With all of the buzz over the AEBS manifold, I've been doing some thinking about aftermarket IM's in general. It seems that Skunk 2 and Edelbrock are some of the only other "reasonably priced" IM's available (although both are still more expensive than the AEBS). There are obviously other more expensive manifolds, but I'll get to that in a bit.

The question is, has anyone done any testing or visual/technical side-by-side comparisons of any of these manifolds? S2's seems to be closer to the stock ITR design (though AEBS looks similar to stock too). I know S2's GS-R manifold is intended to be an alternative to the ITR manifold, but I have to believe that their ITR version offers at least some sort of advantage over the stock piece. The Edelbrock piece seems geared more toward full-blown setups, but perhaps it would still offer some gains on a more mild motor.

Obviously, as the price of the manifolds increases (AEBS < S2 < EdelBrock) the cost/benefit ratio can begin to decrease if the gains aren't proportional, and perhaps that's really the only reason why the AEBS has gotten so much attention. 2-3 whp is a decent gain when it costs < $200, but if the other manifolds provide only similar gains for a greater expense, they aren't worth it.

This brings me to a related point. Most people have said in the past that IM's are waste on even a significantly modified motor. Yet now we are seeing the AEBS turning up quite a bit, and showing some gains. Would other, more expensive manifolds show better gains (similar to low-cost vs. high-cost header setups), or is there really little to be gained from an IM, regardless of the price, making it only "worth it" to purchase the AEBS because of its low cost?

Phew...this turned out longer than I anticipated. Sorry for the lengthy read.

 

skunk2 IM = ITR IM

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JiggyKooAndy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">skunk2 IM = ITR IM</TD></TR></TABLE>

But then why would any ITR owner want a S2 IM?

 

AEBS is cheap priced and even more cheaper quality IM.
there just plain junk.
i just installed mines this weekend with a hondata gasket didnt even come close to feel any results.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by SpinningDUBs &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i just installed mines this weekend with a hondata gasket didnt even come close to feel any results. </TD></TR></TABLE>

you mean butt dyno? how about a real dyno?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Calavera &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

you mean butt dyno? how about a real dyno?</TD></TR></TABLE>

lol.

for those that are in so cal...and not, i guess ...tetsu from es tech in torrance had his ITR motor balanced and blueprinted from "zero factory." anyway, my point is that he's running a gsr IM, which has made more power over the ITR's IM. i'm thinking it depends a lot on the setup of your motor.

i'm running a ITR IM on my b16 and i'm lovin' it

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Padawan &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

But then why would any ITR owner want a S2 IM?</TD></TR></TABLE>If you had a OEM ITR manifold (which came stock for most ITR onwers), why would you wanna down grade to a Junk2?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Padawan &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

But then why would any ITR owner want a S2 IM?</TD></TR></TABLE>

you wouldn't....the ITR owners who bought that skunk2 were idiots, because it is an ITR IM clone, with skunk2 stamped onto it.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JiggyKooAndy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">you wouldn't....the ITR owners who bought that skunk2 were idiots, because it is an ITR IM clone, with skunk2 stamped onto it.</TD></TR></TABLE>

If that's the case (and I've never read of any technical comparison between the two), why does S2 even offer a manifold for the C5?

Actually though, after looking at their site, it seems that they just listed the ITR application because the manifold will fit, not necessarily because they built it got the ITR (since it shares part numbers with a couple of other applications).

 

and because they want extra money from idiots.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Padawan &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

If that's the case (and I've never read of any technical comparison between the two), why does S2 even offer a manifold for the C5? </TD></TR></TABLE>

GSR owners buy it.

 

I guess it's for people with incomplete motors.

I'm interested in hearing from people with experience using the Victor X manifold.



Here's what they said at Turbo Magazine:

When it comes to maximum efficiency, you have to tip your hat to Honda engineers. Time and time again, Honda engineers have proven why they're the kings of small displacement engines.

