Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 115

Thread: Steed Speed Twin Scroll Manifold Spool Comparisons

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    288
    My Cars
    1998 M3 643whp
    Quote Originally Posted by chikinhed View Post
    Has anyone done any clean up around the waste gate port to promote better flow to the wastegate or am I the guinea pig?
    I have taken the grinder to mine slightly, and you can easily fillet the inside corners of the waste-gate flange area. Getting tuned soon and will post some results when I have them. I'm hoping to just get by on EWG with my EFR8474, but I have a cat and 2 mufflers adding to the back pressure. As long as she'll control down to 15-17psi, I should be fine.

    The design of this manifold could use a revision or 2, but it is currently the best we have for twin scroll. When you look at cylinder 6, it has no way to ever get to the EWG, prompting all the boost control issues. Matchbot estimates about 30-35% of engine flow need to be wastegated, but we are giving up 17% (1/6) of flow that will never be. We are also loosing a bit of cross section with the WG divider plate. It is a tough job fitting 10lbs in the 5lb engine bay though.

    SS Design issues with manifold that I see:
    1. Cylinder 6 can't ever flow through wastegate (must reverse back through a tapered merge collector against cylinder 4 and 5 flows)
    2. Hard 90deg bend at flange (this is noted in every turbo installation guide as something to try to avoid)
    3. Little to zero filleting on edges into wastegate path (around the ID of Vband flange) These could easily be added to the CNC program of the top plate.
    4. Cylinder 5 even has to reverse back slightly to hit wastegate path (also has sharp collector merges to flow around)
    5. Port cross section tapers down from head port area. Seems to be plenty of wall thickness to keep head port geometry throughout the runner sweeps.
    6. EFR positioning leaves much to be desired around engine mount, but has tons of room to engine block side

    The thing is that many of these issues (except #1) could be addressed with a slightly modified design. With this being a CNC piece, you aren't into new tooling either to fix many of them. The EWG is dying from a thousand cuts in the manifold design, and I feel several of these issues are low hanging fruit (3,4,5). They might push it over the edge of flowing enough.
    Last edited by wgknestrick; 01-16-2020 at 12:01 AM.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    25,402
    My Cars
    F90 M5; E36 M3 Turbo
    I could not control boost with the EWG 8374 on the original open steedspeed. The TS45 recommended by Steedspeed is not the best choice. I tested it back to back against the original Tial 45 on the open steedspeed with the same rated springs and the Tial controlled boost better. Someone studied the TS45 and found its travel is very limited, but that even the newer compact Tial 44 was better. There is also a JMS 50 that will fit the flange and that is taller and has more travel. Could be worth looking into if you think more WG capacity could help. If the problem is entirely inside the manifold, then it won’t help. When I changed to the twinscroll steed, I went to the IWG 9180. No problem with it.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    288
    My Cars
    1998 M3 643whp
    Quote Originally Posted by pbonsalb View Post
    I could not control boost with the EWG 8374 on the original open steedspeed. The TS45 recommended by Steedspeed is not the best choice. I tested it back to back against the original Tial 45 on the open steedspeed with the same rated springs and the Tial controlled boost better. Someone studied the TS45 and found its travel is very limited, but that even the newer compact Tial 44 was better. There is also a JMS 50 that will fit the flange and that is taller and has more travel. Could be worth looking into if you think more WG capacity could help. If the problem is entirely inside the manifold, then it won’t help. When I changed to the twinscroll steed, I went to the IWG 9180. No problem with it.
    The WG problem is with the divided manifold design IMO. While this is certainly no easy design task, everything can always be improved. IMO, the best and easiest solution would be to weld a flange onto the turbine housing, but that involves some machining to an expensive housing (that you also don't have CAD files for). It is a shame that BW IWG design is so marginal in the first place. It took me a while to pull the trigger on this manifold knowing the issues others have had with it. It's still a great manifold relative to the limited options out there, but it's not perfect. I just didn't want to jump into 2 wastegates and the added cost if I didn't have to. John at CES thinks we may be OK (has stated other cars able to run with just EWG and EFRs) because I have a cat and a very quiet (ie more restrictive) exhaust. It didn't feel like an uncontrollable spool monster driving it home from the exhaust shop yesterday, but I only took it up to 6-8psi before getting off it. My car still has the TT stage 2 tune on it and don't want to risk it too much. If my car turns out OK, then great. I don't want people to think I'm pooping all over this, just trying to be constructive. I still voted for it with my money.

