FRS/BRZ Turbo UEL vs. EL (read OP PLEASE)
 

It has already been debated to death what is better, what makes more power, etc.... I am not looking for more debate, anyones opinion or results from other platforms.

What I WANT, is people with UEL FA20's to post their results so we can compare to what the EL kits have produced and see if there is really nay noticeable difference. Dyno sheet would be better, if not:

Kit: FA20Club, JDL, P&L, etc.

PSI: XX

Power: XXX WHP/ XXX WTQ

Dyno type, correction used: (Hopefully Dynojet), SAE/STD

Fuel Used

Tuner

Exhaust

The only way this debate will end is with hard data.

FRS/BRZ Turbo UEL vs. EL (read OP PLEASE)
 

FA20Club Garrett 57 Trim UEL Recirculated
No CF used
8 psi
770cc FIC Injectors
3" PTUNING Turbo-back Exhaust
PTUNING Tuned
Stock Fuel Pump
Attachment 70641

I think this thread is practically pointless. Unless we have identical vehicles with identical forced induction systems with identical tunes in identical weather on the same dyno on the same day, comparing these results won't yield much.

I didn't even want UEL. It's just what I needed to get for a recirculated dump option.

Turbo size: a gt28 running 16 psi will produce less power than a gt35 at 16psi.


For those interested

http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...ative-thread**


Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Precision 4854 journal bearing 10.5psi
UEL manifold
FIC 1100's
2.5" DP/OP
3" catback

Rough tune 93oct...final tune to come next week

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/x...pse0d5a3db.png

Let me answer your question:

EQUAL LENGTH ALWAYS MAKES MORE POWER

/closethread

With all other things being equal, a well-engineered EL turbo manifold will naturally perform better than a quality UEL manifold. Most people that are starting dynopulls at 3-4+k rpms may not notice the differences that occur off idle and towards the midrange. Also, if you compare a well engineered EL to a UEL manifold, you will also notice differences in the higher rpms as well.

How can one engineer an UEL manifold to perform better than properly engineered EL manifold? How short should the shortest runner be from the longest runner? What cylinder should get the short end of the stick by being stuck with the shortest exhaust runner (most exhaust gas reversion from the other cylinders with longer runners)? What is the correct design formula for this? There's a reason why engine builders across every platform of racing spend countless hours trying to make headers with perfectly equal runner lengths and perfect merge collector designs.

To avoid starting a EL vs. UEL or turbo system manufacturer war, I'll say that there is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with running UEL manifolds, but this should be dictated by turbo location, recirculating options, etc. rather than a desire for sound. Just my 2 cents.

Honestly, even sound is subjective as our entire staff here prefer the sound of evenly timed exhaust pulses over an off beat rumble. Again, sound preference is just that, a preference.

I have to run the dyno right now, but I'll post some dyno info on this very shortly. :cheers:

- Toan

The point of the thread is not to compare FBM EL with GTX35, full 3 inch with FA20club 57 trimm, stock exhaust.

The point of opening up to let everyone post their setup is that we will eventually get pretty comparable setups posted, example, FA20club 57 trim full 2.5 inch exhaust, WG spring, both running canned tuned, only difference UEL vs. EL.

That's it. I don't get why every thread has to be a freaking drama or war between supporters either way (not talking about you at all, forum in general).
Everyone says that, but NO ONE ever shows the hard paper data to back it up.

I tried researching it, and came across a company who makes headers for STI's (I don't remember who, but it was a decently known company), and their tests between aftermarket UEL and aftermarket EL concluded that UEL made a little more power so that's that...

That is the point of the thread, real data, not just he/she says...

you can't achieve empirical data from keyboard scientists, not to mention the data would be from different cars, mod lists, turbos.... and all these manifolds are hand made so no two are the exact same...

find a control then just swap EL ->UEL manifold on a dyno, use same car, same day, same dyno etc...

If you want improved accuracy do it several times over several days with the exact same car and same dyno and manifolds.

even in that case your results will only be telling for those two manifolds..

to give you an idea of why EL trumps UEL is this;

each cylinder sends a "Pulse' of exhaust gasses as it opens the exhaust valve.

In an EL manifold these gasses never occupy the same space "in theory" and actually create a vacuum behind themselves drawing the next pulse from the next cylinder out of the head and into its runner.

With an UEL Manifold the "pulses" often hit each other causing increased back pressure and turbulence. Also due to this impact of the pulses you lose the vacuum from the previous pulse to pull the next pulse into the runner.

Mathematically you could derive a manifold that was UEL in nature but able to perform like an EL manifold but you would need to know several things such as the "pulse's" duration, mass and velocity.

in the end I conclude this: EL makes technically more power (think drop in filter vs intake) and UEL sounds better(my opinion)

you worried about power go EL
you like UEL sound Go UEL

I agree with you in all accounts. Just would like to get some data on it, even if rough...

This thing I tell someone when training them in R&D, you're better to provide no data, than inaccurate data.

Our EL and UEL manifold both use the same turbo placement, downpipe, intecooler pipes etc. It would be an easy test...now i just need someone donations for my rebuild :P

As for my personal theory its more manifold design than it is el vs uel. The Ideal manifold would have equal pressure drop through each runner. Our EL manifold is pretty ideal for this as each runner has roughly the same degree of bends. As far as i know the pressure drop in a bend is far greater than a straight section and that the pressure drop between different length straight sections is very minimal. Our EL manifold has roughly 180 deg of bends per runner and ~10" of straight. Based on that i believe a UEL manifold that retained the same number of bends but had 2 cylinders with a much shorter straight section would perform VERY simliar if not the same. Is that possible to build is the next question...It won't happen using the same turbo placement, etc. At that point compromises must be made for fitment and production.

This is similar to the debate between a log type and a tubular mani in a regular inline 4 situation.

Tubular manifolds might make more power, but many, many races have been won with a log type just because they are more durable.

off topic, but related.

I should be able to contribute in a week :), my @MAPerformance kit is slightly UEL