Manifold issue

[Bruce]

You can go here to look at the proposed Spec Manifold. s782.photobucket.com/albums/yy108/sabre1fv/ The FV committee are the only ones with all the info and has not given it out to the FV community yet. They are going on the assumption that the FV community is in favor of Spec Manifold. I haven't seen any indication one way or the other, so I have devised this poll.

[Take 'em Out Terran]

It looks good, but what is the point of having one side essentially cut off and kept together with a rubber piece and some hose clamps? Make it easier to check wall thickness or something? or will the actual product not have that cut... O.o

[sabre1]

Terran,

The most likely reason for having the rubber coupling is either for inspection as you suggest or to allow for the variation in spacing between the heads which can vary somewhat. For example: we are allowed to flycut the heads to achieve a minimum combustion chamber volume. This brings the heads closer together. Another possibility is that some engine builders will machine the piston tops to reduce the weight. This modification then requires shortening the cylinders to maintain the compression ratio - which also brings the heads closer together. Variations in the cases will also have an effect. Because our manifolds are so thin, we can gently bend them into place (VERY carefully). The stainless steel spec manifold is a LOT stiffer and wouldn't allow the 'bend-to-fit method'.

-Jim

PS: Bruce's poll is part of this thread and you have to click on the thread to access it. I voted!

[Take 'em Out Terran]

I do? lol thank you Jim for explaining it for me, I didn't even think of those reasons