I'm finally about to purchase a manifold to suit VN heads on a 308 and I'm trying to decide which one.
I've heard the Hi-Rise dual plane torque master is a great manifold but the Harrop single plane is cheaper and the Redline is lower allowing better bonnet clearance so each manifold has its good and bad points.
Does anyone have any first hand experience with any of these ?
Its going on a 308 in my circuit car, after good power from 3-7000 rpm.
The next upgrade might be to a stroker so it needs to suit that also.
Harrop v Torquemaster v Redline
Started by
micklx
, Mar 02 2007 09:01 AM
22 replies to this topic
#1
micklx
-
- Members
-
- 1,785 posts
Forum Fixture
- Name:Mick
- Location:Frankston South
- Joined: 18-November 05
Posted 02 March 2007 - 09:01 AM
#2
_rorym_
_rorym_
-
- Guests
Posted 02 March 2007 - 09:05 AM
You will need a A9X style bonnet scoop with either Hi Rise..hence I went Torque Power dual plane..it fits under the std LH bonnet.
R
R
#3
_Herne_
_Herne_
-
- Guests
Posted 02 March 2007 - 09:36 AM
From what I gather redline is also lowest in performance and not only price.
I dont have the figures to prove this but I am reliably told that Torque Power out performs the rest - by how much I cant say.
I recently purchased a Torque Power Dual plane for my 308 when I get around to building it.
Cheers
Herne
I dont have the figures to prove this but I am reliably told that Torque Power out performs the rest - by how much I cant say.
I recently purchased a Torque Power Dual plane for my 308 when I get around to building it.
Cheers
Herne
#4
dattoman
-
- Administrators
-
- 16,488 posts
Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
- Name:Neil
- Location:Perth Western Australia
- Car:LX SS , 76 Cadillac , 3 x dattos
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 02 March 2007 - 11:35 AM
My racecar mechanic swears by the Redline
He won't use the Harrop at all
He's never mentioned the Torque Power
Every engine is different though so choice is really up to you
Has anyone done a dyno test on all 3 ?
He won't use the Harrop at all
He's never mentioned the Torque Power
Every engine is different though so choice is really up to you
Has anyone done a dyno test on all 3 ?
#5
_LX8VD69_
_LX8VD69_
-
- Guests
Posted 02 March 2007 - 11:36 AM
im running a redline torker and i dont understand what the problem is my motor pulls hard, its still pulling strong when i back it off at 200kmh 
#6
_Herne_
_Herne_
-
- Guests
Posted 02 March 2007 - 11:41 AM
I guess there is no problem with any of them, to the driver they probably all feel much the same. I would hazard a guess that a race driver might notice the difference and a dyno and or flow test certainly would.im running a redline torker and i dont understand what the problem is my motor pulls hard, its still pulling strong when i back it off at 200kmh
Be happy with what you have and enjoy.
Herne
#7
_LX8VD69_
_LX8VD69_
-
- Guests
Posted 02 March 2007 - 11:55 AM
yeah herne im sure they probably would
#8
_moot_
_moot_
-
- Guests
Posted 02 March 2007 - 01:28 PM
from what i have witnessed,the torque power is the pick.made more power over all and alot more torque and power althrough the rev range than the harrop.
the harrop is suposed to be better on really high hp cars (600+) but under that use the torque power.
the redline is suposed to be pretty good,and not far behind the other 2. it also is suposed to make its power a bit sooner 9probably due to being smaller than the others) come racing used a redline on a 400ci 511hp engine,then swapped it out for one of there own injected manifolds and only made 11hp more. so they cant be bad.
the harrop is suposed to be better on really high hp cars (600+) but under that use the torque power.
the redline is suposed to be pretty good,and not far behind the other 2. it also is suposed to make its power a bit sooner 9probably due to being smaller than the others) come racing used a redline on a 400ci 511hp engine,then swapped it out for one of there own injected manifolds and only made 11hp more. so they cant be bad.
#9
dattoman
-
- Administrators
-
- 16,488 posts
Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
- Name:Neil
- Location:Perth Western Australia
- Car:LX SS , 76 Cadillac , 3 x dattos
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 02 March 2007 - 02:57 PM
So for a street/tarmac rally type car the Redline would be more suitable due to lower engine speeds I guess
Yes ?
Yes ?