    Here's an example, but you'd want to hug the housing more to keep ground clearance up. You also use the 90deg in the wastegate to turn the flow right back into the down pipe. I'm assuming this all fits though instead of mocking it up under my car. It's hard to believe you couldn't find an angle to mount an EWG that would clear the block and have enough ground clearance though.
    Attachment 665116


    I have the Gen5 wastegate, so I don't know if you were comparing this version or the gen4.

    The divider on the SS manifolds also now looks much thinner (.125" vs .250"?) from what I've seen in other pics. That is helping and should be an improvement. I would love to be able to redesign this for them. The main issue is the front to back location of the wastegate relative to the 4,5,6 bank. It needs to be moved further back, or the internal geometry modified to allow a direct flow path (which would impair top end performance). I also used header armor and can't recommend the stuff more. $100 for a OEM/F1 looking manifold shielding.
    Header Armor Steed Speed Manifold.jpg
    Last edited by wgknestrick; 01-16-2020 at 11:03 AM.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    25,402
    My Cars
    F90 M5; E36 M3 Turbo
    You will know as soon as you put your foot down in 4th and run to redline. Be ready to lift since you have 42 lb injectors. Let us know what happens. The extra restriction in your exhaust will help, but will it be enough? Maybe the creep will eventually stop, but probably not at a boost level safe with your 42 lb injectors.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C., Canada
    Posts
    8,162
    My Cars
    '97 M3
    I was told from Mr Steedspeed that my warranty would be void if I used a manifold blanket.

    It looks like a nice job though.
    Last edited by chikinhed; 01-16-2020 at 07:38 PM.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    25,402
    My Cars
    F90 M5; E36 M3 Turbo
    If you sand blast the cracked manifold before returning, how would he know you wrapped it?

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    288
    My Cars
    1998 M3 643whp
    I could on and on about the (lack of) merits for voiding a warranty on a CNC manifold, but there is zero risk. Tubular headers are another thing, as is header wrap. I have neither.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota eh?
    Posts
    6,155
    My Cars
    86 325es
    That manifold wrap looks great. Nice job.


    86 325es, 2.8L m50, S476sxe, ProEFI 128 ecu, e85, solid rear axle, TH400 trans, 28x10.5w slicks, zip ties, popsicle sticks, tape
    best time 9.06 @ 151.8 mph, best 60 foot 1.30

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    1,154
    My Cars
    M3
    This manifold can run at low boost with non-EFR turbos correct?

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    25,402
    My Cars
    F90 M5; E36 M3 Turbo
    Butters can’t control the spool on his with a PT 6466. Not sure whether he is using the TS45 or a Tial. He had to add pop off valves to his charge pipe. He does have a straight through exhaust. Might be 4”

    A big turbine housing should help. CES ran a 9180 with a 1.45 and supposedly could get boost down to about 18 psi.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    1,154
    My Cars
    M3
    Jesus, down to 18? I'm talking like 8psi. I prefer this power range in the mountains. I'm using a big turbine housing Borg Warner. Hope this works...it's Journal bearing not EFR so maybe that will work.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C., Canada
    Posts
    8,162
    My Cars
    '97 M3
    I’ve been able to control the 9180 .92 using the Tial MVR and TS IWG75 down to 13-14 psi. That is my low boost target for my water/meth failsafe. I have not tried for lower boost, that’s slow enough. The issue that I’m having is boost falling off from 24-25 psi between 4500-5000 rpm down to 21 psi after 5500 rpm. At the end of the summer it looked like I had gained some ground on the issue but it wasn’t consistent.

    It still also needs a tweak from Jordan as the last revision took away a bunch of power. The max EGT is down to 1550°F now.
    Last edited by chikinhed; 01-17-2020 at 09:46 AM.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    25,402
    My Cars
    F90 M5; E36 M3 Turbo
    Yes, I can do 14 also with the IWG and EWG with the EFR9180. Like you, I have not tried and lower. Unlike you, I have not tried over 20-22 psi. Now that I have a trans that will hold, I plan to raise the boost and assume I will experience the same issue as you SSI I am hoping you figure it out.

