JG Engine Dynamics Intake manifold or Skunk2 ????
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,031
Likes: 0
From: San Dimas, CA
Re: (gogunkergorilla)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by gogunkergorilla »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I believe the JG manifold uses the stock runners with a larger plenum so midrange is not compromised for high rpm power. At least not as much as a full sheet metal manifold like the Golden Eagle or Venom.</TD></TR></TABLE> our turbo intake manifold is not sheet metal like the old venom there is a huge difference the old sheet metal ones used to blow up under high boost and we have cars out there boosting 60+psi on ours just wanted to set it strait
I believe the JG manifold uses the stock runners with a larger plenum so midrange is not compromised for high rpm power. At least not as much as a full sheet metal manifold like the Golden Eagle or Venom.</TD></TR></TABLE> our turbo intake manifold is not sheet metal like the old venom there is a huge difference the old sheet metal ones used to blow up under high boost and we have cars out there boosting 60+psi on ours just wanted to set it strait
Thread Starter
ME LOVE U LONG TIME
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Tx
Re: (CerealKiller)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CerealKiller »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Don't know where you got this info from, but I for damn sure know that GE's manifold isn't sheet metal. I also have a quick ?, wouldn't you want a bigger manifold for turbo?</TD></TR></TABLE>
bigger doesn't always mean better... if i had springs/retainers i probably would have kept the JG manifold so i could use it to its full potential.. but since i'm reving to 8200 i'd like to keep my low end/mid-range ....
Don't know where you got this info from, but I for damn sure know that GE's manifold isn't sheet metal. I also have a quick ?, wouldn't you want a bigger manifold for turbo?</TD></TR></TABLE>
bigger doesn't always mean better... if i had springs/retainers i probably would have kept the JG manifold so i could use it to its full potential.. but since i'm reving to 8200 i'd like to keep my low end/mid-range ....
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,319
Likes: 0
From: Southern Cali, Estados Unidos
Re: (tannerLSt)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tannerLSt »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
bigger doesn't always mean better... if i had springs/retainers i probably would have kept the JG manifold so i could use it to its full potential.. but since i'm reving to 8200 i'd like to keep my low end/mid-range .... </TD></TR></TABLE>
Ah, that's cool, I see your taking it easy. I just wouldn't see a use for a skunk2 manifold (unless n/a) for a turbo setup. just my .02
bigger doesn't always mean better... if i had springs/retainers i probably would have kept the JG manifold so i could use it to its full potential.. but since i'm reving to 8200 i'd like to keep my low end/mid-range .... </TD></TR></TABLE>
Ah, that's cool, I see your taking it easy. I just wouldn't see a use for a skunk2 manifold (unless n/a) for a turbo setup. just my .02
Thread Starter
ME LOVE U LONG TIME
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Tx
Re: (CerealKiller)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CerealKiller »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Ah, that's cool, I see your taking it easy. I just wouldn't see a use for a skunk2 manifold (unless n/a) for a turbo setup. just my .02 </TD></TR></TABLE>
i guess you didn't see the skunk2 vs. JG edelbrock thread... for lower boost levels the skunk2 made MORE power and made 20+wtq in spot over the JG... so why wouldn't you see a use for the skunk2...
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=2137420
i guess i should be using the stock intake for the GSR huh?
and no i'm not taking it easy, just not shooting for 600whp
Ah, that's cool, I see your taking it easy. I just wouldn't see a use for a skunk2 manifold (unless n/a) for a turbo setup. just my .02
</TD></TR></TABLE>i guess you didn't see the skunk2 vs. JG edelbrock thread... for lower boost levels the skunk2 made MORE power and made 20+wtq in spot over the JG... so why wouldn't you see a use for the skunk2...
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=2137420
i guess i should be using the stock intake for the GSR huh?
and no i'm not taking it easy, just not shooting for 600whp
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,319
Likes: 0
From: Southern Cali, Estados Unidos
Re: (tannerLSt)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tannerLSt »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
i guess you didn't see the skunk2 vs. JG edelbrock thread... for lower boost levels the skunk2 made MORE power... so why wouldn't you see a use for the skunk2...
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=2137420
i guess i should be using the stock intake for the GSR huh?
and no i'm not taking it easy, just not shooting for 600whp</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yes, it's true that the skunk2 is better at LOW BOOST. What I'm saying is that if you want a HIGH BOOST you should run something like the victorx or GE manifold. I myself like to shoot for high hp, no need to get your panties up in a bunch.
e-beer
on me
i guess you didn't see the skunk2 vs. JG edelbrock thread... for lower boost levels the skunk2 made MORE power... so why wouldn't you see a use for the skunk2...
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=2137420
i guess i should be using the stock intake for the GSR huh?
and no i'm not taking it easy, just not shooting for 600whp</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yes, it's true that the skunk2 is better at LOW BOOST. What I'm saying is that if you want a HIGH BOOST you should run something like the victorx or GE manifold. I myself like to shoot for high hp, no need to get your panties up in a bunch.
e-beer
on me
Thread Starter
ME LOVE U LONG TIME
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Tx
believe me .. i'll hit my desired hp level WITH the skunk2... without the loss of torque... torque is what makes hp
and boost levels won't be that high with the turbo i'm using
my tuner even suggested the skunk2 over the JG i had(i think he's got a little more experience that you)
i was just looking for opinions from people that might have used this JG engine dynamics manifold...
you said there was no reason to use a skunk2 besides on a NA setup... well you were wrong... low boost is a turbo set up
and boost levels won't be that high with the turbo i'm using
my tuner even suggested the skunk2 over the JG i had(i think he's got a little more experience that you)
i was just looking for opinions from people that might have used this JG engine dynamics manifold...
you said there was no reason to use a skunk2 besides on a NA setup... well you were wrong... low boost is a turbo set up
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,319
Likes: 0
From: Southern Cali, Estados Unidos
Re: (tannerLSt)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tannerLSt »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
you said there was no reason to use a skunk2 besides on a NA setup... well you were wrong... low boost is a turbo set up</TD></TR></TABLE>
True. I also said it was my opinion. , but I guess your always right
you said there was no reason to use a skunk2 besides on a NA setup... well you were wrong... low boost is a turbo set up</TD></TR></TABLE>
True. I also said it was my opinion.