#10
_moot_
_moot_
-
- Guests
Posted 02 March 2007 - 03:20 PM
i would say yes,but in a manual car for tarmac rally type work i'd probably go a dual plane. you'll be down a fair bit in power,but power and torque will be a lot lower in the rev range.
do you need 500hp+ for tarmac rallies?
do you need 500hp+ for tarmac rallies?
#11
_RTS Guy_
_RTS Guy_
-
- Guests
Posted 02 March 2007 - 03:29 PM
my pick would be the torque power hi-rise dual plane.So for a street/tarmac rally type car the Redline would be more suitable due to lower engine speeds I guess
Yes ?
i currently have a normal dual plane torque power on my motor which is still unstarted. i wish the hi-rise dual plane was available when i bought mine.
i would have thought torque power would be the pick in every option.
#12
dattoman
-
- Administrators
-
- 16,488 posts
Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
- Name:Neil
- Location:Perth Western Australia
- Car:LX SS , 76 Cadillac , 3 x dattos
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 02 March 2007 - 03:47 PM
Since when has any form of motor racing ever been about NEEDdo you need 500hp+ for tarmac rallies?
I'll be happy with 400-450
Others though like alittle more on tap
Pleases the crowd
#14
_LX8VD69_
_LX8VD69_
-
- Guests
Posted 02 March 2007 - 07:11 PM
can some one please explain to me the difference performance wise between a single plane and a dual plane manifold
cheers adam
cheers adam
#15
_ultrabluea9x_
_ultrabluea9x_
-
- Guests
Posted 03 March 2007 - 12:12 AM
TORQUE POWER SINGLE PLAIN (NO 1)
REDLINE (NO 2)
HARROP (NO3)
As for the rest ,your call
but if you want to make big power at big rpm,s take the torque power single plain
and you will be grinning from ear to ear ,oh yeah for got to mention i have tried them all......................................your other alternative quad 48mm down draught webers
REDLINE (NO 2)
HARROP (NO3)
As for the rest ,your call
but if you want to make big power at big rpm,s take the torque power single plain
and you will be grinning from ear to ear ,oh yeah for got to mention i have tried them all......................................your other alternative quad 48mm down draught webers
#16
dattoman
-
- Administrators
-
- 16,488 posts
Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
- Name:Neil
- Location:Perth Western Australia
- Car:LX SS , 76 Cadillac , 3 x dattos
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 03 March 2007 - 12:15 AM
Don't suppose you kept those quads before you sold the car did you ?
#17
_Herne_
_Herne_
-
- Guests
Posted 03 March 2007 - 08:28 AM
Ok I will have a laymans stab at this for you. Dont take this as gospel as I am rather grasping at straws and I am sure there will be many that know more about this.can some one please explain to me the difference performance wise between a single plane and a dual plane manifold
cheers adam
I 'think' one of the main differences between a single plain and a dual plane is the rev range they work best under? To keep it as simple as possible and trying to keep myself out of trouble here:
The single plain works at a higher rev range.
The dual plane comes in earlier at a lower rev range.
From what I understand the single plain works better on a more modified engine
and the dual plane works well for those less modified...I am out of my depth here lol
But at least this way you may get more people involved in yhis discussion esp if I am wrong
Cheers
Herne
#18
dattoman
-
- Administrators
-
- 16,488 posts
Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
- Name:Neil
- Location:Perth Western Australia
- Car:LX SS , 76 Cadillac , 3 x dattos
- Joined: 04-February 07
Posted 03 March 2007 - 10:16 AM
My engine isn't very modified so I'll be using a dual plane (I'm serious.... its not very modified)
Better for autos on the street too
Better for autos on the street too
#19
makka
-
- Members
-
- 3,559 posts
A m��se once bit my sister
- Name:Cohen
- Location:ya daughters place
- Joined: 08-November 05
Posted 03 March 2007 - 08:51 PM
the dual plane manifold gives better performance over a wider spread of RPM's because it has 2 different lengths of runners (the are all different lengths anyway) whereas the single plane manifold has similar length runners for all cylinders. also with the single plane manifold it has a common plenlum chamber which allows each cylinder to draw air through all 4 barrels of the carbureettor where in a dual plane only allows each cylinder to draw from half orf the carburettor.
i hope that makes sence, I have had a few beers
i hope that makes sence, I have had a few beers
#20
micklx
-
- Members
-
- 1,785 posts
Forum Fixture
- Name:Mick
- Location:Frankston South
- Joined: 18-November 05
Posted 03 March 2007 - 10:35 PM
makka, your grammer after a few beers is way ahead of many others here......
