Custom FFI update w/ pictures!

jt2ma71

Impeller Head
Mar 30, 2005
868
0
0
Washington State
www.cardomain.com
Seth, the accepted standard for flow testing is 28" h2O. That's how mine are tested. I think, any flow numbers made other than that is just pointless. Like somebody said before, "I can make my manifolds flow any numbers I want". I posted my flow numbers for stock, long runner and short runner many times before, maybe 5 to 10 times in the last 2 years?? I remember reading somebody's post where the stock flowed far more different than my results, I don't remember how it was tested though. Ron
 

jt2ma71

Impeller Head
Mar 30, 2005
868
0
0
Washington State
www.cardomain.com
IJ. said:
Ditto to Adjuster's post I'd be very interested in some data!

I'll have dyno figures for both but they won't be a direct comparison as I'm using the long runner manifold on my base motor that is just a stock rebuild and the short runner one will be on a fully built new motor (cams headwork big valves forged pistons and rods and so on)


Once I get maximum hp on my long runner setup, a/fs right on and what not (i'm taking my time), I will switch to a short runner style and will have dyno comparisons then, I know I've said that many times. But I'm just too busy making manifolds and such for others :)
 

sethron71

Authorized Vendor
Jul 19, 2005
871
0
16
39
Las Vegas, NV
www.SethIngham.com
jt2ma71 said:
Seth, the accepted standard for flow testing is 28" h2O. That's how mine are tested. I think, any flow numbers made other than that is just pointless. Like somebody said before, "I can make my manifolds flow any numbers I want". I posted my flow numbers for stock, long runner and short runner many times before, maybe 5 to 10 times in the last 2 years?? I remember reading somebody's post where the stock flowed far more different than my results, I don't remember how it was tested though. Ron

Ron,
Thank you for the information I greatly appreciate it. I flowed my first couple at 25" h2O, not mercury my bad. So I will have him bump it up to flow this manifold and see how it goes. But thank you again for sharing all of your information.

I will have pics of it installed later tonight!! :biglaugh:

Sincerely,
Seth Ingham
Sleeper Designs
 

sethron71

Authorized Vendor
Jul 19, 2005
871
0
16
39
Las Vegas, NV
www.SethIngham.com
Pictures of it installed!!! Sorry for the delay but between a new job and my racing program I have been laying low on the forums with very little time. But here are some pictures I took of the FFI installed. Been running it for about a week and a half and works great! Hope you enjoy!

p63600_1.jpg

p63600_2.jpg

p63600_3.jpg


Sincerely,
Seth Ingham
Sleeper Designs
 

sethron71

Authorized Vendor
Jul 19, 2005
871
0
16
39
Las Vegas, NV
www.SethIngham.com
Ne0z said:
im talking about your Ass Dyno

Haha, well it is definitly a mod for those who like top end. I improved high end reving fairly dramatically. But when you are talking about 20hp added to 400hp it is fairly hard to feel a difference cause it is crazy fast anyways..lol :evil2:

Thanks,
Seth Ingham
 

tte

Breaking In - in progress
Mar 30, 2005
940
0
0
Northern California
Does getting rid of the top runner end in better performance?

I know long runners is for low down torque and short runners for top end horsepower.

Cheers,
Roy
 

siman

Lifetime Ban
Mar 31, 2005
1,371
0
0
39
Murfreesboro, TN
www.cardomain.com
The "veilside" design is made for top end performance ( saying that top rpm peroformance that is...not mph LOL)...

the design is made so that the air that is forced into the intake chamber via the turbocharger actually SPEEDS UP because the angle the rear of the manifold takes......

its kind of like a jet engine effect....the air just rams itself in the chambers rather than the long runner "torque" style.....

with either design, tube or veilside, you get added performance....but when it comes to style ( for me, though yes I believe in form follows function) the Veilside short runner design takes the cake and looks GREAT when polished.

-Jonathan