is street unit's manifold custom or not? NO BASHING
- Thread starter azian6er
- Start date
- Status
RXMmazdaspeed
Member
- :
- 2007 Mazdaspeed 3
he wants to be proven wrong, which has yet to happen. the manifolds in the pictures look damn near identical, which makes me skeptical as well. he even admitted he hadn't known they originally they were based off of 626 manifolds which makes it appear he was probably stiffed, and in turn we would be getting stiffed to pay 545 dollars when we could do it for much cheaper.
and look, i am not here to bash or anything, but asian6er has raised a valid point that has really yet to be proven wrong. thats all.
and fk.. i love you.
and look, i am not here to bash or anything, but asian6er has raised a valid point that has really yet to be proven wrong. thats all.
and fk.. i love you.
- :
- '13 CWP MS3 & '16 Mazda6 GT
(rlaugh) <3
RXMmazdaspeed said:
MIA protege
Member
- :
- 06 Lexus IS250, 06 Kawi ZX10r
Spapster said:
i was also wondering the same thing ... are you 17 ??
I'm posting this because I am completely impartial to this whole ordeal... why exactly should I care who's right or wrong anyway? I have the FS-ZE intake manifold, I'm happy with it and I *know* the gains it gives and I have proved it. The only thing I care about is people not getting ripped off. Also my other main reason is so that anyone else who reads this thread won't jump ahead and say azian6er is the "bad guy" and the "hater", and the "MAM supporter"... his posts have legitimate questions that I feel are completely rational.... I will let the reader of this post decide if he's such a "hater" after all.... I'm not saying he's completely in the right because he did outright made accusations before waiting on what cullen has to say
So I was wrong about the protege fuel rail not bolting on into the 626 "based" manifold... I was going off of what I've visually seen before and it just looked to me that the angle and bolt locations would be different. This still doesn't solve why there aren't 2 more bolt holes for the stock protege fuel rail when this manifold is supposedly custom cast
Here lies the "custom" question... if it was custom cast, then why is a new EGR pipe needed instead of modifying the "626 design" to have the EGR pipe port angled/positioned correctly for the Protege one? Is it because the Protege one is too long or two short?
Kudos for including vacuum lines and tees for the "package"... but no where do I see that the vacuum solenoids bracket being included... afterall the point of this cast intake manifold is for the "stock look" right? 2 unused vacuum solenoid zip tied to something or just hanging around just looks too out of place to be "stock"... I mean it's hard to notice at first glance on vacuum solenoids that are mounted but not hooked up to vacuum lines.... again the question about the "stock look"... 2 unused bolt mounting tabs on the fuel rail also looks a bit odd... luckily not as glaringly noticable as 2 hanging solenoids..... going by those manifold pics again, the 2 "tower posts" on the #3 runner of the intake manifold appears too far away from the stock harness connectors for the vacuum solenoids... with the "L" shaped bracket bolted onto the manifold and the vacuum solenoids in place, the harness connectors cannot reach it.... so the first logical solution is to either make a custom metal bracket (that "looks stock") to locate the solenoids closer to the harness or to change the casting design of the manifold (it's "custom" afterall right?)
another thing that I'm having trouble understanding... if this is a "custom" cast manifold, why base the design so closely similar to the 626 one? Is it because of ease? Is it because of costs? I mean $550 for something that is only a bit "different" from stock (going by how it looks outside, and assuming you're correct and that the s*** is custom/different from the stock 626 s***) seems a bit expensive to me too... I mean, from what I understand, turbo engines prefer to have large plenums and short runners for their intake manifolds... I saw 2 greddy "footballs" yesterday at a shop on an SR20 and RB26 and the "footballs" were huge, while the runners run straight off of it into the head... very short lengths and no bends at all.... I don't see how the FS-DE is such a significantly different or "special" internal combustion engine to warrant the "inspiration design" based on a stock intake manifold that was designed for low end torque
again, if the manifold is custom cast, why was the relocation of some inherent incompatiblities weren't done? or why was a totally different design from stock but still stock looking (look at the bpt intake manifolds for inspiration for example) not done?
so you took the pictures when the "sensors" (they're solenoids, they don't "sense" anything) weren't hooked up and mounted? so are you saying you were dynoing the car while a CEL was on?
dude, did you read ANYTHING I posted in the big thread (in MSP engine performance section)? I said that the EGR valve is the same and there are no "flappers" on the federal emissions manifold
read the page on SU's site again... the s*** isn't ported... not without extra money
so if they used other mazda designs, are you implying they're using mazda s*** and not redesigning/improving s*** *based* on their designs? I thought you said on the other thread that it is the latter.... can you clarify this?
again, I'm only posting this because of some unanswered questions
I also feel that "it was changed and we're not telling you because of the R&D spent on it" is just as poor of an excuse of a certain protege cam maker not providing specs when someone can easily "reverse engineer" them by putting the cams on a measuring lathe or using degree wheels.... all major cam makers such as crane cams, etc provide specs so that people can use degree wheels to verify how far off the specs they are due to manufacturing variations..... that's a whole different issue to discuss elsewhere, but my point is, someone can easily buy this manifold and also spend the $356.65 (retail) on the stock 626 manifold and compare what was changed... then tell the world about it.... not giving info will just slow people down in finding out anyway... plus even when people know such info, most people don't have the time, expertise, or want to go about making a preexisting part the same as the new product... so they end up buying the "modified" new product anyway or in some cases help boost sales because they know exactly what they're getting
anyway, here's how the vacuum related s*** is done on the 626....
