Dyno... Marine trim VS Dyno (race) trim
#1
Gold Member
Gold Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Olmsted Falls,Ohio Marblehead,Oh
Posts: 11,634
Likes: 0
Received 204 Likes
on
132 Posts
Dyno... Marine trim VS Dyno (race) trim
Dyno... Marine trim VS Dyno trim..??
Who has dynoed both ways? Trying to see what changes happened going from a full race Dyno header and no accessories, then going to marine exhaust and alternator and sea pump....
Anyone done it both ways?
Looking for info and not guessing differences in output HP
Who has dynoed both ways? Trying to see what changes happened going from a full race Dyno header and no accessories, then going to marine exhaust and alternator and sea pump....
Anyone done it both ways?
Looking for info and not guessing differences in output HP
#2
Registered
I'm wondering the same thing,
I was trying to find a place that I could run my marine manifolds on the dyno! (never found one), I have a relatively unique setup and I'm not sure how I would run it with out the manifolds. (twin turbos)
I was trying to find a place that I could run my marine manifolds on the dyno! (never found one), I have a relatively unique setup and I'm not sure how I would run it with out the manifolds. (twin turbos)
#5
Registered
Yes Ryan (Precision) dyno'd my engine with full accessories and wet exhaust. Bob Llyod from Full Throttle has probably done both ways on the same engine. He's since closed his shop and not sure how often he gets on the site anymore but you could PM him and see if he responds.
#6
Registered
I think there is something else that needs to be addressed here in these conversations. The following are good technical discussion points:
Performance MANIFOLDS whether Stainless Marine (not Gen III), EMI, Dana, Imco, Hardin will all flow nearly the same, all have similar construction and internal passage sizing. They are still a short runner manifold that dumps into a tubular riser with 3.5" ID and with long risers all generally dump just in front of the tip. I believe I remember reading on a Merc 525 that converts from the crappy CMI headers to Stainless Marine manifolds it lost over 20 horsepower. Mind you that this is on only a 525 hp engine, we are shooting for the 700's here. As with most horsepower related losses, it will not be a linear assumption or a standard "take 30 hp for wet exhaust" assumption, but more or less running into some kind of exponential curve of efficiency losses. So the harder you push, the even harder the restriction pushes back until you reach a point where you will go backwards.
Now, from what I have understood is that manifolds are a decent performance option but around that 650 hp mark will start to become a restriction again compared to a header or something with a TUNED primary length. Tim's engine, my engine and many others here that are at this 650-700 hp threshold yet are using manifolds. Going to a full dry tail will help because ultimately it reduces some back pressure and takes away some of the inherent design limitations. At what point do you need to stop chasing a lack of HP and upgrade to headers? At what point does the short runners, swirling of gasses in the collection chamber, lack of scavenging, and relatively sharp transition into that tubular riser begin to really rear its ugly head?
Now, we are all worried about exhaust flow bench numbers and port shapes. Has anyone ported their manifold openings to ensure a smooth exhaust transition? Made sure gaskets are trimmed? We all wouldn't mount an intake manifold without checking all that but how about exhaust? It is just as important. Has anyone ever flow benched a port on the manifold to see if it can even flow as much as your exhaust port?
Now, I've always taken Bob's speculated HP numbers to mean what I should see validated on a dyno. Now we all know there are skimpy, average, and happy dynos out there. None of us are dynoing motors like OEM vehicle manufacturers do to get a standardized "rating." I imagine this factor alone starts half of HP pissing matches.
Performance MANIFOLDS whether Stainless Marine (not Gen III), EMI, Dana, Imco, Hardin will all flow nearly the same, all have similar construction and internal passage sizing. They are still a short runner manifold that dumps into a tubular riser with 3.5" ID and with long risers all generally dump just in front of the tip. I believe I remember reading on a Merc 525 that converts from the crappy CMI headers to Stainless Marine manifolds it lost over 20 horsepower. Mind you that this is on only a 525 hp engine, we are shooting for the 700's here. As with most horsepower related losses, it will not be a linear assumption or a standard "take 30 hp for wet exhaust" assumption, but more or less running into some kind of exponential curve of efficiency losses. So the harder you push, the even harder the restriction pushes back until you reach a point where you will go backwards.
Now, from what I have understood is that manifolds are a decent performance option but around that 650 hp mark will start to become a restriction again compared to a header or something with a TUNED primary length. Tim's engine, my engine and many others here that are at this 650-700 hp threshold yet are using manifolds. Going to a full dry tail will help because ultimately it reduces some back pressure and takes away some of the inherent design limitations. At what point do you need to stop chasing a lack of HP and upgrade to headers? At what point does the short runners, swirling of gasses in the collection chamber, lack of scavenging, and relatively sharp transition into that tubular riser begin to really rear its ugly head?
Now, we are all worried about exhaust flow bench numbers and port shapes. Has anyone ported their manifold openings to ensure a smooth exhaust transition? Made sure gaskets are trimmed? We all wouldn't mount an intake manifold without checking all that but how about exhaust? It is just as important. Has anyone ever flow benched a port on the manifold to see if it can even flow as much as your exhaust port?
Now, I've always taken Bob's speculated HP numbers to mean what I should see validated on a dyno. Now we all know there are skimpy, average, and happy dynos out there. None of us are dynoing motors like OEM vehicle manufacturers do to get a standardized "rating." I imagine this factor alone starts half of HP pissing matches.
Last edited by Gimme Fuel; 09-19-2016 at 10:14 AM.
#7
Charter Member#568
Charter Member
The variations in exhaust and accessories from one person to the next would make meaningful comparisons tough. Probably no one that replies to this thread will have the same combo of accessories and exhaust.
__________________
Straight bottoms and flat decks
Straight bottoms and flat decks
#8
Gold Member
Gold Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Olmsted Falls,Ohio Marblehead,Oh
Posts: 11,634
Likes: 0
Received 204 Likes
on
132 Posts
Not sure about that, there are TONS of guys with stainless marine systems, sea pumps and alternators, give or take a PS pump (that I don't have) I think comparing same with GIL and stainless marine are going to be pretty close over a header or such
#9
Registered
iTrader: (1)
On my motorcycle engines the biggest gains were found in the exhaust ports. If you can't get the gassed out then the intake charge backs up like young girls in Uggs at Starbucks when the pumpkin lattes come out.
When Mercruiser rates their engines do they do it at the prop fully accessorized? So a Merc 385 would be closer to a 450hp crate motor?
When Mercruiser rates their engines do they do it at the prop fully accessorized? So a Merc 385 would be closer to a 450hp crate motor?
#10
Charter Member#568
Charter Member
There might be lots of similar combos but I'll bet not so much when you narrow it down to people who've dyno'd and are posting
__________________
Straight bottoms and flat decks
Straight bottoms and flat decks