he was pointing out the relevance of the test method. It is good for evaluating how much of an increase each manifold will get you with a stock head and valves (albeit on the center port). The datapoints for the MS manifold version 1 are there for both a stock head and a ported head with larger valves (so there is no need to have the data ""normed" to correct"). This helps people judge what kind of impact it will have on their car overall since it is obviously part of a much larger system. Sure, it is not a pure test of the manifolds and there is something to be said for that as well (I'm looking forward to seeing Ash's results and I have even pushed to have a set of the MS manifolds sent to him) but to completely discredit the previous test method isn't wise.
The system perspective is a key point. Sure, you can have great flowing manifold but if your head/valves are really holding it back that should be considered as well OR sure you can have a great flowing manifold but if your only downpipe design is not really optimal....
I'm all for more data but the criticism of other products or testing that IS beneficial isn't doing you much good IMO.
Yes, I think ash's orignal critisim was taken too far. But it could have been avoided had he just said he wanted pure manifold flow numbers (very valid) without discrediting all other testing done.
m a g l i t o Original engine destroyed itself...new engine being built now. Full official details coming soon. sig photo by me effects by ZXRider(SoCal) The build up begins - progress - reassembly part one - part two