More than a decade ago, Honda was one of the first companies to produce a 100 hp/liter from a production engine (B16A est. 1988). Honda continues to push the performance envelope as evidenced by the soon-to-be-released stateside K20 Type-R engine (110 hp/liter), which produces even more horsepower per liter than the previous B16A. The "H" has proven there's a replacement for displacement. However, there's a flip side to the amazing little Honda engine. The drawback of a highly efficient engine is there's not much room for improvement.


Although Honda did its homework when it came to designing the B-series engine, the engineers at JG Edelbrock have found ways to improve the intake system. Although the stock intake manifolds on B-series engines work fine on everything from stock to lightly modified applications, it can become insufficient when more extensive modifications are performed.

When items like high-lift cams, ported and polished heads and high-compression pistons are installed, the engine's air flow requirements increase. The primary job of an intake manifold is to direct the air from the intake tract into the intake ports of the cylinder head. If the plenum isn't large enough or the runners are too small, the resulting lower air velocity and/or lack of air volume going into the combustion chamber can impact the performance output of the engine.

Having fabricated hundreds of intake manifolds in the past, the engineering staff at JG Edelbrock has designed an intake manifold specifically for high-output B-series Honda engines. Unlike the stock intake manifold that features a small plenum and runners, the JG Edelbrock Victor X manifold incorporates a large plenum with large runners for high-compression or forced-induction engines. The Victor X cast-aluminum intake comes with all the necessary fittings and hardware for installation. The Victor X intake also comes in the standard four injector design but casting incorporates bosses that can be drilled for additional injectors or nitrous nozzles.

For our test purposes, we found a high-output naturally aspirated vehicle and a high-output turbocharged engine. The first engine was a 1998 Acura Type-R modified with a ported-and-polished cylinder head, JG Edelbrock Pro-flo header and high-lift cams. The B18 was running a stock ECU with a raised rev-limiter. The combination netted 193.3 hp and 142.3 lb-ft of torque to the wheels on the Dynojet. With the vehicle still strapped to the dyno, we swapped the Type-R intake with the Victor X manifold. This time, the B18 generated 205.1 hp and 140.0 lb-ft of torque. Although we lost 2.0 lb-ft of peak torque, we were able to gain an impressive 11.8 hp.

The second victim was a fully built GS-R engine boosting 20 psi of turbo pressure. With the stock GS-R manifold on the engine, peak power was 438.9 hp and 309.8 lb-ft of torque. Installing the Victor X manifold, we witnessed an increase of 27.4 peak hp and 12.6 lb-ft of peak torque pushing peak power to 466.3 hp and 322.4 lb-ft of torque (fuel was increased on the motor's Motec engine management system to maintain proper air/fuel ratio). At around 7450 rpm, we were amazed to see an increase of 41.5 hp and 29.3 lb-ft of torque.

Does the intake work? The dyno graphs speak for themselves. The JG Edelbrock Victor X intake was designed to optimize power production from heavily modified naturally aspirated engines or force-induced powerplants.

To fully maximize the power production of these engines, you need an intake manifold matching the air consumption needs of the engine. The larger plenum and runner design is ideal to deliver maximum air velocity into the chambers. Installing the Victor X intake is a straightforward proposition and requires only a few hand tools. The manifold can also be used with all the factory sensors for a direct replacement of the stock system


All I've heard on this board is that this IM is for boosted motors and will lose power on a NA motor.

Anyone with empirical evidence to support this - other than heresay??

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

All I've heard on this board is that this IM is for boosted motors and will lose power on a NA motor.

Anyone with empirical evidence to support this - other than heresay??</TD></TR></TABLE>

my friend had that mani. on his B16A2 for a while. all motor... skunk 2 stage 2 cams... slightly bumped up compression... and his power was next to nothing below VTEC engagement. with the skunk2 manifold he made significant more torque and hp downlow, as well as gained a little more up top as well after further tuning on the dyno.... but then again... its just hearsay cuz i don't have the dyno plots, but have seen them in person.... and don't remember all the numbers.

 

JG's victor x manifold makes power near top end. Had it in my car until some shitbrain stole it. Now I have a skunk2.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Chris N &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">GSR owners buy it.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Not the ITR version.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Padawan &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Not the ITR version. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Really? I'm clueless. I thought it was the same, since it is a look-alike ITR manifold that I see the local GS-R doods using....