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    288
    My Cars
    1998 M3 643whp
    Quote Originally Posted by someguy2800 View Post
    That manifold wrap looks great. Nice job.
    Yeah, I highly recommend this stuff to anyone. Great to work with and the results are great. You can easily make this in 1 piece that folds around to the bottom of the manifold. You have a rip joint at the turbo inlet. I do recommend drilling holes through the webs between cylinders though to better secure the heatshield. I wished I had done that in the end as it can slide off slightly. It was a little tight getting some of the manifold nuts on with the shield installed, but manageable.

    For documentation purposes:
    https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...?ie=UTF8&psc=1
    Heatshield Products 177004 HP Header Armor 18" x 24" x 1/4" Thick

    Enough to cover entire manifold and if you look in the picture you can see I had plenty left to wrap the 1.75" waste gate pipe. Use a cardboard pattern first and reference my seams. I would not recommend the thicker .5" stuff as it would interfere with the nuts and other items.

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    PEI, Canada
    Posts
    2,817
    My Cars
    2001 330i
    Quote Originally Posted by chikinhed View Post
    I’ve been able to control the 9180 .92 using the Tial MVR and TS IWG75 down to 13-14 psi. That is my low boost target for my water/meth failsafe. I have not tried for lower boost, that’s slow enough. The issue that I’m having is boost falling off from 24-25 psi between 4500-5000 rpm down to 21 psi after 5500 rpm. At the end of the summer it looked like I had gained some ground on the issue but it wasn’t consistent.
    The way you describe your issue, it's almost like you have the VE of the engine increasing dramatically above 4500 RPM, and are running off of the compressor map to the right. This would vary a bit with weather conditions, which could be a reason to see different results at different times. This shouldn't be happening though with a 9180 though....

    The other thing would be high exhaust back-pressure opening the gates.....but based on the boost control issues seen previously, (Can't regulate low boost) this also shouldn't be an issue. Unless it IS exhaust back pressure.....but from after the turbo? (Exhaust pipe and muffler) If there was a choke point based on mass flow, and the pressure ratio between pre-turbine and post-turbine went down, this would lower the drive torque to the compressor wheel.....

    Have you tried running the car with the exhaust removed?

    Note to self: Install a post turbine pressure sensor on my car.
    Last edited by PEI330Ci; 01-25-2020 at 01:12 AM.

  16. #91
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    25,402
    My Cars
    F90 M5; E36 M3 Turbo
    The IWG 9180 uses a 0.92 turbine housing. Could that be a factor? I tend to agree with Chikinhed that the relatively small internal flapper valve is not holding. He has the Turbosmart cannister/rod assembly that uses the same springs as a TS45 external gate. It may be that we need to use a stiffer spring set on the internal gate than on the external gate (I have not yet experienced this because I have not run as much boost but hope to this year now that I have a trans that will take the power). Given that manifold does not do a good job of diverting exhaust to the external WG, maybe there is more pressure in that little 0.92 housing pressing against the flapper.

    I don’t think it’s an issue of our 3.2L running off the 9180 map at a pressure ratio of 2.8 and 4500+ rpm.

    The issue of not controlling boost with this manifold applies to turbos with only EWG, and it’s not an EFR only issue. Butters has the problem with a PT6466.

    One concern with not addressing the issue is over spinning the EFR9180 titanium turbine, which can shatter. If your electronic boost controller is calling for more boost but your IWG is being pushed open and is bleeding exhaust gas energy, the EBC will spin the turbo faster to make up for the loss. Could put the turbine at risk. Chikinhed is not running the optional shaft speed sensor as far as I know. I don’t use it either.

    And it’s noteworthy that CES says it can regulate boost down to as low as about 18 with just an EWG using an EFR 9180 with the big 1.45 turbine housing. No IWG option for the 1.05 and 1.45; just the 0.92.
    Last edited by pbonsalb; 01-25-2020 at 08:14 AM.

  17. #92
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    288
    My Cars
    1998 M3 643whp
    Just got tuned today by Nick G @ CES, so I finally have some results to add.