So I was wrong about the protege fuel rail not bolting on into the 626 "based" manifold... I was going off of what I've visually seen before and it just looked to me that the angle and bolt locations would be different. This still doesn't solve why there aren't 2 more bolt holes for the stock protege fuel rail when this manifold is supposedly custom cast
Here lies the "custom" question... if it was custom cast, then why is a new EGR pipe needed instead of modifying the "626 design" to have the EGR pipe port angled/positioned correctly for the Protege one? Is it because the Protege one is too long or two short?
Kudos for including vacuum lines and tees for the "package"... but no where do I see that the vacuum solenoids bracket being included... afterall the point of this cast intake manifold is for the "stock look" right? 2 unused vacuum solenoid zip tied to something or just hanging around just looks too out of place to be "stock"... I mean it's hard to notice at first glance on vacuum solenoids that are mounted but not hooked up to vacuum lines.... again the question about the "stock look"... 2 unused bolt mounting tabs on the fuel rail also looks a bit odd... luckily not as glaringly noticable as 2 hanging solenoids..... going by those manifold pics again, the 2 "tower posts" on the #3 runner of the intake manifold appears too far away from the stock harness connectors for the vacuum solenoids... with the "L" shaped bracket bolted onto the manifold and the vacuum solenoids in place, the harness connectors cannot reach it.... so the first logical solution is to either make a custom metal bracket (that "looks stock") to locate the solenoids closer to the harness or to change the casting design of the manifold (it's "custom" afterall right?)
another thing that I'm having trouble understanding... if this is a "custom" cast manifold, why base the design so closely similar to the 626 one? Is it because of ease? Is it because of costs? I mean $550 for something that is only a bit "different" from stock (going by how it looks outside, and assuming you're correct and that the s*** is custom/different from the stock 626 s***) seems a bit expensive to me too... I mean, from what I understand, turbo engines prefer to have large plenums and short runners for their intake manifolds... I saw 2 greddy "footballs" yesterday at a shop on an SR20 and RB26 and the "footballs" were huge, while the runners run straight off of it into the head... very short lengths and no bends at all.... I don't see how the FS-DE is such a significantly different or "special" internal combustion engine to warrant the "inspiration design" based on a stock intake manifold that was designed for low end torque
again, if the manifold is custom cast, why was the relocation of some inherent incompatiblities weren't done? or why was a totally different design from stock but still stock looking (look at the bpt intake manifolds for inspiration for example) not done?
********** said:
so you took the pictures when the "sensors" (they're solenoids, they don't "sense" anything) weren't hooked up and mounted? so are you saying you were dynoing the car while a CEL was on?
YellowSpeedInNY said:
dude, did you read ANYTHING I posted in the big thread (in MSP engine performance section)? I said that the EGR valve is the same and there are no "flappers" on the federal emissions manifold
97Protegedx said:
read the page on SU's site again... the s*** isn't ported... not without extra money
********** said:
so if they used other mazda designs, are you implying they're using mazda s*** and not redesigning/improving s*** *based* on their designs? I thought you said on the other thread that it is the latter.... can you clarify this?
again, I'm only posting this because of some unanswered questions
I also feel that "it was changed and we're not telling you because of the R&D spent on it" is just as poor of an excuse of a certain protege cam maker not providing specs when someone can easily "reverse engineer" them by putting the cams on a measuring lathe or using degree wheels.... all major cam makers such as crane cams, etc provide specs so that people can use degree wheels to verify how far off the specs they are due to manufacturing variations..... that's a whole different issue to discuss elsewhere, but my point is, someone can easily buy this manifold and also spend the $356.65 (retail) on the stock 626 manifold and compare what was changed... then tell the world about it.... not giving info will just slow people down in finding out anyway... plus even when people know such info, most people don't have the time, expertise, or want to go about making a preexisting part the same as the new product... so they end up buying the "modified" new product anyway or in some cases help boost sales because they know exactly what they're getting
anyway, here's how the vacuum related s*** is done on the 626....
Attachments
Last edited:
This thread is over, as it is pretty pointless. Rebranding is nothing new at all. I mean, I know of a certain company that sells Bypass Valves as thier own, when they are from Bailey. Who cares where the manifold came from? If he doesn't want to share with you everything about where it came from that is his right. It's called proprietary info people. It doesn't matter if you can get the info easily, or find out for yourself. It's been said, if you can, go do it! Sounds to me like people are fishing for ways to undercut vendors, and are mad because he is making you pay for his product. Again, so what if you think it is so easy to make. If it is, then go do that s***, and sell it! If you are not going to do that, then I'm gonna have to say stop starting these bulls*** thread that stir up drama. This so reminds me of the Joe P. MBC incidents over a year ago. We lost that vendor due to this bulls***, and we are not gonna play this game anymore. If you don't agree with me, frankly I don't give a ****. The bottom line is he has a right to do what he is doing, and is doing so within the guidlines as an authorized vendor.
- Status