Chris - who is most likely wrong... and clueless.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by SpinningDUBs &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">AEBS is cheap priced and even more cheaper quality IM.
there just plain junk.
i just installed mines this weekend with a hondata gasket didnt even come close to feel any results. </TD></TR></TABLE>

AEBS gets a full in my book, they have always made quality products. If something is wrong I am sure they would be willing to help you out

 

No, you're right that many GS-R owners buy the S2 IM, and it is an ITR look-alike. However, that manifold is S2's GS-R manifold. Their site also lists a manifold for the ITR application. After looking at their site though, it seems that they didn't actually design it as an upgrade for the ITR, and instead just list an ITR application because it will physically bolt-on (I think it was probably intended as an upgrade for the B16).

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Chris N &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Really? I'm clueless. I thought it was the same, since it is a look-alike ITR manifold that I see the local GS-R doods using....

Chris - who is most likely wrong... and clueless.</TD></TR></TABLE>

if i'm not mistaken, ITR IM will only fit on the Type R motors and B16 motors, not the GSR motors.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Padawan &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">No, you're right that many GS-R owners buy the S2 IM, and it is an ITR look-alike. However, that manifold is S2's GS-R manifold. Their site also lists a manifold for the ITR application. After looking at their site though, it seems that they didn't actually design it as an upgrade for the ITR, and instead just list an ITR application because it will physically bolt-on (I think it was probably intended as an upgrade for the B16). </TD></TR></TABLE>

They list a manifold for the C5 and B16a because they are the same part. They have the same bolt pattern. If someone bought a C5 head and didn't have a manifold, they could buy a Skunk2 instead of having to go to Honda to get an ITR one.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jdmjunky &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

if i'm not mistaken, ITR IM will only fit on the Type R motors and B16 motors, not the GSR motors.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes, this is correct as well.

 

actually, there are a few differences between an OEM ITR and a skunk2 manifold...

the S2 mani wheighs significantly less then the OEM ITR (different casting + no big bracket below where the T/B mounts.




below you can see the ITR intake mani sitting higher due to that bracket...

ITR=


S2=


also, the runners on the skunk2 I/M are wider (1.5mm from ports, 1.26mm from T/B side) and the runners open up more on the skunk2 further in (although we were not able to measure this it was quite evident even to the eye).


BUT, the quality of the casting deffinetly shows when you try to port both manis. The OEM casting is sooooo much better then the crappy skunk2 casting. Unported though the skunk2 has a much smoother surface inside the runners.

so the skunk2 is lighter (much lighter, at least 4-5lbs) and flows more/better. Just the casting sucks on it.

no bracket on the skunk2 I/M...


all measurements taken with a digital guage...

 

for those who are saying the skunk2 manfold is an exact clone of the itr...you obviously dont do research before you post. check around with some of the various dynos, skunk2 makes more peak power, the itr makes more midrange (typically)

 

imho, (after all these manifold discussions) if you are staying na with a b18c5 you only have 2 options... keep stock tb/manifold, or run itbs.

the entire process of calling the company, placing the order, giving out your credit card info, waiting for shipment, installling manifold, driving around afterwards and feeling disapointment, taking it to the dyno to gain 1-2-3 whp. then driving around again trying to convince yourself that you feel a difference, when all you really feel is disapointment... is not worth the effort.

however, instant throttle response, screaming vtec, and 15whp across the board may be worth the effort.
my .02

edit: in the case of the jg victor-x you will serioulsy lose low end, they say themselves that the manifold is meant for gains above 7k rpm... stock cams stop making power soon after that, serioulsy a waste of $ in my opinion.



Modified by euclid at 5:20 AM 10/17/2003

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by kitkatR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

AEBS gets a full in my book, they have always made quality products. If something is wrong I am sure they would be willing to help you out</TD></TR></TABLE>

This is a fact! I have the AEBS typhoon IM and it works great. A definite improvement. It is a great bang for the buck. If an AEBS product malfunctioned, they would definitely help you out. They will not take a chance at destroying the good name they have made in the industry.