    EFR 8474 Black Edition 1.05 EWG
    Turbosmart Gen5 Hypergate with 7psi spring
    93 pump
    Stock S52 + ARP studs + .140" Spacer
    M50 Manifold
    3.5" Vibrant OBD1 Cat + 2 mufflers
    Steedspeed manifold with mild EWG port job (filleting entry corners)
    TT FMIC
    80lb Dekas

    Min boost we could run was 10.5-11psi (blue curves) which was 4 psi over WG, but well within the safety zone. This was a huge positive result and John@CES was right about the exhaust config helping a ton. Ended up at 516whp@16-17psi and was at the limit of the block. Not bad for a catted, OEM quiet exhaust, stock block on pump.

    Bill K 98 E36 M3 8474 EFR 93 oct Nick G tune Dyno.png



    Bill
    Last edited by wgknestrick; 01-27-2020 at 09:37 PM.

  18. #93
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    25,402
    My Cars
    F90 M5; E36 M3 Turbo
    Putting a cat in the exhaust helped boost control. 500 lbs at 4000 is my definition of fun. Great results for an M52 at 17 psi.
    Last edited by pbonsalb; 01-27-2020 at 08:10 PM.

  19. #94
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    22,823
    My Cars
    skateboard
    Quote Originally Posted by pbonsalb View Post
    Putting a cat in the exhaust helped boost control. 500 lbs at 4000 is my definition of fun. Great results for an M52 at 17 psi.
    Wasn’t it an s52?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
    ― George Orwell

  20. #95
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    288
    My Cars
    1998 M3 643whp
    Quote Originally Posted by GG///M3 View Post
    Wasn’t it an s52?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Yes

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    22,823
    My Cars
    skateboard
    Quote Originally Posted by wgknestrick View Post
    Yes
    Pretty fancy


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
    ― George Orwell

  22. #97
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C., Canada
    Posts
    8,162
    My Cars
    '97 M3
    Nice results!

    The exhaust and down pipe are 3.5” with two straight through mufflers. The EWG recirc pipe joins the exhaust at about a 30° angle just ahead of the center muffler. I have not checked exhaust back pressure with this turbo but I did when I had the GTX3582R set up installed. Back pressure measured about 1.8 psi at WOT near redline in 3rd or 4th. I hadn't considered the post turbine exhaust back pressure in my troubleshooting.

    Again, I haven’t checked the exhaust manifold pressure with this set up but did with the old set up.

    I have not tried running it without the exhaust.

    I don’t have a turbo shaft speed sensor, my poly engine mount is almost touching the sensor port. I’d have to re-engineer the mount arm and mount to make that happen.

    One of the next checks I wanted to do was pre vs post intercooler pressures to check the pressure drop. The eBoost2 measures its pressure from the intake and uses compressor discharge pressure for controlling the WGs so I am doubtful that this is the issue. The boost will happily shoot up to the moon if I keep one of the WGs closed.

    I tried the 13 psi spring in the IWG75, then switched to a 17 psi spring.
    I then tried increasing the preload on the IWG75 up to 6 mm with little to no improvement. I then increased spring pressure in the IWG75 up to 19 psi with 4 mm of preload. It’s affecting my minimum boost I can run so I'm just doing it for troubleshooting. Next is to bump it up to 6 mm preload. Any work on the IWG75 really sucks and it requires the car to be on stands, cold engine and a lot of inspiration.

    I’d like to put the 13 psi spring back in the IWG75 and try a 19 psi spring in the MV-R EWG to see what difference that makes but I suspect from my testing that the EWG is doing the majority of the boost control.

    The rod guide assembly, the bushing the shaft passes through, in the IWG75 does not have any type of seal on it so control pressure to the bottom port (which would be the top on a regular WG) can leak out lowering the pressure that would be holding that WG closed. I either try to modify the bushing to seal better or enlarge the supply line to the IWG75. I’d need a high temp, self lubricating, o-ring to deal with such harsh conditions.

    I don’t get to work on a solution again until I get the car back from the body shop and reassemble it.
    Last edited by chikinhed; 01-27-2020 at 10:41 PM.