, but I guess your always right
Thread Starter
ME LOVE U LONG TIME
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Tx
Re: (CerealKiller)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CerealKiller »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
True. I also said it was my opinion. , but I guess your always right
</TD></TR></TABLE>
your opinion doesn't count, lol you haven't personally used a JG Engine Dynamics manifold... and xenocron proved you wrong... they ARE useful on turbo set ups...
so tell me ... WHY the skunk2 is pointless on a turbo set up? whats your reasoning for this... ya you said it was your opinion.. so back it up
personally i'd rather have power and torque thoughout the WHOLE powerband rather than just topend
True. I also said it was my opinion.
, but I guess your always right</TD></TR></TABLE>
your opinion doesn't count, lol you haven't personally used a JG Engine Dynamics manifold... and xenocron proved you wrong... they ARE useful on turbo set ups...
so tell me ... WHY the skunk2 is pointless on a turbo set up? whats your reasoning for this... ya you said it was your opinion.. so back it up
personally i'd rather have power and torque thoughout the WHOLE powerband rather than just topend
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,319
Likes: 0
From: Southern Cali, Estados Unidos
Re: (tannerLSt)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tannerLSt »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
your opinion doesn't count, lol you haven't personally used a JG Engine Dynamics manifold... and xenocron proved you wrong... they ARE useful on turbo set ups...
so tell me ... WHY the skunk2 is pointless on a turbo set up? whats your reasoning for this... ya you said it was your opinion.. so back it up
personally i'd rather have power and torque thoughout the WHOLE powerband rather than just topend</TD></TR></TABLE>
If you read my post, I said I wouldn't use a skunk2 manifold unless n/a. that said, I later agreed with xenocron, on low boost. I believe that if someone wanted to achieve high hp, they should use high boost, which the S2 manifold is not designed to do.
AND yes you'll have power, but eventually you will be limited.
your opinion doesn't count, lol you haven't personally used a JG Engine Dynamics manifold... and xenocron proved you wrong... they ARE useful on turbo set ups...
so tell me ... WHY the skunk2 is pointless on a turbo set up? whats your reasoning for this... ya you said it was your opinion.. so back it up
personally i'd rather have power and torque thoughout the WHOLE powerband rather than just topend</TD></TR></TABLE>
If you read my post, I said I wouldn't use a skunk2 manifold unless n/a. that said, I later agreed with xenocron, on low boost. I believe that if someone wanted to achieve high hp, they should use high boost, which the S2 manifold is not designed to do.
AND yes you'll have power, but eventually you will be limited.
Thread Starter
ME LOVE U LONG TIME
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Tx
Re: (CerealKiller)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CerealKiller »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
AND yes you'll have power, but eventually you will be limited.</TD></TR></TABLE>
yes i'll have the power i want... not looking for more.... so i won't be limited... trying to make the stock sleeves last a while...
if i was sleeved and built head i might agree with you... but as of now i don't
AND yes you'll have power, but eventually you will be limited.</TD></TR></TABLE>
yes i'll have the power i want... not looking for more.... so i won't be limited... trying to make the stock sleeves last a while...
if i was sleeved and built head i might agree with you... but as of now i don't
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,319
Likes: 0
From: Southern Cali, Estados Unidos
Re: (tannerLSt)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tannerLSt »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i might agree with you... but as of now i don't </TD></TR></TABLE>
lol
2 u
lol 2 u
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
From: handing you your ass
Re: (Golden Eagle)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Golden Eagle »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> our turbo intake manifold is not sheet metal like the old venom there is a huge difference the old sheet metal ones used to blow up under high boost and we have cars out there boosting 60+psi on ours just wanted to set it strait </TD></TR></TABLE>
Oops, sorry about that. It's hard to tell the difference.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tannerLSt »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">oh well.... sold the JG 5 minutes ago
skunk2 FTW</TD></TR></TABLE>
You should have kept them both and tested them since theory doesn't always dictate reality and it's the only way to know for sure.
Oops, sorry about that. It's hard to tell the difference.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tannerLSt »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">oh well.... sold the JG 5 minutes ago
skunk2 FTW</TD></TR></TABLE>
You should have kept them both and tested them since theory doesn't always dictate reality and it's the only way to know for sure.
Thread Starter
ME LOVE U LONG TIME
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Tx
Re: (gogunkergorilla)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by gogunkergorilla »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Oops, sorry about that. It's hard to tell the difference.
You should have kept them both and tested them since theory doesn't always dictate reality and it's the only way to know for sure.</TD></TR></TABLE>
not worth it to me... too much trouble...
Oops, sorry about that. It's hard to tell the difference.
You should have kept them both and tested them since theory doesn't always dictate reality and it's the only way to know for sure.</TD></TR></TABLE>
not worth it to me... too much trouble...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
