Guys kit was boost creeping since they put it on. Nick was "experimenting" with diff size wastegate holes to perfect his mani. Never bothered to fix this guys stuff, so he makes a post on evom about it and DTM basically flames him.

Just thought it was interesting to note.

Said thread: http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=329949

 

Huh?

 

So this test manifold was more geared towards higher boost levels than lower. By DTM creating a smaller hole passage, they could figure out a good medium between low boost control and high boost control.

When I upgraded my 14b to a 34mm wastegate flapper and ported the hole, all creep issues were eliminated. Further down the road I was ready to run 20+ and the internal gate spring could simply not hold the large flapper shut due to the high volume now flowing out of the wastegate passage causing boost to fall off when I tried to run high psi. A stock flapper would of been better for my application.

Seems like the manifold tester got a bit ansy, because they didn't have time to port the hole, and posted a thread about them.

Why didn't he just grab a carbide bit and have at it?

 

I figured it wouldn't take long for this to come about, and oh was I right.

 

yup, drag is the pot and I'm the spoon.

Andrew the setup they were running was setup for pump gas from what I understand.. so there was no need to setup for a higher boost manifold. Just as well they were experimenting I understand, thats great. Thats what the market needs is for someone to try new ideas and make them work, and I'll give it to Nick and the crew they are trying.

Thing is dude has had the mani on the car since January, when they tuned the car on the dyno it was creeping. It should have been fixed. Regardless the point I did not like was that the OP never mentioned anything bad in the original topic that I saw, and then they called him a whiny bitch? Nice service, real class act.

 

i agree completely, they were way too quick to jump his ass. it seems like he just wanted some help with his car and was looking for suggestions. if that was a prototype mani and they saw that it was not performing correctly when they dynoed the car why wasn't it fixed at that time and not wait another 2 months?? if i took my "pride and joy" to a shop i"ll me damed if i was going to be a test rat.

 

Wow. They instantly just started destroying his thread,and he didn't even say anything bad on the first post. That is ridiculous. I agree with you they should have talked to him about it before just getting pissed.

 

i haven't looked at the original thread,but what exactly is there to experiment with on wastgate feed piping size?make it the diameter of the wastegate inlet,as short as possible,and there's plenty of knowledge on what placement will contribute to or help reduce spiking/creeping.i can't see any benefit in "tuning in" creep.use the appropriate size wastegate,and there are many capable EBCs and add-ons to EMSs out there that can allow you to set up exactly what you want.
they should definitely replace his manifold though,if he paid full price,and didn't know his car was becoming a test vehicle.
Chris

 

Maybe I'm wrong, but they could of possibly been trying to make the manifold as high flowing as possible. When a huge 44mm hole is mounted on the runner, it causes the exhaust path to divert around instead of flowing evenly through. My guess is that with the right hole passage size, the exhaust flow would be optimal while still keeping creep under control. We all know that the higher boost levels you want to achieve, the less "wastegate" you need. This is exactly why AMS used 38mm tials on their turbo kits. It's cost effective, and works.

I know the manifold was mounted on a pump gas only car, but maybe they wanted real world data for all applications.

Now for the way they handled his thread, I felt it was completely uncalled for. They treated him like a little kid and ganged up on him in a heart beat. If DTM was worried about their reputation, they should of handled it differently. Shops rely heavily on customer relations, and they are always in the public eye.

I realize that shops have prototypes, and they don't have much time to work on them with other projects going on, but 2 months is slightly excessive.

 

Lets see... If you had a customer that had this problem how would you handle it?

Better question is if you had an employee that had this problem how would you handle it?

Even better than that what if you had an X-employee that has this problem and knew about the issue since the manifold was created and knew well into the R&D phase that it was an issue?

That thread was started because Jordan wanted to get the hole widen which would stop the boost creep. He came to DTM to see if he can get some on the spot work done on the manifold. But as he should have known DTM is not a walk in work type of place. They were busy doing multiple builds and they told Jordan that he would be able to get to his manifold next week.

That wasn't good enough for jordan so he went on and posted here.
http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=329949

Not a big deal but he did it out of spite because he wasn't able to be seen soon enough. On top of that he also knew the remedy as he had been told before during the initial stages of the R&D of that manifold.

It is easy to say that the product sucks and that it should have a larger opening when you DON'T know a thing about flow characteristics of DTM's hybrid turbos and built 4g63 head's.

hell... that's the same manifold design that got them the win for EAST Coast Time Attack champs 2 years running and the 2007 NASA Time Trials Championship in the highest class TTR.

I think that DTM only went on there flaming because they just spoke with the guy and that whole thread was his retalliation. Needless to say he posted more accurate information once he re-read his initial posts.

Get your information right and how about posting the whole thread instead of the part to slander a companies name.

Good luck chump.