  23. #98
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geigertown, PA
    Posts
    547
    My Cars
    95 M blk/blk

    Steed Speed Twin Scroll Manifold Spool Comparisons

    I have some comments and questions. I have the steed on my hillclimb car with a 87mm block and a 8374 EFR with internal gate with TS actuator and the TS45 external gate. Exhaust is only 3" which I think is the systems saving grace. I have VERY limited time to perfect things as the wife and kids were so fed up with me building a racecar and turbo system twice (crashed the first one) that I have just been running it with less than ideal characteristics. I have the problem where the boost spikes initially then tapers down. I have run the car the following ways.

    1. Only on wastegate spring. I had a 7PSI spring in the external and what I thought was a 7 in the internal but it turned out to be a 14. The boost would spike to 10 then taper to 7 and the car drove great and was fun and trouble free. This proves that the interal gate was doing nothing and the boost was still controllable.

    2. The same 7psi/14psi spring combo with a manual boost controller. I would run at about 15psi at the spike then it would taper down to 11-12ish. Still very drivable and I honestly couldn't tell it was tappering because the thing is so friggin fast at the hillclimbs.

    3. Then I had to reshell the car (after I crashed the first one) and I built the 87mm motor. During the reinstall I discovered I had the 14 lb spring in the internal gate, so i installed a 10 lb in BOTH gates now.
    I ran the new motor with the manual controller and it felt pretty much the same and the old spacer motor, but it seemed to "hit" harder.

    4. Then the last event of the year I hooked up a Cortex EBC. I connected it the simplest way by only using one port on the wastegates and ran the controller in open-loop mode. I was able to use the boost by gear and rpm feature which was neat, but the boost curve acted exactly the same as the manual controller. I even increased boost in the controller as rpm increased, but it still tapers down. I only did one round of changes so maybe I can tune it in better.

    So
    -I dont think the internal gate is doing anything
    -Is the spike and taper a hardware problem?
    -Should I even bother trying to "tune in" my EBC?
    -Would i have better luck in closed loop mode?
    -Should I use the "two port" connection method for the wastegates?
    -Somebody here mentioned the TS45 was junk and the Tial works better, so maybe I should start there.

    Ideally I would like a more linear boost graph...I have the complete opposite now and it makes racing the car a bit difficult. If you are in the middle of a third gear sweeping turn and you try to roll into the throttle the boost suddenly hits like a ton of bricks!

    Last edited by bimmerbumm193; 01-31-2020 at 10:21 AM.
    96 328i ITR Racecar
    95 M3 blk/blk - hillclimb project - http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum....php?t=1798796 - Retired to street duty after two awesome seasons!
    2002 325XiT - daily


  24. #99
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,375
    My Cars
    E36 Turbo
    Quote Originally Posted by bimmerbumm193 View Post

    I find myself asking why you have a spike, drop then spike, and then another drop and recover in that screenshot.

    Are you using an AEM EMS? Or are just data logging using something else and displaying/reading with AEMData? Do you have the ability to plot the Boost controller duty cycle and TPS into that graph?

    Can you easily switch between controlling just one gate at a time (vac. lines reasonably accessible)?

  25. #100
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geigertown, PA
    Posts
    547
    My Cars
    95 M blk/blk
    That screenshot is running Manual boost controller, so i agree that drop is very weird. I will look through other data to see if it is consistent. That is a 5th gear pull to 150 mph.
    I am using a tuned Ms41 ecu. I am just logging boost, rpm and afr on a AEM failsafe gauge.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    96 328i ITR Racecar
    95 M3 blk/blk - hillclimb project - http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum....php?t=1798796 - Retired to street duty after two awesome seasons!
    2002 325XiT - daily


Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. E36 FS: Steed Speed Twin Scroll T4 manifold, Rally Road engine mount
    By tsalfie in forum Forced & Chemical Induction Parts
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-23-2018, 09:53 PM
  2. Interest in a cast SPA twin scroll manifold?
    By Keith1054 in forum Forced Induction
    Replies: 239
    Last Post: 03-05-2014, 06:39 AM
  3. T4 Twin Scroll Manifold Options?
    By RobertFontaine in forum Forced Induction
    Replies: 99
    Last Post: 11-16-2013, 07:53 AM
  4. Why use a twin scroll manifold over a single scroll?
    By wazzu70 in forum Forced Induction
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-23-2012, 07:13 PM
  5. single scroll vs twin scroll manifold?
    By jfdmas in forum Forced Induction
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 03-26-2010, 07:15 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •