not sure on the Tubular vs Cast debate there are always going to for and against (i know what i would prefer to have when pushing 34psi+)

 

but having had both cast & Tubular my 2260 on DS tubular feels better and responds better than the 1756 did on cast

 

i know my current map is very similar to someone else's on a cast & 2260 and i believe he was getting a lot of smoke at 2.4bar, where i am not at all (maybe Faboka can comment?)

 

from reading and having spoken to a certain ex mapper from a certain tuning company the tubular offers better flow and much higher scope for higher boost levels while keeping the EGT at a sensible level

 

i know once my last set of tweaks have been done for my 2.4bar map i'm going to ask faboka to try a 2.8bar and see what the smoke levels are like

FFS this thread.... ISTR the first kits to allow 2260s et-al to be fitted to a mk4 came from Darkside and they included a tubular mani. Darkside then modded that to fit Fabia/Ibiza etc and introduced their "budget" kit including a cast manifold.

 

Anything else I've seen before and after that has been a DIY or bespoke solution to plonking a non-standard turbo on a 1.9TDI. Almost all adapting some earlier cast manifold.

 

To my mind, though, cast = reliable, tubular = potential for more power. Whether anything's ever been proven one way or another I dunno.

 

From the tubular mani perspective, would be interesting to see the same design of manifold tested with different diameter primaries. To see how responsiveness/spool vs pressure, temps and power works out.

 

DS Budget kit with Cast Manifold stops at the 1756 turbo 

what heat wrap do the tubular mani guys use any links plzzz...

 

in response to your first post i wrapped my downpipe with this stuff from JJC http://www.jjcraceandrally.com/trackday/exhaust-wrap/design-engineering-titanium-exhaust-wrap-3

 

1" 15 foot length just because of how close it sits against the steering rack, all depends if your running a 3" downpipe?

 

was told not to wrap the tubular manifold, but i did wrap my cast manifold on the 1756 and had no issues

 

DS Budget kit with Cast Manifold stops at the 1756 turbo 

 

Oh yeah, tnx, I just checked that and no 2260 option. Goes along with some of Ryan#s comments I read on TDICLUB about not making a cast mani and a 2260 fit.

in response to your first post i wrapped my downpipe with this stuff from JJC http://www.jjcraceandrally.com/trackday/exhaust-wrap/design-engineering-titanium-exhaust-wrap-3

 

1" 15 foot length just because of how close it sits against the steering rack, all depends if your running a 3" downpipe?

 

was told not to wrap the tubular manifold, but i did wrap my cast manifold on the 1756 and had no issues

 

proper answer! thanks m8! 3" down pipe yeh well im just gunna wrap that then

Tubular manifolds offer a 'theoretical' advantage, however due to packaging constraints and the fact that the shortest possible runner lengths give the best performance, cast is generally always the way to go, the ideal would be to have the turbo as part of the head casting to minimise distance from the face of the exhaust valves, some manufacturers are now effectively doing this and the cylinder head water jacket can also be used to help keep EGT lower.

Tubular or 'equal length' runners simply make the runners as short as possible while all being the same length. I would imagine that power outputs would need to be very large indeed before such manifolds make any appreciable difference.

 

Short runners offer a greater benefit than longer but equal length runners on a road car due to the reduction in lag.

So there we have it, waste of money

So there we have it, waste of money

unless ur going for serious power then i agree

unless ur going for serious power then i agree

 

I would say on a VNT TDI it won't show any benefits at all, maybe on an Evo at around 500BHP using an FGT like a dustbin lid, big FGT's have huge spooling issues and lag becomes so bad that an equal length wrapped manifold might actually help.

unless ur going for serious power then i agree

 

Which your not, so I say again, waste of money

If I could have tubular or standard, id pick tubular every time. Not saying it will improve things but better to have it than not.

It's the whole PD160 intake discussion again...

It either...

- Works

- Doesn't work

- Is a waste of money either way

So make your own mind up

If I could have tubular or standard, id pick tubular every time. Not saying it will improve things but better to have it than not.

It's the whole PD160 intake discussion again...

It either...

- Works

- Doesn't work

- Is a waste of money either way

So make your own mind up

 

Or listen to wise information from someone that actually knows what they're talking about, worked for me when I was at University and has worked ever since.

 

Edit: Seriously Hutchy, how did you ever learn anything if you didn't listen, you must have been to college as well as done an apprenticeship.

Edited 19 October, 201411 yr by sepulchrave

 

 

Which your not, so I say again, waste of money

 

280/300bhp is more than ur average 

Or listen to wise information from someone that actually knows what they're talking about, worked for me when I was at University and has worked ever since.

Edit: Seriously Hutchy, how did you ever learn anything if you didn't listen, you must have been to college as well as done an apprenticeship.

Let me know when you find them.

Let me know when you find them.

 

Dude, that really is a very, very long way from being the brightest thing you've ever said.

 

I know lots of people who I can call or email if I have a problem I need help with, every project I've ever done is a collaborative effort, that's why we use project managers, I call up the PM and say I need to know X or Y and he calls some other people and so on. I'm strong in certain areas, other colleagues are strong in other areas and we all compliment each other. Seriously, REALLY SERIOUSLY, how the f**k do you get anything done?

.

No surprises there then, good luck with your new career direction.

If I could have tubular or standard, id pick tubular every time. Not saying it will improve things but better to have it than not.

It's the whole PD160 intake discussion again...

It either...

- Works

- Doesn't work

- Is a waste of money either way

So make your own mind up

 

Bit of a difference though between those two ain't there!!!!

 

so you've got a grand to spend on a modification, would you go for a LSD or a tubular manifold?

 

One transforms the car and its performance, the other does not.

280/300bhp is more than ur average 

 

But doable on a cast manifold!

 

Tell you what, you give me a grand, I'll tell you I've fitted a tubular manifold for you, and pocket the grand

You will be non the wiser as there is no difference in performance when you drive off

Can someone lock this before it turns into a slappy bitch fest please.

LMFAO! at this thread

 

would like to see some comparable results from a 2260 on Cast vs Tubular at 2.4bar on race nozzles and see what the difference is fueling wise & spoolup & smoke levels

 

a very hard thing to do cause no 2 cars are the same

 

at 1756vk level sticking with cast manifold is fine, but once moved to 2260vk and higher boost levels i know where i'd rather be

 

i would agree the price of the DS manifolds are not something i would've considered when i was doing my 2260 upgrade, but just as i was about to buy a 2260 from Xman

 

a week old DS kit came for sale that was cheap so bought that instead, otherwise i would be on a Cast manifold and just kept with standard injectors

Tubular would save some mass, I imagine?

Tubular would save some mass, I imagine?

 

 

yes and off the shelf downpipe fitment as well

Just to add fuel to it...

 

Anyone hogged out/ported a cast manifold? :sun:

Just to add fuel to it...

 

Anyone hogged out/ported a cast manifold? :sun:

 

Nice, because raw flow is where it's at, forget gas speed and throttle response right, it's all about POWAH!