you seen the comparative pics between standard and ATP in my other thread?
Best wishes
Koomorph
24-01-2007, 08:11
Dave, I meant no offence in the slightest - it was merely an observation that I seem to be getting the same g/s readings without the manifold - therefore possibly the standard one would be up to the job for the ATP conversion and reduce lag - especially as it flows upwards of 270 on KO4's and is the same manifold as the KO3. If KO4's are hitting a barrier at 270ish due to the turbo being the restrictive part and not the manifold, then there's a possibility that the standard manifold could flow more with a bigger turbo..... Unless 270ish is also the approx. barrier of the standard manifold, but the KO4 restriction masks this....
Raf
Ibiza sport man
24-01-2007, 08:45
bill, any pics of the mount the vf sat on? would you say it would be worth trying before buying a more expensive fab'ed manifold?
I just happen to have a couple of the adapters sitting on my desk. They enable an IHI to fit a 150/180 BHP ported manifold. It did work well, but the mounting bolts stretched. Looking at getting some studs made from Incalloy.
Bernard
Dave, I meant no offence in the slightest - it was merely an observation that I seem to be getting the same g/s readings without the manifold - therefore possibly the standard one would be up to the job for the ATP conversion and reduce lag - especially as it flows upwards of 270 on KO4's and is the same manifold as the KO3. If KO4's are hitting a barrier at 270ish due to the turbo being the restrictive part and not the manifold, then there's a possibility that the standard manifold could flow more with a bigger turbo..... Unless 270ish is also the approx. barrier of the standard manifold, but the KO4 restriction masks this....
Raf
For the sake of the clarity, the K04 and K03 manifolds are different, I think Dave meant that the runner sizes aren't that different. Haven't seen both side by side, but from pictures he's probably right. It's a shame nobody's measured the volumes :whistle:
Dave, I meant no offence in the slightest -
Raf
No offence taken! :)
For the sake of the clarity, the K04 and K03 manifolds are different, I think Dave meant that the runner sizes aren't that different. Haven't seen both side by side, but from pictures he's probably right. It's a shame nobody's measured the volumes :whistle:
I think Dave was very possibly talking shit! :hide:
cordobabrendy
24-01-2007, 10:00
I just happen to have a couple of the adapters sitting on my desk. They enable an IHI to fit a 150/180 BHP ported manifold. It did work well, but the mounting bolts stretched. Looking at getting some studs made from Incalloy.
Bernard
:whistle: and what sort of money are you talking?:whistle:
Koomorph
25-01-2007, 18:34
Something else I came across while looking at the ATP site in relation to using the stock manifold on the GTRS conversion....
"...... in addition, we found that the slight taper designed into the runners of the stock manifold promotes exhaust gas velocity even further. Further testing resulted in a much quicker GT28RS turbo on a 1.8T engine, at least by 300 rpm faster than any other off the shelf GT28RS turbo driven by an aftermarket manifold on the original T25 flanged turbine housing."
Makes sense to me. I can understand that the stock manifold is restrictive - but that would be only in the upper part of the rev range when it's trying to pump massess of gas through it. The thinner runners would actually promote spool lower down, but restrict top end power..."
Only question that remains is....... would it stay in one piece..... ?
Raf
Only question that remains is....... would it stay in one piece..... ?Raf
Lifetime guarantee against cracking! (I'd cry if I had to spend the time swapping mine again!)
Koomorph
26-01-2007, 08:15
Don't blame you - not looking forward ot mine if I decide to go down that route.......
If I went with my standard manifold to start with and had the car mapped.... then soemtime down the line it started becoming problematic..... if I decided to fit the ATP one, would the car rhave to be remapped...? I guess it would due to the different flow characteristics .... and boost coming in lower down the rev range.... ?
Raf
cupra_matt
29-01-2007, 20:10
I run the GT2X conversion as many of you know, for 7 months it has had some serious stick (not on a track though) and so far no cracks or problems.
As for the fitting issues with the ATP Manifold i have major problems, then when the gasket blew it had to come off again, but it wouldn't budge due to the bolts touching the casting they just rounded off.
I removed the cylinder head and had to grind the nuts off. By this time i was sick, so i called my dad so he could take a look. (clever bloke). The fix was quite simple.
The stud holes which are close to the casting were elongated so that we could get M8 (6mm) allen headed bolts in the complete top row.
So next time it has to come off, it will be a piece of cake.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/matt_cupra/Photo-0157.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/matt_cupra/Photo-0155.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/matt_cupra/Photo-0154.jpg
I would not be using the standard manifold for high power applications. no way!
...................
The stud holes which are close to the casting were elongated so that we could get M8 (6mm) allen headed bolts in the complete top row.
So next time it has to come off, it will be a piece of cake.
Neat solution Matt.
ibizacupra
29-01-2007, 21:21
removing those studs is well stiff tho... was on mine when i had to remove my JS one a few times..
Used cap heads myself on 16v applications and awkward fitment.. so long as they dont seize and strip the allen head
Koomorph
30-01-2007, 08:09
Bill, when you were running your setup on your Ibiza with the standard manifold, what power were you making and at what boost? I 'm just trying to get an idea of how restrictive the standard manifold is at the top end....
Raf
cuprabaz
01-02-2007, 15:59
I fitted one of the few AM large bore mani's to my ko3s ibiza. It made the car a lot more aggressive and noticeably quicker. The peak boost also went up 3 psi. Very worth while bit of kit! Complete c**t to fit!!
ibizacupra
01-02-2007, 17:28
Bill, when you were running your setup on your Ibiza with the standard manifold, what power were you making and at what boost? I 'm just trying to get an idea of how restrictive the standard manifold is at the top end....
Raf
I have never run a bigger turbo on std manifold.
JS kit originally on IHIVF34/18, then VF34/20, then Pe1820 on 1900cc, then my own equal length on mitsi hybrid turbo
320bhp then 340bhp then 360bhp then 390bhp then 517bhp respectively rough guide progression from specs
It will be a surprise for some but my old MK4 golf when 1st IHI'd was actually on a std manifold, ported, and running an adaptor plate to mount the IHI onto.
I have never run a bigger turbo on std manifold.
I think that's where he got the idea from
But I guess since you weren't "1st IHI owner" of the golf it might have had the 'pukka' one on in your ownership?
Koomorph
01-02-2007, 18:03
Thanks Bill, and yip - thanks Mark... that's where I got the idea from.... selective memory methinks... :blink:
Still stands though that if a chipped Ko4 can push 270-80 ponies through a standard manifold, a GT2X should be able to manage 280-90..... as long as the 270-80 barrier is the Ko4 running out of puff not the manifold.....
Anyone with a chipped Ko4 running the ATP manifold?
Raf