Ultrablue - thats the first time I've seen someone rate the Redline ahead of the Harrop ??????
Ultrablue - thats the first time I've seen someone rate the Redline ahead of the Harrop ??????
#21
_rorym_
_rorym_
-
- Guests
Posted 03 March 2007 - 10:39 PM
I have the Torque Power dual plane..Did lots of research on this and that was the one for my application that ticked all the boxes. Experience from Yella shows I spent most time at 4 to 5,500 rpm...thats where the TP works best.So for a street/tarmac rally type car the Redline would be more suitable due to lower engine speeds I guess
Yes ?
R
R
#22
micklx
-
- Members
-
- 1,785 posts
Forum Fixture
- Name:Mick
- Location:Frankston South
- Joined: 18-November 05
Posted 04 March 2007 - 11:04 AM
I've had the torque power dual plane hi rise recomended to me by a couple of people who should know. My main concern is height and clearance in a Commodore engine bay.
At Phillip Island, it's hard to narrow down a rev range, it's difficult to know whether top end performance down the straight is worth more to a lap time than a bit extra midrange out of the corners.
whatever I decide, I'm sure any of these manifolds on VN heads is going to be better than a stock Holden manifold on my B Cast heads.
At Phillip Island, it's hard to narrow down a rev range, it's difficult to know whether top end performance down the straight is worth more to a lap time than a bit extra midrange out of the corners.
whatever I decide, I'm sure any of these manifolds on VN heads is going to be better than a stock Holden manifold on my B Cast heads.
#23
_bodallafella_
_bodallafella_
-
- Guests
Posted 04 March 2007 - 01:18 PM
The main reason the dual plane manifold works better at low to mid rpm is becuse because the manifold is split so that each pulse is 180� apart meaning that 2 cylinders in a row never feed from the same plenum. The downside is poor fuel distribution and flow due to the long, uneven runners.
In a single plane manifold the pulses are 90� apart so when one cylinder is at TDC on overlap (inlet & exhaust valves are open) the next cylinder is 90� down the intake stroke with the intake valve approaching maximum lift. The valves on overlap are now acting as a vacuum leak in the manifold and exhaust gases are sucked into the manifold, diluting the intake charge. At idle and part throttle it is worse because the overlap hole can be larger than the opening at the carburettor. This is why single plane manifolds make less vacuum and idle rougher (or tougher).
The other factor is that in a single plane setup, each cylinder can draw from all 4 barrels of the carburettor but in a dual plane each cylinder can only access 2 barrels of the carb. That is why a dual plane normally needs a larger carburettor than a single plane. A dual plane can be made to act more like a single plane by cutting away the plenum divider or using an open spacer so that each side of the manifold can draw from all 4 barrels and this will normally increase the RPM range as if you had a bigger carb.
The dual plane is best for normal street use and will give better fuel economy and idle vacuum than a single plane but for tough street and most race engines the best choice is normally a single plane and single 4 barrel carburettor. The most important thing is to match the manifold and camshaft to the operating range of the engine.
In a single plane manifold the pulses are 90� apart so when one cylinder is at TDC on overlap (inlet & exhaust valves are open) the next cylinder is 90� down the intake stroke with the intake valve approaching maximum lift. The valves on overlap are now acting as a vacuum leak in the manifold and exhaust gases are sucked into the manifold, diluting the intake charge. At idle and part throttle it is worse because the overlap hole can be larger than the opening at the carburettor. This is why single plane manifolds make less vacuum and idle rougher (or tougher).
The other factor is that in a single plane setup, each cylinder can draw from all 4 barrels of the carburettor but in a dual plane each cylinder can only access 2 barrels of the carb. That is why a dual plane normally needs a larger carburettor than a single plane. A dual plane can be made to act more like a single plane by cutting away the plenum divider or using an open spacer so that each side of the manifold can draw from all 4 barrels and this will normally increase the RPM range as if you had a bigger carb.
The dual plane is best for normal street use and will give better fuel economy and idle vacuum than a single plane but for tough street and most race engines the best choice is normally a single plane and single 4 barrel carburettor. The most important thing is to match the manifold and camshaft to the operating range of the engine.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
